Cops and Robbers: The Rest of the Story

This is the second officer down shooting I've looked at, and the back story is disgusting.

When Clairton officer James Kuzak was shot, it wasn't by a choir boy, or a law abiding citizen with a license to carry firearms, or a nut case, but rather by a recidivist criminal. The news reported today that the man who shot him has been arrested and is to be tried—again.  

And that, dear reader, is the crux of today's blog. Ever heard the term "swallowing the gun?" It refers to the habitual dropping of gun charges either completely, or to a lesser charge. It often results in revolving door justice, and men who should be behind bars are on the streets.

Why does this happen? Most likely it happens because District Attorneys like to tout a high "disposition rate" around election time. Judges like to show clear dockets, because, after all, a backlog means a judge isn't working hard enough, right?  When you carefully read plea bargains, and see the result in terms of carnage, murder, robbery, and general mayhem as criminals get off nearly Scott free, it should send shivers through to the very core of your body. Jim Kuzak was shot in the line of duty. He chose a career that requires one to run toward the sound of gunfire. You and I, if we have any sense at all, run away from it. Jim Kuzak was protecting life and property.

Some will tell you, and really mean it, that it was Jim Kuzak's fault. Maybe he should have been a soccer coach. Perhaps some other nondescript job? Certainly his career choice contributed to his shooting. Those same folks will tell you that we just have to get guns off the street. All guns, everybody's guns, and just forget about that pesky Article I, Section XXI of the Pennsylvania Constitution. That's the one that says "The right of the citizen to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned." That's all it says.  

When Emilio Jose Rivera was convicted in 2004, the District Attorney had an opportunity to insure he would be behind bars for five years, just on the gun charge. Officer Kuzak's assailant and would be assassin, Rivera, has court records that are a matter of public record. Anyone can view them at this link http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CourtSummaryReport.aspx?matterID=79756298

The issue of mandatory sentencing for crimes committed with guns isn't something that is pulled from thin air. Pennsylvania Crimes and Sentencing laws are pretty clear:

42PAC.S.A.§ 9712.  Sentences for offenses committed with firearms.

(a)
Mandatory sentence.--Except as provided under section 9716 (relating to two
or more mandatory minimum sentences applicable), any person who is convicted in any court of this Commonwealth of a crime of violence as defined in section
9714(g) (relating to sentences for second and subsequent offenses), shall, if
the person visibly possessed a firearm or a replica of a firearm, whether or not
the firearm or replica was loaded or functional, that placed the victim in
reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury, during the commission of the
offense, be sentenced to a minimum sentence of at least five years of total
confinement notwithstanding any other provision of this title or other statute
to the contrary. Such persons shall not be eligible for parole, probation, work
release or furlough. (my emphasis added)

The next time some Nimrod tries to convince you that it's the guns, show them this. Its the recidivist criminal, often as not released far too early. And its nearly always a District Attorney and a judge who place re-election before public safety. Above all, ask your anti-gun friend if he or she even bothered to vote in the last election.

(Contributions for Officer James Kuzak, who is undergoing a long process of rehabilitation, are accepted at  James Kuzak Benefit Fund, P.O. Box 225 Clairton, PA 15025.)