New Haven Independent

Posted by: Two Good Hands | November 10, 2008 10:08 AM

I agree with much of what PAI members have to say. I think an important addition, though, is a discussion about what it is that predominantly white and suburban voters are really afraid of. I believe that these kinds of get-tough-on-crime measures, just like campaigns to deport immigrants, have much more to do with peoples' fears and uncertainties about their economic future than about crime or immigration. I believe that part of a successful struggle to defeat these knee-jerk proposals is to constantly remind working class people of the real dangers that are making them feel afraid: lay-offs, foreclosures, the collapsing value of their retirement funds, the danger that a catastrophic illness could take away everything that they own. The tough on crime crowd are manipulating those real fears by looking for scapegoats and quick fixes.

Posted by: What???? | November 10, 2008 10:14 AM

Uh, Ms Fair they did come from Afghanistan to kill us and they did. 9/11/2001.

Posted by: anon | November 10, 2008 10:40 AM

We should address the problems behind crime with a fervor never before seen. Raise taxes on millionaires if we need to fund better social programs, gun buybacks, education and the like.

However, we also need to recognize the enormous cost of crime to society, particularly VIOLENT crime involving firearms. The only way to deter such crime is to set much stricter penalties. Anyone who so much as pulls a gun on another human being, or is involved in an armed robbery, should be sent to prison for 20 years with absolutely NO possibility of parole, regardless of their age. If you pull a trigger and hurt someone, you should get a minimum 60 year sentence, with parole out of the question.

Posted by: jackie | November 10, 2008 12:24 PM

i'm sorry, i just can't do my part to make the alleged "disproportionate incarceration rates" more equitable.

the problem is, every time i think about committing a crime, i remind myself that i might go to jail, and that committing crime would ruin my opportunities to be a productive member of society in a land of opportunity.

so, if you want to correct the disproportionate incarceration rates, i don't know what to suggest.

Posted by: robn | November 10, 2008 1:08 PM

WHAT,

15 of the 911 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, 1 from Egypt, 2 from UAE, 1 from Lebanon.

NONE were from Afghanistan
NONE were from Iraq

Your misperception was carefully cultivated by the Bush administration who lied to promote invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. For these lies GWB should be tried.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/06/saudi.htm

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 10, 2008 2:18 PM

I love Gary and Sally! Good people. But I will always differ on this issue, but I do understand why they fight and respect it.

anon OMG I totally agree! As a survivor of violent crime on may different realms. And as a person that has dealt with other survivors from all different walks of life, we are talking about VIOLENT CRIME
Homicide, Sexual assault, abduction, certain Robbery's , certain physical assaults, Child abuse, some domestic abuse, animal abuse at some level. Ok it can be society fault but only to a point!! When you rape a women once, then twice and then 3 freaken times sorry this person has no soul! When you kill someone..weather is is a white girl in Cheshire or a drug dealer on the corner and you do it again 2 more times, if you hold a gun to someones head as you rob them sorry JUST WRONG, guess what THAT was their choose!! The VICTIM deserves JUSTICE! WHAT HAPPEN DO THAT??? Why do they keep repeating these crimes?? Why because the LAW is going to let them go and they KNOW IT!!!!!!! So as long as they know there are no real penalties they are going to keep committing these types of crime!. Remember this is not the man robbing to feed his family and the kid on the bike taking a purse, this is not a hooker doing her thing...this law does not apply to these crimes...ONLY to VIOLENT crimes!!!!

Decriminalize pot, take the money saved on not prosecuting that crime and the fees from that crime redirect it to some programs to target the youth so we can stop them from going down this path and break the cycle. BUT some people are not savable!!! and those are the people that we need stricter laws for!!!

Sorry guys I do love ya but I have seen to much from the other end of this to sway this view.

Posted by: bjfair | November 11, 2008 12:52 PM

Thank you Robn for clarifying things for a confused "what". At times it is tedious trying to open a closed mind and so I don't even bother. Cedarhill: you say you respect the work of PAI but you are always challenging it and not with FACTS but with emotion. Emotions can cloud reasoning and allow for the passage of policies that will end up doing a lot more harm than you can imagine. If you want to push for 3 strkes legislation then begin by researching the FACTS:Fact: Connecticut has a law that will allow the state to lock up individuals who commit 3 VIOLENT crimes for life.It's called the repeat offender law. The 3 strikes law, if modeled after California will allow the term VIOLENT to be redefined and once on the books will likely end up locking people up for life who HAVE NOT committed 3 VIOLENT crimes. As an agent of change I have come to expect challenge whenever I oppose or express dissent relative to injustice. Many times it's actually amusing reading the comments. At least know the FACTS surrounding what it is you are challenging/supporting. As I said in the meeting emotion/fear propoganda is why we sat back , supported our government with pride in going into Iraq, slaughtering and displacing millions of people, executing their leader and upsetting that government for personal and political reasons not based on FACTS. As indicated by "What" some of us continue to believe that Sadaam was behind 911. If time permits meet with PAI and legislators, attend hearings, research 3 strikes that exists in California, research Connecticut's repeat offender statute...get the facts and then challenge me all you want. At least then it will be an informed conversation. Peace and love

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 11, 2008 2:45 PM

Barb luv ya :)
first facts that it works
http://www.threestrikes.org/TenYearReport04.pdf

But yes it is emotional it is more than emotional it is being a functioning member of a civilized society. We could always chop off the hands of thief's and stone women that are raped even if it is not their fault. Some country's do not treat their criminals half as good as the usa. TV's 3 meals a day! Store to buy treats?? Hmmm

Ok barb and fellow opponents of 3 strikes. I want you to be the ones that sit down with the women that was beaten by a stranger while he puts his member in her and was a repeat offender prior to this. I want you to tell her that life was unfair to him! That sorry but he will be out in a year. I want you to be the ones that help her move because she no longer feels safe! I want you to be their while she is up all night with nightmares!

I want you to sit their with the little boys who sister was killed by a repeat offender's.

Victim's Barbara! I feel for people who's lives sent them in the wrong direction. I am human! But 3 strikes in CONN. is only addressing VIOLENT OFFENDERS!

As stated in the 10 year study of Calf.
*Record Crime Drops
*Prison Construction Stopped
*Reduced Inmate Growth
*Dramatic Financial Savings
*Huge Reduction in Victims

That sounds like a plan to me! Now don't get me wrong I realize that facts can be twisted to support both sides so I do take that into consideration.

Reality..somewhere between my feelings and yours is a plan. It is a matter of figuring it out.

Barabra I feel that the VICTIMS come first! Some time the damage done to them the violation that is done to them lasts a life time. And I will always stand by them! And yes some of your criminals are people that fit in the realm.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 11, 2008 4:24 PM

sorry here is a better list of the crimes that would be subject to this...
Violent felonies

* Murder or manslaughter.
* Mayhem.
* Rape by force, violence, duress, menace or fear of immediate bodily injury on the victim or another person.
* Oral copulation by force, violence, duress, menace or fear of immediate bodily injury on the victim or another person.
* Lewd act on a child.
* Any felony punishable by death or life sentence.
* Any felony resulting in great bodily injury or in which a firearm was used.
* Robbery of an inhabited dwelling, vessel or trailer coach in which a deadly or dangerous weapon was used.
* Arson that causes great bodily injury.
* Penetration by a foreign object.
* Attempted murder.
* Explosion with intent to commit murder.
* Out-of-state kidnapping transported to California.
* Continuous sexual abuse of a child.

Posted by: Bob | November 11, 2008 8:34 PM

Jackie - understand that people like you and I have it all wrong. We need to stop being these "productive members of society" and start hanging out on street corners, selling drugs and shooting guns aimlessly. And THEN, when we get caught, we can blame it on society, because being a productive member of society just didn't work out for us, so we were forced into the lifestyle. Lets start tomorrow, I'll cook the crack and you go get some guns....

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 11, 2008 9:56 PM

sorry took a moment thier to educate people...answer to your facts statement
Until May 2008, these laws did not impose a mandatory minimum sentence for "persistent dangerous felony offenders" (the kind of repeat violent criminals who are the focus of our three strikes initiative). Until that time, this law imposed a maximum sentence for these criminals but did not require that they be sentenced to any minimum sentence let alone a tough mandatory minimum prison sentence. In May 2008, improvements to this law were enacted whereby two- and three-time offenders must be sentenced to minimum sentences that are twice and three times, respectively, the minimum sentences required by the law for the crimes for which they are convicted. That sounds good, but in reality this law remains weak because the minimum sentences for most of these crimes are very low, i.e., one to five years. Connecticut still does not have a law that requires a tough mandatory minimum sentence for repeat violent criminals

sorry got this answer from threestrikenow feared I many answer it wrong.

And people keep in mind that a person would have to commit in commit 3 of the crimes from the above list of crimes. So some scum bag can rape 3 times. abuse his kid 3 times murder 3 times before this law would apply!!

gee..so keep fighting for them.. fight for their rights screw the victims!

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 11, 2008 10:00 PM

sorry...I am very passionate about this. Get the help for the kids I support that get programs and such I support that BUT DON"T GO after this law!

Posted by: bjfair | November 12, 2008 8:48 AM

Cedarhill: I don't have the energy to educate the populace through email which is why I invite people to get from behind the computer, attend community forums, conferences and talk to legislators and you will clearly see that the crimes you mentioned are NOT the only crimes being defined as violent crime in the legislation that is being put together for Connecticut's 3 strikes. You mention only the most vile behavior which noone would fight against but it is not factual for the Conn 3 strikes law. Yes, the persistent offender bill may be weak, well then strngthen it. There's no reason for constructing another bill. I don't know where your facts about California 3 strkes came from because I read recently that California's prisons are so overpopulated that they are taking another look at their 3 strikes law that ended up putting people away for life even when their 3rd strike was might have been stealing a loaf of bread. I also read a recent article written by New York Times in which legislators stated that once they pass the bill in Connecticut that they can consider putting someone away for life after 2 strikes and those strikes could be burglary which was not a violent crime in the past but has been redefined in the last legislative session. The 3 strikes law that Ct is seeking to pass would not have put away the 2 men who killed the family in Cheshire because they had many NON VIOLENT crimes.My empathy leads me to help vicitms of trauma but it also leads me to think about the forces that lead people into crime( poverty, physical and sexual abuse,mental illness etc) and try to correct that. The fact that I don't deal drugs and pick up a gun does not mean that in I am so self righteous that I can't empahtize with those that make bad choices. I believe that any of us given the same circumstances MIGHT do something out of character whether we choose to belive it or not and yet I still have to care about you. That's how I define humanity. To err is human. A wonderful professor in Social Work reminded us (students)that in decision making we must not allow our emotions to override our ability to think clearly.She said that intellect and emotions are opposite parts of the brain. I have been reminded of that wisdom a lot (in life).I began putting it into practice and it has helped me so much in my activism. I find that people don't hear you when you're too emotional.Bottom line, I refuse to sit just sit back and take pride in the fact that we lock up more citizens than anywhere else in the world under the fallacy of being safe. I felt more safe when we had one prison and we cared about each other. I will continue to fight for equal justice and humanity until my Creator says, "well done thy good and faithful servant".

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 12, 2008 9:46 AM

Barb the words above are yours??? Hmmm who typed that for you??

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 12, 2008 9:54 AM

list of people from Hart. already supporting it
State Senate
9 Ralph Capenera (R)
14 Vincent Marino (R)
15 Joan Hartley (D)
15 Cicero Booker (I)
16 Sam Caligiuri (R)
17 Joseph Crisco (D)17 Tamath Rossi (R)
20 Thomas Simones (R)
22 Robert Russo (R)
24 Michael McLachlan (R)
25 Steve Papadakos (R)
26 Toni Boucher (R)
28 Martin Goldberg (D)
34 Leonard Fasano (R)
35 Tony Guglielmo (R)

House of Representatives
8 Timothy Ackert (R)
16 Robert Heagney (R)
18 Thomas Knox (R)
19 Theresa McGrath (R)
22 Scott Saunders (R)
31 Kurt Cavanaugh (R)
39 Jason Catala (R)
44 Angeline Kwasny (R)
45 Steven Mikutel (D)
57 Ted Graziani (D)
57 Christopher Davis (R)
58 Susan Lavelli-Hozempa (R)
59 William Ballard (R)
60 Michael Royston (R)
60 Mohan Sachdev (Petitioning Candidate)
63 John Rigby (R)
65 Anne Ruwet (R)
70 Kevin DelGobbo (R)
74 Frank Burgio (I)
75 Robert Adkins (I)
77 Jill Fitzgerald (R)
80 John "Corky" Mazurek (D)
80 James Farrell (Concerned Citizens)
81 Timothy Knibbs (Concerned Citizens)
85 Michael Vitali (R)
86 Vincent Candelora (R)
87 Veronica Kivela (R)
89 Martin Atkins (R)
92 Paul Ortiz (R)
100 Raymond Kalinowski (R)
101 Jeanne Stevens (R)
103 Al Adinolfi (R)
105 Theresa Conroy (D)
110 Roger Palazano (R)
111 John Frey (R)
117 Stephanie Williams (R)
120 John Harkins (R)
122 Lawrence Miller (R)
123 T.R. Rowe (R)
137 Ellen Wink (R)
138 Janice Giegler (R)
142 Lawrence Cafero (R)
151 Fred Camillo (R)

Posted by: Art Buchanan | November 12, 2008 11:33 AM

You miss the point entirely. The persistent felon law can be a sham. Minimum sentences for 10 or so of the 21-22 violent felonies are 1-2 years- so even with a second or third conviction the penalty can be 4-6 years. You would not feel very good if your sister, husband, child, or wife was raped or murdered and then given a 6 year prison sentence.
The Office of Fiscal Analysis study showed that the AVERAGE sentence given to a convict on a third violent felony was 7.9 years.

You miss the point entirely.
This is not about race. This is about violent people who do nor belong out in society and who the government fails to protect us from. I hope it never happens to you or your family, but if it does you will actually understand that when yopu are a victim it is forver-there is no parole for you, there is no probation for you. You miss the point of violent crime completely.Witgh all the young people dying in the cities it is hard to understandhow you can oppose putting violent offenders away forever.

Currently there are 437 violent offenders with 2 violent felony convictions on their records-if they commit a third and are caught and convicted -I think it is our government's responsibility to put them away forever to protect us.

I hope someday you wake up and understand this, but you live in a bizarre fantasy world and really have no grasp of the reality that exists. Interestingly the people you elect to represent you continue to foster false notions for you and you continue to re-elect them.
Just because one is for locking up violent criminals dose not mean one is against education and prevention-they are not separate issues-but first the violent and evil people need to be removed from society and for unknown reasons you want to continue to live side by side with them.

--

Posted by: bfair | November 13, 2008 8:36 AM

Cedarhill" In response to the last comment. The list of reps whom you listed as supporting the 3 strikes law.....63% of them were voted out of office this last election. Misinformed again!!!! Update your facts instead of wasting time TRYING to insult me. Peace

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 13, 2008 10:35 AM

Yeah I know I realized that after I posted it...my bad :)

But the plain simple truth and tell me if I am wrong...You want to put repeat violent offenders on a "poor me" list. You want to put REPEAT VIOLENT offender before the people they victimized?? You are using the 3 strikes law as a platform to get money for much need programs not caring about the fact that the victims do not get justice??? That is how I see it.
Yes we need the programs not one person is denying that. I will even fight with you for them. But why do you have to use this platform? Because it is high media attention?? Please Barbara explain why the victims mean so little to you? Are they the bad guys now? Which includes children and women in abuse sexual and physical!

Posted by: bfair | November 13, 2008 1:48 PM

I care about those who have been victimized. I, as well as family members have been victimized. I work with victims all the time as a clinical social worker. I work with them to empower them to move themselves from the "victim" role and toward being a functioning survivor. Because I advocate for fairness and humanity in the justice system does not eradicate my concern for those who have been victimized. Is it really that difficult to understand?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 13, 2008 2:02 PM

But you are advocating for a system that allows for Violent Repeat offenders to continue do do 1 to 5 years for Hannis crimes not once but 3 times. And the victims never get justice for the violence committed against them. And the criminal never gets to understand that this is wrong to do to other people. The only reason the numbers in Cali went up was because the population legal and non-legal. If you where to calculate crime on a per person...base on every 100,000 people the crime rate has not gone up. It is holding steady and dropping in some levels. Even with today economic problems.

Barabra I to would go out at night and help women and children leave their homes. I have sat with family's who have lost loved ones, including myself to murder. You can fight for the programs again I really want them to...but don't USE this platform to get attention it is wrong. It is using the victims of these crimes!

Posted by: Jeanne DeFlorio | November 22, 2008 5:00 PM

This contraversial subject matter is to be examined closely. Do victims begin to address their wounds because the offender spends the rest of his/her life in prison? Or do victims begin to heal because we as a society address some of our prevailent issues with some constructive assistance to what causes criminality in our society? How about addressing the highly proven and confirmed fact that incarating less than violent offenders creates a violet offender? SO are we offering rehabilitation through our criminal justice system or are we just warehousing a segment of our society and then releasing them with no re-entry assistance (the so called get out of jail free pass) which re-invites the back when another crime is committed. When a rapists goes to jail for rape and rapes again this time killing his/her victim, has that rapists killed their victim so that the victim cannot identify him/her or because he is just a violent re-offender? And what of the serial killer? The ones that are so difficult to catch? Until the killer himself slips up? When we finally do catch the serial killer he/she has never been to prison on a three strikes conviction has he/she? Yet, a violent killer that criminal is. We cannot legislate our way to safety, but perhaps we can re-think how to make our society more productive, more positive, more awe inspiring and there by promote safety, even security. First by rechanneling some of the funds that have been spent on military persuits, faulty persuits. Excessive costs to incarate 2 million people. Eigthy to ninty percent incarated initally on substance related crimes. We do have violent offender; society has always had violent offenders. Address the violent offenders with quick substantive laws. Release the others with alternative sentencing and utilize monies for preventing crime and improving, educating and expanding opportunites which provide economic possibilities.