Life, as a criminal sentance ?

Over the past years, and now many years.........

I have come to wonder IF 25 years is appropriate as a LIFE sentance ????

The world has changed so much in the last 50/100+ years.......

Life expectancy today is well into the 80's now
(Am but a year or so from 50, and such a long way from 25 now).

Now with step kids and granddaughter growing up it got me wondering

Where is the liability for ones actions in this so called Modern World ????

Negligent acts today include, terrorism, driving intoxicated/tired/ inattentive, domestic violence, acting or being violent while under the influence of drugs down to a one punch act and pure stupidity. ...

Who decides that a LIFE is ONLY WORTH 25 years MAX ?

Because lets face it, with a remand system struggling, too often sentances are often reduced and appear well short of appropriate/or a deterrent lately

Should the original understanding of "life/25 years" be reviewed to be more appropriate ?

@Simon Hampel and the mods may find this inappropriate, so please feel free to delete
Too often life expectancy issues like having a will and other morbid subjects are not discussed publicly, and I'd life to know peoples thoughts
TIA

 

rehabilitation is the key thing imo. Also should look at factors that lead someone to commit the crime and looking at opportunities to address that .... suspect most of that will have to do with education, addiction and lack of opportunity (perceived, imagined or real).

 

Depends on why imprisonment was the best solution

 

"When 100% guilty, video or DNA, the sentence should be for remaining life". I have major issues with this statement and it keeps coming up again and again. DNA and Video does not equate to 100% ... just look at the american justice system for multiple occurrences of people being gaoled (or executed) because of DNA and later acquitted due to tampering or just coincidence - it's also not the way our justice system works .

 

@Stoffo cunningly revives the euthanasia debate.

 

Honest question here - what do you see is the point of a longer sentence exactly if its already fairly well established that longer sentences don't work as a general deterrent ?

 

May not work as a deterrent, but some people will never be deterred. Soft sentences aren't a deterrent either, though an actual life sentence (remainder of living life) ensure that the criminal will not do it again and community can be guaranteed against harm from the same criminal. The victims and their families at least deserve this in exchange for the life sentence they didn't choose when loved ones are lost or harmed.

 

It is not about deterrents, it is a guarantee that the offender can never harm the community again

 

Retribution (punishment)
Rehabilitation
Deterrent
Incarceration/incapacitation

Really the only goal should be rehabilitation.
In some cases incapacitation is the only choice to protect the community.
Imprisonment as a deterrent don't really work. Texas has the death penalty, in enforces it for capital crimes doesn't necessarily reduce the amount of murders.

 

For the vast majority of murderers, the risk of re-offending is very low. Most homicides are committed upon people known specifically to the offender, in emotionally charged circumstances. Think domestic violence.

Do we lock up these people forever? Why?

 

Don't judges hand down 40 year sentences now? Or life with no parole? Look at some of the more serious terrorism, murder and rape crime sentences.

I think if it's a worst case scenario then it's heaps more than 25 years. It could be so bad you'd have to cut off a finger just to get a sandwich maker.

 

There are many people who will never be rehabilitated like Ivan Milat, serial rapists, serial murderers, openly unremorseful offenders, psychopaths etc They should all rot in jail until the end of days.

 

This is a toughie...rehab that stops recidivism is a win for everyone...but..its more effective with younger crims who have done less serious crimes.

Once you start hitting life sentence territory it can be an politically, socially and potentially morally difficult to go the rehab route. I.e does anyone want the guy who raped, chopped up and dumped your daughter to go into rehab?

In a lot of cases it's better for everybody that the offender ceases to exist in our society (jailed).

Tough call though. Guess that's why we pay judges the big bucks.

 

When you are discussing repeat offenders of very serious crimes, such as serial rapists, serial murderers, you are into Personality Disorder territory. I am not in any position to make psychiatric diagnosis but afaik these are the ones who cannot be rehabilitated. This would be at the opposite end of the "murder" spectrum from someone who was way over the limit from the Melbourne Cup luncheon and insisted on driving their kids home from school, then crashed the car.

 

Not at all.
As we would like to think we are an evolved and humane society, euthanasia is not an answer.

As per others posts, all too often we hear about reoffending....

Sure it could be the media hyping up another story on a slow news day, or maybe I am actually watching the news and paying attention

There have been cases recently where individuals have admitted to killing their spouse, and they get life, as @datto said there are times where longer sentances have been handed down, but with "time already served", the reduction for "good behavior" these people can be in day release programs inside of 5 years

25 years is not life (looking back 25yo was the best days, not the end)

Instead of more childcare/other subsidies, build more custody facilities

 

Why wouldnt we? Rehabilitation (while there may be a benifit) is very offender focused and what a slap in the face for the victim. I know if someone murdered a family member of mine I wouldnt want them released in 15-20 years just because the have been deamed “rehabilitated” how about you?

 

So it sounds like you're saying we should give the highest priority to how a victim feels in deciding what sentence is given?

ie. Revenge or retribution now becomes the main sentencing consideration?

If it was me, I would leave the sentencing to the experts. We moved away from retribution based sentencing a long time ago. Not for any warm or fuzzies either - there's been plenty of research to suggest it has worse outcomes for re-offending rates and society.

 

I dislike making comparisons to other countries, particularly USA (who in many states still have the death penalty), a lot of the difference in the stats could be attributed to the level of firearm ownership there

I do like that if you are convicted of auto theft in the US that you go directly to prison, now that is a deterrent

Would you commit corporate fraud knowing the minimum term was 10 years ?
Or 2nd offence driving unlicensed instant 12 months jail
Or assault causing a grevious injury being a 15 year minimum......
I know I wouldn't

Surely we can take some examples and improve on them to establish a better system ?
Why do we blindly follow

 

I am in favor of capital punishment.

Rehab (esp for crimes that attract capital punishment) rarely work