Crime and Punishment

Instapundit links to an article concerning arrest records for teens, citing statistics that 1-in-3 teens will be arrested during their formative years.

Now, Blumstein says, youth may be arrested for drugs and domestic violence, which were unlikely offenses to attract police attention in the 1960s. "There's a lot more arresting going on now," he says.

When I was a teen in the '60s I knew that possession of marijuana might get me arrested. That hasn't changed, it's still illegal to possess marijuana in most jurisdictions. It's true that domestic violence laws have tightened up since the '60s, but that's a result of the legislature placing greater emphasis on violence, which might not be a bad thing.

There are a lot more laws now and the police are tasked with enforcing them. It's not my fault, nor the fault of my brethren that there are more laws on the books. In fact, if you ask most police officers, we'd be better served with fewer laws on the books. It seems, though, that every time the legislature meets, there is always a cause de jure that results in new laws. Another problem with the way laws are written is that the concept of intent has been written out of the laws. Back in the old days, laws used to take intent into account, with verbiage that made motive part of the offense. Nowadays, intent is likely to not be addressed.

The average teenager who steals an iPod or is arrested for possession of marijuana — why do we make that define their lives?"

I would submit that 40 years ago it was impossible to steal an Ipod. They didn't exist and while theft was still illegal, you simply could not steal an Ipod. However, marijuana existed and arrests were made for possession of dope.

If you want the law changed, talk to your legislator. They're the ones that make the laws. The police only enforce them.

I am reminded of a quote from Mark Twain: "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session."