Jump to content

Joint Criminal Justice Reform Committee 9/23/2014


mauserme

Recommended Posts

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140922/BLOGS02/140929974

 

 


Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy are scheduled to be the headliners at a legislative hearing on gun violence tomorrow, and the big question is whether they'll throw their weight behind an emerging compromise that some think actually could pass the Illinois General Assembly.

...

 

The proposal is to shorten penalties for mere possession of small amounts of illegal drugs while lengthening them for big-time dealing and gun offenses. The idea is to focus resources while allowing minority lawmakers to say they've done something beyond just throwing more young African-American and Hispanic men in jail.

...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Touching on "gun offenses", people should keep in mind that homicides are down. The legislature already says that these people (violent offenders) have to serve most of their time behind bars.

 

It's important to maintain some discretion. You don't want a one size fits all.

 

Historically, sentences were shorter in Cook County but that's changed.

 

We need to be holistic in addressing "gun violence".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Representative Dunkin asks Mr. Emanuel if he could support a bill without mandatory minmums.

 

Mr. Emanuel says he cannot speak to hypothetical legislation.

 

Mr. Dunkin asserts that they do not work.

 

Mr. Emanuel says he has fought for the Brady bill, fought "gun crime", etc and would like to address the challenges faced by the City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to Mr. Dunkin's question as to whether the City has hired more officers to address the problem, Mr. Emanuel speaks of officer reassignments, overtime, etc.

 

Mr. Dunkins wnders how much has been spent on overtime.

 

Mr. McCarthy answers $90,000,000 but that it shouldn't be looked at in dollars and cents.

 

Mr. Dunkin states that some look at it differently. That it's taking money from the state that could be used for health care and other programs.

 

Mr. Dunkin wonders why that shouldn't be spent hiring more officers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Dunkin asks Mr. Emanuel if the violence was happening in Lincoln Park, Ravenswood, areas that are not a "black or brown community", how would he rate Mr. McCarty's job performance.

Mr. Emanuel says Mr. McCarthy is doing a fine job.

With an edge on his voice and a finger pointing at Mr. Dunkin, Mr. Emanuel expresses how happy he is to have the Representative's help with Chicago crime.

Representative Dunkin is perhaps too congenial to respond in kind regarding Mr. Emanuel's help with state matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reintroducing Marc Levin, Senator Noland asks him for a policy view regarding mandatory minimums and the "discretion we should allow judges".

 

Mr. Levin reminds him that offenders already serve 85%. He states that there are so many thousands of offenses now that prosecutors choose what to charge, whether to stack, and that works against uniformity in sentencing.

 

He does think there's room for more police discretion.

 

Adds that virtually any offense committed with a gun already carries a mandatory minimum and he sees no need for additional minimums related to guns in Illinois.

 

Senator Noland reiterates that final sentence, seemingly for emphasis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regard to mandatory sentencing, in the 1980's and 1990's the US and many states enacted "truth in sentencing" laws. This reflected a consensus the incarceration should be the main method of crime control.

 

There is now a shift in that thinking. Incarceration is our most expensive form of control and is bankrupting us. It isn't justified by other state's experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Senator Raoul asks to what extent risk assessment has been used for illegal possession of a firearm. Uses the example of a boy who has done noting wrong but is being threatened by a gang. Wonders about about remiving a judge's discretion.

 

Mr. Hermann does not have specific data but says we must look at the individual, find a way to "get them to a better side". Adds that there are no guarantees, but says we should increase our options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regard to mandatory sentencing, in the 1980's and 1990's the US and many states enacted "truth in sentencing" laws. This reflected a consensus the incarceration should be the main method of crime control.

 

There is now a shift in that thinking. Incarceration is our most expensive form of control and is bankrupting us. It isn't justified by other state's experience.

 

How about bringing back capital punishment? A lot cheaper and no repeat offenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...