Letter: We’re getting way too soft on criminals

Friday, June 23, 2000 | 9:33 a.m.

To what are this city and state coming? In Las Vegas, Metro watches as an "alleged" car thief steals cars. Yes, they took them back, but a crime was still committed. He broke the law, but upon a promise not to do it again and cooperate with police, he was allowed to stay home.

Did he? No, he went out again and stole another car. The tragic thing here is that not only did Metro allow this, they videotaped his crimes.

A rabbi, but it could have been a priest or a minister, held a religious service in his home. Was he allowed to observe the Sabbath and come in the next day? No, he was arrested for this heinous crime. Why was he not allowed to promise he would be a good citizen? He was easy, the authorities knew he would not resist and there would be acceptable fallout.

The chief justice of the Nevada Supreme Court wants to ease the penalty for "walking under the influence" down to a misdemeanor to match a person who drives while under the influence of drugs. What's wrong here? I would think that after two serious accidents involving drugs, the move would have been to make DUI of drugs the same felony that "WUI" is at present.

We need to get our priorities straight, and if a crime has been committed -- not a code violation -- enforce the law equally and punish the criminal. We are becoming way too soft on crime, which in turn leads to more crime. Wake up, people, we only go this way once.

BILL SULLIVAN