Saturday, November 1, 2008

Mike Lawlor: Soft On Crime

H/T to Jim.

One of the saddest byproducts of the massive liberal, Democratic majority in Hartford has been their complete unwillingness, even in the light of the hideous home invasions and murders such as that in Cheshire, to get tough on violent criminals.

A virtual one-man obstacle to Connecticut adopting a Three Strikes Law which would put violent criminals in jail for life on their third violent conviction, Democratic Judiciary Chairman Michael Lawlor of East Haven has demonstrated that his priorities are totally out of whack.

Lawlor's four votes against Three Strikes since the Cheshire murders earned him a visit in his district this past week from Dr. Bill Petit, whose family was slain in th horrible events of the summer of 2007. Petit appeared on behalf of the Three Strikes Now Coalition to endorse Lori Musco, Lawlor's Republican opponent, who has pledged to support Three Strikes legislation if elected.

The excuses Michael Lawlor has given for opposing Three Strikes have been consistently lame, and Dr. Petit does a good job discrediting them.

Lawlor claims he has worked to keep parolees in jail. But the reality is that when Governor Rell put a moratorium on parole releases in the wake of the Cheshire tragedy, all Lawlor did was visit jails and complain about prison overcrowding.

If only one Democrat gets defeated for reelection, I really do hope it's Michael Lawlor, a man entirely out of touch with the needs of public safety.


CT Bob said...

The problem with the three strikes law is that it takes any discretion out of the hands of the judges in those cases. Passing tougher laws with corresponding sentencing guidelines might be more appropriate.

Besides, a three strikes law wouldn't have stopped the creeps who killed Dr. Petit's family. They weren't three-time losers, so they still would have gotten parole when they did. Passing a three strikes law might remove the focus from more constructive legislation.

That being said, I'm absolutely pro-death penalty for monsters like them. As far as I'm concerned, they cashed in their membership to the human race when they committed that horrific crime. I feel that they fully deserve the punishment that awaits them.

Headless Horseman said...

Well, we all know that the legislature, including Mike Lawlor, has voted in the past to take away judicial discretion in the past, for example with Jenny's Law. That is a straw argument to me.

I don't know why judicial discretion is so sacrosanct to some folks. Judicial disretion has lead to a lot of violent repeat offenders spending very little time in jail. That's the point of Three Strikes.

And that is true, Three Strikes would not have saved the Petit family. That lies at the feet of the broken parole system.

I get weary of legislators like Lawlor who are wishy=washy on this stuff, but every two years pretend to be tough on crime.

Bob, you and I look at the death penalty the exact same way... when someone commits these kinds of crimes, they turned in their humanity card, and need to get iced.

Laurel O'Keefe said...

Please read "Deal away a crime system needs change" on page 22 of The Justice Journal re three strikes and Connecticut's sentencing woes.