Let’s start easy.
Who believes that Santa drops into your house once a year to leave off presents, which were often made in China before Donald Trump took back the White House?
Well, that’s a good start.
So, how many of you non-believers set out cookies and milk on Christmas Eve?
Yup.
I think what’s happened here in Aurora and across the country is that at an early age, we’re passionately taught to believe in myths that are loosely based on what we’re later taught in school to understand as “correlative” evidence rather than “causative” proof.
Mom and Gramps tell you Santa’s on his way. You sing about it for weeks. You go through the cookie caper and awake to find just what you wanted for Christmas, crumbs on the plate and a few months later, plastic eggs under the bushes in the front yard with quarters and candy inside them.
In a perfect world, as we get older we understand that, yes, the presents appear. The “cause” of the gifts, however, is not what we were passionately told to believe. Alas, it was Gramps or Mommy who dropped that long-awaited Johnny Astro set under the tree.
The job now is to explain all this to members of the city council who just don’t get it.
For years, and especially for the last few months, a handful of Aurora city lawmakers just know in their heart of hearts that if you punish people severely with mandatory jail sentences for crimes like shoplifting and loitering, the scofflaws will avoid such bad behavior and we’ll all live happily ever after.
Years and years of real science doing real studies showing real results that consistently prove that human criminal behavior is not much affected by the threat of severe consequences, like prison, embarrassment or even the death penalty.
Really, really, folks.
Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have the highest murder rates in the nation, and they all have the death penalty.
The harshest penalties for car theft are in Texas, which has the seventh highest car-theft rate in the nation.
There’s even boatloads of research helping us all to understand why some humans seem to be immune from what most of us think is a natural response to contemplating doing something wrong, bad or even felonious: not wanting to get caught and pay the consequences.
It turns out that the fear of getting caught diminishes greatly if we don’t think we’re going to get caught right away or at all. It’s the fear of imminent or immediate retribution that keeps us mostly in line.
You don’t have to read a bunch of studies to understand this. Just drive on I-225 for a few minutes. It’s a freaking freeway free-for-all. These aren’t felons in cars weaving around traffic at 100 mph, they’re just idiot ass hats who are certain they won’t get caught. I’m certain they won’t get caught either. I haven’t seen a state patrol officer or an Arapahoe County sheriff deputy or an Aurora cop on the interstate pulling someone over in years. And years.
Yet all of these road racers know the penalties for aggravated reckless driving. Still, they persist.
But one of the biggest problems with Aurora shoplifters and arguments against mandatory jail? They’re repeat offenders. They do get caught. They tell their friends they got caught. They go to court. They go to jail. They get out, and they do it all again.
Despite the clear and unmistakable evidence that incarceration does not prevent crime, or addiction, or recidivism, some city lawmakers just can’t let it go.
Chief offenders of defenders of the myth these days are council members Stephanie Hancock, Francoise Bergan and Angela Lawson.
This week, as the city council was forced by the Colorado Supreme Court to take Aurora’s “tough on crime” minimum jail sentences for shoplifting and being a vagrant off the books, Hancock laid out a few minutes of terse talk targeting Aurora outsiders.
She blamed state legislators for not allowing the city to do whatever it wants to people busted for stealing dog food or TVs.
Hancock said that we, as a city, can’t just let people go around breaking the law just because they want to.
That wasn’t the case. It was the Colorado Supreme Court that pointed out that it was Aurora breaking the law by imposing the illegal minimum sentences for petty crimes.
It’s apparently a case of “rules for thee but not for we.” We just can’t let shoplifters off the hook with a little jail time and fines, but it’s OK for the City of Aurora to thwart 250 years of jurisprudence and the Colorado Constitution.
Perhaps Hancock confuses Santa and Trump at this point, another politician who hates science but loves rules.
Regardless, Hancock made a long case for voting “yes” on a measure to bring Aurora back inside state law and then voted “no” saying it was important for her to thumb her nose — and other novelties — at outside powers who are not letting Aurora have its way, regardless of facts, science or reality.
She said she hopes the city council will “grow a pair” and do something.
Given Hancock’s repeated remonstrance against the frequent vulgarities some members of the public regularly fling at the council dais from the public commenter lectern, I can only assume Hancock was referring to a pair of handcuffs.
She insisted that Aurora’s hokey pokey policy for shoplifters has driven down the shoplifting rate, and the proof is in the numbers.
Those numbers show that shoplifting complaints have fallen in the past few years in Aurora. But also in Denver. And Broomfield. And Littleton. And Arvada. And, well, someone needs to explain to Hancock and other mandatory minimum faithful on the dais that it doesn’t work that way and, sorry, Santa didn’t leave all that stuff under the tree.
Really really.
Maybe a more practical solution would be to pass out pairs of ruby red slippers on the dais and teach everyone to click three times for less fentanyl, more jail time and $5,000 Trump Tariff Checks.
Follow @EditorDavePerry on BlueSky, Threads, Mastodon, Twitter and Facebook or reach him at 303-750-7555 or dperry@SentinelColorado.com
How would Mr. Perry and others who believe this nonsense explain this:
AI Overview
Denver’s multi-layered crackdowns and tougher legal penalties led to a dramatic, sustained decline in motor vehicle thefts, dropping by roughly 46% to 73% from peak 2022 levels through mid-2026.
Impact on Car Theft Rates
• Massive Reduction: Motor vehicle thefts in Denver fell by roughly 73% from their peak in early 2022 through mid-2026.
• Recent Drops: Year-over-year data showed continued momentum, with Denver metro auto thefts dropping 39% by mid-2026.
• Improved Rankings: Colorado’s national per-capita ranking improved significantly as thefts plummeted statewide by over 55% since 2021.
This is just another example of those on the left thinking if they say the word “science,” their assertions can’t be questioned.
The main purpose of harsh punishment and penalties for crime is not only to try to reduce crime, which from this commentary apparently it does not, it is to punish those who engage in criminal behavior. Just continually increase the penalties, forever, paying whatever it takes to imprison all of them, for long periods.
Another fascinating aspect of crime in America is that it is actually a very small percentage of people engaging in such acts, as repeat offenders. Lock them up for EXTREMELY long periods of time. That would begin to reduce the problem. The article even mentions them getting out too soon.
Get the state to enact laws to make it happen.
Mr. Perry didn’t havea word to say when two of the liberals voted against the APD contract even though their attorney clearly said it would put the city in jeopardy. The reason is that he “liked” their decision and here we are. Madison was asked what kind of government they were creating and he replied “a republic if you can keep it.” We are losing the republic because those who have influence, power, and a way to utilize it for the good of everyone, are using it to advance what they “like” like Mr. Perry or all they want is to advance their economic interest. I am talking to both replicans and democrats, the disgrace of our country. But since you decided to play Mr. Perry, I will go along. Hancock was asking to maintain the minimum sentence within the permited sentencing guidelines. Instead of ten days and letting the judge decide, at least three of those would be mandatory sending a message that jail is there regardless. But again your interest is not the truth but what you like or want. This is the reason none takes your newspaper seriously. You seem to be the speaker of the liberals not a news reporter. Take this to heart and return to the real reason why reporters exist: to challenge the narrative of the government, be that republicans or the democrats!
Well said. Reporting fairly is not within hs ability.
Instead of lowering Auroras punishment limits the Supreme Copurt shoud have raised the limits of all other jurisdictions to match Aurora’s limits. That way there would not be an equal protection argument as all could be punished the same. Then mandate only that the mandatory aspect be romoved so that judges have discretion, again. Those judges who fall outside the expectgations of their vairious jurisdictions would be removable from office. Problem solved, and constitutionally so.