The victims of violent crime are paying the price

Quote:Twenty percent of convicted murderers, and nearly 60 percent of those convicted for rape or sexual assault, serve less than five years of their sentences.

Quote:In Illinois, a study found that of those arrested for homicides or shootings in Chicago in 2015 and 2016, about ’90 percent had at least one prior arrest, approximately 50 percent had a prior arrest for a violent crime specifically, and almost 40 percent had a prior gun arrest.’ Of this number, nearly 36 percent were ‘on parole or probation’ at the time of the alleged crime.

Yeah.

Everyone in Washington with a D next to their name should be incarcerated.

(09-13-2020 07:51 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Yeah.

Everyone in Washington with a D next to their name should be incarcerated.

And a bunch with an R too.

maybe there would be more room if we didn't incarcerate for little drug crimes?

(09-13-2020 08:58 AM)fsquid Wrote:  maybe there would be more room if we didn't incarcerate for little drug crimes?

Yep. Step One.

Maybe if we actually held the criminals. There was a report in the Atlanta paper that people were getting out on bail with 20 or 30 charges pending. An incredibly high proportion of series crimes were committed by a handful of suspects. And this was a couple years ago before the revolving door really got excessive.

As I've mentioned here before, maybe one strategy would be to hold accountable those who let the people out of jail early.

If your order (judge, parole board member) lets someone out of jail you now are responsible for any future criminal activity they engage in. If they are arrested and convicted you would serve time in jail based on a percentage of the type of crime committed. Lesser crimes might draw 5% while rape and murder would draw 25%.

There’s nowhere to house a lot of these people due to severe overcrowding. The 2nd these guys report prison administrators are looking for ways to move them out.

(09-13-2020 09:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  As I've mentioned here before, maybe one strategy would be to hold accountable those who let the people out of jail early.

If your order (judge, parole board member) lets someone out of jail you now are responsible for any future criminal activity they engage in. If they are arrested and convicted you would serve time in jail based on a percentage of the type of crime committed. Lesser crimes might draw 5% while rape and murder would draw 25%.

So basically you want to get rid judges and parole board members? Or just make sure that every crime any person is ever convicted of gets the maximum sentence with no possibility of parole?

(09-13-2020 09:54 AM)HappyAppy Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 09:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  As I've mentioned here before, maybe one strategy would be to hold accountable those who let the people out of jail early.

If your order (judge, parole board member) lets someone out of jail you now are responsible for any future criminal activity they engage in. If they are arrested and convicted you would serve time in jail based on a percentage of the type of crime committed. Lesser crimes might draw 5% while rape and murder would draw 25%.

So basically you want to get rid judges and parole board members? Or just make sure that every crime any person is ever convicted of gets the maximum sentence with no possibility of parole?

Nope. I want judges and parole board members to be held responsible for their decisions.

And I didn't say make they judge responsible for NOT giving the max sentence. I said make them accountable for letting the criminal out EARLY.

Say that a jury sentences a murder to 20 years or a judge sentences a rapist to 20 years.

After the criminal has served time there may come an instance where someone makes the decision that criminal can be let out of prison before 100% of his time has been served.

That criminal may have made a life changing decision leading him to lead a law-abiding life. Or he may continue to to engage in criminal activity.

One the decision has been made to LET HIM OUT EARLY, the judge or parole board members making that decision are on the hook.

But I'm cool with max sentences. It's a much safer option for society than min sentences.

I'm not putting the criminal above society, i.e. you or me.

Why would you?

(09-13-2020 09:05 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 08:58 AM)fsquid Wrote:  maybe there would be more room if we didn't incarcerate for little drug crimes?

Yep. Step One.

I want to be clear about what I'm saying here....

The reason they don't do it is because they can't make a 20% reduction in headcount by making one decision today on letting drug crimes go. They would have to make that same decision almost constantly, or they'd have to change the laws...

The only way they can create an event that lasts beyond their next election is to let people with long sentences go.

(09-13-2020 11:47 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The reason they don't do it is because they can't make a 20% reduction in headcount by making one decision today on letting drug crimes go. They would have to make that same decision almost constantly, or they'd have to change the laws...

Changing the laws is what I am advocating.

(09-13-2020 12:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 11:47 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The reason they don't do it is because they can't make a 20% reduction in headcount by making one decision today on letting drug crimes go. They would have to make that same decision almost constantly, or they'd have to change the laws...

Changing the laws is what I am advocating.

Oh I know you are... but its clear why that seems to take so long to happen. They'd rather keep the issue alive

(09-13-2020 08:58 AM)fsquid Wrote:  maybe there would be more room if we didn't incarcerate for little drug crimes?

On that I agree. For instance, why arrest the poor sap, like the one who posts here, but don't go full throttle on the dealer. Get to the source like we did with Soleimani and it will lessen the problem.

Fine the poor sap or make personal use legal, if used in one's home.

Here's a case in point...


5 arrested after child sex exploitation and trafficking sting — including former detective

Quote:On Sept. 2, Butts, a former Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office detective from Phoenix, was arrested on charges of aggravated luring of a minor for sexual exploitation and furnishing harmful items to a minor, according to the statement.

Butts was out on bond for his arrest in February on the same charges, officials said.

Dude was arrested and let out on bond. Within 7 months he's arrested AGAIN for doing the SAME THING to another child.

Cmon now. This is ridiculous. We don’t have enough people locked up? Land of the free?

(09-13-2020 07:26 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  Cmon now. This is ridiculous. We don’t have enough people locked up? Land of the free?

What we need is fewer people incarcerated for minor stuff, so we can keep the violent criminals put away longer.

(09-13-2020 08:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 07:26 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  Cmon now. This is ridiculous. We don’t have enough people locked up? Land of the free?

What we need is fewer people incarcerated for minor stuff, so we can keep the violent criminals put away longer.

Agreed completely. How do we get to that point? I’m all ears because we don’t have politicians on either side working towards that. It pays to have people locked up.

(09-13-2020 08:51 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 08:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 07:26 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  Cmon now. This is ridiculous. We don’t have enough people locked up? Land of the free?

What we need is fewer people incarcerated for minor stuff, so we can keep the violent criminals put away longer.

Agreed completely. How do we get to that point? I’m all ears because we don’t have politicians on either side working towards that. It pays to have people locked up.

Legalize marijuana and decriminalize other drugs. Treat drugs as a mental health issue. That also gets rid of a huge disparity between Black and White incarcerations.

(09-13-2020 08:56 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 08:51 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 08:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2020 07:26 PM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  Cmon now. This is ridiculous. We don’t have enough people locked up? Land of the free?

What we need is fewer people incarcerated for minor stuff, so we can keep the violent criminals put away longer.

Agreed completely. How do we get to that point? I’m all ears because we don’t have politicians on either side working towards that. It pays to have people locked up.

Legalize marijuana and decriminalize other drugs. Treat drugs as a mental health issue. That also gets rid of a huge disparity between Black and White incarcerations.

I’m with you on that. How do we get the dems or reps to do that?