Alphecca

So true.

>So any attempt to "get guns off the streets" by imposing more and more gun control measures (or bans!) will have absolutely no effect.<

You forgot to mention the asinine gun "buybacks."

There is a time, I believe, where a truly wise judge may give a lighter sentence without being "soft" - this was not one of those times. Even if he did "take responsibility" for his actions.

As far as kids stealing guns, what gives? We just had a couple here in Michigan steal guns and go on a murderous rampage. Maybe if we made stealing and murder illegal, they wouldn't do these things anymore.

When the kids get caught with stolen handguns, is the sentence (if any) lighter if the guns are Mass Compliant? Jack

Now Jeff...

"And, teen gangs will steal firearms, not legally purchase them. So any attempt to "get guns off the streets" by imposing more and more gun control measures (or bans!) will have absolutely no effect."

If you ban all firearms, the street gangs won't be breaking into houses to steal them, because the people will have all turned them in.

Right?

Right?

Bueller?

Bueller?

Uhhh, Yeah! That's right! I'll have turned all my guns in! We all will! Yeah, that's the ticket...

And they continue to get tough on gun crime in Boston. This "child" was busted for illegal gun possession, and had a prior convictin for armed robbery.

The "compassionate" judge hearing the case, gave him 11 days. As a result of him not being in prison where he belonged, he was subsequently shot and paralyzed on the gun-free streets of Boston.

Maybe if judges understood why we really punish offenders they'd be more willing to lock them away. It's not about rehabilitation or to get them off the street.

We lock them up to protect them and to maintain an orderly society. If people believe the system will dispense appropriate justice they're willing to let the system take care of the problem. If they don't believe it some will try to handle it themselves.

If someone killed one of my family I would let the system catch them and put them away for a long time, if I thought that that's what would happen. If I didn't think that I would have no compunction about killing the criminal myself. It's better for society to put them in jail to protect them than to have to deal with the blood fueds that would otherwise develop.

But the punishment has to fit the crime for it to work as intended.

As and example, there really was no punishment suitable for Jeffrey Dahmer. He should have just gotten the death penalty. So the other prisoners took care of it.

So when judges consistently go soft on criminals they're running the risk that sooner or later the rest of us will stop trusting the system and simply take matters into our own hands.