[Mpls] Sex Offenders

[rhalfhill at juno.com]

   Proposals to make all released sex offenders live at Fort Snelling or some other similar place is just another proposal to build another prison.  If you put the released sex offenders at Fort Snelling, you would need to hire guards to ensure that the released offenders stay there, money to build a wall around the facility, and money to pay for their food, clothing, medical care, etc since you don't want them leaving to work at jobs where they would be going into neighborhoods where they would have the opportunity to reoffend.
   We could avoid the problem of sex offenders and other criminals being released to prey on new victims if we habe a three strikes and you're out law for FELONIES.  I limit three strikes to felonies because reasonable people would not want the absurdity of someone being sentenced to life in prison for shop lifting or cruising to pick up a prositute when these offenses are their third strike.  But when someone has committed three successive felonies such as armed robbery or rape,  
they have been given a reasonable chance to reform their behavior and the rest of us are entitled to the assurance that we will not be preyed on  again.  I did not mention murder because, in the case of murder, ONE strike should be sufficient for being out.  And the three strikes should mean any felony; we should not have to be told after someone has committee two rapes and one armed robbery that we have to wait until they have committed three rapes or three armed robberies before we can 
ensure that they will never prey on us again.
   Cases such as Dru Sjodin and Katie Poirier(sp?) demonstrate that there are criminals to whom we should have said "no more" and "we're through explicative deleting with you!"   But the problem is that we can't afford to build the prisons to hold all the people we are locking up now plus all the additional people who would be added with a three strikes law.  But many of the people we are locking up now include people found guilty of victimless crimes, mainly drug users.  If it were not for all the drug users we are locking up, we would have more than enough prison space for the people we should be sending there.
   So you people have to make a clear choice.  Would you rather keep locking up the drug offenders and people who commit other victimless crimes or do you want to lock up the murderers, rapists and armed robbers who really do prey on you?  You are not willing to pay for enough prisons to do both.  So it has to be one or the other.  If someone likes to smoke marijuana and you don't, you can simply refrain from smoking marijuana and let him or her smoke marijuana and you can both be happy.  On the other hand, if someone wants to murder, rape or rob you and you don't want any of those things done to you, there is no way you can both be happy.
   We can avoid having a draconian criminal justice system that would be unworthy of a civilized society if we give criminals a reasonable chance to reform.  But we can avoid having sex offenders who have continued to offend after they have had a reasonable number of chances to change living among us and having new opportunities to prey on us.
   But we can't do it if we continue overcrowding the prisons with people who commit drug offenses and other victimless crimes.  So which do you choose?  You can't have both.
      Robert Halfhill   Loring Park
http://halfhillviews.greatnow.com