Opinion Nuggets: Doing the Time of their Life

"You just made a fool of yourself in front of T-Bone."

Neither is there time nor reason for a full write-up today; the idiocy of today’s New York Times editorial on criminal sentencing is at least concise enough for me not to belabor the point. The wizards at the Gray Lady posit that the sentence of life without parole is doled out too freely given the severity of the sentence. I do not concur.

The sentence [of life without parole] is no less severe when applied to adults. Yet life without parole, which exists in all states (Alaska’s version is a 99-year sentence), is routinely used, including in cases where the death penalty is not in play and where even an ordinary life sentence might be too harsh.

From 1992 to 2008, the number in prison for life without parole tripled from 12,453 to 41,095, even though violent crime declined sharply all over the country during that period. That increase is also much greater than the percentage rise in offenders serving life sentences.

The American Law Institute, a group composed of judges, lawyers and legal scholars, has wisely called for restricting the use of the penalty to cases “when this sanction is the sole alternative to a death sentence.”

First, to be clear: my scorn extends to prattling ninnies at the ALI with no less rancorous condemnation. Dumbasses.

More importantly, did these venerable scholars consider that the reason why “crime declined sharply all over the country” was because “the number in prison for life without parole tripled?” There is only one force that we know with absolute certainty that deters crime: an increase in the cost incurred by committing that crime. Sometimes that takes the form of harsh or uncompromising judges, hard-nosed cops, and relentless prosecutors. Other times, it takes the (admittedly more awesome) form of granny packing a sidearm. Liberals despise both.

There’s nothing valiant about condemning justice for its sometimes gritty byproducts. Issuing a blanket condemnation of a specific prison sentence is about as nonsensical as refusing to use the number two. By breaking the social contract, criminals forfeit their constitutionally protected rights. We’re not giving out life sentences without parole for parking tickets or smoking a dime bag. These are very bad people who have, with certainty beyond a reasonable doubt, done very bad things. I see not problem with sticking them in a very bad place. (Sadly, Canada is not a viable possibility—for now—so we’ll have to stick with prison.)