This is a rant.

From this thread about the prosecutor wishing to have sex with a 5 year old we can see that a man faces up to 40 years in prison and he never actually commited the crime.

From this article about a robbery-homicide (yes I know its in Canada but our systems are similar) we see that a man who robbed a gas station then tied up the teen employee, beat her and stabbed her to death while she was unconscious gets 25 years. His accomplice got 10 years and the driver 18 months.

This probably isn't the biggest discrepency I could find but I see this all the time. Shouldn't the cold blooded murderer and his friends get 40 years and the almost-pedofile be up for 3-5 or something?

What I want to debate is weather anyone else has ever wondered how the fuck they come up with penalties in the USA and Canada.

Canada's "life sentence" is 25 years. There's no such thing as life imprisonment in Canada unless one is sentenced to multiple "life" 25-year sentences).

The U.S. generally has longer sentences.

I know what you mean.

If you commit a crime of a sexual nature, you'll serve a decent amount of time, then have to register as a sex offender, so that everyone can freely see you're a sex offender.

If you kill someone, you'll serve a decent amount of time, then you get out and no one has to know about what you've done.

I can freely find out of my neighbor inappropriately touched a kid 20 years ago, but I can't find out if my other neighbor stabbed an old woman to death.

Is it the puritanical nature of our society, where things of a sexual nature are as bad as, if not worse than things of a violent nature? Is it that murder is intriguing and mysterious, while sexual crimes are just gross and nasty? Is it the idea that violent criminals have the ability to reform and become normal members of society, while sex offenders will always be undesirable deviants? Who knows.

__________________
“Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.” -Dr. Carl Sagan

I suspect that all those possibilities contribute, but there may be some sense in the last one (at least as far as registering goes). Without any statistics, I can't say, but it certainly seems possible that, in general, those who have committed one sexual crime are more likely to commit another whereas those who commit violent crimes are less likely to do so again.
Anyone know any numbers of that? I'm just guessing here.

Your first mistake is to compare the crimes and their punishments. They need to be looked at seperately.

I don't care where it is. If someone's a convicted pedophile, they should spend the rest of their life behind bars...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

I think punishments should be determined according to how much suffering the crime has caused or could have caused. For instance a drug smuggler wouldn't get as harsh of a sentence compared to a cold blooded killer who destroyed the lives of the people that loved the victim. Sex crimes are terrible yes and the victim is scared for life but at least they are not dead.

Good.

Then they can look forward to spending all of their time, leading up to when they are dead, in prison...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Not necessarily. The county where I live maintains a public database of every convicted felon, and the felons remain listed until 5 years after the end of any probation or parole.

http://www.seminolesheriff.org/en-us...lons/index.php

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

There is no such thing as a penalty that is too severe when it comes to child molestation.

I, personally, support the death penalty for such offenses...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

That's not really true. The crimes he is charged with - using interstate communications to solicit sex with a minor and traveling across state lines for that purpose - are things it appears he actually did do.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

Sometimes mandatory sentences are applicable, but generally in the US, we use what we call 'Sentencing Guidelines.' They are advisory calculations that set ranges for certain kinds of crimes, their attendant circumstances concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and factoring any prior offences and their nature, frequency and seriousness.

Here are some starter links for the federal system and Pennsylvania where I practice:

Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manuals and Amendments

PCS Homepage

CRIMINAL SENTENCING

These are extremely useful and have generally disposed of the old problem of very disparate and arbitrary sentences and undue harshness or leniency. My local courts just got a great report on compliance and consistency with the Guidelines:

Pottsmerc.com

The Guidelines are advisory rather than mandatory, but the sentencing judge must be consider them when sentencing and if a judge decides to depart up or down from the standard Guideline range for the case at issue then the reasons must be put on the record why the judge did so. Sentences within the established ranges are presumed to be lawful and not an abuse of discretion for appeal purposes for which the challenger has a very strong burden to overcome.

[quote=O'Sullivan Bere;1074106]Sometimes mandatory sentences are applicable, but generally in the US, we use what we call 'Sentencing Guidelines.' They are advisory calculations that set ranges for certain kinds of crimes, their attendant circumstances concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and factoring any prior offences and their nature, frequency and seriousness.

************************************************** *******

I read; We (THe USA) have more persons incarcerated on parole or probation than any other country in the world. The blacks and hispanics constituting the majorities of those in that category.

Is there a relationship to our standards VS the worlds in respect to lawlessness and punishment or has this area become a commercialized venture in our country?

This is one of those things that I rant about IRL (in real life) quite frequently. I believe strongly that in the United States we should reduce the amount of things we call crime (drug use as an example) while simultaneously making the penalties for actual crimes much stiffer and prisons much more clinical and severe. I believe that the result of such a policy will make prison much more of a deterrent. I also believe that that if you can't trust someone to have all the same rights as any other citizen then it is sheer lunacy to allow them out of prison.

So again. Decriminalize certain things, increase the penalty for the actions that are still considered illegal, and make our prisons more severe and clinical.

I do get your point about penalty discrepancies. It was no problem for me. I'd kill all your examples without the slightest remorse.....

Yes, I'd pull the switch, or the trigger or whatever.

The world has gone crazy when criminals(animals) have "rights".

I guess that's just me. You described crazed murderous animals to me. I shoot rabid dogs and feel no sympathy. Sometimes humans are like any other RABID ANIMAL. The world is done a favor when they are no longer roaming among healthy humans.

Lock them in prison for 100 years if you can't condone killing. Or if you have the guts, hand them over to men and forget about them as you did the rattlesnake that a MAN blew out of YOUR harms way when you were a child. He never felt remorse for that act, or asked PETA if it was ok...

What the heck has this country come to when they can't tell animal from man?

Sure, let's murder fetuses. Wait... We're not convinced those are human beings. That guy with a desire to rape a 5 year old little girl, that mass murderer, that woman who shot her husband in the back as he slept;... THOSE we're not too sure about though, those are human and deserve "humane" treatment. Sick. Sick. Sick. DECIDEDLY ILL.

this is why I advocate the death penalty for any crime equal to or higher than jay walking