TexasCHLforum.com

I'm willing to let it go. The old "activist judges" canard that progressives throw out there is funny and disingenuous in one fell swoop.

I'm going to start a humorous thread about arguing with progressives.

marksiwel wrote:

MoJo wrote:For four felony convictions eight years seems about right. Did you see the crockagator tears? I if more judges would throw the book at criminals and there were less slap of the wrist sentences there would be fewer career criminals on the street because they'd be locked away where they belong. I applaud the judge, agenda or not, for being tough. It will probably be overturned on appeal by some bleeding heart.

8 years WITHOUT Parole, 8 years with the option of parole sounds better to me. Throwing a minor trouble maker into State prison isnt going to do him anygood when he gets out. 10 years from now I bet they are taking him down for REAL Crimes with his Prison homies

Mark, it seems as if the difference of opinion you're seeing here is because you don't view tagging as a "real" crime. My answer... have you been tagged? Repeatedly? Have you had to cover the cost of undoing the tagging? Repeatedly? To you, maybe it's only a nuisance. But to the person who has to repeatedly invest actual financial resources, actual labor, and actual time into undoing what a tagger has done, it is an expensive destruction of property, and it also diminishes the value of the owner's property, which affects the owner's future financial prospects. In this case, you are also dealing with a repeat offender; and an offender who, if not dealt with harshly, would likely continue to destroy the property of others.

You've gotten some negative response because you seem to care more about what will happen to this criminal than you care about the rights of those whose properties were affected. Justice should never be comparative. By that, I mean that legal retribution ought not be based entirely on precedent. Precedent can be a guide, but it ought not be the final arbiter because the fact that perpetrator A got a lighter sentence than perpetrator B may be due to extenuating circumstances which do not apply to perpetrator B. What you have in an increasingly permissive society and an increasingly coarsening culture is a judge who finally said, "Enough! THIS is the place where we are going to begin reversing the trend of lawlessness we brought upon ourselves." The facts are that this young man is a serial destroyer of property. That it is his unlucky day to be the one the judge chose to draw a line in the sand with is merely incidental. It needed to happen to somebody. He's the one.

Now if we can just apply the same standard to rapists, wife-beaters, child-molesters, armed robbers, etc., etc.

I'm just sayin'...