One of the suspects in the Jihadist massacre today in Paris is 34 year-old Cherif Kouachi. An ABC News report
notes this about him:
Kouachi, along with six others, was sentenced in May 2008 to 3 years in prison for terrorism in Paris. All seven men were accused of sending about a dozen young Frenchmen to join Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, after funneling them through radical religious establishments in Syria and Egypt.
It appears, however, that Kouachi served only 18 months of his sentence -- not that three years was long enough even if he'd served every day of it.
Sentencing "reform" advocates unceasingly assure us that only "low level, non-violent" offenders will be released. Even assuming they (1) had and (2) were willing to share with the public, the nuts-and-bolts specifics of what that gauzy phrase actually means, we have no assurance that its execution will live up to its promise. We have, to the contrary, a mountain of evidence that the government is incompetent to determine who is safe to release and who isn't. For several years, California has provided a good deal of this evidence all by itself; the foolhardiness of its early release decisions has been documented again and again in C&C's News Scan. Now, in a horrifying display, the Paris massacre brings home this same lesson.
"Reform" advocates tell us that the government has made a generation's worth of horrendous mistakes in deciding who should be incarcerated and for how long. In the next breath, they tell us that the same government will suddenly be seeing and wise in deciding who should be released and how early.
Today's bloody violence should give us a clue about whether they're right. It should also give us a clue about who will pay the price if they're aren't.