Crime

Reports today on CNN indicate that the Netherlands will soon ban toelicking:

Unsolicited toe-licking would be banned in the Netherlands under a law sought by the Dutch Labor party after police were unable to prosecute a would-be Casanova with a taste for female toes because he had committed no crime.

A police spokesman said Friday a man had been detained after women sunning themselves in Rotterdam’s parks and beaches claimed he had snuck up on them and begun to lick their toes.

“The officers had to let him go. Licking a stranger’s toes is rather unusual but there is really nothing criminal about it,” the spokesman said.

As a Criminal Justice professional, I have a strong interest in news about crime and sentencing. I’ve always felt that judges should be provided with wide discretion in sentencing. Granted that this often means that the public may not be happy when a judge chooses to be lenient – but it also means that judges get to drop the hammer on someone when circumstances warrant – rather than having to use calculus to come up with a sentencing structure. Specifically, the federal courts and Massachusetts’s Criminal Courts use a sentencing matrix – and this drives me absolutely crazy.

I have a professional interest in this in the areas of identity theft, felony and misdemeanor (petty theft in Massachusetts) theft, and related crimes that I deal with at work. But that’s not my point.

Indiana doesn’t use a sentencing matrix or any crap like that – and thus we get wonderful sentences like this one, reported in yesterday’s Indianapolis Star:

Anthony Keith Brown and two of the police officers he tried to kill stared at each other in a Marion County courtroom Friday.

“You wasn’t laughing that night, was you?” Brown said, after the judge and most of the spectators had left the courtroom.

“I am now,” Officer Andy Lamle replied.

Officer Frank Miller II got in the last word as deputies ushered Brown away to begin serving a 126-year prison sentence:

“Enjoy your cage,” Miller said.

Brown led police on a car chase in December 2002, then unleashed a barrage of bullets at three Indianapolis Police Department officers.

Judge Sheila Carlisle of Marion Superior Court sentenced Brown on Friday for the attempted murders of Miller, Lamle and Officer Linda Jackson, who did not attend the sentencing.

Carlisle said a long prison term was the only way to protect society from the 26-year-old Brown.

“He clearly has a pattern of three things: guns, drugs and disregard for police authority,” Carlisle said in court. “If Mr. Brown is out in our community, or any other community, he’s going to get involved in criminal activity.”

A jury convicted Brown on May 12 of three counts of attempted murder, dealing cocaine and other crimes.

Brown repeatedly fired a rifle at the police officers during the Dec. 21, 2002, shootout.

“This defendant is an animal and deserves to be locked up for the rest of his life,” Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi said after the hearing.

After leading police on a car chase, Brown fired at least 34 shots from a MAK 90 assault rifle at the officers near Sherman Drive and 32nd Street.

The Massachusetts Criminal Code takes up about three inches on my shelf in my office. The Indiana Code takes up about 1/2 of an inch.

Which system is more effective? There’s no question.

The Bl(A)ck Tea Society, one of the leftist groups planning on protests during the Democratic National Convention next week in Boston has this little ditty on their website:

Scenario III: “Liberation/De-arrest”

This is an extremely high-risk procedure. If done correctly, it works. If done incorrectly, it is likely to result in serious repercussions. You must be able to quickly assess the situation and decide on whether or not to attempt a de-arrest. Things to take into consideration are the weight of the consequences. Is your comrade being arrested carrying something that will trigger ridiculous charges? Is it worth the risk? Is your comrade of a foreign nationality or here illegally? What are your chances?

If you decide to proceed, the general scenario of an arrest has various stages. The police stop, physically restrain the person, and eventually place the person in handcuffs and take him/her away. Any de-arrest must be done before the handcuffs are put on. Basic martial arts knowledge is helpful, or at least a basic knowledge of various holds and how to get out of them (specifically if the person being arrested is going to try to get out of a hold).

When de-arresting, everything must happen quickly. Whether freeing yourself from a hold or assisting someone else to get out of a hold, follow through in the same direction you are facing. You do not have time to physically turn around.

The basic idea of an assisted de-arrest is a hit and run. This scenario is specifically when the person being arrested is on the ground with one cop on his/her back. Two people are required to complete this de-arrest in addition to the person being arrested. The first person needs to knock the cop off balance and off of your comrade’s back. The first person should cross his/her arms over his/her chest and hit from the side. The second person needs to pick your comrade up off the ground and get him/her running. This is a one shot deal. Regardless of whether or not you are successful, you do not get a second chance. ONCE A DE-ARREST HAS OCCURED OR BEEN ATTEMPTED, THE PEOPLE INVOLVED ARE DONE FOR THE DAY! ALTER YOUR APPEARENCE AND GO HOME! YOU MAY NOT BE SEEN IN PUBLIC AGAIN!

Liberation can be successful, but carries the risk of massive consequences. Liberation is most effective when all points involved are ready and react without hesitation. It is easier to do this if you attend a training or practice doing it. As always, be safe, and be aware of your surroundings.

Yup, that’s what these folks endorse.

De-Arresting.

Also known as assaulting and attacking police officers.

I could post some of the other dribble on their website, but it’s simply not worth the space on this weblog.

Today’s Indianapolis Star has an article about the number of carry-permits that lawful gunowners have in Indiana presently (300,000):

In May, when pizza deliveryman Ronald B. Honeycutt was confronted by a gun-toting robber, he drew his own 9 mm and pulled the trigger, pumping more than 10 bullets into the Indianapolis man, killing him.

Two months before, when a neighbor came after Daniel L. Floyd with an ax handle, the Johnson County man fired his 9 mm handgun, sending one bullet into the neighbor’s neck and two into his torso. The man died.

Like 300,000 other Hoosiers, the two men had permits to carry handguns in public. In neither case were charges filed.

Unlike the communist state that I presently reside in, Indiana has a pretty good legal and legislative system where the laws are simple, easily enforced, carry stiff penalties, and respect the rights of the people.

I was one of those who at age 18 applied for a gun permit and received it a few weeks later. Then again, I was also an employee of the Sheriff’s Department But during my eighteen months working in law enforcement, I only once saw a permit revoked – and never saw a permit abused.

Massachusetts is a whole other story.