Drew Wrigley wants to send a message to those who commit offenses against or in the face of law enforcement officers.

“There are too many people that turn to violence when confronted by law enforcement, and we can’t stand by anymore,” Wrigley, North Dakota’s attorney general, recently told Forum News Service. “There has to be an additional penalty. If there is not an additional penalty, they’ll do it every time. … We can’t let it go on anymore. It has to stop.”

And with that goal, he plans to reintroduce a proposal during the 2025 session of the Legislature that he hopes will set minimum sentences for crimes against officers — things like assault on an officer, resisting arrest and fleeing. Opponents contend Wrigley’s proposal will put more people through the court system and crowd jails, according to a Forum News Service report earlier this week. The cost could be in the millions of dollars.

We don’t care about the cost, the potential crowding or any of that. Wrigley’s proposal has merit.

He first pushed the idea during the Legislature’s 2023 session, but it died in surprising fashion. Despite an intent that we see as actually helping law officers do their job — and to protect them better — SB 2107 was derided by some.

Among the new proposal’s bullet points are minimum sentences of:

• 14 days in jail for resisting arrest
• 30 days for simple assault on an officer
• 30 days for fleeing an officer

And if a person commits another crime, the sentences for resisting, fleeing and assault would be served consecutively to that other crime, Forum News Service reported. At present, Wrigley said, sentences of crimes against officers run concurrently with a person’s other crimes. It means offenders of crime against officers often aren’t really punished for it. Thus, Wrigley believes, offenders consider it rational to resist, flee or assault an officer.

It’s been on Wrigley’s mind for some time now. In 2022, he told the Grand Forks Herald that a tightening of laws is needed to help cut down on things like police chases, which endanger not only police but others, too. At the time, he also was pushing for sentencing changes for concealed and discharge of weapons, but police chases and other crime against officers also were discussed.

He notably called police chases “a dramatic problem” and said the public has lost faith in the system’s ability and the will to protect them. Perhaps deep down, police officers might feel the same way, too. And in a time of a shortage of officers — many departments report difficulties filling open positions — doesn’t it make sense to do more to protect those who protect us?

Tougher sentences must be the way forward.

“Some people will say, this is going backward in time. But sentencing reform should be methodical and intelligent. It shouldn’t just be ‘people get out of jail earlier.’ That’s not sentencing reform,” Wrigley said.

Sure, some North Dakota jails are crowded, but that shouldn’t dissuade lawmakers from seeing the merit of Wrigley’s proposal. Mandatory, and tougher, sentences for certain crimes — especially those involving chases, assaults on officers and the like — seem like a common-sense fix to a rising problem.

Herald editorials are written under the byline “Herald editorial board,” since they sometimes include the thoughts, opinions or written input of multiple authors. Editorials generally reflect the opinion of a newspaper’s publisher.