A pro surfer recently got a 3 year sentence for tax evasion, to me this seems way over the top, I was thinking a lot of sentences are too long. Violent stuff needs to be punished, dangerous people need to be isolated, but tax evasion? Non violent drug offenses, simple possession--if that needs a jail term at all I think it ought to be very short. Whats your thinking?
2006-07-28 06:35:35 · 6 answers · asked by jxt299 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
And it costs $40,000 per year for each inmate. Enough to send a kid to Harvard for two years.
2006-07-28 09:26:43 · update #1
Jail is a training ground for criminals. Longer sentences don't reduce crime - it creates hardened criminals.
On a personal note, I don't smoke weed, but some of the sentences for pot are asinine.
2006-07-28 06:55:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You need to understand that money is the most important thing to the government. If they don't give hefty jail sentences to people who evade taxes, they are afraid everyone might do it. Secondly, the government cares little about individual citizens except when they fail to pay taxes, fines, or fees. If you don't believe that try to get the government to respond to your personal needs. I personally would like to see the probation and parole system abolished and convicts doing straight sentences which are appropriate to the crime. When they have served their time they are free to re-enter society. I further believe all violent crimes conviction have a mandatory prison sentence with no time off for good behavior. They are expected to behave. That first offense non-violent property crime perpetrators should receive a diversionary sentence in which they pay restitution to the victim, commit no new crimes for the term of the diversion, and do community service. Failure to complete the diversionary agreement shoud result in a mandatory prison sentence with no time off. Anyone who commits a second felony should receive a mandatory sentence of twice the length of a first offense sentence with no time off and a third felony should receive a life sentence without release.
2006-07-28 07:18:43 · answer #2 · answered by rico3151 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In general I'd say they are normally pretty fair "you do the crime you do the time" right?
Now sometimes there are certain cases, and I believe that this is one of them that people either get slammed or off easy because of who they are.
I think in this case they are just trying to make an example out of him to let people know what can happen to them.
Now I don't know about that particular state but i know here in Virginia if the sentence someone to "3 years" then in reality if they behave they will only do about 85% of that amount of time.
2006-07-28 07:15:46 · answer #3 · answered by Kerri 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that if there is a so called victimless crime, restitution and house arrest is the thing. Murder, rape, armed robbery, muggings, kidnapping etc should all be very long long sentences.
Prisons are not what they say they are. We shouldn't try to rehabilitate these kinds of people. Just put them all together and let them sort themselves out.
One thing I do disagree on though. Drugs are dangerous and those people can go too as far as I'm concerned.
2006-07-28 07:33:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if we lock people up for long periods of time even for small small offenses then maybe we wouldn't have so much crime on our hands. So I say heck yeah to the 3 years for tax evasion.... besides... I have to pay my taxes and so should he.
2006-07-28 06:45:08 · answer #5 · answered by BeC 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
umm..sentences are sentences. There are certain times for everything like if it is really long , it will obviously take forever. It depends on the case and how the way people act to it.
2006-07-28 06:56:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋