|Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Webcam, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insiders. Learn more...|
GLENN: Yes, that's right. California is now in a budget crisis and, you know, a lot happens when a crisis hits. You want to make sure you never let a crisis go to waste. I'm sorry, I didn't say that, that's just Rahm Emanuel. Let's just get the social elements of the ACLU to help us out a little bit and that's when the rest of us are left scratching our heads as mass numbers of prisoners are being set free in the name of saving a buck and help balance the budget, and this logic is going to amaze you.
The ACLU has been successfully filing lawsuits against prisons for quite some time now. What they do is they claim that it's a human rights violation to keep prisoners in crowded spaces. The lawsuits are virtually always won by the ACLU, and after the suits are filed but before any court decisions are handed down, prison populations grow more slowly in the litigation states. Got it? The ACLU keeps suing and the prison population goes down slightly.
Let me give it to you in a less cryptic way. Criminals are being let back out on the streets because of the ACLU. Well done, mission accomplished, ACLU. Not only do you stop that horrible human rights violation of people being a little crowded in prison but you've also helped California's bottom line. Study points out a little hiccup in the process, however. I mean, who would have seen this one coming? But apparently when criminals are released in large numbers -- again I'm not a scientist, but try to figure this one out. Crime goes up. Isn't that weird? But in the land of socialism and for the greater good, what's a few extra violent crimes every year? Quoting the New York Times: Ultimately violent crime will be roughly 6% higher in Californian it would have been absent the lawsuit. That is roughly 150 extra homicides a year, 500 additional rapes and 4500 more robberies. Oh, those 500 women that have been raped, I mean, I'm sure they will understand the greater good argument. You know, aren't you willing to be raped to help the budget deficit in California? I mean, seriously. New York Times -- and this is actually from the freakonomic guys who I love. The New York Times continues: While those crime numbers sound bad, letting out the prisoners, from a wash perspective. Oh, I'm sure the 150 extra families who have had their loved ones murdered and, of course, the 500 rape victims would more or less get on board with this being more or less a wash. "The money we save from prisoners is on the same order of magnitude as the pain and suffering associated with the extra crime." Excuse me? Pardon me? Anyway, when you base all your policies on experts who know everyone and they are the only ones that can do the job -- Tim Geithner -- this is how you stop thinking about things: "Don't worry. The cash we save will cover the pain we cause." And then when you give the state the power to act on these recommendations, it only gets worse. The study and the book freakonomics both go on to conclude that tougher penalties drastically lower violent crime rates. Wait a minute. Tougher penalties drastically lower violent crime rate, how is that possible? And I don't even know why you need to read the book when you can learn the same lesson with the minimum societal cost of only 500 rapes. I mean...