Three Strikes press conference
From the MRJs Jesse Buchanan:
The Three Strikes Now Coalition, state Senator Sam Caligiuri and state representative Al Adinolfi held a press conference in town hall in support of the coalition's efforts to pass tougher criminal penalties.
Dr. William Petit also spoke in support of the legislation, saying protecting citizens was a fundamental role of government.
Tim White
11 comments:
You know Esty wasn't at that press conference!
She feels we are to harsh on the criminals....
She forgets what this town went through on July 23, 2007.
Remember that on election day!
Perhaps you Connecticut residents might check the records (and budgets) of states like California and Colorado that have adopted 3-strikes legislation, and see how much of their budget is spent on prisons. For supposed fiscal conservatives, you're looking at adopting a meat-ax approach to criminal punishments. Are you really willing to spend a huge portion of your state budget building prisons?
Perhaps you should check to see how many criminals in CT this law would actually affect.
Right now there are under 500 criminals with 2 strikes on them. If they ALL commited the 3rd strike, we still wouldn't have a prison over crowding problem.
What would you rather have, a slightly higher tax base to keep these violent criminals locked up for life, or would you rather have these scum bags roaming the streets looking for their 4th and over victims?
How would you feel 1:06 if one of these crimes was commited against you or your family?
Check the facts a little better and you will see it WILL NOT be using a huge portion of our state's budget to build prisons.
Comparing CA to CT is not a very good comparison.
Anon 1:06 sounds like an Esty parrot. She cries “we can’t afford it” when it comes to protecting society from habitually violent offenders, but somehow we can afford her pal Altieri’s wasteful pet project: turf.
Dr. Petit says that “protecting citizens is a fundamental role of government,” but the beautiful people, the elitist liberals like Ms. Esty won’t hear of it.
No 3 strikes, 1 strike and your done. Over the long term prison population would be reduced.
How can Ms. Esty support abortion and not support the 3 strikes law. Explain that.
You ask, How can Ms. Esty support abortion and not support the 3 strikes law?
She thinks government's role is to protect abortion, but not to protect decent citizens. Her left-wing extremism isn't just lunatic, it's evil.
Esty is merely a puppet. She will do anything to promote her political future. Don't try to make any sense of her positions on anything, she just doesn't have any of her own. A rubber stamper.
Notice how the last poster (11:01) uses ad hominem attack to change the subject and distract attention from Esty’s extreme off-the-wall positions.
I’m independent and never voted for Bush. I agree that Bush ruined the economy, with plenty of help from Democrats. Obama and Dodd are the two top recipients of bank executives’ donations!! And Barney Frank demanded that mortgage standards be lowered to accommodate unqualified borrowers. Yes, Bush had plenty of help from Democrats.
Bush’s disastrous presidency still doesn’t justify unleashing repeat, violent thugs onto the streets like Esty is intent on doing. But then, as her defender says, Esty “makes more money and is a hell of a lot smarter than (we) are.”
11:01 says Elizabeth Esty “makes more money and is a hell of a lot smarter than (we) are.”
Point proven. She and her ultra-leftwing supporters are elitist, out of touch ideologues. Esty is a liberal version of Leona Helmsley who said, “Only little people pay taxes.”
So, 8:55 is complaining about "ad hominem" attacks. Amazing. There hasn't been a single post on this website about this race without (probably 1 or 2) anonymous posters attacking Esty with ad hominem scurilous attacks ... not on the issues, not on the facts, but childish epithets. Just from this string: "lunatic, puppet, rubber stamp." Sure, that's intelligent debate. Glad that you're at least talking to one another mostly.
3-strikes legislation would apply to more than the current prisoners in Connecticut prisons. You think there are only 500 people it would apply to? Those may be the number of 2x felons currently in prison. But do you really think that's the total number of 2x felons in Connecticut? Check the percentage of the state budget going to prisons in states that have this legislation. It won't initially be big, but in 10 years, you'll be shoveling bucket-loads of money. And your struggling other state programs will go unfunded. How much of your population do you want imprisoned? 2%? 3%?
RE: How much of your population do you want imprisoned? 2%? 3%?
As much as it takes and as much as it costs to get habitually violent thugs off the streets.
Government's first duty is to protect the citizens from preditors. Period.
Post a Comment