Letter: Burglars deserve the punishment they get

Saturday, Sept. 16, 2006 | 8:15 a.m.

In response to the Sun's Sept. 6 editorial, "A burglar, or a shoplifter?": I would like to remind the editorial's writer that the definition of burglary is universal and not solely the discretion of legislators.

The Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law defines burglary as "the act of entering or remaining unlawfully (as after closing to the public) in a building with intent to commit a crime (as a felony)." The cited examples of a woman drinking two cups of coffee without paying and a man stealing bottles of alcohol are both instances where the individuals entered the buildings for the sole purpose of committing a crime. Therefore, the above cited definition is adequate in describing the criminal activity.

It is not just the victims of the theft who wish for burglars and/or shoplifters to serve mandatory jail time. The general public does not want our county to become a safe haven for people to commit what the writer referred to as "petty crimes." The charge of burglary is warranted because these people intended to take something without paying for it, which we all know to be unlawful.

If there are extenuating circumstances, such as mental handicap or a juvenile offender, then the judge may choose to factor these issues into the sentence. However, the general rule of thumb for our society is that taking something without paying for it is stealing. Stealing something will likely result in going to jail. This is not a new concept and warrants no consideration in upcoming legislative discussions.

Jake Marston, Henderson