Skip to content

A Candidate for DA Wants to Not Charge People for Breaking in or Property Destruction

A candidate for Boston’s Suffolk County DA, Rachael Rollins, is proposing to not prosecute 15 supposedly “less serious” acts of law-breaking. And that is partly because prosecutions of “petty crimes” is heavier on minorities than others, and also because of “clogged” courts. But like most statists, Rollins doesn’t get the real purpose of the law which is to protect the persons and property of the people from aggression.

For instance, Rollins’s list of proposed “charges to be declined” includes trespassing, breaking and entering, and wanton or malicious destruction of property. Are you kidding? What this tells people is that it’s okay to break into someone’s home, it’s okay to trespass on someone’s property without the consent of the property owner, and we can let people get away with not just destruction of someone else’s property but malicious destruction of property.

This is a major violation of property rights, as well as making citizens more vulnerable to intrusions and violence against them in their own homes. The laws against these kinds of acts are, theoretically anyway, exactly why we have a criminal justice system. That such a system should be run by the State, the same State that steals money from the people through taxes and imposes a monopoly on community security, needs to be debated.

Also on the list to not be charged are shoplifting and larceny under $250. So, don’t prosecute people for stealing. You might as well, given that the government steals so much from the people. Why $250? Do you know how important $250 is to someone especially who is poor? You want to excuse a mugger for stealing that kind of money from some guy with a low-skilled job or an old lady on Social Security?

But she does have some charges on the list that shouldn’t be prohibited by law, including minor in possession of alcohol, drug possession, and drug possession with intent to distribute. The reason why these should not be charged or enforced and such laws should be repealed is that those acts are not crimes. There is no victim. Whereas in the above examples, there are clear victims.

Government prohibition of private acts in which there is no actual victim doesn’t prevent the people from acquiring their vices. All it does, especially the drug war, is cause a black market, which brings on drug dealers on school playgrounds, drug traffickers, drug lords, turf wars, violence and death, and the police state we now have.

I wish there were candidates for these DA offices or judgeships who were advocates of liberty and the rights of the individual, advocates of property rights, and proponents of ending the drug war and repealing laws against other peaceful, victimless acts.

Published inUncategorized