While I can agree that repeat offenders seem to keep coming back it would appear as though this has been tried before and guess what? Crime continued on.
Guest you NAILED it with this comment:
" Make it what it is supposed to be, HELL! If they want to come back to that, then so be it...their choice."
So at it's core your argument still gives THEM the choice - you're willing to take the CHANCE that the second offense will be no worse than the first.
So you see the problem even being "tough" on criminals allows for a second chance.
So now do we throw away the key on the first offense? Having never been a criminal Guest I can't say whether that will do any good. Like you I also share the frustration that they get out so soon.
What nobody wants to face is that politicians, yes even the GOP, want so badly to cut costs that hey WILL release criminals early to repeat their exact thing.
I don't want to politicize this but even conservative, tough on crime Republicans are forcing the state into a situation whereby the way to cut cost s boils down to early release of violent, felonious criminals.
You see GOM? It's not JUST the Judiciary - now its the legislative branch too, and the Governor.
And "we" put them there to do exactly what they are doing under some belief that somehow they will be tougher on the criminal.
They are not.
They just use a different method, a different argument to justify their actions.
They are just as much at fault as the ACLU, and the NAACP.
So without provocation, we are closing 3 prisons. AT some point they will have to "early release" already incarcerated criminals so they can go out and do it again.
All under guise of "saving money" - no ACLU, no NAACP needed.
Tougher sentences will stop this?
Not if they're cutting prison space at the same time...
More information about formatting options