from
https://mynorthwest.com/3293353/rantz-wa-democrats-bill-says-its-racial-equity-to-go-easy-on-drive-by-murderers/

Rantz: WA Democrats’ bill says it’s ‘racial equity’ to go easy on
drive-by murderers
Dec 28, 2021, 5:20 PM | Updated: 6:57 pm

BY JASON RANTZ
The Jason Rantz Show, 3pm-6pm on KTTH

Washington Democrats hope to go easy on drive-by murderers in order to
promote racial equity for criminals. It’s the latest light-on-crime
scheme pushed under the guise of being anti-racist.

House Bill 1692 lessens the criminal penalties for drive-by shootings.
It prohibits using a drive-by shooting as a basis for elevating a first
degree murder charge to an aggravated first degree murder. The bill is
also retroactive, lessening punishment for those already found guilty in
drive-by shooting cases. It even offers carve-outs to release felons
from jail if they committed their violent act when they were under
21-years-old.

The bill’s sponsors, state Representatives Tarra Simmons (D-Bremerton)
and David Hackney (D-Tukwila), pre-filed the bill ahead of the Jan. 10,
2022, start to the legislative session. They claim this change promotes
“racial equity in the criminal legal system.” It does no such thing. It
merely goes easy on criminals who deserve lifetime jail sentences.

Rantz: Councilmember, Seattle activists pushed to keep teen out of jail.
Then he allegedly shot two women.

Democrats again side with criminals
Criminals found guilty of first degree murder face a maximum sentence of
life without parole. These crimes are usually pre-meditated, though a
murder that shows extreme indifference to human life also qualifies. Due
to sentencing guidelines, first degree murder charges usually result in
a sentence of 20-30 years, with 20 years being the minimum.

Under current state laws, a drive-by shooting qualifies for an
aggravated first degree murder charge. It isn’t regularly charged as the
partisan prosecutor’s office in the county drive-by shootings are most
likely to occur — King County — is reticent to dole out life sentences.
The aggravated classification, however, remains an option for a future
prosecutor’s office when faced with a suspect who is truly evil. It can
also provide a disincentive for criminals to engage in such behavior.

This class A felony comes with a mandatory penalty of life imprisonment
without the possibility of parole. Thanks to the Washington State
Supreme Court, drive-by murderers under 21 cannot serve life without parole.

Other aggravating circumstances that qualify for mandatory life sentence
without parole include murder-for-hire, rape, kidnapping, and arson. It
would normally qualify for the death penalty, but the progressive the
state Supreme Court abolished it, citing racial bias.

HB 1692, if passed, would remove drive-by shootings from the list of
aggravated factors. Thus, a drive-by murderer, if charged and convicted,
could be released from prison. But the bill goes even farther than
reclassifying drive-by shootings.

Rantz: Prolific offender and meth addict allegedly rapes woman after
courts go easy on him

Bill retroactively applies the new standards
HB 1692 is retroactive if a drive-by shooting was the only aggravating
factor in the first degree murder charge.

That means that anyone convicted or who plead guilty to first degree
murder with a drive-by as the sole aggravating factor, “must be returned
to the sentencing court or the sentencing court’s successor for entry of
a conviction of murder in the first degree and sentencing according to
the sentencing guidelines in effect on the date of the offense.”

The age of the suspect also comes into play, both retroactively and in
the future, “regardless of any other provisions of state law.”

If the criminal was under the age of 21 at time of the drive-by
shooting, HB 1692 says “the court has full discretion to depart from
mandatory sentencing requirements, including but not limited to any
applicable enhancements, and to take the particular circumstances
surrounding the person’s age and all other pertinent factors into
consideration when determining an appropriate sentence.”

Rantz: No plans to investigate massive Seattle homeless scandal,
ensuring it happens again

A lazy implication by lawmakers, one who won’t respond to basic questions
Reps. Simmons and Hackney claim in the bill’s introduction that this is
about “promoting racial equity in the criminal legal system.” But the
neither the bill nor the lawmakers explain how the bill would do that.

Hackney did not respond to multiple requests for comment. His district,
which includes south Seattle, Tukwila, Renton and Kent, are cities that
experience a high number of drive-by shootings. The gun violence has
prompted area-Mayors to demand more legal consequences to those
perpetuating the gun violence. And Washington has been ranked amongst
the worst states for drive-by shootings.

Simmons, however, offered a statement.

Through her office, Simmons argued that first degree murder “is a
heinous crime which already carries a long and serious sentence.” But,
she added, “it’s clear that [this aggravated classification] was
targeted at gangs that were predominantly young and Black.” She argues
it’s an example of “systemic racism.”

And while Simmons wants to make this issue about saving children from
life sentences, her bill applies to adults, the majority of which commit
gang-related gun violence. And no child can get life without parole for
a drive-by murder in Washington state.

Her argument doesn’t make sense.

Drive-by charges target gang members? No kidding.
Given that drive-by shootings are a common practice of gangs, and that
gangs in this country are majority Hispanic and Black, one could see the
disproportionality argument coming: that Hispanic or Black criminals are
more likely to spend life in prison without parole than white criminals
due to this aggravating factor.

But disproportionality arguments are relatively useless as they don’t
explain why the disparity exists in the first place. Progressives who
view everything through a critical race theory lens argue the disparity
exists due to racism. They’re seldom correct.

In fact, Simmons claims that the aggravated murder charge for a drive-by
shooting has only been used once since it became law in 1995.

Kimonti Carter became a gang member at just 11 years old. He admitted he
committed burglary, robbery, car theft, possession of narcotics, and
more, before he turned 16. But in 1997, when he was 18, Carter was
involved in a drive-by shooting that murdered a young college student in
Tacoma. He was sentenced to life without parole.

Simmons’ office did not provide a source for her claim that this is the
only case charged with that aggravating factor. It’s possible she meant
that it’s the only time the aggravated charge was the only aggravating
factor in a first degree murder charge.

(Un)divided host Brandi Kruse tells the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH that
when she pressed them for the source, Simmons’ spokesperson responded:
“Rep. Simmons is out of office and unavailable for comment.” Perhaps the
staff doesn’t know where the stat came from, either.

The cause to get behind
In the last several years, Carter has become a cause de célèbre for
local media members and progressive activists like Simmons.

In jail, Carter has since reformed. He created Taking Education and
Creating History (TEACH), which offers inmates education that earns
college credit.

The bill, due to its retroactive nature, would likely free Carter. It
appears this part of the law was written specifically for him.

But it’s worth noting that Carter likely would not have reformed if not
for the life sentence. And without that life sentence and reform, the
very program he runs in detention would not have been created.

Simmons also chides the current law.

“Murder is murder no matter where the bullet comes from, but locking
children up and throwing away the key is not the answer,” she says.

But Carter wasn’t a child when the drive-by took place. He was an adult.
And children aren’t subject to mandatory life without parole under the
current law.

The missing argument
Lawmakers do not argue that Black drive-by criminals are charged with
aggravated first degree murder, but white drive-by criminals are not.
That issue could be easily fixed by charging the white criminals as
harshly as every other criminal, rather than letting them off easier
because they’re non-white.

The argument appears to be that Black criminals commit more drive-by
shootings than white criminals, thus non-white criminals spend more time
in jail. On paper, the stat shows disproportionality, though doesn’t
explain why it exists. It’s meant to falsely imply the criminal justice
system is racist.

But if a white suspect is charged with murder when there were no
aggravating circumstance, why would that white criminal spend more time
in jail? The more egregious criminal — regardless of race — is supposed
to spend more time in jail. If there are more drive-by charges against
Black suspects than white suspects, it might have to do with the gang
demographics.