BILL NOT TOO HARSH

Daily newspaper reports regarding area crimes must certainly suffice
to win the necessary support of the bill proposed by the House
Judiciary Committee. If nothing else, this bill finally sends a long
overdue message that rules and laws are created to be followed. How a
defense attorney could oppose such a bill as being overly harsh is
inexplicable.

No law can be viewed as being too "harsh" in sending the message that
the only way back into society is through this corridor of proof that
these people are willing to abide by the stipulations of their
probation. If these offenders cannot at least fulfill this part of
their sentence while being permitted to go on with their lives, then
there is justified concern they never will do so.

Nancy Daniels' remarks, "There are some situations where the five-year
mandatory sentence would be extremely harsh," and "A person who was on
probation for burglary and got a positive drug test, they'd be
captured in the net," are astonishing. What business does someone
indicted for burglary, on probation, have being involved with drugs?
Is it not possible that this "underprivileged criminal" would again,
under the influence of drugs, be prone to return to his/her criminal
ways to support their addiction? Are we trying to protect society from
criminal action or are we trying to protect criminals from society?
Carlie Brucia's father hit the nail on the head when he said, "When
(Smith) violated his parole, in my opinion, not enough care went into
studying the violations and his pattern, his criminal behavior."

It's about time the Florida Legislature stiffens penalties for violent
criminals who knowingly violate the terms of their probation. This
bill, as well as the sheriff's recent sweep of area schools, is a dire
message to offenders that they are free on a no-tolerance basis and
that their own good judgment is what is keeping them from
incarceration.

Gabriele Boecker

Bradenton