3 ms·
If you remove the risk of prison for nonviolent offenders, you're creating a world where large businesses and their owners will no longer care whether they do s
by beeboop 11y ago
If you remove the risk of prison for nonviolent offenders, you're creating a world where large businesses and their owners will no longer care whether they do something illegal, they will only care about the risks of getting caught versus the potential profit to be made. You turn the criminal justice system into a risk analysis that happens in some board room. There will be no real detriment to rich people for breaking the law - worse case scenario they lose some money, the equivalent of you ruining the financial security of thousands of people or causing billions in irreversible environmental damage and getting a speeding ticket for it.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jasonjei 11y agoI understand there has to be some price to be paid. My question is the length. Is the term deterministic or is it arbitrary? I have never really understood why some non-violent crimes are sentenced with 10 years in prison versus 200 years in prison. For example, a self-victim crime of consuming drugs is punished harshly in Singapore.
- beeboop 11y agoAt some point the length was arbitrary. As precedence is created, it becomes more deterministic but only somewhat more so. Often times there are minimum sentencing laws, the length of which is mostly arbitrary.