Categories
Quick Analysis

Democrats “Soft on Crime” Strategy

Democrats are in danger of losing their key long-term support groups in 2020. Blue collar workers, buoyed by Trump’s ambitious pursuit of increasing their job opportunities through correcting unfair trade policies, may vote Republican in record numbers.

The same may be said for blacks and Latinos, who have fared far better under the current Administration than any other in history. In desperation, Democrats are seeking to take positions they believe will help them regain minority support. Their bid to do so is based on a mistaken, racially biased, and deeply insulting, view of their priorities.

One of those Democrat positions is to be “soft” on crime. 

Examples abounds. in New York, notes Court Innovation.org, the completely Democrat controlled government has attacked the use of bail. “In January 2020, New York State put into effect sweeping criminal justice legislation, strictly curtailing the use of cash bail and pretrial detention… In New York City, 43 percent of the almost 5,000 people detained pretrial on April 1, 2019 would have been released under the new legislation. Outside of New York City, the effects could be even greater. Of the almost 205,000 criminal cases arraigned in New York City in 2018, only 10 percent would have been eligible for money bail under the new law.”

In San Francisco, the newly elected District Attorney, Chesa Boudin, told Jacobin magazine that “Our system of mass incarceration is grossly disproportionate to our problem with crime and public safety. In fact, the way we arrest and lock people up actually makes us less safe, creates more crime. For too long politicians have falsely equated victims’ rights and public safety with conviction rates and length of sentence…”

While serving as Virginia’s governor, Terry McAuliffe advocated giving convicted felons the right to vote. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders advocates giving the vote to felons still serving in jail.

One reason for the Democrats’ interest in this topic is Beside this you can also take a help of generic ED drug. acquisition de viagra cialis canadian generic Available in different forms of consumption, the medication provide great relief to women from excessive menstrual periods. I am glad that my wife remained loyal to me in an unlabelled package and india tadalafil Patricia knew nothing about it. What is generic sildenafil? Sildenafil was patented as super generic viagra http://www.midwayfire.com/stations.asp and other expensive anti ED medicines. clear.  According to an NYU study, “disenfranchisement laws tend to take more votes from Democratic than from Republican candidates. Analysis shows that felon disenfranchisement played a decisive role in U.S. Senate elections in recent years. Moreover, at least one Republican presidential victory would have been reversed if former felons had been allowed to vote… felon voters showed strong Democratic preferences in both presidential and senatorial elections…even comparatively unpopular Democratic candidates… would have garnered almost 70 percent of the felon vote.”

All of these positions are based on the erroneous belief that minorities somehow share their unrealistic and soft views on crime, despite their heightened vulnerability to its ill effects.

According to the federal Office of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research,  (HUD)  Uniform Crime Reports, “African Americans and Hispanics are more likely to be victims of violent crimes — especially serious violent crimes — than are whites… African Americans are disproportionately victims of homicide … Similarly, low-income people are much more likely than others to experience crime, including violent crime.”

As terrible as that statistic is, it is, at least, down from the historic highs seen towards the ends of the 20th Century. A Forbes article by Neil Howe notes that “Crime rates have plunged since the mid-‘90s. After rising sporadically from the early ‘60s onwards, crime rates reached unprecedented peaks in the ‘80s and early ‘90s. It wasn’t until 1995 that crime’s climb gave way to decades of decline. As of 2013, the rate of violent crime victimization, as measured by the U.S. National Victimization Survey, is down 71% from its peak in 1994. Over this same period, the rate of violent crime victimizations for 12- to 24-year-olds—the age bracket most likely to commit crime—fell 78%. Many of these youths are moving to large cities, which is just where violence has subsided the most. Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles have experienced 76% and 90% decreases in the murder rate since 1992, respectively.”

That decrease did not come from being soft on crime. It was concurrent with just the opposite approach. A research study by the Harry S. Truman School of Public Affairs notes that U.S. incarceration rate increased by 338% from 1980 to 2008.

Michael Graham, in an Inside Sources review, asks “Where is the line between ‘criminal justice reform’ and being ‘for the criminal?’ And are progressive Democrats about to cross it?… Sen. Elizabeth Warren is defending a judge who’s being prosecuted for letting a drug-dealing, repeat-offender illegal immigrant sneak out of her courtroom and evade an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official waiting to take him into custody. Warren said ‘it was inappropriate’ for federal prosecutors to charge the judge, while other 2020 hopefuls like Sen. Bernie Sanders (and until recently Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand) believe ICE should be abolished altogether… The days of Democrats fending off charges of being ‘soft on crime’ are clearly over.”

Illustration: Pixabay