promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentLaw & Ethics · 1 decade ago

should life in prison mean life in prison?

i think it should, if your in for murder . i also think if your sent down for ten years or two years tou should do the full sentence and not get out for good behaviour or parole . and i think prison is easy street now compared to what it should be ( no telly ,made to work inside , and no four course meals that we keep hearing about) . there is too many do gooders saying what about their rights as humans well as far as i'm concerned they give up their rights when they do the crime .

Update:

with so many of in agreement with me how do these politicians make decisions without our approval its supposed to be a democracy so why are'nt these things put to a vote

35 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Well dealing with prison life everyday (as a guard, not inmate) I believe that these in mate get way too many rights. I really think that once they do the crime they need to be responsible for their actions, and they give up their rights....kind of like how they took away the rights of their victim. But you get people that complain that these inmates still have rights. Now tell me how an inmate that rapes someone still has rights, didn't he take away all his victims rights when the forced them into a sexual act. Now his victim may or may not be able to go on with their normal life, and this inmate is now working out 8 hours a day, three square meals, ice skating and playing hockey (don't get me started on that!!) watching TV (with more cable channels that I get) and pretty much living a good life.

    I can tell you that when an inmate is written a "major" ticket it does add time to his sentence, so at least that's something.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I think you need to look at the whole reason we have prisons. They were built so that people who infringe on other people's life, liberty and possessions could be detained, so that they would be no longer able to do harm to others. A committed crime is over and there is nothing you can do to reverse it. This means putting people in prison for the satisfaction of the victims would be revenge - a very immature thing for any society to do. It would be like trying to make a right with two wrongs.

    If there is an individual who will no longer do these things there would be no more reason to have him in prison because he is no longer a threat to society.

    So the real question is how can one determine if a prisoner has matured enough for him to be released back into society without a reasonable chance that he will commit another crime.

    This is very difficult, because it will be different in each individual.

    Also, you shouldn't try to make prison "hard" for the inmates, because that won't serve the purpose mentioned above, only hinder the inmate from maturing.

    Finally, people who didn't infringe on other people's life, liberty or possession should not be punished because they don't pose a threat to society - only themselves.

    PS I do think prisoners should work if they want more than bread and water.

    Source(s): my thoughts
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    A life sentence could mean 20, 25, or 30 years depending on the jusrisdiction. However once you walk into prison they start deducting time for good behavior. A sentence of life that meant 25 could mean you would be out in 18 with good time deducted. The judge probably threw the 40 years on top, knowing that if they were concurrent sentences that the bad guy will never see the outside. By the way...all bets are off if you get sentenced federally. They have mandatory minimums so you serve what you are sentenced! NO good time.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes, I do think that life means natural life. One of the things that gets to me too is that juries are not told how long a "life" term is when they are deliberating, so they may decide against it based on it being really "life" and not seven years or something even less. They may feel that life is too harsh of a punishment and give a lesser verdict when all they really want to do is have the person spend 10-20 years in prison - which he would do if given "life".

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes life should mean life not just 35 years which I think is what is currently is. As for people only serving 2years of a 4 year sentence for example, I think it should depend on what they did to be in prison and be monitored better when they are released. As for paedophiles they should never be able to leave due to the nature of the crime, they are mentally unstable and they always re-offend!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    These days, most are sentenced to "Life without the possibility of parole", because, several years ago, it was discovered that people sentenced to 20 years were averaging more time in than those sentenced to life. There was sort of an uproar, and the sentencing language was changed on that account.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    i'm all for human rights, but as far as i'm concerned, people should do the full sentence that they are sent down for, at the end of the day, what about the rights of the victims, those who are in prison fo two years, should do two years, if you get ten years, you do ten years, if you get life, you do life, and you should only get bread and water to eat no matter what the sentence.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I agree with u i mean these prisioners just like get treated like royalty compared on how it used 2 be in the olden days, so ya ur right im kinda peeved off at this i mean some are murderers!!! I mean they can get out and watch tv and all that good stuff, if anything homeless people should really be in Prison they would enjoy it and deserve it!!!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I think that life in prison SHOULD be life in prison. I think that the sentence should not be shortened for good behaviour but lengthened for bad behaviour! No parole though! Prison should be basic & downright shoddy compared to haw we live because why should prisoners have a better life than everone who has done nothing wrong whatsoever!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    When they say "20 years in prison" it should not include time already spent in custody. It should mean from the time they leave court. They should not be eligible for parole til the 20 years is up, & a thorough assessment should be carried out to see if that person is liable to re-offend. If they are, they should be held a while longer.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.