Honestly, I don't think the laws are properly aligned to get the results we want. Amping up punishments doesn't do much to compensate for poor design. We want criminals to not have guns. But, regulation and enforcement on 3rd parties to not give them guns is so low that it may as well not exist as far as incentivizing the right behaviors. It only really comes up when things go badly. All the times someone gave a family member a contraband gun went unpunished so long as the gun wasn't used in a crime. The provider of the gun carries risk at that point but no costs until it is too late. If you can increase the certainty of getting caught you'll do more to curb the behavior than if you increase the cost for those who have made bad choices. In any case, having a lawyer and getting the maximum punishment are not mutually exclusive ideas. What this woman did was a bad, stupid, negligent, reckless thing to do. She should be punished for it. Wholly separate is that everyone should have good representation in court to achieve the most fair outcome. It'd be unfortunate if she compromised her own defense because she wanted to be forthright and didn't have the foresight to also think about her own circumstance.
Poor design? In order for her to provide him a gun she lied on a federal form. That is an easy case. No one is talking about "amping up" punishments, just enforce the laws we have. Regulation is high, enforcement is low so therefore increase regulation? The entire gun control battle boiled down to universal background checks. It would be just another law people here wouldn't want to enforce. Get the 4473, prove that she knew her brother couldn't own a gun (she knew he was on probation) , boom two convictions. There was a large reward that was recently increased. You are applying motivations that don't exist. I honestly don't understand what you are arguing against. She broke serious laws that resulted in a murder. She confessed. She turned her brother in for a reward. They increased that reward to $10K 6 days ago.
Vernon Maxwell saved from a violent life??? He ran in the stands during a game and attacked a fan. He threw a weight in the team's weight room at a teammate. He locked a woman in her Marietta home, then beat her after an escape try. He was charged with kidnapping and aggravated assault. People with money pay child support too. Maxwell was an extremely poor example here....
I'm not referring to the gun control debate, background checks, and all that. I'm reacting to your stated desire to see a maximum punishment to increase deterrence. The scholarship on deterrence is that increasing severity isn't nearly as effective as increasing the certainty of being caught. With the way we swap around guns like they were lawnmowers, getting caught for providing a felon with a gun is highly unlikely until that felon commits another crime. Low deterrence. Poor design. I don't know what her motivations were for turning her brother in, and it doesn't matter. I want those accused of crimes to have good representation. There isn't anything controversial about that, is there? If she turned her brother in just for the money -- aside from being despicable -- she needs good representation even more, or she might not get the money she was hoping for.
Yeah.....like most people need to learn to ride it out and deny.... She committed a criminal act that lead to a felon committing a murder. She deserves to get the appropriate sentence for the act she committed.
Right so I guess because people regularly drive drunk, increasing the punishments when they kill people isn't a great idea? It is your same argument. When talking about human behavior it might be true it doesn't increase deterrence but you have to do it. People are not just prosecuted when murders happen. FFL dealers lose their license for straw purchases. People are convicted of buying to resell when they are not dealers. You might not hear about them but it happens. I also reject people perform star purchases as often as you claim. There just aren't that many complete subhuman animals out there like this jackass. Outside of that end results matter more for punishment than actions. That is the way it works for everything and we accept it so I don't understand this argument against putting her away. I'm all for due process. I want it completely explored that her confession was not under duress and that she actually signed a 4473. I am taking those facts as reported when I express my opinion. If she did, then send her to prison. I talk about motivations because you implied her motivations with this "because she wanted to be forthright "
She doesn't deserve the money since her criminal act had a direct result on her brother being able to execute someone. What the hell did she think a career criminal was going to do with a gun??? She behaved like a criminal when she chose quick cash without thinking about the consequences.
I'm not saying not to punish her. Drunk driving and straw purchases should be punished. Cooperating with police, admitting guilt, and turning in suspects should be rewarded. Lawyers need to negotiate that. On straw purchases, I'm sure dealers face enforcement more often because they are subject to more regulation. I have a hard time believing many sisters buying guns for their brothers get caught unless it turns ugly. You can tell these sisters they'll go to Gitmo forever if they're caught, but you won't deter them because they believe they will not be caught. This lady should be punished, but giving her the maximum punishment won't make people realize the severity of the crime or reduce rates of straw purchases or murders. Give her instead the punishment commensurate with the crime, adjusted for whatever mitigating factors. I agree in principle that rewards should not be paid to people complicit in the related crimes. But, if Bandwagoner is right that that was the whole point of betraying her own kin, it'd have been wise and prudent for her to have consulted a lawyer before putting this plan into action.
You seem to be arguing that drunk drivers should be punished, but the penalty should not increase because they killed a family as it will not increase deterrence. Is this correct? People do go down for willfully lying on federal forms. I am glad you don't support universal background checks tho.
And how do you break that cycle? I will credit you here for being intellectually honest - I am surprised.
Maybe Obama can start trying to work on this once he leaves office. ...although he's only driven UP racial problems through what he's done as president.
Agreed...I think the point is that she's a simpleton looking for a payout and doesn't take the time to think things through.
This has gone back and forth too many times. I objected to your intimation that a maximum penalty should be assessed because it would increase deterrence. That is all. The punishment the woman faces should be more severe than otherwise because a murder resulted. It should also be less severe than otherwise because she turned in the killer and confessed her own guilt. Deterrence is irrelevant. On universal background checks, lol; if you'll recall I want to abolish the second amendment and take away everybody's guns. But, that isn't relevant here (even if it would mean she wouldn't have been able to supply a gun to a felon in the first place).
Culture is part of the reason a group stays disadvantaged. The Asian community puts an extremely high level of importance on education and that culture has allowed them to become the highest paid racial group in this country. So while I agree with your study that shows that being poor creates crime, I think you have to agree that a cultural focus on working your way out of poverty would be the best way to change things. Focusing on education is a great place to start. You can blame environment or other people or government or racism or bad luck or whatever but unless you do something to change your situation it will not change.
Black culture has lost the strong leaders it once had. Gone are real leaders, over the last 2 decades, the spearhead voices have disentrgrated into whiny, entitled victimizers. Using Twitter to prey on the weak, rhetoric, to impress the uninformed. Where were you, in 92 , when Nina Simone was rocking in Montreal? I was there, dancing, UNINHIBITIDEDLY between throngs of adults. That's a real black hero and a role model for all women. From greats like MLK , to Luther Vandross, to AL B Sure, we've now got Lil wayne, ray rice, al sharpton and obama. And then you realize why drug and gun culture is glorified, or seen as an excuse for problems "beyond our control", why the average brotha feels like he has a right to be angry and pissed off about things that happened 60+ years ago, and why after the 20th century ended with so much hope, the next 15 years have led to a culture on the way down. Blame poverty. Blame whitey. Blame autotune. Gotta blame something as long as we don't have to look at ourselves. Forget about learning from other minorities like asians and aboriginals who make the best of their impoverished situations. Forget about using the strength and courage of our grandparents. I WILL not stand for this. I have too much pride and emotion invested in this topic. I have an announcement .... I declare myself the new leader for the black culture movement. It is a decision made out of necessity, not necessarily desire. Things are going bad, and it's no one's fault but our own. TAKE ACCOUNTABILITY EXORCIZE THE HATE IN YO BLOOD STOP LEAVING BABY MAMA'S TO FEND FOR THEMSELVES DIVIDED WE FALL UNITED, WE STAND STRONG -H. Sugah
Maxwell robbed a lot of people. He had 975 career steals in the NBA. God bless Vernon Maxwell.. to Hell with his enemies
