Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Should selling drugs be reason for a life sentence?

Rlyss · 10-29-2004, 07:37 AM

I don't want to be the idiot who says 'Drugs are bad, mmkay', I'd rather be the one that acknowledges that they can be abused. Sure, they can be used responsibly, and they aren't Super Solid Pure Evil in white powdered form sent from Satan to punish us. But right now our laws state that we can't do this and that with them. If I don't agree with those laws then I either leave the country, or I break the laws and suffer the consequences. Breaking the laws and then complaining that we think marijuana should be legalized, for example, is fine and all, but until it is, you're still going to get punished, and I'm fine with that.

Life for this guy is far too harsh a punishment. I don't really know what a better one would be but I think that unless the law states (and it might for all I know) that you might be thrown in prison for life by commiting that crime, then I think life is out of the question. We should be told what the punishments are for breaking certain laws. The punishment doesn't fit the crime here. I think we should go by what the law says.

And as an aside, I was reading a newspaper today (more like the illegitimate child of an unemployed tabloid) and in the street interview section, I came across this:

-----
<b>"Should high-risk prisoners be kept in jail after serving their time?"</b>
Woman, 28: "Yes, they should be kept in or under really tight surveillance."
Man, 22: Yes, if they're not reformed they still need to have their issues sorted out."
Woman, 19: Yes, they should be because they're in jail for a reason."
-----

I think it's similar to the original poster's question. If the criminal has served their time, then they should be set free. The court has decided that in order to pay the debt pack to society, they must serve 5 years in prison. Five years go by and that debt has been paid, they certainly shouldn't be kept in jail simply because they're a high risk.

For both the original poster's question and this one, I think the punishment should fit the crime, and that unusual punishments shouldn't be handed out just because people can't think of anything better.

10-29-2004, 07:37 AM	#23 (permalink)
Rlyss The Pusher Location: Edinburgh	I don't want to be the idiot who says 'Drugs are bad, mmkay', I'd rather be the one that acknowledges that they can be abused. Sure, they can be used responsibly, and they aren't Super Solid Pure Evil in white powdered form sent from Satan to punish us. But right now our laws state that we can't do this and that with them. If I don't agree with those laws then I either leave the country, or I break the laws and suffer the consequences. Breaking the laws and then complaining that we think marijuana should be legalized, for example, is fine and all, but until it is, you're still going to get punished, and I'm fine with that. Life for this guy is far too harsh a punishment. I don't really know what a better one would be but I think that unless the law states (and it might for all I know) that you might be thrown in prison for life by commiting that crime, then I think life is out of the question. We should be told what the punishments are for breaking certain laws. The punishment doesn't fit the crime here. I think we should go by what the law says. And as an aside, I was reading a newspaper today (more like the illegitimate child of an unemployed tabloid) and in the street interview section, I came across this: ----- <b>"Should high-risk prisoners be kept in jail after serving their time?"</b> Woman, 28: "Yes, they should be kept in or under really tight surveillance." Man, 22: Yes, if they're not reformed they still need to have their issues sorted out." Woman, 19: Yes, they should be because they're in jail for a reason." ----- I think it's similar to the original poster's question. If the criminal has served their time, then they should be set free. The court has decided that in order to pay the debt pack to society, they must serve 5 years in prison. Five years go by and that debt has been paid, they certainly shouldn't be kept in jail simply because they're a high risk. For both the original poster's question and this one, I think the punishment should fit the crime, and that unusual punishments shouldn't be handed out just because people can't think of anything better.