Not trying to detract from this thread but i read this, this when i woke up:
Tyler Clementi, Dharun Ravi and the problem with hate crimes laws | Fox News
Not really all that great of an opinion piece, but it made me think about this thread because of this:
Quote:
|
Longer prison sentences actually increase the likelihood of recidivism.
|
http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc...riefing%20.pdf
Which i think is intuitive and what we all knew for the most part.
All of us were outraged when we found out the Norway killer would serve a maximum of 21 years in a Danish/mid-century-modern style prison for the 70 or so people he killed. But i believe someone posted in that thread (i get all my news from warpath threads, fyi) that Norway has an extremely low murder and recidivism rate compared to the US and other countries with stricter sentencing.
So unless youre going to put a person away forever or kill them, it unintuitively makes more sense to give them a lighter prison sentence that focuses on rehabilitation IF your goal is to reduce the likelihood of recidivism.
But while rehabilitating a violent offender may be great for that person and preferable to the community he is released in, it leaves out the accomplishment of one major thing, justice. In my mind justice and atonement is and should be the most important aspect in administrating punishment. I dont think we owe it to a violent criminal, thief or cheat to fix or rehabilitate them for hurting another. However I firmly believe we owe the persons they wronged, in the form of just punishment on the wrongdoer.
Also with regards to should a 13 or 14 year old be sentenced to life or death for carrying out a plot to kill another? Absolutely. I think its fair to make a judgment call on the mental capability of a youngster but in general I think a 13 year old can be just as culpable as a 18 year old.