6 ms·

At some point tacking years on just doesn't do anything to change the reality of the sentence.

by wbl 4y ago

Retric 4y ago
I disagree simply because many people go on to commit the same crime again after release. Most notably with a few serial killers who continued after release. That isn’t to say we should lock everyone who commits a serious crime up for life, just that there can be utility for seemingly excessively long sentences. It’s really the ~5-10 year convictions that are over used IMO. I think we have lost sight of how large a penalty 3 years actually is.
- aswanson 4y ago
  Serial killers should be locked up for life. Full-stop.
  - actionfromafar 4y ago
    Yeah but sometimes you don’t know they are serial killers until they go out and do it the second time.
    - Retric 4y ago
      And sometimes they let them go, this list has a surprising number of people who got long though limited sentences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_numb...
- highwaylights 4y ago
  I think parents point was that if you’re old enough a 40 year sentence might as well be a 1,000 year sentence, because you’re never getting out either way.
- mrep 4y ago
  IDK, fraud gamble for the chance to become a billionaire sounds way more attractive if the worse case is 3 years in prison. 3 years is less than college whereas 11 is basically k-12.
  - Retric 4y ago
    Fraud on that scale definitely deserves a stronger penalty. I was more talking about cases like this where prosecutors sought 10 years for a protester getting excessively confrontational with police officers and now she is serving 4 years in prison: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pregnant-black-activist-serving-4-years-protest-comments-rcna46453 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pregnant-black-activist-... The jury acquitted Martin of inciting a riot and reached no verdict on whether she threatened officers’ lives. Her legal team was “elated” when jurors found her guilty only of breaching the peace, punishable by no more than a $500 fine and 30 days in jail, investigator Tony Kennedy recalled. State law defines breachers of the peace as any disturbers, “dangerous and disorderly persons” or people who utter “menaces or threatening speeches.” But prosecutors presented the charge as a “high and aggravated” crime, which carries up to 10 years imprisonment. Rosado said Judge Kirk Griffin did not allow her to explain the distinction, and the possibility of a much stiffer penalty, to the jury. I am not saying she does or doesn’t deserve to go to prison, I am more commenting on how the options go from 30 days to multiple years between the seemingly similar crimes.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  > there can be utility for seemingly excessively long sentences That’s only if there is no rehabilitation. The US system seems to be focused solely/overtly on punishment, which obviously means that whoever got locked up hasn’t had their mental state improved during the time of their lockup.
  - aerostable_slug 4y ago
    There is some rehabilitation, but obviously not what we'd like to see. I work with formerly incarcerated individuals that have ended up going on to do quite well. There's also a phenomenon where gang bangers and the like "age out" — they just seem to stop. Unfortunately for many, this realization often occurs in the middle of a very lengthy sentence (they typically drop out, debrief, and enter protective custody). Sadly, for many rehab isn't just a matter of wanting to do better. Very large numbers of the incarcerated can't do something as seemingly trivial as parse a bus schedule. Aside from undereducation, a fair amount are objectively unintelligent. When all you know is crime and you have a massive uphill battle just to be what many would consider a functional adult, recidivism seems inevitable for some. What makes it worse is that cultural reasons prevent many from reaching out for help while they're behind the wire. It's frankly sad to see, but we're getting better —the investments being made in tablets and the like will hopefully bear fruit in the coming years.
bufferoverflow 4y ago
Many people will gladly take $100M for spending 11 years in prison.
- kube-system 4y ago
  You don’t keep the $100M when you get caught
- tptacek 4y ago
  Almost everybody would take $100M for 11 years; that's a $9MM/year return. Which is why that's not the deal.
  - joering2 4y ago
    Since you say "almost everybody", I assumed you have been behind bars yourself and know how easy it is to survive not being raped, stabbed to death, pushed to wolves by other gang or being killed by that gang for not going against another one, being forced to snitch by guards, or being snitch out to other inmates in retribution for not snitching out to the guards, and much much more. No I don't think you spent a day behind. If you were to, you wouldn't be merely pricing your life at $24k per day.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      I don't think you've read much about low-minimum security federal prisons.
      - erosenbe0 4y ago
        You forgot to add female.
      - joering2 4y ago
        No prison is fun to be in, trust me. No matter how "low" it is.
    - 55555 4y ago
nprateem 4y ago
Won't she be out in 5 with good behaviour, or doesn't it work like that outside the movies?
- sigzero 4y ago
  At the Federal level there is no parole. She gets 54 days off per year for "good behavior". So even if she gets that every year she still serves 9 years.
- devman0 4y ago
  The federal government doesn't have a parole system, and the minimum amount of time you have to serve of your sentence is 85% regardless of good behavior credits.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

At some point tacking years on just doesn't do anything to change the reality of the sentence.

by wbl 4y ago

At some point tacking years on just doesn't do anything to change the reality of the sentence.

I disagree simply because many people go on to commit the same crime again after release. Most notably with a few serial killers who continued after release. That isn’t to say we should lock everyone who commits a serious crime up for life, just that there can be utility for seemingly excessively long sentences. It’s really the ~5-10 year convictions that are over used IMO. I think we have lost sight of how large a penalty 3 years actually is.

aswanson 4y ago
Serial killers should be locked up for life. Full-stop.
- actionfromafar 4y ago
  Yeah but sometimes you don’t know they are serial killers until they go out and do it the second time.
  - Retric 4y ago
    And sometimes they let them go, this list has a surprising number of people who got long though limited sentences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_numb...
highwaylights 4y ago
I think parents point was that if you’re old enough a 40 year sentence might as well be a 1,000 year sentence, because you’re never getting out either way.
mrep 4y ago
IDK, fraud gamble for the chance to become a billionaire sounds way more attractive if the worse case is 3 years in prison. 3 years is less than college whereas 11 is basically k-12.
- Retric 4y ago
  Fraud on that scale definitely deserves a stronger penalty. I was more talking about cases like this where prosecutors sought 10 years for a protester getting excessively confrontational with police officers and now she is serving 4 years in prison: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pregnant-black-activist-serving-4-years-protest-comments-rcna46453 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pregnant-black-activist-... The jury acquitted Martin of inciting a riot and reached no verdict on whether she threatened officers’ lives. Her legal team was “elated” when jurors found her guilty only of breaching the peace, punishable by no more than a $500 fine and 30 days in jail, investigator Tony Kennedy recalled. State law defines breachers of the peace as any disturbers, “dangerous and disorderly persons” or people who utter “menaces or threatening speeches.” But prosecutors presented the charge as a “high and aggravated” crime, which carries up to 10 years imprisonment. Rosado said Judge Kirk Griffin did not allow her to explain the distinction, and the possibility of a much stiffer penalty, to the jury. I am not saying she does or doesn’t deserve to go to prison, I am more commenting on how the options go from 30 days to multiple years between the seemingly similar crimes.
Aeolun 4y ago
> there can be utility for seemingly excessively long sentences That’s only if there is no rehabilitation. The US system seems to be focused solely/overtly on punishment, which obviously means that whoever got locked up hasn’t had their mental state improved during the time of their lockup.
- aerostable_slug 4y ago
  There is some rehabilitation, but obviously not what we'd like to see. I work with formerly incarcerated individuals that have ended up going on to do quite well. There's also a phenomenon where gang bangers and the like "age out" — they just seem to stop. Unfortunately for many, this realization often occurs in the middle of a very lengthy sentence (they typically drop out, debrief, and enter protective custody). Sadly, for many rehab isn't just a matter of wanting to do better. Very large numbers of the incarcerated can't do something as seemingly trivial as parse a bus schedule. Aside from undereducation, a fair amount are objectively unintelligent. When all you know is crime and you have a massive uphill battle just to be what many would consider a functional adult, recidivism seems inevitable for some. What makes it worse is that cultural reasons prevent many from reaching out for help while they're behind the wire. It's frankly sad to see, but we're getting better —the investments being made in tablets and the like will hopefully bear fruit in the coming years.

bufferoverflow 4y ago

Many people will gladly take $100M for spending 11 years in prison.

kube-system 4y ago
You don’t keep the $100M when you get caught
tptacek 4y ago
Almost everybody would take $100M for 11 years; that's a $9MM/year return. Which is why that's not the deal.
- joering2 4y ago
  Since you say "almost everybody", I assumed you have been behind bars yourself and know how easy it is to survive not being raped, stabbed to death, pushed to wolves by other gang or being killed by that gang for not going against another one, being forced to snitch by guards, or being snitch out to other inmates in retribution for not snitching out to the guards, and much much more. No I don't think you spent a day behind. If you were to, you wouldn't be merely pricing your life at $24k per day.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    I don't think you've read much about low-minimum security federal prisons.
    - erosenbe0 4y ago
      You forgot to add female.
    - joering2 4y ago
      No prison is fun to be in, trust me. No matter how "low" it is.
  - 55555 4y ago

nprateem 4y ago

Won't she be out in 5 with good behaviour, or doesn't it work like that outside the movies?

sigzero 4y ago
At the Federal level there is no parole. She gets 54 days off per year for "good behavior". So even if she gets that every year she still serves 9 years.
devman0 4y ago
The federal government doesn't have a parole system, and the minimum amount of time you have to serve of your sentence is 85% regardless of good behavior credits.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]