Friday, August 19, 2005

"Guns, chaos, death…"

More information, or speculation and description in lieu of information, on the "smash-and-grab mayhem in London" yesterday can be found in today's London Free Press here, here, here and here.

Ian Gillespie of the Free Press suggests that "it's time to get hopping mad" about guns, and suggests "we started imposing mandatory long-term sentences for weapons-related offences." As a deterrent? There are already laws against murder, assault and robbery, with punishment apparently (or so one would think) determined by the severity of the crime. I would suggest that the objectively observed outcome of criminal activity is the most non-arbitrary standard that the justice system can perceive in its deliberation, not the means. Additional considerations such as the weapon used are not only superfluous to the actual crime, they potentially introduce arbitrary and emotional encumbrances to what should be a rational judicial process. For example, the hysteria about guns in this country.

1 Comment:

Anonymous said...

Care to decipher what you just said? Are you for or against heavier punishment for the use of weapons in the commission of a crime? Personally, I don't care if they work as a deterrent or not. Once somebody has shown the willingness to employ potentially lethal weapons, lock them the hell up. Even if it can't be for forever, at least we'll be that much safer for as long as they're imprisoned. Deterrence is important, but it's a sidebar issue.