But of course, they can't imprison all potential drunk drivers. They could send those already found guilty to prison, though.
Well, if it's only saving lives they think about when they create harsh sentencing laws, maybe they should focus on the biggest of the big dogs first. Such as people with STD's or, even those acting in a manner which may spread or promote the spreading of STD's. I suggest this because more Americans die each year from sexually transmitted diseases
(on average 22,000) than by all categories of murder combined. In fact, those people who are so afraid to be murdered by a random criminal during the commission of a felony, write laws making it legal to throw non-violent people away for (15) fifteen years (someone who has never hurt anybody, and committed his or her first crime ever). Laws that can also end up throwing these people away for life. Let me inform these logical people: If you count the nation's murderous robberies (731), burglaries (61), car theft and carjackings (11), and rapes (15) committed, where the police believe the victim and offender had no discernible prior relationship, you are roughly 27 times more likely to die from someone who gave you a deadly STD than from any of the above mentioned felonies. (27) Twenty-seven times the raw number 22,000 — is pretty significant, especially since many of the perpetrators could be tracked, investigated, and then prosecuted. Both as examples and also for public safety.
The major difference between the, on average, 22,000 dying each year from STD's and say the (11) eleven dying annually from carjacking, besides the huge difference in numbers, is that relatively very few affluent or influential (white) families will be affected by the mandatory 10- or 15-year sentence for carjacking. Whereas consensually engaging in an activity that may give another an STD, is something partaken of by even affluent kids and university students.
So, regardless of the tens of thousands dying each year, these same lawmakers see no need for rigorous prosecution for the passing along of deadly STDs. Since, like their own children, many of them are capable of transmitting an STD. Their minds are simply unable to demonize it. It's acceptable to them, even as thousands of young, wonderful, university women contracted and died from cervical cancer (caused by an STD).
And actually, because this affluent white sexual indulgence won't stop, minorities also will continue to receive a pass from prosecution.
Why is not all sex illegal for people who possess these historically murderous beings inside their bodies? Why not, like gang members, label the infected that have even protected sex with the healthy, `street terrorists' and given (10) ten-year and up sentences, regardless of the circumstances? Even as they kill thousands and bring worry and concern into our intimate lives. We could even, with near perfection, adapt the existing 10-20-life law for people with STD's. The firearm can be replaced with the sex organs. (10) Ten years if you display it in
a sexual manner, (20) twenty years if you use it sexually in front of someone, and 25 to life if you engage in any sort of sexual intercourse with them. And, of course, if they died, accident or not, protected or not, you'd be charged with their murder and subsequently face the death penalty.
When a cop kills someone who is committing a criminal act, it's the criminal's partner in the said crime that gets the murder charge. In this case, the STD could take the place of the murderous police officer. They both were acting carelessly because just as the healthy caught it they could then spread it, and also were promoting such wanton and reckless behavior by aiding its execution.
The intent, or outcome, is rarely considered when it comes to (3) three strikes and the gang and gun enhancements unless of course it could be used against the criminal.
Should then intent or outcome even matter when judging someone sexually promiscuous who has an STD?
Considering the potentially extreme danger it can subject countless lives for countless years, how is there no prisons for these mad biological terrorists? Why don't the police investigate each new documented case of a recently contracted sexually transmitted disease in order to make sure no crime took place? To facilitate the process, why aren't documented cases of STD's registered (either publicly or solely for police investigation)? Why aren't the sworn protectors of our society considering all those who are dying?
Well, the “Why?” is simple: Just as DUI's have historically been,
sex is something experienced by the majority of Americans.
And even the rich and powerful ones have contracted STD's. How, in any way, could they demonize themselves?
