Discuss this editorial

Victims and their families know that the laws were made to protect the guilty and not the innocent. Recently, a man who tortured, raped and murdered an 11-year-old girl received only an 11-year sentence, because it was the first criminal offense. Criminals cannot be rehabilitated; the recidivism rate has proven that time and time again. All we want is our freedom to feel like normal people again. It isn't for vengeance sake that many of us rallied for this law; it's to allow us a voice in a system that ignores us, or calls us liars or tells us that what happened was not that bad...it was all a misunderstanding.

Tracy Beckham @ 9:47 AM PST, Nov 11, 2008

As the Californian tax payer is bearing the burden and paying for yet more prisons being built instead of much-needed investments being made in the education system, the CCPOA and CCA are laughing all the way to the bank. The new figures of the ridiculously large profits of the Correctional Corporation of America (the prison-industrial complex we're supporting through Prop. 9 and all the other tough-on-crime laws that don't work) are just in: http://investor.shareholder.com/cxw/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=345987 Read and be appalled.

YapYap @ 2:27 AM PST, Nov 11, 2008

Couldn't agree more. If the person is ever to be released they must not just receive a punitive sentence, but also a REHABILITATIVE one. Otherwise we are simply using taxpayer dollars to make criminals WORSE, then re-releasing them back out into society. We lock up fathers and mothers for victimless crimes, for durations where they never see their children grow up, then are surprised and outraged to see their children offend. Tough on crime? Give me a break. It's making it worse.

Adam LoCascio @ 10:15 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

It is pretty clear that the editorial writers probably never attended a parole hearing and certainly never a hearing where one of their own loved ones was the victim. Thank God the voters didn't listen to you.

John Dadian @ 8:35 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

Please rally with the families who have filed wrongful death lawsuits due to prison overcrowding at the Fed Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Ave, San Francisco, 9 am on Nov 21. The prisoner deaths will only increase now with this passage of this terrible bill. The flyer is here, back up the three judge panel, demand release of terminally ill with families who will take them, and hospitals for mentally ill http://www.1union1.com/medical_neglect_rally_nov21.html save billions by being smart on crime

Dr. B. Cayenne Bird @ 8:25 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

The same people who defeated Prop 6 should have defeated Prop 9 but obviously didn't understand why the Teachers' unions were so adamantly opposed. The politicians want to hire prison guards and fire teachers so they can get elected on a tough-on-crime platform. George Runner should have been recalled for this type of destructive and expensive bill, instead he was re-elected. More voter registration is needed for people not taking money from law enforcement labor unions.

Dr. B. Cayenne Bird @ 8:22 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

It must also be noted that the California district attoneys assoc and many in law enforcement supported this law. Why? because they stand to profit from increased budgets.The real losers are the taxpayers!With a provision that will not allow lawmakers to release any inmate early, even non-violent a burden that already exist will be componded by this law.Our jails and prisons will no doubt be jammed for years to come.

Frank Courser @ 7:27 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

The parole standard created by Prop. 9 is a mandatory 15 year denial unless "clear and convincing evidence" is presented to jusityf setting a lower term of 10 down to 3 years. There is no such evidence, and so that population of inmates -- the costliest of all -- will continue to grow, thereby requiring more money from our broke budget. California voters just got sucker punched into expanding a prison system that they have otherwise consistently voted not to do. And THAT is the power of propaganda.

Matt Gray @ 6:41 AM PST, Nov 10, 2008

You're right! A largly ignorant and uninformed electorate often do not study the issues, nor do they consider them critically. Instead they are, more often than not, swayed by simplistic, rhetorical emotional appeals. The California initiative system takes advantage of that as many of those who propose such propositions are well aware. So, proposition 9 is yet another example of a generally uneduacated and simple minded electorate staring into dazzling headlights manipulated by their billionaire puppet masters.

Francis Roffel @ 2:52 PM PST, Nov 9, 2008