Comments on: Respect for Law http://sierra-faith.com/2005/04/19/respect-for-law/ God, Country and Family thoughts from the Sierra. Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:57:08 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Jeremy Pierce http://sierra-faith.com/2005/04/19/respect-for-law/comment-page-1/#comment-61 Jeremy Pierce Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://sierra-faith.com/index.php/2005/04/19/respect-for-law#comment-61 If I propose that we should weaken penalties for certain crimes, does that amount to endorsing lawbreaking? Not at all. There's still a penalty. It's just not as harsh as it used to be. So certainly is doesn't amount to rewarding lawbreaking. Bush has proposed reducing the penalty for illegal entry. Some of the current restrictions on what such people can do would be removed. Not all of them would be. For instance, the path to citizenship would still be a good deal harder than it is for legal immigrants.<BR/><BR/>It's just plain not a reward for illegal activity any more than reducing the death penalty for murder to 40 years would be rewarding murderers for killing. If they didn't kill, there'd be no 40 years. If they hadn't entered illegally, they wouldn't have a more complicated process toward getting legally recognized. Therefore, there's still a penalty for the crime, just as some other crimes don't have a death penalty but just have a fine. It's not rewarding people for parking in a handicapped spot just because all they get is a fine instead of a night in jail. It just seems unfair to me to use the kind of rhetoric you and La Shawn are using. The facts don't support such language. If I propose that we should weaken penalties for certain crimes, does that amount to endorsing lawbreaking? Not at all. There’s still a penalty. It’s just not as harsh as it used to be. So certainly is doesn’t amount to rewarding lawbreaking. Bush has proposed reducing the penalty for illegal entry. Some of the current restrictions on what such people can do would be removed. Not all of them would be. For instance, the path to citizenship would still be a good deal harder than it is for legal immigrants.

It’s just plain not a reward for illegal activity any more than reducing the death penalty for murder to 40 years would be rewarding murderers for killing. If they didn’t kill, there’d be no 40 years. If they hadn’t entered illegally, they wouldn’t have a more complicated process toward getting legally recognized. Therefore, there’s still a penalty for the crime, just as some other crimes don’t have a death penalty but just have a fine. It’s not rewarding people for parking in a handicapped spot just because all they get is a fine instead of a night in jail. It just seems unfair to me to use the kind of rhetoric you and La Shawn are using. The facts don’t support such language.

]]>