SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (6507)1/28/2002 10:19:44 PM
From: jcky  Read Replies (1) of 14610
 
There are really two issues here in the sentencing by the judge.

The first issue deals with consistency of the sentence given similar circumstances in any other case. That is, would another judge have imposed the same sentence on another defendant. I believe Dithers, OMD and you have a very valid argument on this matter.

The second issue addresses what is an appropriate length of time to serve in prison given the crime committed and the intent involved. Some say three to five years for involuntary manslaughter is appropriate; others say it is too lenient. This is where the grey area really begins.

Yes, the judge in this case did try to send a message to parents who can't control themselves. The question one should ask is whether this tactic works or not. You use the analogy of the war on drugs as an example.

But it is more than judges who are sending a message in society. Let's take this war on terrorism and the bombing of Afghanistan. Was this not a message sent by the US government to terrorists and those states who harbor terrorists of the possible consequences of their actions?

So what's the difference? I say, if it works, use it. Or if it doesn't work then we just bombed Afghanistan for nothing.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext