 |
 |
|
|
Vote Archive |
Issue: Should Governors Commute Death Sentences After Juries Say It Is The Appropriate Punishment? |
|
Web-voters have spoken loud and clear. 72% say "NO" to a governor’s ability to commute death sentences after juries have considered all of the evidence and determined that "death" is an appropriate punishment. In America, we ask jurors to interrupt their everyday lives and bring their common sense to the Courtroom to determine the guilt or innocence of a defendant charged with a crime. If they determine a defendant is guilty of a crime, then we ask them to recommend the appropriate punishment. This is called the penalty phase of a trial. During this part, the prosecution and the defense present evidence about a defendant’s criminal record as well as evidence designed to mitigate the punishment. If a jury, after listening to all of the evidence for and against the defendant, determines that the appropriate punishment is a sentence of death, web-voters, by an overwhelming majority, object to any governor commuting that death sentence. |
|
Issue: What concerns you most about the safety of your child's school? |
Parents Most Concerned About Disruptive Students In Their Schools And Lack Of Discipline By School Administrators |
When asked, "What concerns you most about the safety of your children's school?," 495 web-viewers responded. Their votes are as follows:
A number of web-voters commented on their concerns about bullying which goes on in Fayette County's schools. One web-voter made a very sensible suggestion. He said,
GREAT IDEA! It's about time that we eliminate the confidentiality of juvenile courts. Some of our most violent crimes are committed by juveniles. The public has a right to know who is dangerous in our community. |
|
Issue: Is residential burglary a violent crime? |
|
76% of web-voters believe that residential burglary is indeed a violent crime and any attempts to call it otherwise are made by individuals who have not been the victim of a residential burglary. We couldn’t say it better than Fran Andersen did in her response to the question. Here are Fran’s feelings about residential burglary:
|
|
Issue: Should Gov. Paul Patton release inmates early from Kentucky prisons? |
|
Issue: Should 17-year-old John Malvo face the death penalty? |
|
Issue: Did the media coverage of the "sniper" encourage the sniper's conduct? |
|
Web-voters were asked if the media coverage of the D.C. snipers encouraged their conduct. By a large majority, the public said, "Yes!" News coverage is one thing, but a constant barrage 24-hours a day is more than the public wants or needs. Law enforcement has long been concerned that massive media coverage of violent behavior encourages copy-cat crime. In the case of the snipers, the public believes that the media coverage was too much. |
|
Issue: Should drugs be legalized? |
|
Fortunately, the vast majority of web-voters understand that legalization of drugs is not an alternative, but rather a surrender that will further reduce our quality of life. Almost all Americans agree that the legalization of drugs would complicate an already devastating situation. Health and social costs associated with the increased availability of drugs would stress our economy. Crime would not decrease. The moral fiber of our country would be torn apart. The devastating effects of drugs are real and lasting. It is not the drug laws or the enforcement of the drug laws that cause the harm, it is the drugs themselves. We are grateful that most Americans still have some common sense and oppose the legalization of drugs. |
|
Issue: Should insurance companies be allowed to cancel the homeowner's policy of a victim of multiple burglaries? |
|
90% of web-voters say no to homeowner's insurance cancellation as a result of burglaries. Web-voters don’t like the idea of insurance companies canceling the homeowner's insurance policies of innocent victims of burglaries. It’s not the fault of victims, so why should they have to suffer the consequences? Good question! Maybe insurance companies ought to provide all of us an answer. |
|
Issue: Should dead-beat parents go to jail for ignoring Court Orders to pay child support? |
|
Issue: Should parolees be returned to prison for violating the conditions of their parole? |
|
Convicted law-breakers who refuse to comply with the rules established by the Parole Board upon their early release from prison simply show a continuing refusal or inability to conform their behavior to laws or other rules. The first obligation of government is to do all that it can to guarantee the safety of the public. Those convicted felons who have already been given a break by parole should be re-incarcerated. That’s the feeling of the vast majority of web-voters. |
|
Issue: Should photos of Lexington’s convicted felons be published in the newspaper? |
|
When asked whether the photos of convicted felons should be published, 87% of web-voters said, "Yes." The fundamental purpose of government is to do all that it can to guarantee the safety of the public. That being the case, it makes great sense that the public ought to know who amongst them is dangerous and has been convicted of serious crimes. Some day, perhaps the internet will provide the opportunity for the public to see the photographs of those in our community who commit serious crimes. |
|
Issue: Do you believe that burglary is a violent crime? |
|
One web-voter was right on track when he said:
The impact of burglaries on victims is frequently devastating. They fear for their safety and security in their own homes. True, most burglaries do not involve physical violence, but the emotional injury caused to burglary victims frequently has a greater impact. It’s time to treat burglaries more seriously given the nature of the damage they do to victims. |
|
Issue: How many burglaries have been committed in Fayette County in the last 20 years - 10,000, 20,000, 40,000 or 60,000? |
|
Over the past 20 years there have been over 60,000 burglaries reported to police in Fayette County. In the past 6 years alone, those burglaries have resulted in over $32 million dollars in stolen property. Nationally, burglars have been shown to be some of America’s most prolific criminals. Because such a large number of burglaries are committed by such a small number of burglars, it makes great sense to incarcerate these repeat offenders for as long as possible. The public deserves to be protected from them. |
|
Issue: Is it time to make convicted criminals serve their entire sentence? |
84% Of Web-Voters Want To Abolish Parole And Require Convicted Criminals To Serve Their Entire Sentences |
|
There is increasing support for the abolition of parole and the requirement that convicted criminals serve the entire sentence they receive after being convicted of a crime. The public continues to be frustrated that sentences received by criminals are not accurate. They only serve a small percentage of those sentences. Swiftness and certainty of punishment is what the public wants. They understand that abolishing parole would require the shortening of some sentences, however, they do want criminals to serve all of the sentence they receive. |
|
Issue: Should taxpayers pay for elective surgery for prisoners? |
|
A former prison employee put the entire issue in perspective:
According to that former employee, here are just a few examples of our mixed-up prison priorities:
Don’t fool yourself. This
goes on more than the general public realizes." |
|
Issue: Should crime victims have the right to speak at a defendant's sentencing? |
|
Kentucky is one of several
states in which crime victims do not have "the right" to speak at the
sentencing of the defendants who victimized them. Thirty-two states have
enacted Constitutional Amendments in order to guarantee rights to victims.
Although some judges allow victims to speak at sentencing, it is not a
guaranteed right. It should be, and web-voters
agree. |
|
Issue: Do you believe the present juvenile justice system is effective? |
|
An overwhelming 90% of web-voters do not believe that our present juvenile justice system is effective. Juvenile Court in America was created over a hundred years ago. Its purpose was to bring to bear all social services to rehabilitate young people who had typically committed minor law violations. Juvenile courts were designed to be non-adversarial and confidential as they attempted to make decisions "in the best interest of the child." Since then many things have changed. Young people are committing far more serious crimes. Appellate courts have ruled that juveniles are entitled to the same constitutional protections as adults. However, the confidentiality of juvenile courts remains in place. The public seems to want to know who the dangerous and repeat juvenile offenders are, as well as to be assured that they are suffering consequences for the crimes they commit. |
|
Issue: Should the "no contact" requirement of Domestic Violence Orders apply to both parties? |
|
Proposed law to require "No Contact" provision to apply to both parties of Domestic Violence Orders dies during current Legislature. The question generated a
great deal of spirited debate on lexingtonprosecutor. Even in the midst of a spirited discussion, one voter said:
Click here to view the entire web discussion. Editor’s comment: Obviously people can disagree on an issue, without being disagreeable. |
|
Issue: Do prisoners have too many privileges? |
Most Web-Voters Believe Prisoners Have Too Many Privileges, However, They Still Want Them Rehabilitated |
|
Web-Voters say prisoners have too many privileges. 78% of Web-Voters believe that prison inmates have it too easy. However, most voters want convicted criminals to be rehabilitated, and several voters made good points. Here are a few:
Speaking of phone service for prisoners, this could only happen in California: For security reasons, prison inmates in California's prison system are allowed to make only collect telephone calls. Two telephone companies have contracts with the state to provide telephone service. They pay the state a commission on collect calls made out of the prison. A state Senator, Richard Polanco of Los Angeles, is outraged at the "exorbitant phone rates" families must pay when prison inmates call home. Unlike Californians not behind bars, prison inmates have no collect call options, including the use of lower rate calling cards, and Sen. Polanco apparently doesn't like that and intends to do something about it. Editor's comment: Whatever happened to lawbreakers losing some privileges? |
|
Issue: Do you think juvenile courts should be open to the public? |
|
Juvenile courts were designed to be a non-adversarial environment where social service experts would determine what the best disposition of a case involving a juvenile should be. Under that plan, there would be no need for adversarial proceedings in juvenile courts. The role of lawyers would be minimal at most. NOT NOW! Almost all of that has changed. Today’s juvenile courts resemble adult courts in all but one respect. JUVENILE COURT IS STILL SECRET. Today, juveniles commit some of the most serious and vicious crime imaginable, yet the public is still unable to learn the identity of these dangerous, yet young, criminals. Web-Voters, by a large margin, want that changed. The public does have a right to know who is dangerous, and protect themselves from these young criminals. |
|
Issue: Do you think criminals are treated better than crime victims by the criminal justice system? |
|
Web-Voters by a large margin, believe that criminals are treated better than their victims by the criminal justice system. It’s no wonder that some of the general public is losing confidence in the court system, and that military tribunals are not a bad idea of dealing with terrorists as opposed to our court system. For example, the first terrorist bombing of New York’s World Trade Center occurred in 1993. It took our court system EIGHT YEARS to get the case to trial. EIGHT YEARS!!! Eight years that the victims and survivors of the victims had to wait for some closure. Web-Voters seem to sense that crime victims are left to try to put the pieces of their lives back together, while the criminals are frequently back on the streets in no time. Many are probated and never suffer any consequences for their crimes. |
|
Issue: Do you consider armed robbery and attempted murder violent offenses? |
|
97% of Web-Voters said they believe that attempted murder and armed robbery qualify as "violent crimes." Why is that important? Because under Kentucky law, criminals convicted of "violent crimes" must serve 85% of their sentence. Attempted murder and armed robbery are not now classified as "violent crimes." Now, under Kentucky law, a person convicted of attempted murder or armed robbery is eligible for parole after serving only 20% of his sentence. It is time for the Legislature to change that. Kentucky’s Commonwealth’s Attorneys are supporting legislation to expand the definition of "violent crimes." The Paducah Sun recognized this shortcoming in our criminal law last year, and urged the Legislature to expand the definition of "violent crime," in the following editorial.
|
||||||||||
|
Issue: Should voters have a right to know the positions of judicial candidates on controversial issues? |
94% of Web-Voters Think Voters Should Have A Right To Know the Positions of Judicial Candidates On Controversial Issues |
|
94% of Web-Voters think voters should have a right to know the position of judicial candidates on controversial issues. Web-Voter J.G. says, "I need to know something about judicial candidates. I should not be asked to buy 'a pig in the poke.'" J. G. reflects the attitude of most of the voters on the question of whether the public should have the right to know the position of judicial candidates on controversial issues. Their concern appears to be that, under the present system, they have no idea about the individuals who want to serve as judges. Overwhelmingly, they want to know. |
Related News Story: U. S. Supreme Court To Decide Whether States Can Ban Judicial Candidates From Speaking Out On Controversial Issues |
|
Does a
candidate for judge surrender his/her right Do voters have
a right to know something The United States Supreme Court agreed to decide whether states can stop candidates for judicial office from speaking out on controversial issues. The case from Minnesota represents an important test of free speech and what candidates are able to say in order to win election to the bench. In Kentucky
Since that decision, the Kentucky Supreme Court amended its rule (Canon 5,B,(1),c), relating to the Campaign Conduct for judicial office. Now the rule prohibits judicial candidates from making:
By reviewing the Minnesota case, the US Supreme Court will decide whether states can stop candidates for judicial office from speaking out on abortion, prison sentences, and other political issues. The case will be heard next spring. Those arguing against state laws which prohibit comments by judicial candidates claim that voters should be able to learn more about candidates for judge. Those who support the limitation argue that statements about controversial issues is at odds with a judge’s obligation to render impartial decision based on the law and facts. |
|
Issue: Should a repeat felony offender be eligible for parole? |
|
87% of Web-Voters said they do not think repeat offenders should be eligible for parole. They must be aware of the studies that reveal that 6% of the criminals commit most of the crimes. Common sense tells them, and us, that if the repeat offenders which make up that 6% were convicted and incarcerated for as long as possible, the crime rate would fall even more. Now under Kentucky law, Persistent Felony Offenders are not only eligible for parole, but can be probated as well. An excellent crime prevention idea would be for the Legislature to change that law to at least make PFOs ineligible for probation. |
|
Issue: Should a murder committed in the course of a kidnapping be eligible for the death penalty? |
Kentucky Supreme Court Rules: Death Penalty Does Not Apply To A Murder Which Occurs During A Kidnapping |
|
Much to the surprise of some prosecutors and the general public, a murder that occurs in the course of a kidnapping is not eligible for the death penalty in Kentucky. Web-Voters in large numbers believed such a crime should be eligible for the death penalty. In its opinion in the case of Jacobs v. Commonwealth, the Kentucky Supreme Court held:
According to the Opinion of the Kentucky Supreme Court, Kentucky's law, as written, must be amended by the legislature in order to make such a crime eligible for the death penalty. |
|
Issue: Should premeditated murder be eligible for the death penalty? |
|
Most of the public are shocked that a premeditated, planned murder is not eligible for the death penalty now. Web-Voters overwhelmingly support a change in Kentucky's law to permit prosecutors to seek the death penalty against a murderer who committed such a planned murder. Such a change makes great sense to us too! |
|
Issue: Should the murder of a child under the age of 12 be eligible for the death penalty? |
|
Anyone who intentionally murders a child under the age of 12 should face the death penalty, according to an overwhelming percentage of Web-Voters. They obviously recognize the vulnerability of children. Anti-death penalty opponents disagree. Their position is that no criminal charged with any murder should ever have to face a death sentence. Of course, under their strange reasoning, murderers would still be able to impose a death sentence (by committing a murder in the first place). |
|
Issue: Should acts of terrorism be eligible for the death penalty? |
|
Overwhelmingly, Web-Voters have said that criminals who commit fatal acts of terrorism should be subject to the death penalty. The American public finally appears to be fed up with the criminals who hurt people and are then coddled by a criminal justice system that seems to favor law breakers over law-abiding citizens. It is a shame that it took the September 11th acts of terrorism to awaken the public to the notion that the fundamental purpose of government is to do all that it can to guarantee the safety of the public. Smaller, but still devastating acts of terrorism occur everyday on the streets of our communities, in the form of murder, robbery, burglary and rape. It is the obligation of the government to do what it can to guarantee our safety from ALL terrorists, international AND urban. The American public deserves no less! |
|
Issue: Should a life without parole sentence be available in all murder cases? |
|
Under Kentucky’s liberal sentencing laws, only defendants who qualify for the death penalty are eligible for the next most serious penalty, "Life Without Parole." Click on Death Penalty to learn those circumstances when the death penalty is available. Web-Voters want that changed! They want every murderer to face the possibility of "Life Without Parole." Let the juries decide, they say. As it is, criminals seem to get all the breaks. What’s new! |
|
Issue: Should criminals who use guns in crimes be subject to increased penalties? |
Web-Voters
Want The Book Thrown At Criminals Who Use Guns To Commit Crimes |
|
Almost all believe that citizens should have the right to own a gun and have the right to defend themselves, their families and property from a crime or from an attack by criminals. But the vast majority of Web-Voters also believe that any person who uses a gun to commit a crime should suffer increased penalties if they are convicted of that crime. Take a look at the comments by some Web-Voters:
|
|||
|
Issue: School is starting. Are you concerned about your child's safety while at school? |
Are Parents Concerned About The Safety Of Their Children At School? YOU BET THEY ARE, Say Web-Voters |
|
81% of Web-Voters say they are concerned about the safety of their children while they are at school. Just read the following comments:
It doesn't seem to be the headline grabbing acts by a few that concern parents, it is the day to day bullying and disruption by trouble-makers. Listen up parents, school boards, administrators and teachers. If you don't do something about their concerns, public school attendance will continue to drop. |
|
Issue: Do media comments by lawyers undercut the public’s faith in the system? |
|
Web-Voters overwhelmingly believe that comments made by lawyers undercut the public's faith in the criminal justice system. Apparently they are weary every time an attorney appears to be "spinning the facts" to favor their client. Their comments reflect those feelings:
Amitai Etzioni, author of The Monochrome Society, recently wrote,
Obviously, Web-Voters agree. |
|||||
|
|
The majority of voters, when asked whether judges should be elected by the people or appointed by the politicians, want to have their say through the ballot box. A number of comments were received from voters, some of which are as follows:
Obviously, our elected legislators should keep the public in mind when confronted with such issues. |
|
Issue: Should a planned, premeditated murder be eligible for the death penalty? |
|
"If a planned, premeditated murder is not eligible for the death penalty, that what murder is?" That comment by a Web-Voter sums up the attitude of the voters on this week's question. This question and responses by voters underscores the lack of understanding of the general public about when and for what homicides the death penalty is available. Obviously most Web-Voters felt that a planned, premeditated murder is already eligible for the death penalty. Under Kentucky law, it is not. Web-Voters think it should be. We agree. |
|
Issue: Should we toughen and strengthen penalties for repeat offenders? |
Overwhelming
majority of Web-Voters Want Penalties For Repeat Offenders Strengthened |
|
An overwhelming majority of Web-Voters want penalties for repeat offenders strengthened. 90% of Web-Voters expressed their displeasure that repeat offenders are not being punished sufficiently. Citing concerns that repeat offenders commit most of the crime, Web-Voters want to be protected from those criminals through incarceration. Comments from some voters include:
|
|
Issue: What do you think is the most important problem facing the country in the next 10 years? |
Declining
Moral Values Are Greatest Concern Of Web-Voters |
|
42% of Web-Voters said declining moral values is the most important problem facing our country in the next 10 years. Worry about crime, followed by concern for the environment and education also continue to be major concerns of the public. The question this week was:
The results of the vote are as follows:
|
|
Issue: Should a crime committed as a result of hatred of another's race, religion or sexual orientation result in increased penalties? |
Web-Voters
Closely Divided On Whether A Crime Committed As A Result Of Hatred Of
Another's Race, Religion Or Sexual Orientation Should Be Reason To
Increase Penalty |
|
In a close vote, 52% of Web-Voters have said they don't think penalties should be increased for crimes committed as a result of hatred of the race, religion or sexual orientation of the victim. Several of the Web-Voters added their comments to their vote. They were:
|
|
Issue: Should criminals who use guns in crimes be subject to increased penalties? |
|
90% of Web-Voters say YES! In Lexington almost 70% of homicides involve guns. Over 50% of robberies and about 20% of aggravated assaults involve guns. It is time that criminals who choose to commit crimes and use a firearm in the process suffer swift, certain and increased penalties. That’s what the Web-Voters think, and we agree. |
|
Issue: Should teachers be aware of a student's felony conviction? |
Web-Voters
Want Teachers Told If A Student Has A Felony Record |
|
Comments from Web-Voters included:
Not only should the teachers and administration be told, but so should the public. We all have the right to know who among us is dangerous. The time has come to lift the veil of secrecy from juvenile courts. |
|
Issue: Should school lockers be subject to a search without a search warrant? |
Anti-punishment
Web Visitors Do Their Best To "Stuff The Ballot-Box On "Question
Of The Week" |
|
I guess we have too much faith in the public’s honesty. At least some of the public anyway. It appears that the opponents of the Law & Order positions of www.lexingtonprosecutor.com crowd have been trying to "stuff the ballot box" on the "Question of the Week." How do we know? Simple, just look at the facts. The "Question of the Week," posted on Thursday, April 25, 2001 is:
On Friday, April 26, 2001 the vote count on the question was:
The www.lexingtonprosecutor.com visitor count was:
That's more than three times more votes than visitors to vote. 357 of those votes were "NO." It is obvious and amusing that the "anti-punishment gang" is so concerned by the overwhelming public support for "holding criminals responsible for their behavior" and "enforcing of the law," positions of www.lexingtonprosecutor.com, that they feel compelled to try "stuff the ballot box." |
|
Issue: Should
accused murderers have a "right to plea bargain?" |
|
The United States Constitution guarantees defendants accused of murder have a right to a fair jury trial. It does not guarantee them the right to a "plea bargain." Web-Voters are aware of that and a majority agreed. The issue was raised in a recent case when the Fayette Commonwealth's Attorney's Office policy of no plea bargaining in murder cases was challenged in Court. The Judge overruled the defendant's motion. |
|
Issue: Should
Animal Cruelty Be A Felony? |
|
What do Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and David Berkowitz have in common besides being serial killers? All reported killing animals as children and "getting away with it." Research has shown that exceedingly violent offenders have childhood histories of repeated animal cruelty. The FBI has concluded that most killers, as children, had killed or tortured animals and the pattern often continues and turns into child, spouse and elder abuse. The question is how to most effectively address these issues. Many states have responded by making animal cruelty a felony offense. In Kentucky, animal cruelty is only a misdemeanor unless it involves animals fighting each other. |
|
Issue: Should
juveniles convicted of felonies and probated by the Court be permitted to
return to regular classrooms? |
|
Perhaps there is no greater worry for parents than the safety of their children at school. Consistently surveys have shown school safety to top the list of concerns of the public and parents. Permitting juveniles convicted of felonies to return to regular classrooms is the last thing most parents want. They have no desire to have their children go to school with other young people who have chosen to violate our laws. The courts and legislature should listen to these parents and insure that dangerous juveniles are not permitted to return to the regular classrooms. |
|
Issue: Should
juveniles convicted of sex offenses be required to register as sex
offenders? |
Web-Voters
Want All Juvenile Sex Offenders To Register |
|
Web-Voters were asked this question:
96% said YES, they should be required to register as sex offenders. That would allow the public not only to know who they are but where they live. Email to the Editor: Our question produced an interesting e-mail from Ray DeBolt, General Counsel for the Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice. He wrote:
Editor’s comments: Your interpretation is not correct. ALL juvenile sex offenders are not required to register as sex offenders. The law you cite only requires registration of sexual offenders who are over the age of 18, unless they are prosecuted as Youthful Offenders. Many juveniles are convicted of sexual offenses in juvenile court and not as Youthful Offenders in Circuit Court. ALL sex offenders should be required to register regardless of their age or in which court they are convicted. We believe your interpretation of the law is what it should be. Unfortunately it is not. That is the reason that the law should be changed to require ALL sex offenders, including ALL juveniles to register for the protection of the public. 96% of Web-Voters agree. |
|
Issue: Should
Terroristic Threatening be prosecuted even if committed at school? |
Voice From The Red-Zone: 95% Of Web-Voters Say Terroristic Threatening Should Be Prosecuted Even If Committed At School |
|
An overwhelming 99% of Web-Voters felt that the Court system should protect the safety of America's teachers. We received many emails from Web-Voters, one of which reflects the attitude of the rest, and is quoted below: Web-voter's email:
|
|
Issue: Do
you consider burglary a violent crime? |
|
Only the "we know what’s best for everyone else gang," who have been spared the fear and trauma of learning that some criminal has broken into their home, gone through drawers and closets looking for valuables, can claim that, "burglary is not a violent crime." The rest of America, including 92% of Web-Voters, disagree. Those cultural conservatives which make up America’s "Red-Zone" believe that the unlawful invasion of a person’s home is not only a serious crime, but a violent one as well. Who are these Web-Voters? I suspect they are those cultural conservatives who fit squarely into America’s "Red-Zone." "Red-Zone" inhabitants live all over America. Living in the "Red-Zone" is not a geographic classification, it is an attitude. One that is based on a fundamental belief in right and wrong. They have a great deal more in common than just thinking that burglary is a violent crime. They also share a belief in America and the ideals upon which it was founded. They have a deep-seated understanding of right and wrong and fair-play. They believe that every person:
Victims of burglary feel violated. They lose much of their sense of security and safety. They believe that a person who breaks into another’s home has committed a very serious and violent crime. Is burglary a violent crime? YOU BET IT IS! |
|
Issue: Should
people who intentionally murder defenseless elderly citizens be eligible
for the death penalty? |
|
The "we know what’s best for everyone else" death penalty opponents continue to demand that Kentucky’s death penalty be abolished. Meanwhile the average Kentuckians who make up our juries continue to believe that some of these killers who commit the worst of the murders deserve the death penalty. Just in the past couple of months, juries in Jefferson and Hardin Counties have recommended death for two killers. In addition, Web-Voters not only support death for these killers, they want to expand the circumstances in which the death penalty should apply. By an overwhelming margin they voted that any person who intentionally kills a defenseless senior citizen should be eligible for capital punishment. As usual, average Kentuckians have a pretty good grip on right and wrong. They really don’t need the "we know what’s best for everyone else" gang to tell them. |
|
Issue: Should
the murder of a child under 12 years of age be eligible for the death
penalty? |
|
93% of Web-Voters said that the intentional murder of a child under the age of 12 should qualify the killer for the death penalty. In Kentucky, not every murder qualifies for a death sentence. Only those murders which are classified as "aggravated murders," under Kentucky law, make the killer eligible for death. Such aggravated circumstances as multiple murder, a murder in the course of a robbery 1st degree, rape 1st degree, burglary 1st degree, a murder for profit, a murder in which a destructive device was used, to name a few. Almost 70% of Americans continue to favor the death penalty, and juries across the country continue to believe many aggravated murderers deserve death, despite the intense anti-death penalty campaign by the main-stream media. |
|
Issue: Should
all teachers be told of a student's
juvenile criminal record? |
|
Web-Voters were asked if teachers should be made aware of a student's juvenile criminal record. 95% said "YES," all teachers should know about the criminal records of all of the students in the school. Voters have consistently said they are fed up with misbehavior in schools. They do not want schools to be dumping grounds for law-breakers. Schools should be safe, not only for students, but for teachers as well. Until Kentucky’s antiquated juvenile laws, which protect criminal records from people who should know, are changed, ALL teachers in a school cannot be told about juveniles criminal records. Web-Voters are right. All teachers should have the right to know who in their school is dangerous. |
|
Issue: Should
businesses require a thumb-print before cashing checks? |
Web-Voters said it again. They said juries, made up of average citizens in communities from one end of Kentucky to the other, are best qualified to decide whether a convicted killer deserves to be sentenced to death for what he/she has done. This opinion is consistent with polls conducted by nationally respected pollsters which reveal that nearly 70% of Americans support the death penalty. This support has remained high despite the intensive negative media campaign by the mainstream media against the death penalty. Because support for juries remains so high, and the "we know best" gang is so opposed to juries making these decisions in their communities, we can only conclude that the "we know best" bunch just doesn't trust it's fellow citizens much. Thankfully, common-sense won out again. |
|
Issue: Do
jurors know the Parole Board can undue a sentence? |
Web-Voters Unaware That Parole Board Can Change
Jury's Sentence |
95% of Web-Voters believe that jurors do not know that a Parole Board can reduce a convicted felon's sentence. If fact, for most sentences, a prison inmate is eligible for parole after serving only 20% of his or her sentence. Our guess is that most Kentuckians are not aware it either. That may explain why so many of our citizens are calling for abolition of the Parole Board, and the requirement that convicted criminals serve at least 85% of their sentence. That’s what they do in the federal system. Defendants do all that they can to avoid going to federal court because they know they will have to go to prison. They would much rather face the more lenient state sentencing laws. We ought to do the same thing in Kentucky! |
|
Issue: Should drug possession be de-criminalized in Kentucky? |
Web-Voters Say "No-Way" To Legalizing
Drugs |
The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University said:
It seems only some in the media and a few wealthy supporters want illegal drugs legalized. Web-Voters have said "no-way," when asked if they favor the legalization of drugs. Most Americans don’t have contact with the problems caused by drug use and abuse. However, they are concerned about the crime associated with drugs, and the negative impact drug use has on the character and morals of our country. The "Alice in Wonderland" attitude of the advocates of the legalization of illegal drugs is super simplistic and naive. They seem to think that if drugs were legalized that the price would drop, and with the high profits gone, the dealers would go away, and the crimes associated with the buying and selling of drugs would go away as well. That foolish attitude ignores the dangerously addictive nature of drugs. The experts tell us that only 10% of those who drink are problem drinkers, while 75% of crack user become addicts. A lower price would lead to greater consumption, causing more problems, not fewer. One expert estimated that legalizing cocaine would increase the number of addicts by 10 times. If millions are addicted when drugs are illegal, socially unacceptable and generally difficult to obtain, then millions more would surely become addicts if drugs became legal, socially acceptable and easily obtained. Once again average citizens, who have a real sense of right and wrong, got it right. They think legalizing drugs is a lousy idea. Maybe that group that thinks they are smarter than the rest of us ought to spend some time with some average citizens. |
|
Issue: Should
convicted felons be required to give DNA samples for comparison in other crimes? |
Web-Voters
Want DNA Samples Taken From All Criminals Convicted Of Felonies To Solve Other Crimes |
"Absolutely! Take DNA samples from every criminal convicted of a felony." That's what 99% of Web-Voters have overwhelmingly said. Hardly a week goes by during which some past crime is solved through the use of DNA. The technology is becoming much more sophisticated each day. And the public knows it. The public wants that technology put to good use by police. Convicted felons have broken our laws, and most have previous run-ins with the law. Frequently, hair, blood or semen (containing DNA) is left at the scene of a crime. It makes great sense to collect DNA samples from convicted felons to compare against the evidence found at the scene of other crimes. Criminologists confirm that a relatively small percentage of criminals commit most of the crimes. We ought to do all we can to identify, prosecute and convict these repeat offenders. Then the public needs to insist that judges send them to prison and they stay there. After all the public has a right to be protected from criminals. |
|
Issue: What is
your greatest concern about safety in our schools? |
Bullying
In Schools Greatest Concern Of Web-Voters |
By a large margin, Web-Voters cite "bullying in schools" as their greatest concern in schools today. Web-Votes - What Is Your Greatest Concern About Safety In Our Schools?
An e-mail received from a Web-Voter said it best. It said:
Bullying has no place in our school, or anyplace else for that matter. Bullies must be disciplined by our school administrators. No child should be afraid to go to school! |
|
Issue: In
which of the following institutions do you have the greatest confidence? |
Web-Voters Have Most Confidence In Our Military, Followed By Organized
Religion And The Supreme Court |
When it comes to public confidence, our military comes out way ahead, according to lexingtonprosecutor.com Web-Voters. Not surprisingly, organized religion and the U.S. Supreme Court finished second and third. Having the least confidence of the Web-Voters was the Presidency. Over 600 Web-Voters were asked to vote for the institution in which they had the greatest confidence. Their votes are as follows:
|
|
Issue: How
effective is the criminal justice system in holding criminals responsible for their
crimes? |
How effective is the criminal justice system in holding criminals responsible for their crimes? That was the question Web-Voters were asked to answer last week. 60% of them said it rated only a "Fair" or "Poor." Most believe that every person should receive equal treatment by the criminal justice system for the same crime. Most also believe that everyone should be held responsible for their acts. If people violate our laws, most feel that they should suffer consequences. A majority of the Web-Voters appear to feel that the criminal justice system doesn't get a very high grade. If the public loses confidence in our court system to punish those who violate our laws and victimize innocent victims, then we must be concerned that people will take the law into their own hands. The criminal justice system must do a better job of treating every person the same, holding people responsible for their acts, and causing them to suffer consequences when they break the law. |
|
Issue: Do you
think the parole system should be abolished? |
78%
Of Web-Voters Want Parole System Abolished |
The federal justice system did it. Why can’t Kentucky’s criminal justice system do it too? What did the feds do? The federal system abolished parole. Now criminals convicted of crimes in federal court and sent to prison must serve 85% of their sentences. That’s not the way it works in Kentucky. In state courts most prisoners are eligible for parole after they have served only 20% of their sentences. It should be noted, a limited number of criminals convicted of violent crimes must serve 85% of the sentence, but the number of crimes considered violent by that law are far too limited. For example, armed robbery and attempted murder are not considered violent crimes under that law. Under Kentucky law, the Kentucky Parole Board can disregard jury recommendations and Judge's sentences and release convicted criminals long before their sentences are completed. Web-Voters want that changed. It is time for a sentence to mean what it says. If the federal system can do it, why can’t Kentucky? |
|
Issue: What is
your source of criminal justice news? |
Web-Voters were asked to name their source for criminal justice news. 37% named television as their main source of crime news, followed closely by internet news. The results of the survey revealed the following:
The only surprises of the Web-Vote were that internet news ranked so high and newspapers so low as a source of crime news. |
||||||||||
|
Issue: Why do
you think the crime rate is dropping? |
Web-Voters
Say, "Getting Tough" With Criminals Works |
94% of Web-Voters credit the "locking-up the bad-guys" approach for the 8-year drop in the U. S. crime rate.
Zogby Poll results agree: the public credits "tough-laws" for drop in crime. These results agree with the results of a recent poll conducted by Zogby America which found that 55% attributed the reduced crime rate to tougher laws, compared to 32% who said they felt reduced rime rates were the result of programs that aided communities and troubled youths. The Zogby America poll asked whether respondents felt lower crime rates were the result of growth in the economy and programs to help children or "tougher laws" such as the "3-strikes" laws, which deliver automatic sentences after the third offense and mandatory sentences. We all know that there is more than one reason for the drop in our crime rates. However, the public rightly gives most of the credit to the "punishment of law breakers" approach. After all, only a small percentage of the criminals commit the largest percentage of the crimes. So when we do catch them, they should be convicted and sent to jail. |
||||||||||
|
Issue: Is the
death penalty an important issue to the public? |
|
Issue: Should there be truth in sentencing? (Example - a
10-year sentence means 10 years served in prison). |
Web-Voters overwhelmingly want convicted criminals to serve their entire sentence, instead of only 20% before they are eligible for parole. "Truth-in-Sentencing" just isn’t occurring in Kentucky. In a few "violent" crimes, defendants are required to serve 85% of the sentence, but the definition of "violent crimes" does not include crimes such as armed robbery or attempted murder. The fact that prisoners don’t serve their entire sentence causes the public to lose confidence in the criminal justice system and the laws. Until convicted criminals serve all of the sentences they receive, the criminal justice system and those who write the laws will continue to be viewed with a cynical eye by the public. |
|
Issue: Should
convicted thieves be able to avoid restitution by declaring bankruptcy? |
93% Of Web-Voters Say "NO" To Convicted Thieves Avoiding Responsibility For Restitution By Declaring Bankruptcy |
Over 300 web visitors cast their votes about whether convicted thieves should be able to avoid paying restitution by declaring bankruptcy. 93% said NO! The U. S. Supreme Court agrees. It ruled in 1986 that "restitution obligations imposed on a criminal defendant as a condition of probation in state criminal proceedings were not subject to discharge in Chapter 7 proceedings." Unfortunately, and as a practical matter, many judges do not enforce restitution obligations that defendants either can't pay or will have difficulty paying, but they are probated anyway. In those cases, the message to the victims and the public in general comes across loud and clear. CRIME PAYS! |
|
Issue: What concerns you most? |
Although crime rates are reported to have dropped in recent years, LexingtonProsecutor.com voters continue to rank fear of crime, drugs and violence as their greatest concern. These results are consistent with a 1999 survey funded by the John S. and John L. Knight Foundation. The survey of 500 Lexington residents was conducted in the fall of 1999, and reported by the Lexington Herald-Leader on January 10, 2000, also found crime, drugs and violence was the greatest concern of Lexingtonians. "What Concerns You Most"
"What Lexington
Thinks"
|
|
Issue: Should violent criminals be placed in minimum security prisons? |
Does Anyone Care About The Public's Safety? Or Are We Only Interested In Putting Prisoners Back On Our Streets As Soon As We Can? |
Over 400 votes were case in response to this week’s question: Should Violent Criminals Be Placed In Minimum Security Prisons? 99% of the voters said "Absolutely not!" Maybe so many felt so strongly about this issue because they feel that the law-abiding public deserves to be protected from people who commit serious crimes. Or maybe it’s because they believe that people who commit crimes should suffer consequences. Or maybe it’s because just two months ago, two violent and dangerous criminals just walked away from Kentucky’s largest minimum security prisons, and are now charged with murdering someone in Georgia. In late June of this year, two convicted felons with extensive criminal records walked away from Lexington’s Blackburn Correctional Complex, Kentucky’s largest minimum security prison. They are both now charged with the strangulation murder of a Virginia man while they were fugitives and are presently lodged in the Chatham County Jail near Savannah, Georgia. One escapee was served a 10-year sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, tampering with physical evidence, and being a Persistent Felony Offender. Three of his prior convictions were for violent crimes. The other escapee has a long criminal history. He was in prison serving a 10-year sentence for Assault 3rd Degree and being a Persistent Felony Offender. He had served a little over one year of his sentence when he was transferred to the minimum facility. After escaping, one threatened the man who prosecuted him, Boyd County Commonwealth’s Attorney Stewart Schneider. Schneider’s reaction was that "placing an inmate in the wrong facility can have grave consequences. When things go bad, somebody usually winds up dead." Unfortunately, he was right. By such an overwhelming vote, Web-Voters seem to be telling our elected and appointed officials that government ought to be more interested in the safety of the public, than in putting dangerous people back on our streets, or in a place from which they can walk away. |
|
Issue: How many convicted criminals are presently on probation in Fayette
County? |
|
Issue: Do you want to know the names and addresses of convicted felons
when they are released on probation or parole? |
Voters Want to Know The Names Of Those Released On Probation, And Where They Will Live |
94% of LexingtonProsecutor.com voters want to know:
That doesn’t seem to be too much to ask. After all, according to Civic Report, No. 7 August, 1999, by the Center For Civic Innovation, at the Manhattan Institute:
The National Center for Policy Analysis recently reported:
Despite the recent drops in crime, the public believes crime rates are still too high, and they are upset with many aspects of the criminal justice system. Most grew up believing that if you broke the law , you suffered consequences. To them, that’s just not happening.
Identifying criminals placed on probation, and telling the public where they will live, like we already do with released sex offenders, is what the LexingtonProsecutor.com voters want. |
|
Issue: Should murderers be able to profit from their crimes? (By
selling such items as books, t-shirts, & other "murder-abilia"). |
Voters Say "No-Way" To Criminals Profiting From Their Horrible Crimes |
89% of LexingtonProsecutor.com voters said "no-way" to murderers profiting from the crimes they commit. This entire subject arises as a result of internet auction sites listing various personal items, such as autographs, artwork, hair samples, handprints, etc., from convicted murderers on its site. Many states have enacted laws that prohibit violent criminals from profiting from their crimes. Proving who gets the money, however, can prove to be very difficult. These items would have no value whatsoever if it were not for the horrible crimes that were committed against innocent victims. To permit the criminals to profit from those crimes is immoral. It is not too much to ask our citizens and businesses alike to conduct themselves and their affairs honorably. Criminals should not be able to profit from their crimes. Any money raised from such activities should go directly to the victims. Otherwise, the message to the public is clear. Crime does pay! |
|
Issue: Should juveniles convicted of felony crimes be allowed to return to
school? |
Parents Want to Know & Have A Right To Know If Their Children Are Going To School With Convicted Felons |
83% of LexingtonProsecutor.com voters said that they don’t think that juveniles who have been convicted of felonies should be permitted back in school. However, our guess is that most of those voters do believe that dangerous juveniles should be placed in an alternative setting, so that students who are serious about an education can learn without fear. What the voters are saying to our school system leaders is that, enough is enough, with these young criminals, disrupters and bullies, most of whom really don’t care about learning. Parents don’t want to send their children into an environment where they can’t be certain they will be safe. They want the trouble-makers away from their kids. Unfortunately, under Kentucky’s "offender-friendly" juvenile laws, no one seems to be able to find out who the dangerous juveniles are that are put right back into our schools. Right now convicted sex offenders, robbers, assaulters, drug dealers and thieves are in our schools, and parents can’t find out who they are. Until parents make enough noise that our legislators will hear them, the laws which allow this situation to exist, won’t change. |
|
Issue: Should crime victims sue their attackers for damages? |
Criminals Should Pay For The Damage They Cause Even If They Have To Be Sued |
92% of LexingtonProsecutor.com Voters say that criminals should pay for the damages they cause, even if their victims have to sue their attackers to force them to pay the costs of those damages. These days, under Kentucky’s "criminal-friendly" sentencing laws, most convicted criminals don’t go to prison. Even if they do, they don’t stay long. They just go on their merry way as if nothing ever happened, just leaving crime victims in their path of destruction. Far too often the crime victim is the one that suffers the long-term effects of some hoodlum’s behavior. These victims are the ones who are left to pick up the pieces of their lives. It’s not right! The courts should require these convicted criminals to pay up or go to prison. As it is, most who are ordered to pay restitution for their crimes are either behind in paying, or don’t pay at all. Unless they pay, the message to all involved is pretty simple. Crime Pays! |
|
Issue: Should Public Safety Be Government's Top Priority? |
Voters Say Public Safety Should Be Government's Top Priority |
By an overwhelming margin Lexington Prosecutor Voters said the safety of the public should be the first priority of our government. 95% of the voters want safety to be first. Americans pay a lot of taxes. It doesn’t seem too much to ask, that in return for those taxes, the government should do all that it can to guarantee the safety of its citizens. So what do we get. Today, most convicted criminals are probated by our courts and put right back on our streets. Many repeat offenders are probated over and over, even in light of studies that repeatedly show that this small percentage of career criminals (6%) commit a majority of the crimes. The public believes that courts should protect them from these repeat offenders by locking them up. Unfortunately, it seems to be backward. The criminals, the ones who break our laws, should be the ones who suffer the consequences, not the people who obey the laws and pay the taxes to support the government. As it is, too many criminals are probated and put right back on the street. Lexington Prosecutor Voters say that government (courts) should be working to protect the good guys, not the bad guys. |
|
Issue: Should a criminal who uses a gun in a crime serve a mandatory
prison sentence? |
Voters Overwhelmingly Favor Mandatory Prison Sentences for Criminals Who Use Guns When They Commit Crimes |
97% of the LexingtonProsecutor.com voters say no "Get Out Of Jail Free" Cards For Armed Criminals. According to voters, they should get a "Go Directly to Jail" Card instead. Overwhelmingly, they want criminals who use guns when they commit a crime to serve mandatory sentences. It seems that more and more crimes are being committed by armed criminals. The public is concerned and wants to be protected from these dangerous outlaws. Criminals are not stupid. They know the risks of incarceration when they break the law. They also know that a large percentage of convicted felons don’t go to prison, but are probated and put right back on the streets. Mandatory prison time and enhanced penalties for being armed with a gun while committing a crime is the message the public wants to send to these thugs. In addition, it would go a long way toward convincing the public that the good guys win and the bad guys lose. |
|
Issue: Is the internet sufficient notice that a sex offender is going to
live in your neighborhood? |
Voters Reject Internet As Only Notice That A Sex Offender Will Live In Their Neighborhood |
The Legislature passed a new sex offender law. Now when a sex offender is released we will have to learn about it from the Kentucky State Police Web Site, http://kspsor.state.ky.us/. Voters were asked if they considered the internet sufficient notice that a sex offender will live in their neighborhood. 99% said no. That overwhelming rejection should come as no surprise to anyone. Today, a large number of people don't even own a computer, let alone cruise the internet on a scavenger hunt for the "sex offender registry" page of the Kentucky State Police web site. Internet notification might be just what the doctor ordered someday, but not yet. The public does have a right to know that these offenders are being released and that they plan on living in a particular neighborhood. Maybe we were spoiled by the Fayette County Sheriff's Office. Under the old law, the responsibility for notification was assigned to the Sheriff's Office. As a result, when a "high-risk" offender was released, Sheriff Kathy Witt sent her deputies to the neighborhood in which the sex offender planned to live. They went door-to-door notifying all of the residents of that neighborhood of their new neighbor and that he was a "high-risk." Under our new law we will only learn about these offenders if we have a computer, and if we have internet access, and if we think about it. Or if something awful happens to someone in the neighborhood. The old way was better! |
|
Issue: Should probation of felony convictions be the exception, not the
rule? |
Voters Believe A 2nd Chance (Probation) Should Be Earned, Not Automatic |
By an overwhelming majority (98%), LexingtonProsecutor.com voters feel that probation (a 2nd chance) should have to be earned by a convicted law-breaker, not automatically granted. Most of us have grown-up believing that everyone should be responsible for their behavior, and that when someone does break the law, he should suffer some consequences. As a result, it should come as no surprise to the court system that the public can’t understand when someone who is convicted of breaking the law is probated and put right back on the street. It is obvious to them that the law-breaker has suffered no consequence at all for what they have done. To them, the lesson is clear. If there are no consequences for breaking the law, why should we expect anyone to obey the law? Our courts put far too many serious offenders and career criminals right back on our streets through probation. Sadly, we find that many of them offend again. We can only hope that some innocent victim is not hurt by someone who should already be incarcerated anyway. The public deserves to be protected from these lawbreakers. Citizens have a right to expect their elected and appointed leaders to do no less. After all, the primary purpose of government is to do all that it can to guarantee the safety of the public. Defendants who have committed crimes of violence or those with criminal records should serve their time, not automatically be released. |
|
Issue: Crime victims should have the right to be present, informed and
heard in Court. |
It's Unanimous! Voters Say: "Victims Deserve Better Treatment By The Courts!" |
100% of the LexingtonProsecutor.com voters say that crime victims should have the right to be present, informed and heard at all criminal trials. Unfortunately, in Kentucky, they don't.In Kentucky, crime victims still are not permitted to remain in the courtroom during the entire trial if they will be a witness. But the defendant has that right. In Kentucky, a defendant is always given the chance to beg the judge for leniency before he is sentenced. But victims aren't guaranteed the same opportunity to tell the judge what they think should happen to the criminals for what they have done. Crime victims have made a major impact on our justice system, and they will continue to make their voices heard. Crime victims, and those who serve them, have earned the right to speak out about the importance of guaranteeing safety, support, and services to those who are hurt by crime. Voters have said loud and clear, that it is time to treat the innocent people (the crime victims) at least as well as we treat the criminals. It isn't fair. No wonder the public is losing confidence in the criminal justice system. Before we spend so much time giving convicted felons the right to vote again, maybe we ought to spend some time treating crime victims better. |
|
Issue: Do you
think Juvenile Court should be open to the public instead of secret? March 22 - April 2, 2000 Poll |
The law-abiding public is fed up with the increasing number of serious violent crimes committed by juveniles. Very few of these young criminals who commit violent crimes are treated as adults. Most remain in juvenile court where everything is done in secret, and from what we can tell very few ever suffer any consequences for breaking the law. Youthful offenders are usually placed on probation many times before anything ever happens to them. In the meantime the rest of us are put at risk because these criminals are released back into our neighborhoods and onto our streets. We are not even permitted to know who they are or what they did, because juvenile court proceedings are still confidential. Because what happens in juvenile court is secret, the public is not permitted to know:
And the public doesn't like
it. 93% of LexingtonProsecutor.com voters have said enough is enough. The say, "We have a right to know who these criminals are. And since when should the criminals have more protection than the law-abiding citizens.@ 93% said they want juvenile courts open to the public view.It is time we quit protecting these young violent criminals, and start worrying about the safety of the public. |
|
Issue: Should convicted felons be allowed to vote, serve as jurors,
and possess guns after they have served their sentence? March 18 - 26, 2000 Poll |
97% of Voters Say "NO" to Lexington Legislator’s Idea To Restore Voting Rights To Convicted Felons |
LexingtonProsecutor.com voters turned an emphatic thumbs down to Rep. Jesse Crenshaw’s proposal to grant convicted felons the right to vote after they have served their sentence. 218 voted, and only 6 agreed with his idea. 97% said no. The Kentucky Constitution forbids convicted felons from voting. It should be noted that the same constitutional provision also prohibits them from serving as jurors and possessing firearms. The law already allows felons to request the Governor to restore their civil rights after they’ve completed their sentence. Governors often grant those requests, if it is deserved. Crenshaw seems to want to make it automatic. He says he is concerned that the Kentucky’s Constitution disenfranchises thousands of convicted felons, mostly poor people. They do not have the right to vote even after they have served their sentence, according to Crenshaw. It wasn’t the Kentucky Constitution that stripped them of their right to vote. It seems to us, that the convicted felons did it to themselves. |
|
Issue: Do you think armed robbery and attempted murder are violent
crimes? March 6 - 17, 2000 Poll |
In 1998 the Legislature passed a law that they claimed was the "toughest" ever on criminals. Under their new "tough on crime" law, any person who is convicted of a "violent" crime must serve 85% of their sentence. It seems pretty tough, until you read the fine print. Only then do you discover that many crimes such as armed robbery and attempted murder aren’t included as "violent" crimes. Criminals convicted of those crimes are still eligible for parole after serving only 20% of their sentence. Just ask someone who has been robbed at gunpoint, or shot, or stabbed or beaten with a hammer, if they consider themselves to have been the victim of a "violent" crime or not. My guess is that everyone of them would say, you bet it was a violent crime! Or ask the 210 LexingtonProsecutor.com voters. They all voted "YES," armed robbery and attempted murder are violent crimes. Yet somehow the Legislators didn’t see it that way when they passed this "toughest ever" crime law. Maybe it’s because the people who run Kentucky’s prison system influenced the decision makers. Their philosophy appears to be that we should put as many convicted criminals, as the law permits, back on the streets as soon as possible. Or maybe the criminal defense attorneys have exerted their influence. Whatever the reason, the protection of the public, which should be the first priority of government, isn’t. If it was, crimes such as armed robbery or attempted murder would be included in the definition of "violent" crimes. Someday, I hope we will remember that we owe more to the people who obey the law, than we do to the criminals who break the law. |
|
Issue: Should prison inmates have internet access? February 28-March 7, 2000 Poll |
LexingtonProsecutor.com voters overwhelmingly oppose making the internet available to prison inmates. 95% said "no" to internet access for prisoners. The internet provides the ability to communicate anonymously with anyone, anywhere in the world, whose address can be obtained. Incarcerated criminals are not only convicted of breaking our laws, but they also have lots of time on their hands. That is a dangerous combination, especially if they are given access to the internet. The threat of a convicted prisoner being able to harass and cyber-stalk witnesses, police, public officials and their families is totally unacceptable. The goal of the criminal justice system should be to do everything possible to protect law-abiding citizens, not give law breakers another tool to victimize and harass them. |
|
Issue: Juveniles charged with murder should be tried as adults. February 21-27, 2000 Poll |
"Juvenile murderers should be tried as adults. Yes or No." That was the issue for voters on LexingtonProsecutor.com for the past two weeks. Over 500 votes were cast, and the results are in. 68 percent wanted juveniles who commit murder to be tried as adults. These results mirror national surveys of the same issue. People are obviously realizing that many of the vicious crimes which used to be committed by adults are now being committed by juveniles. Juvenile Courts were designed years ago to deal with young boys and girls who committed minor offenses and would then straighten out and live productive lives. The purpose of Juvenile Court is only to determine what is in the "best interest of the juvenile." No where in the juvenile code is there any concern for the welfare or best interest of a community. No where is protection of the public even mentioned. Today some of the most brutal, vicious crime are now being committed juveniles. The public obviously wants to be protected from these violent criminals who just happen to be young. Their vote indicates that. We only hope that our elected leaders and law-makers are tuned in. |
|
Issue: Repeat offenders should serve mandatory prison sentences. February 7-18, 2000 Poll |
Should repeat offenders serve mandatory sentences? That was the first question visitors to the Commonwealth's Attorney's web site were asked to vote on. And vote they did. In only five days, 191 visitors cast their votes. 170 voters (89 percent) voted for mandatory sentences for repeat offenders. Criminologists confirm that only 6% of the criminals commit well over half of the crime. This small group of criminals commit such a large percentage of the crime in Lexington and other communities that it is only reasonable that we demand to be protected from them. It makes great sense to incarcerate these repeat offenders for as long as possible.
The public has a right to be protected from this group who has chosen to commit crimes as a career. Our elected leaders need to be reminded that the primary purpose of government is to do all that it can to guarantee the safety of the public. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Red-Zone
