You may not have heard of Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), the Chair of the California Assembly’s Public Safety Committee. But that may be because he’s not doing anything to make you more secure. Convicted criminals? That’s another story.

Cathy Seipp has been exchanging fire with Leno in the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages. She accuses Leno of being “oddly unconcerned with public safety”

That certainly sounds likely. Leno is so far to the left that he signed the nutty World Can’t Wait petition. That’s the front group for the Revolutionary Communist Party that advocates overthrow of the government — no, not impeachment of the President, that’s thinking small! — and replacing it with a Politburo to be named later (our coverage here, here, and here).

While highlighting Leno’s opposition to a bill strengthening community protections against released sex offenders — and his Committee’s subsequent failure to do anything further with it — Seipp first wrote (alternate link here):

… (Assemblywoman Jackie) Goldberg and Mr. Leno, however, seem to have a particular habit of positioning themselves against anyone trying to promote an orderly civic environment in California.

… Leno … this summer criticized Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s efforts to toughen California laws against sex offenders. Proposed new restrictions, which may be on the ballot next year, include keeping rapists and child molesters farther away from schools and parks, and requiring some to wear electronic monitoring bracelets.

“It doesn’t tell you what they’re doing,” Mr. Leno complained to the San Jose Mercury News about the tracking devices. Like many who consider worries about pedophiles overblown, Mr. Leno pointed out that most such offenses are from people the victim knows. True. Such concern would seem more sincere, however, if Mr. Leno hadn’t been the only Public Safety Committee member to vote against a bill closing loopholes in the treatment of incestuous child molesters.

After Leno complained about Seipp’s characterization of his position on a bill covering incestuous child molesters, Seipp replied last week that was only part of the problem (alternate link here):

He once called a San Francisco police sting against Internet sex predators “mean-spirited” and “a waste of taxpayers’ money.” What does he consider a good use of taxpayers’ money? … fighting anti-porn filters in public libraries.

Seipp’s right. Leno just doesn’t think sex offenders are worth worrying about. In May, he told the Riverside Press-Enterprise that “Sex offenders are the least likely of parolees to re-offend, statistics prove that,” Leno said. “We can banish people but it does not deal with the problem.”

If Leno actually believes that sex offenders are low risk, he’s wrong. According to Department of Corrections figures, 43% of male sex offenders are returned to prison within two years of release:

That 43% recidivism rate* is higher than that for attempted murder, second degree, kidnapping, DUI, and some other serious offenses. Leno’s statement that sex offenders are the least likely group to re-offend is simply untrue.

That factual error aside, he also ignores the magnitude of sex crime. What’s more damaging to victims: a recidivist burglar, or a recidivist rapist or child molester? WIth most convicted murderers not making parole (in 2002 only four were released), sex offenders are the most potentially damaging criminals the state releases. Shouldn’t the Public Safety Committee be especially concerned about their potential victims? Why shouldn’t convicted child molesters and rapists be subject to heightened supervision and tracking?

This thinking is alien to Leno; if anything, he seems to believe that parolees should be treated as type of protected class. He told the Press-Enterprise that the state should seek to reduce the risk of re-offense by focusing on stable housing and employment for ex-cons.

In his spare time he’s writing bills that require police agencies to report every incident of Taser use to the legislature (AB 1237), weaken the Three Strikes law (AB 50), and shorten parole periods for certain offenders (AB 505). All reflect the same criminals-first mentality.

Leno may want to get these through the legislature while he can. If his new friends at the Revolutionary Communist Party seize power and then follow the precedent set by their brethren in the USSR, China, and elsewhere, there won’t be much of a need for parolee rights — nor many parolees.

—
There is a comprehensive roundup of Leno comments at CrimeWatch

* Not all were returned for the same offenses, of course.

Technorati Tags: California, california legislature, mark leno, San Francisco, World Can’t Wait

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 15th, 2005 at 1:21 am by A Senior Administration Official and is filed under California Schemin', Nemesises ... Nemesi?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.