KS Laws Too Lax to Protect the Innocent
by Pete Lucas, a contributing author:
Kansascity.com reports that a 42 year old Kansas City, Kansas man has been convicted of 3 counts of child molestation and sentenced to three consecutive life sentences.
Vernie Burns, the molester, was a repeat offender. He was convicted of molesting an 8 year old child in Missouri before these new charges appeared. In his latest case, he was convicted of molesting an additional 3 children.
My question is, how could this have been allowed to happen? We already knew he was a child molester. He was undoubtedly on sex offender registries and may have even been on probation. How is it possible that he had access to MORE children?!
This is why I believe our laws are much too lax with regard to protecting innocent people. Children must be protected. I understand that it’s expensive to lock up sex abusers and throw away the key, but how much more expensive is it to prosecute the same individual repeatedly? How about the impact on the victims?
A person who molests a child should be locked up permanently. They have an obvious disregard for the most basic human instinct - to protect children from harm. They also have an extreme propensity for doing the same thing again the next chance they get.
I feel equally strongly about drunk driving laws. They are clearly ineffective as currently written. In 1998, my pregnant fiance’ was hit by a drunk driver. The baby was killed (8 months along) and my fiance’ spent 2 years going through painful surgeries and physical therapy. The drunk driver who hit her had 18 prior DUI’s in several states, had his license revoked, had no insurance, and had no remorse.
In spite of this, his penalty for DUI number 19 (that killed our unborn child) was 90 days in jail and 2 years of probation. Partly this was because unborn victims were not yet considered people…
Drunk driving should not result in a fine. Drunk driving should result in hard time… first time offenders should get at least 5 years in jail. Someone who kills someone while driving drunk is not guilty of “manslaughter,” they are guilty of premeditated 1st degree murder. They knew they should not drive drunk, but they did it anyway. Someone who drives drunk and kills or injures someone should be locked up for life.
Until we get serious about these crimes, we have no hope. Fines are not a deterrent, but the fear of life in prison just might be…
Related Posts:
- Poll: 50% Say Drunk Driving Laws Not Tough Enough
- Fox 4: Prairie Village Mom With 4 DUIs Back In Jail
- Protecting unborn children ‘too controversial’ — KS Liberty
- National Right to Life Committee on killing of late-term abortionist George Tiller
- UK Telegraph — Conservative party conference: Tell us David Cameron – what sort of Britain do you want to lead?
June 15th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Drunk driving should get SOME kind of prison/jail time first time out. No exceptions. If you’re old enough to DRINK…. then you’re old enough to know how MESSED up you are to get behind the wheel. Second offense should be a PERMANENT revocation of driving priviledges, and minimum 5yrs in jail, working on a public works manual labor detail. Third offense should be a death penalty.