Parole Board Bill: Minimal Benefit vs. Possible Harm
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
17 responses to “Parole Board Bill: Minimal Benefit vs. Possible Harm”
-
Fair comments. Road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
I am always a little skeptical when political types claim they have been threatened. Cuz people never lie, right? And political types even less. Leave me alone for my horrible decision, I’m a victim! Someone said something mean to me!
A better answer would probably be not appointing “equity” idiots to the Parole Board and to apply the law equally, regardless of “color.”
Might want to try that…following the law…-
I don’t doubt the threats, not in this environment. But the people making these decisions are public officials, and cannot be a secret star chamber operating totally in the dark.
-
If you can’t stand the heat, get the H3!! out of the kitchen?
Yep.
-
-
-
I think peoples viewpoints are probably informed mostly by how they view parole generally, and the justice system at large. Many people, and advocates view the justice system as a rehabilitation system, whereas I want it to be a punitive system, particularly with regards to murder. It’s my opinion that the primary purpose of the system should be to obtain justice for victims, and to rehabilitate secondarily. For example, if someone robs me, I can be compensated for my loss, no need to send someone to prison for 10 years. However, in the case of murder, I can’t abide parole or a sentence resulting in anything less than life imprisonment. Taking a life is something that can never be undone. You’ve taken the most valuable and precious things that any of us possess, you’ve created a gaping hole in others lives that can never be filled. There is no amount of compensation or penance that can repay that wrong. I no longer advocate for the death penalty, because I recognize the systemic issues with it, and it provides a solution for which there are no corrections if determined to be wrong. But for murdering another human beings, a criminal should not see the light of day ever again. Any Board that so delegitimizes the gravity of killing someone to allow said perpetrator to walk free and breathe free air again should not stand.
-
For example, if someone robs me, I can be compensated for my loss, no need to send someone to prison for 10 years.
What if the perpetrator can’t or won’t compensate you?
-
Then prison it is. My point being is that some crime can be compensated fairly, achieving justice for the victim without punitive prison sentences. Murder cannot, and the only sentence that serves even a modicum of “justice” to the victim is life imprisonment.
-
I agree with you about murder.
-
-
-
For example, if someone robs me, I can be compensated for my loss, no need to send someone to prison for 10 years.
Maybe I’m not understanding you correctly, but are you saying a crime is to be forgiven — and therefore go without punishment — if the victim can be fairly compensated?
Someone could make a great movie as to how the world would look in 10 years after that practice was put in place.
-
-
Well argued, Dick.
-
I agree with you about the current “transparency bill”. It will not prevent future ideologically motivated members of parole boards from ignoring the laws under which they are required to operate and releasing
unrepentantcriminals on our society without warning.I do wish there was a way to punish every single member of any parole board which engages in such behavior, though.
EDITED to remove unjustified descriptor.
-
They were fired en masse. That count?
-
Not really. Perhaps a large fine on top of the firing?
I don’t know, though, I’m in a bit of a draconian mood this morning. Perhaps we should require them to finish out the sentence of the most heinous criminal they knowingly released on society without warning us?
😉
-
I’d say if they were party to a release of someone who committed another heinous crime, they should be charged with “Aiding and Abetting”, themselves.
-
That might work.
-
-
-
-
“Unrepentant”? How do you know they were unrepentant? One of the criteria that the Parole Board has has used is whether an offender has shown remorse.
-
Good point. I do not know.
I hereby retract the final adjective in the first paragraph of the above comment.
-
-
-
Give the community the criminal is going to return to a vote/veto in the decision — the Board members have no skin in the game — I doubt any live anywhere near where the criminal is going to reside. This interaction can easily be done via ZOOM from a local firehouse, police station, public library, etc. LET THE STAKE HOLDERS decide, not some far away person who won’t be harmed when the criminal commits another crime upon release!
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.