It's true most are not caught in the act. You have to play the hand that is dealt.myntalfloss wrote:I'm with you on the difficulty of trying to put those kind of mandetory laws in effect but it could be done. As in the forfiture of property in drug cases.JALLEN wrote:There are laws on the books for that, with mandatory prison time, but these are usually the first to be dropped in plea negotiations, according to many working on both sides of the crime sausage factory.myntalfloss wrote:I agree about focusing on laws in effect and known criminals. The problem seems to be with the unknown criminal. Most of these asshats that are giving us a bad name have a history of bad behavior but not until they act out with a gun do they become known. Background checks don't give me heartburn and I'd love to see a mandatory sentence for a crime with a gun to be stacked on top of any other sentences.mojo84 wrote:myntalfloss wrote:Does anyone else think we're kind of expressing a cognitive dissonance? We have insisted for years that 'guns don't kill people, people do',(which I firmly believe) and yet when Obama, (sorry, Satan) suggests checking out the people, not the guns, we get our panties in a wad. Is there anything that we law-abiding gun owners will accept without defaulting to the ‘black helicopters’ scenario?
They need to focus on enforcing the laws already in effect. There are plenty of known armed criminals that are running lose killing and robbing people. They need to focus on the criminals and leave the law abiding alone
I don't know how you make it mandatory that filed charges cannot be dropped, or that the prosecution MUST file all possible charges. You can't ban plea bargaining without a hideous increase in judges and courtrooms and court appointed lawyers.
Shooting them in the act is the most efficient, no inefficient trial proceedings, no expensive prison stays, no bogus rehab programs, no recidivism, no probation foolishness, and you are pretty sure to shoot the right perp, no alibis about being in Peoria that night.
Shooting the on the spot would certainly give me the warm and fuzzies. I often thought that what they should do with hijackers. Lead them off the plane and shoot 'em on the tarmac. If you think mandetory sentences would be hard to enact, can you imagine getting that passed.
And then there's the issue that most criminals are not caught in the act and given Texas' piss-poor record of getting capital cases overturned, there' d have to a big Mulligan clause in the law to cover the shooting of innocent people. But hey, can't make an omlet w/o breaking a few eggs, right?
I have no problem with extreme caution when the perp is not caught in the act, given the appalling instances of convicting the wrong person. Think of the difference between L.H. Oswald, who was not seen doing the acts, and Jack Ruby, who was captured and arrested doing the act. Many of us saw it live on TV!
Nor am I talking about post arrest executions. I favor homeowners shooting home break in perps, store clerks killing armed robbers, etc., self defense. When some animal opens up at a school or mall, a licensed carrier, whether O or C, ought to be encouraged, or at least not discouraged, to put us out of that fool's misery.