Should Life Mean Life?

[Peter Parka]

Do you think that life sentebces should measn life without parole?

I personally think, no. Everyone should always have a chance to repent and be given a chance to be a productive member of society. This dosen't mean there arn't people who should be locked away for the rest of their life, just that I think, if after careful assessment, everyone deserves a second chance.
The media is always quick to point the finger at isolated incidents of re-ofenders but never at people who have made a worthwhile contribution to society, when released.

 

[ClicheGuevara]

Don't call it life unless it is life. . And in some cases, yes there should be no chance of parole..Far as I'm concerned first degree murder equals no parole. .That is pre meditated cold blooded murder and that person should not be free to walk around after 20+ years or whatever.

I also feel that rape should be a life sentence or at least castration, there really is no justifying rape.

 

[Peter Parka]

This isn't about justifying a crime, though. If some 16 year old for instance commits a horrific murder, do you think they are still a danger to the public and the same person 40 odd years down the line?

 

[satinbutterfly]

This isn't about justifying a crime, though. If some 16 year old for instance commits a horrific murder, do you think they are still a danger to the public and the same person 40 odd years down the line?

Yes I do. Because they still took that life.

Life should mean life. Quite frankly I think criminals should be punished much more harshly than they are.

For instance, I'm all about the life sentences for sex crimes. I don't believe sex offenders can be rehabilitated.

 

[Peter Parka]

I don't believe sex offenders can be rehabilitated.

Do you have any proof of this?

 

[satinbutterfly]

Do you have any proof of this?

Do you have any proof otherwise?

Do you think the damage done by sexual offenders doesn't last a lifetime? Why shouldn't the punishment?

 

[Guyzerr]

Do you have any proof of this?

It can be argued either way but I kinda side with this Dodd fellow. " A chronic, calcified sexual sadist, Mr. Dodd stated in a recent court brief, "If I do escape, I promise you I will kill and rape again, and I will enjoy every minute of it."

I remember seeing a documentary with / about him. He's not a guy I would leave my kids with.

They executed him but before he took his last walk he did have some stuff to say about the matter... it's buried in here somewhere.

http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/disp_9301_a.html

More here.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westley_Allan_Dodd

And here.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIxrS3PkMug

 

[Peter Parka]

Do you have any proof otherwise?

Do you think the damage done by sexual offenders doesn't last a lifetime? Why shouldn't the punishment?

Of course not on both questions. Sexual offenders dont have their rehabilitation details released to the public because that will just cause the Sun and other red rags to incite vigilante mobs which can only result in sexual offenders disappearing and being an even bigger threat to society or thousands of pounds wasted needlessly on the police breaking up these mobs and the government imprisoning them for breaking the law.

 

[canidae]

I think . . . the punishment should be determined by the victim, or the victim's family. Let them decide what happens. Life/no parole, a second chance, death.

 

[Sneakiecat]

To me, it's like telling you kid they're grounded for a month and then changing your mind a week later. Once you set a punishment, you shouldn't change your mind.

 

[Peter Parka]

I think . . . the punishment should be determined by the victim, or the victim's family. Let them decide what happens. Life/no parole, a second chance, death.

Do you really think though that the victim is in a rational frame of mind to determine the sentence? I mean, for example, someone who asualts me, I want to string them up by the balls and then shoot their bollocks off but it dosent mean that's a fair punishment.

To me, it's like telling you kid they're grounded for a month and then changing your mind a week later. Once you set a punishment, you shouldn't change your mind.

I kind of agree with you but a life sentence dosen't mean the're off the hook once the're released. One minor crime and the're back inside for at least a couple of years.

 

[Sneakiecat]

I kind of agree with you but a life sentence dosen't mean the're off the hook once the're released. One minor crime and the're back inside for at least a couple of years.

That's true. In my mind though, the ones that deserve a life sentence would be the ones that would be more likely to commit major crimes upon release. I don't think life sentences should be passed out like candy.

 

[canidae]

Do you really think though that the victim is in a rational frame of mind to determine the sentence? I mean, for example, someone who asualts me, I want to string them up by the balls and then shoot their bollocks off but it dosent mean that's a fair punishment.

Exactely. But what was fair punishment in the first place.

It's really very simple. Leave me alone and I will do you no harm. Fuck with my family, and you will get my attention in kind, with maybe a bit of malice on top.

 

[satinbutterfly]

Exactely. But what was fair punishment in the first place.

It's really very simple. Leave me alone and I will do you no harm. Fuck with my family, and you will get my attention in kind, with maybe a bit of malice on top.

Oooo... I like that. :nod::thumbup

 

[AnitaBeer]

If it's something like a drug offense i'd say no they don't need life.

If they are in jail for murder or rape. I believe they should stay until their sentence is done without the right to parole.

 

[ClicheGuevara]

This isn't about justifying a crime, though. If some 16 year old for instance commits a horrific murder, do you think they are still a danger to the public and the same person 40 odd years down the line?

Not every crime deserves harsh sentences, but in the scenario you're describing, yes he should never be let out of prison. .I'm assuming you are talking about pre meditated murder though. .

 

[Peter Parka]

If some murder isn't pre meditated, then it's usually not murder and is manslaughter.

 

[cam elle toe]

Yes it should. Buit here....I'm pretty sure a life sentence is like 40 years.

They brought in a "Never to be released" sentence after the ANita Cobby murders here in the 80;s...and :clap to that.

There are some mongrels in gaol, that no matter how rehabilitated they may be......the crime they originally committed is far to heinous to allow any sort of release.

 

[ClicheGuevara]

If some murder isn't pre meditated, then it's usually not murder and is manslaughter.

I don't know about over there but here there are degree's of murder.

first degree is premeditated and usually get's the life sentence.

second degree is also known as a crime of passion, you get angry and decide to grab a knife and stab your spouse..It's still intentional but not pre meditated.

then there is felony murder..if someone dies while someone is committing a felony.

manslaughter usually means you killed without malice or intent to kill...Say you were in a streetfight and accidently killed.


Now obviously in the case of manslaughter I don't feel that person should get a life sentence, that was an accidental murder.

 

[Abcinthia]

There are different types of murders in the UK but it's been 4 years since I studied this in law and I can't remember clearly what they are.

I think the person should do their sentance and then be looked at to see if they are a danger to society. It depends on the person, some people can be succssfully rehabilitated, others cannot.

My psychology teacher used to work in nearby Young Offenders prison and she would psychologically evaluate students in the lessons. The people she evaluated were around 14-19 years old and there were muderers, rapists - that level of crime. And she was saying that most of them were never rehabilitated properly becuase their cognitve processes were so messed up.