dy156

I was thinking about the thread in general discussion calling for the death of people that tortured rodents. What do you think about long prison sentences given increasingly in the United States throughout the past decade?
This might be too broad a thread, but here are some things to think about?

Crime rates are down, and maybe there are just certain bad people that need to be taken away from the rest of society and kept away. Then again, what is the difference in an individual being put away for 20 years vs. 30? Federal sentences mean the guy is in jail the whole time, no parole. Is there any deterrant in the threat of those extra years? Any punative or rehabilitative effect?

Who is going to pay for an increasingly elderly prison population?
Would a fiscally conservative politician be willing to favor lesser sentences at the risk of being labelled "soft on crime"?

We've all heard that Kobe Bryant faces 99 years in prison for sexual assault. A first offense stabbing someone with something much sharper and more deadly than a penis would likely warrant less punishment. Is this fair or just? Are there any discrepancies you've heard of in sentencing that really irritate you, like the rapist that got life for spitting or cruelty to animals as misdemeanors?

I'm curious what ya'll have to say.

Mael

if i remember right, there was a bit more to the rapist/spitting/life sentence thing than that he just spit, i think it had something to do with being a x# offence and on parole and whatnot. anyways, i think a rapist getting life might not be such a bad thing, seeing as how if you rape someone, that's something that they will be traumatized by and have to deal with for the rest of their life. but seeing as how it isn't a permanant thing, the victim will recover, less of a sentence i would not object to. i think murder should get life though, under any circumstances. man slaughter not so much, but premeditated murder, yes.