Probation Violation Payment?

Question

I believe getting out for good behavior is the ultimate oxymoron. Follow me here people...these people go to jail for being "bad", then magically they go to jail, a place where they are watched 24/7 mind you, and then get out early for being good in a place where they have no option but to be. Then they are released from jail and commit another crime, I think the state should be held responsible for them. If they were not let out then they could not have hurt some one. For example: Joe Dirt-bag was sentenced to 15 years for murder, gets out early for good behavior and is on probation for 10 years, if in that ten years he commits a crime against another person i.e. rape, murder, assault etc. the family or the victim should sue the state for liability, by letting him out they are telling people he is better. If more people sue they would be extra careful about who the let out. Tell me what you think!

Answer 1

Just remember this - when someone sues the state and wins YOU pay.

You said "then get out early for being good in a place where they have no option but to be." - While there are incentives to "be good", many are not. Ever read about a prison riot? Those guys were not "being good". Convicts get charged with crimes while in prison.

It is sad that you have formed the opinion that every criminal will ALWAYS be a criminal and will never "be good". I have seen this assumption proved wrong many, many times.

Answer 2

Here's a better idea: How about making prison life so very unpleasant that those criminals who go there will never want to return? The bleeding-hearts have painted all criminals as victims and preach rehabilitation as the answer. Too bad there's a mountain of research that says rehabilitation doesn't work. So instead of putting them in a place where they get better meals than our men and women in uniform, free cable TV (yep, by Federal law they MUST have cable TV in the prisons), free Internet access, free access to libraries and gym equipment, all at the expense of the taxpayer, why not return to the days of hard time and hard labor?

I don't like your suggestion because there are already too many lawsuits in this country, and they're not solving any problems (all they're doing is making lawyers rich and teaching people that the road to easy money is by suing someone for any reason under the sun). Holding people accountable for their actions and PUNISHING them when they break the law is a better solution.

Answer 3

I understand your point but heres the other way to look at it. Truth in Sentencing is where what the judge says they serve, they serve. So, lets say they must serve 2 years or 10 years, whatever, there is no incentive for them to better themselves within prison. There is no benefit for them to get their GED or to learn a trade or to even continue their education. So, the benefit of letting them out for good time is not because they are necessarily being good but they are active within the prison system. They must be active. So, after the two years or the 10 years they have served they have basically just existed for their time. Sure, some may have tried to further themselves but not very likely in prison without benefit. My opinon would be that I do not want to let the same person out of prison as they were when they entered prison. It is not beneficial for anyone to have them simply serve their time, in the long run.

Answer 4

incarceration is punitive and not intended for rehabilitation. the justice system in this country has many, many flaws. these flaws range from overcharging on the DA side, sentences that are not uniform from state to state and rediculous short sentences handed down by judges due to overcrowding and other lame excuses.

unfortunately in the US in many cases the "accused" has more rights than the victim. the scales of justice are not blind, those with power and money can buy justice in their favor