Current Events > New Manhattan DA doubles down on soft-on-crime approach. Murder? 20 years

(+) Yeah! (+)

far left clown world in action

YourDrunkFather posted...

Murderers do not deserve rehabilitation. If you kill an innocent person on purpose you deserve the same fate.

And what about wrongfully convicted people?

ITT: left wing posters point out data from other countries and studies showing the negligible (if not negative) impact of incarceration on recidivism, and right wing posters talk about their feelings.

Solid Snake07 posted...

If you ignore the vast majority of victim impact testament statements that say they take some solace in the fact that the person who murdered them will spend the rest of their life behind bars, sure.

wait, murder victims can give victim impact statements? Is it thanks to Miss Cleo and her free psychic reading?

Intro2Logic posted...

ITT: left wing posters point out data from other countries and studies showing the negligible (if not negative) impact of incarceration on recidivism, and right wing posters talk about their feelings.

Damn lefties and their logic. They can't keep getting away with it.

Houston posted...

And for their families, too. Imagine someone killing your loved one and getting out in 20 years or even less (since the article said it would be a LIMIT... not necessarily a guarantee of 20).

Yeah fuck that. Lock em up and throw away the key

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Agreed with that second part too. Non violent sentences should be far more lenient

I expect murder to increase if all they are getting is 20 years.

ZMythos posted...

I'm sorry that your solution is to pretend that society isn't at fault for creating its own criminals.

It's not. At all.

Self-Accountability is a thing.

Vicious_Dios posted...

It's not. At all.

Self-Accountability is a thing.

So I know you're just a troll but

Care to explain why we have harsher sentencing and more policing than other countries but more crime?

DarthAragorn posted...

So I know you're just a troll but

Care to explain why we have harsher sentencing and more policing than other countries but more crime?

America's culture is overall vastly different than most other countries.

20 years is an unfathomably long amount of one's life to lose

Life sentences are a waste of time and money. Either the prisoner is capable of being rehabilitated and should eventually, at some date, transition back into society, they're mentally incompetent and need to be in a facility, or they're too dangerous to rehab and should be removed from the gene pool with utmost haste.

There's a distressing number of people in this topic who are okay with giving 20 years as a maximum sentence for murder. What the fuck?

Garioshi posted...

20 years is an unfathomably long amount of one's life to lose

You're still alive in prison. Imagine losing your entire life to some criminal murderer who then gets to live another 20 years in prison, and then 20+ more years outside of prison.

That's not even the faintest whiff of true justice.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

You're still alive in prison. Imagine losing your entire life to some criminal murderer who then gets to live another 20 years in prison, and then 20+ more years outside of prison.

That's not even the faintest whiff of true justice.

I'd be dead, what the fuck would I care.

I'm hearing a lot of emotion

Jesus Christ, this forum is nuts. Yeah, serial killers and terrorists will be rehabilitated after 20 years and totally sorry for what they did. Are you fucking stupid?

Again, the ones too dangerous for rehabilitation need to be escorted off this mortal coil entirely. Warehousing them is as you say, fucking stupid.

I'm conflicted on this. I half agree.

Armed robbery shouldn't be a misdemeanor imo, but shouldn't have people locked up for 20 years either, as long as they don't seriously injure or kill someone.

Murders depends on the situation..

I do believe in rehabilitation and having people out if they have good behavior and proved they have made a complete change and are remorseful. But I hope we can focus on rehabilitating people, educating them better + better conditions in prison and having them transition a lot more smoothly as functioning members of society.

People don't seem to realize that prison isn't just for rehabilitation and 'corrections.' It's also a place to put the people who have proven themselves to be dangerous to others. I don't know about any of you, but if somebody planned and executed a murder in which they beat their best friend to death with their bare hands and video taped it, I don't think that person should ever taste freedom again. Ideally, death penalty, but apparently that's going too far nowadays.

PesticideDream posted...

Jesus Christ, this forum is nuts. Yeah, serial killers and terrorists will be rehabilitated after 20 years and totally sorry for what they did. Are you fucking stupid?

How many serial killers and terrorists do you actually think get arrested yearly?

In the other direction, is it ok to kill all murderers regardless of context, and some falsely accused as well, just to make sure we get those few serial killers dead?

uwnim posted...

20 years is a pretty fucking long time, tbh.

Unless you were in your mid 60s or something you probably had longer to live before getting murdered than that sentence.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Ideally, death penalty, but apparently that's going too far nowadays.

Speaking of idiotic arguments. The people for life without parole but against the death penalty don't seem to be self aware enough to realize they're playing semantic games. True life sentences are nothing more than a death penalty via indeterminate time. They need the fiction to sleep better at night saying their adult imaginary friend did the killing rather than human hands. I've zero use for such people.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Ideally, death penalty, but apparently that's going too far nowadays.

I just don't want the state to have that power since no human being is infallible. We've had greater than 0 people be wrongfully convicted. This is why we have appeals, which makes the death penalty prohibitively expensive and impossible to do quickly.

The government should be goddamn perfect before they should even be considered to wield the ultimate power.

If the police union is against it then it must be good

Orestes417 posted...

Speaking of idiotic arguments. The people for life without parole but against the death penalty don't seem to be self aware enough to realize they're playing semantic games. True life sentences are nothing more than a death penalty via indeterminate time. They need the fiction to sleep better at night saying their adult imaginary friend did the killing rather than human hands. I've zero use for such people.

In America, we give most criminals life sentences since we do all we can to make sure they will never reintegrate into society. If people want convicts to fuck off and not rejoin society or be rehabilitated, then they need to go all the way and back the idea of death penalty for all crimes.

Personally, I think there is always a use for those people. Even if they can't be rehabilitated and reintegrated, we can study them and put them to work behind bars.

Friendly reminder that we have a whole country full of rich bastards who need to go to prison, far more than any individual terrorist or murderer, but the only justice they'll ever see is when they're on their death beds - when they're old as shit, surrounded by people they love and idolized by their peers, having lived the life of Riley.

hockeybub89 posted...

In America, we give most criminals life sentences since we do all we can to make sure they will never reintegrate into society. If people want convicts to fuck off and not rejoin society or be rehabilitated, then they need to go all the way and back the idea of death penalty for all crimes.

Personally, I think there is always a use for those people. Even if they can't be reintegrated, we can study them and put them to work behind bars.

Sadly true. This country is far too hung up on the idea of retributive justice despite constant evidence it does not work.

Orestes417 posted...

True life sentences are nothing more than a death penalty via indeterminate time.

You can undo a life sentence. You can't bring someone back to life.

Orestes417 posted...

Speaking of idiotic arguments. The people for life without parole but against the death penalty don't seem to be self aware enough to realize they're playing semantic games. True life sentences are nothing more than a death penalty via indeterminate time. They need the fiction to sleep better at night saying their adult imaginary friend did the killing rather than human hands. I've zero use for such people.

The only reason I oppose the death penalty is because of wrongful incarceration. A life sentence gives the convict the maximum amount of time to prove their innocence. If they're actually guilty they deserve to rot.

Tyranthraxus posted...

You can undo a life sentence. You can't bring someone back to life.

Lemme know when you can give years and decades back to an individual. Until then, they're both as permanent.

Orestes417 posted...

Lemme know when you can give years and decades back to an individual. Until then, they're both as permanent.

It doesn't always take decades to undo a life sentence. Delbert Tibbs was sentenced to death and exonerated 3 years later. Thankfully bureaucratic wrenches got him to live long enough to see his freedom.

And while losing 3 years of life sucks, it's not an unrecoverable setback.

and yet in the most literal of senses it IS unrecoverable. Three years of a mans life were stolen with nothing ever truly balancing those scales. Is that less serious than outright killing them? I'd argue it shouldn't be considered to be. Shouldn't be allowed to be. Life sentences should demand the absolute gravity of a death penalty because that IS in fact what they are. Just a very slow, and arguably more cruel, one.

Financial compensation at great enough levels can make one's remaining years better than they'd have otherwise been.

Hoodroar posted...

Financial compensation at great enough levels can make one's remaining years better than they'd have otherwise been.

Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep better at night.

Orestes417 posted...

and yet in the most literal of senses it IS unrecoverable. Three years of a mans life were stolen with nothing ever truly balancing those scales. Is that less serious than outright killing them? I'd argue it shouldn't be considered to be. Shouldn't be allowed to be. Life sentences should demand the absolute gravity of a death penalty because that IS in fact what they are. Just a very slow, and arguably more cruel, one.

There's essentially zero difference in this specific case between sentencing him to life vs sentencing him to 3 years.

So unless your argument is that no one should ever go to prison for anything ever it would seem that abolishing the death penalty is a reasonable compromise that still allows the state to undo their mistakes hopefully sooner rather than later.

Orestes417 posted...

Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep better at night.

There is no alternative to what you're complaining about but just not punishing people for crimes at all.

Tyranthraxus posted...

There's essentially zero difference in this specific case between sentencing him to life vs sentencing him to 3 years.

See that's where people piss me off. They think because they can stop the consequences before the full measure it makes everything better. It doesn't. Not to the core principles of the thing. That jury didn't sentence him to three years. They sentenced him to the rest of his natural life in prison. Intent makes for a hell of a difference.

Hoodroar posted...

There is no alternative to what you're complaining about but just not punishing people for crimes at all.

I feel like you're missing my point. Let me state it more clearly. There are things you cannot fix after the fact no matter what the suggested reparation is. You can only move forward wearing the weight of it.

Context matters imo

Everyone pointing out the Dutch and Swedish hotel prisons is ignoring the major differences in our societies in general that make it possible over there, and the fact that those counties still incarcerate certain types of offenders eternally(by just reviewing their case and denying their release).

We have far more offenders like that in America, and our social structure, culture and infrastructure is worse in every way. Racial inequality is also a huge problem here, where sadly most white people are afraid or too delusional to address it rationally. It's either going to unfairly target non whites, or turn a blind eye to non white offenders in the name of "progress" when the actual solution to the problem with enforcement is to replace the actual people abusing the system and not applying the laws...not to get rid of the law. Judges and police leadership need to be replaceable by more than just death and retirng at 99 years old.

That is why the majority of serious criminals will always re-offend here until our culture and society is fixed. Prison terms are like 3% of the problem in America. Yes, some need to be shorter, some longer. Some criminals need to be executed very quickly as well. Some crimes need to be legal, some need no jail time at all but maybe a fine or treatement program.

Guess this is one of those things I'm more conservative on, because I'm not near enough of a bleeding heart to think murder and armed robbery aren't that horrible. I'm all for redoing our criminal justice and prison systems and for reduced sentences for non violent crimes, but fucking murder?

Fony posted...

Everyone pointing out the Dutch and Swedish hotel prisons is ignoring the major differences in our societies in general that make it possible over there, and the fact that those counties still incarcerate certain types of offenders eternally(by just reviewing their case and denying their release).

We have far more offenders like that in America, and our social structure, culture and infrastructure is worse in every way. Racial inequality is also a huge problem here, where sadly most white people are afraid or too delusional to address it rationally. It's either going to unfairly target non whites, or turn a blind eye to non white offenders in the name of "progress" when the actual solution to the problem with enforcement is to replace the actual people abusing the system and not applying the laws...not to get rid of the law. Judges and police leadership need to be replaceable by more than just death and retirng at 99 years old.

That is why the majority of serious criminals will always re-offend here until our culture and society is fixed. Prison terms are like 3% of the problem in America. Yes, some need to be shorter, some longer. Some criminals need to be executed very quickly as well. Some crimes need to be legal, some need no jail time at all but maybe a fine or treatement program.

This.