Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldworldnet who wrote (99556)	3/26/2005 11:47:19 AM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Here's an example from our local news: a guy here was caught setting up a peeping tom system in his bathroom, videoing his niece and her friends in the bathroom. As bad as that is, and he got 2 months in jail for it, people are saying the law should be stronger - 2 months isn't enough. Let's say we give a year minimum jail time. Who is that going to hurt? Sure, it will hurt the peeping tom more than 2 months, but this guy has a day job and a family whom he currently supports. What about the loss of an income stream to his family? We are now penalizing people that had nothing to do with the original act. Plus, we don't address the root cause - the eroticism and compulsion that caused him to do it in the first place. A really effective punishment would to let him keep his job, put him under house arrest and give him community service and mandatory counseling until such time he was "corrected". This is not the "file and forget" approach to crime people want. If the "Department of Corrections" was actually properly name, it would be the "Department of Incarcerations". There is little evidence that anyone who gets into the legal system and is sentenced to a jail term is ever "corrected".