The Predictable Pattern

The pro-criminal industrial complex, which includes legacy groups like the ACLU and the NAACP, and newer more aggressive advocates such as the Death Penalty Information Center, Sentencing Project, the Marshall Project and numerous Soros-funded groups with a state or city name like “Californians For Safety and Justice,” are celebrating the expected elimination of the death penalty in Virginia.  In an opinion piece in last Friday’s Washington Post, Ashley Nellis, a senior research analyst at the Sentencing Project notes  “Now, Virginia joins a growing wave of states that have rejected this punishment and chosen to make our criminal justice system more humane, equitable and fair.”

Setting aside for the moment the suggestion that executing John Allen Muhammad, the Beltway Sniper, for indiscriminately murdering 12 people and injuring six others, was somehow unfair,  one of the primary arguments utilized by Ms Nellis and most other death penalty opponents throughout the decades-long campaign to abolish it has been that the alternative sentence of life in prison without parole (LWOP) still protects the public, costs less, and constitutes justice.  Here’s a succinct ACLU version of that argument.

But, as many of us who have supported the death penalty for the worst murderers have for years predicted,  once the abolitionists reached their goal of eliminating capital punishment, LWOP became their new target.  As Ms. Nellis points out, “LWOP is also deeply problematic and riddled with many of the exact same problems as the death penalty.  In the end, sentenced people are still condemned to die in prison, but LWOP sentences receive far less scrutiny by our justice system than death sentences.”

She then trots out the same arguments used to condemn capital punishment;  “For one, there’s the claim that such sentences improve public safety. But many studies have found that extreme punishments such as the death penalty and LWOP do not deter violent crime. Additionally, significant research on offending reveals that in most cases, even individuals who commit serious crimes grow beyond their poor judgment and learn to abide by the law. So locking people up for life is unnecessary.”

So we should all agree that Los Angeles mother Heather Barron, and her boyfriend, Kareem Leiva’s  years of horrific torture and ultimate murder of Anthony Avalos, who survived until age 10, was just a matter of poor judgement  and we should help them learn to abide by the law?   With regard to deterrence, there are quite a few peer-reviewed, widely available studies that differ from the one Ms. Nellis cites.

Ms Nellis continues, “And then there is the cost argument. Though cost savings are greater with LWOP than the death penalty, this is mostly at the expense of substandard legal protections. To commit just one person to life in prison is at least a $1 million investment for the state. Costs are particularly hefty for folks over the age of 55, who make up 3 in 10 people serving life sentences and often require much greater medical attention and care.”

That’s the same argument death penalty supporters made for an effective death penalty process similar to the one the state of Virginia used to have.  Virginia was saving tons of money because its process was able to euthanize absolutely guilty aggravated murderers within seven years from conviction.

LWOP we are told, is also racially biased.  “Two-thirds of the people with life sentences are people of color.”

This makes more sense if one recognizes that 52% of all murders are committed by African Americans, who make up just 13% of the U.S. population.

The article ends with the admonition that “We need to end life sentences for good. At the Sentencing Project, we’re proposing a 20-year cap on life sentences as the best path forward. The proposal is backed by research and the experience of other nations. In Scandinavia, for example, sentences are capped at around 20 years for the most serious offenses. A 20-year cap recognizes that people grow and change and that our laws should always allow for both justice and mercy.”

I’m not sure that the Scandinavian model can be applied rationally to Chicago or Baltimore but, for people living in a bubble, it sure sounds good.   Ms Nellis has a devout disciple in Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón who is currently pushing for the 20-year sentencing cap.

The endgame for pro-criminal progressives offers nothing for the law abiding public or victims of crime, except more crime.  They are not even hiding this anymore.