Thursday, July 7, 2011

Another Unwasted Tragedy


Rham Emanuel said:
"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."

That's what it looks like is happening again.  I was not planning to comment on this case, as it has been covered so extensively by others, and it's been all over the MSM as well.  However, this result of the case is enough to get me commenting.

The jury seems to have reached their conclusion based on the evidence (or lack thereof) as presented by the prosecution.  Regardless of what people believe happened, there was not enough clear-cut evidence to convict.  At least, as far as the jury was concerned, that is the case.  Personally, I'd rather one guilty person go free, than one innocent person be convicted wrongly.  Every time. 

However, rather than be grateful for the American justice system, which is designed to protect innocent people as well as convict the guilty, there are those who would suggest a new law, or more regulations, or other requirements on the American people.  This is another example of those in the government using a tragedy to their advantage, to push legislation they would otherwise not be able to push.  To be perfectly blunt, I do not care how sad or terribly you feel about what happened to an innocent child.  I despise that evil exists, and that these things happen.  However, as a person who loves freedom, and loves having the right to choose how I live my life, I would be remiss to not extend that same freedom to everyone else.  That includes small details about my life, such as deciding when to alert authorities that my child is missing.  There is no way to legislate a time-frame which makes sense across the board.  Every family is different, every instance of a child 'getting lost' varies. 

When I was growing up, in the rural mountains of Pennsylvania, it would have been very easy for me to go 'missing' any given day of the year.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that at some point along the way, I probably did.  If my parents had been required to alert authorities every time they didn't know precisely where I was, it would have been a tremendous waste of tax-payer resources, additional unneeded stress in the family, and a myriad of other negatives.  This is just one problem of having a nanny-state. 

I would suggest that any legislator who thinks it's a good idea to enact a law because of a single tragedy is a traitor to the very concept of personal liberty and responsibility.  Rather than pushing for more regulations, or more restrictive rules regarding parenting, perhaps the government should consider getting out of the way of families, and giving them the freedom to grow how they wish. 

Now, obviously that is all speaking to the missing portion of the issue.  This bill also mentions (and has a focus on) death of a child.  My one question is this:  Why do we need another law to push parents to do this?  Several reasons come to mind as to why we don't.  Firstly, give the parents a chance to mourn the loss.  In the case of accidental or unintentional death of the child, it's simple respect toward the parents.  Secondly, there's the issue of all the other legal reasons which exist for the death to be reported.  The need to have a burial, the need to notify the IRS, and SS office, and any other governmental agency involved.  Also, acquiring a death certificate for the child needs to go through the system.  However, an even more obvious reason is simple: In the case of intentional death (which is the logic behind this bill), IT......WOULD......CHANGE......NOTHING!  If the parent murdered, or intentionally allowed the death of, their child, what makes anyone with  the ability to reason think that said parent, who is now a criminal, would follow that law, which would carry a much less stiff penalty? 

The very logic behind this bill is flawed, and in a way that inhibits innocent people, rather than promoting freedom, and preventing crime.  It's the same concept as why gun-control laws fail:  Criminals are already committing crime, why would they stop a crime because of one more law?  I urge you to let your representatives know that this bill is a waste of tax-payer resources, and a drain which we do not need on our system.


  1. Great conclusion. Criminals don't follow the laws. That is just the way it is.

  2. Thanks, Mike. It's funny how so many people like to over look that simple concept. "One more law" isn't going to stop them any better than the last 30.