Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
He did three years for a series of drunken assaults and threats, he then went to a treatment center (which he could have walked away from but didnt) before he was sent back home, if he'd gone to jail for 5 or 10 or 15 years he would be no safer on release
Short of locking every drunken idiot for life at 18 on the off chance that one in a million might do what this #### did I dont know what you are suggesting?
|
He wasn't 18 when he went in, and he had 59 convictions.
Also, I'm curious whether you have any statistical backup for the assertion that he would have been no safer on release with a longer sentence? I'd be very curious to whether any research has been done on that topic (eg a natural experiment across 2 different states with different sentencing guidelines or something like that).
It seems intuitive to me that if you kept him until 70 he would have been much less likely to commit new violent crime/go on a murderous rampage. Also if you kept him until 60, 50, and probably even 40. I dont know where the line is there, but I'd be interested in actual data.
The system objectively failed in a big way here - "meh, nothing could be done" doesn't seem like the right response to me.