I'm Wondering About Prop 47
The Lost Coast Outpost reports on eight inmates being released from the Humboldt County Jail after their charges were reduced to misdemeanors per recently passed Prop 47. The Santa Rosa Press- Democrat reports on charges being reduced in Sonoma County.
Interesting that the comments from both LCO and SRP-D seem rather leery of the idea releasing anyone. I can't help but wonder how many making those comments voted for Prop 47? I suppose you can count me among them as I did vote for Prop 47, albeit grudgingly. Now we get to see how it works.
What I didn't like about Prop 47 is it didn't differentiate between predatory criminals such as burglars and other thieves, as opposed to those involved in what most consider victimless crimes- simple drug possession and such. If someone just gets caught with some pot, I don't feel they should even go to jail. If someone is stealing, or physically attacking others, they should probably spend more time in jail than they already do. But who are the ones being released?
I would assume that by now, with both prisons and jails being overcrowded, we'd prioritize those being held to the predatory types- those assaulting or stealing from others. Are the non- predatory types still being jailed? Then you have the mix of the two types that you read about where someone is arrested for drugs but was also in possession of stolen property, or some such.
You have to wonder how it was working before Prop 47 and how it will work now? I want the predatory types in jail for at least longer than just overnight. Then again, it seemed like they were being released fairly quickly even before Prop 47. Maybe there isn't going to be much difference in the before and after?
posted by Fred Mangels @ 7:28 AM
11 comments
11 Comments:
I wonder how much money will be saved annually?
like the rest of the idiots who do not or did not research the proposition, BEFORE voting on it, our society is now having to live in the aftermath. Good job on questioning the proposition AFTER the fact!
anon@7:48
And the alternative would have been......
1. Continue to overpopulate the jails and prisons, which the courts have mandated an end to, which precipitated 47, or,
2. Build more jails and prisons. That solution would require lots of time to implement, lots of $$$$ (which can always be gotten by lowering welfare and social services according to the conservative-mind-set )and, suitable locations. NIMBY anyone?
If you had/have a better idea, let's hear it
Good questions Fred, but your analysis is a little simplistic. The act does let drug offenders go. Marijuana has been an infraction for years, so no jail for that. This has made hard drugs a Misdemeanor, like Cocane, Heroin, Meth, PCP. What is known is that those folks commit petty theft crimes, and burglaries, so they are inter-related. It changes two major theft crimes Possession of Stolen Property and Comm'l Burglary to Misdemeanors if the value is less than $950. Comm'l Burg was used to make ordinary shoplifting cases a Felony. Stolen Prop cases are what you charge when you can't prove a Burglary (ie house is broken into and thief is selling loot at Pawn Shop). In short these changes massively restructured a while criminal class some of who harm only themselves, but most effect society. The Prop changes no laws on any violent offenders and in fact the benefits do not apply to those who have committed violent crime in their past. I hope this helps.
There are almost no perps in jail for mere drug possession. This was the case even before our jails were overcrowded, but with crowding there was even more incentive to give light sentences for mere possession.
The people doing jail time have other related offenses -- selling drugs, theft, burglary, battery, etc. Drugs might be the reason perps commit these crimes, but they're not in jail for the crimes.
Basically, before Prop 47, a drug possession charge was just an optional thing that could be thrown on top of the pile of charges to help assure bad people stay in jail longer... like giving more jail time when a gun is used in the commission of a crime. It's not an anti-gun or anti-drug law... it's just another tool for police and district attorneys, leverage when making plea deals or when judges pass their sentence.
In short, Californians screwed themselves over on this one. Petty crime is already way up. Expect it to skyrocket now as all sorts of offenders do less or no time because we've removed an important tool needed to keep bad people off our streets.
Lesson #1 when trying to hoodwink voters... label your law as being about safe schools and neighborhoods when it's really about releasing criminals from jail.
Odd they say only 8 were to be released. I was visiting the courthouse and overheard a deputy say that 75 are being released this weekend. Lock your doors and keep a watchful eye out. These hoods will commit crimes and end back up in jail before the week is up. It always ends up that way. I guess they miss having 3 squares and a warm dry place to stay.
Well if 75 are released and commit new crimes that they are arrested for, then there will be 75 open beds for them. Sheriff will not be able to blame this on over-crowding.
8:51 wrote, "I hope this helps.".
Thanx for the clarification.
Hopefully we can start tackling the real issues such as the stigmata associated with being a criminal and somehow incorporating these people into civil society in a better way than the jail system which has a very high recidivism rate.
"Hopefully we can start tackling the real issues such as the stigmata associated with being a criminal and somehow incorporating these people into civil society..."
Hopefully. The problem is, some people are career criminals, whether they commit petty crimes or major crimes as part of their career. I've known some of them.
Even if someone is a petty thief, but does it all the time, I don't know that there is any hope of rehabilitation.
I do believe in redemption, and that some people can turn their lives around. I also acknowledge that some people need either strict control over their lives, or to be excluded from general society as much as possible.
I'm not sure that Prop 47 works toward that.
Two things: because of prison realignment, many of these folks were spending little time in jail after srrest anyway. Eventually, after they went to trial or plea bargain, they'd presumably go to jail, or perhaps probation. So there was no immediate jail consequence for their behavior. We've already seen the effects of this. But as another poster pointed out, to remedy this would cost lots of $$$$ (increase the size of the jail, more jailers, more money spent on incarceration costs, etc.). The new law doesn't mean no jail time for those srrested -- but it will be for misdemeanors, not felonies, and will be considerably delayed, just like now.
Second, you can think of the increase in the stolen property limit from $500 to $950 as a sort of inflation adjustment. $950 today is the equivalent of $500 in 1989, and i believe the $500 figure was put in the law considerably earlier than that.
Post a Comment
<< Home