Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged Prison

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Bryan Pregon

Iowa Lawmaker Wants To Bring Back The Death Penalty - 1 views

  •  
    I think life in prison would be worse than the death penalty to begin with
  • ...33 more comments...
  •  
    I think the death penalty is pointless. In my opinion all it does is give horrible criminals an easy way out. If I did something horrible enough to get the death penalty, I'd rather die than serve life in prison.
  •  
    Yup we are for sure with out a doubt falling back into a dark age.
  •  
    i think we should have the death penalty
  •  
    Capital punishment is scarier than going to jail. I think crime rates would go down if this came back.
  •  
    I think that the death penalty is wrong because they are trying to stop a murderer by murdering him themselves so really it's not much better then what the killer was doing himself.
  •  
    What would happen if the person was innocent after all?
  •  
    Yea its pointless cuz then there not going sever there crime and its a easy way out
  •  
    It will be interesting to hear Sorenson's argument as to why to changes things. Prisons are getting crowded but this is still Iowa. We still have a small population
  •  
    I think the death penalty is not a bad idea nor I think it is a good idea. They will suffer in jail or suffer in hell. My opinion is put them in jail. If it is not their time to die yet then it is not. If they did something as bad as kill someone then they do deserve to go to jail and suffer for life.
  •  
    I would agree with harvey. The crime rates would go down and death penalties are effective in other regions.
  •  
    Its not weather which one is worse, its that killing a person for killing another person is not only hypocritical but inhumane to today's society.
  •  
    I disagree with bringing the death penalty back to Iowa. We've taken it away twice, once in 1872 and the second time in 1965, so I feel that shows that we, as a state, don't want it. Also the death penalty isn't really a deterrent for crime. There is a really interesting website that shows so facts about murder rates and comparing states that do and don't have the death penalty. They have a ton of information and I would recommend that you go through the site a little if you're interested in this topic. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state#MRord
  •  
    I agree with Aaron, but i also think that justice should be served
  •  
    Aaron giving someone the death penalty is acceptable. Having life in prison is worse anyway and it just puts more people in danger if that person is still alive.
  •  
    better for the death penalty then life in prison.
  •  
    Maybe we need to start corporal punishment.
  •  
    Mr. Garner, it would cost more money to give somebody the death penalty then to have them spend life in prison. We live in a different type of world then when people had there heads chopped off and dragons happened to be there to save "johns" life. To me that's not what God intended us to do with people that made a mistake and yes a big one but everybody has a reason to something or there could be something seriously wrong with there head to commit a murder but its not always there fault.
  •  
    For 2011, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.7, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.1 For 2010, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.6, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.9 For 2009, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.9, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.8 For 2008, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 5.2, while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.3 http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state#MRord
  •  
    It seems like if the act of violence is bad enough to get the death penalty most of the people kill themselves before the law can.
  •  
    Would you rather spend the rest of your life in prison or be dead? Think about that!
  •  
    Mr. Valdivia how would it cost more to give the death penalty then to keep them in prison for life? That's right, IT WOULDN'T. And I'm not saying give the death penalty for 1 murder. Based on depravity and body counts they should be sentenced to death.
  •  
    unless you commited that bad of a crime i wouldn't worry about it coming back if your not gonna kill people
  •  
    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CostsRptFinal.pdf Dylan pages 20 and 21 of the PDF I linked above, explain why the death penalty costs more to administer than life in prison with out parole. More specifically on page 20 under the heading Time on Death Row it says, "In California, a legislative commission concluded that it costs the state an extra $90,000 for each death row inmate per year compared to the costs of the same inmate housed in general population. With over 670 inmates on death row, that amounts to an additional yearly cost of $60 million solely attributable to the death penalty."
  •  
    Lets keep it simple say the death penalty would be cheaper than housing an inmate for life. Boom, Roasted.
  •  
    Well then we can change the process to a quick and easy death without all that court BS. And plus I'm a prison warden so you guys both don't know what you are talking about. Aaron. And Jeremy.
  •  
    FALSE. There is NO WAY you're a prison warden. The minimum age for a Warden is 21, plus you have to have lots of training. So someone of your prestige and experience, (not to mention your practically a 5 year old) would never be able to be a warden. Kthnxbye
  •  
    I am prison
  •  
    Dylan and Joe, The reason that the death penalty is more expensive (and always will be) is the courts have to make sure that the criminal that is convicted is 100 percent guilty. There can't be any room for doubt. This means that the state has to supply better (More expensive) lawyers for the suspected party, and the trial has to be more in depth, therefor much longer. We can't make this time shorter than it is, because as a country, we are will do everything we can to keep an Innocent man from dying. And to just keep the perpetrators in jail is much cheaper, as there is already a well set system in place, and one more person will not increase the cost of that system to go up in large amounts as much as the singled out attention a person on death row will.
  •  
    @ Dylan and Joe, if you both still think that the death penalty is cheaper, you are wrong, look at the 20th page Jeremy posted. @ Jared, ethically speaking, shouldn't any person who is accused of murder have an outrageously expensive lawyer anyways? If someone is going to be imprisoned for life, or going to be executed for a crime, should the one being executed receive a better lawyer?
  •  
    I think they should, but the person being put to jail for life has the chance to have new evidence pop up, and potentially let them eventually get out, they have the chance to get out on parole, they have the potential for choices. The man that is getting the death penalty have to be 100 percent sure. They don't have room to make mistakes. Ethically, I believe that people getting put away for life should have the same standards of 100 percent, but as I said, they have choices later on down the road. The dead don't.
  •  
    @ Payton. It is cheaper. I know for a fact. I AM A PRISON WARDEN.
  •  
    I think one would suffer more life in prison rather than getting the death penalty.
  •  
    @Peyton Are you trying to tell me its more expensive to keep someone alive in prison? this means that dude lives off our tax money. You will literally pay for his food, housing, and heck, that dude can even go lift for 3 hours a day and run his block! THink about that. State Champ.
  •  
    @ Dylan, you are not a prison warden, keep the topics on this page relevant to the conversation, and have some potential form of evidence to back up what you say. @ Joe, it is much less expensive to keep someone alive then execute them. The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated. Example State: California How much they could save: With life in prison as the maximum punishment for 1st degree murder, they would save over 1 billion dollars a year. Money that could be saved per year for taxpayers: 90,000 dollars a year. Taxpayers save money if they do not use the death penalty. http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42 Besides, many murder victims PREFER the idea of Life without Parole. If you do not believe this, check out this site made by the victims families: https://www.aclunc.org/docs/criminal_justice/death_penalty/Voices_from_California_Crime_Victims_for_Alternatives_to_the_Death_Penalty.pdf I have the feeling that nobody will even look at these links, but they are blunt evidence that it is cheaper, and makes more people happy, then when we use the death penalty. Oh.... By the way, 2nd degree murders (who cannot receive the death penalty) can do all that which you stated before Joe. Why should first degree murders be any different?
  •  
    The death penalty is dumb you should just let that sever his/or hers time in prison.
Bryan Pregon

Nebraska outlaws the death penalty - CNNPolitics.com - 17 views

  •  
    "Six states have abolished capital punishment since 2007 -- Nebraska is now the seventh."
  • ...17 more comments...
  •  
    I think it was a good idea to outlaw the death penalty, personally because I don't think that you should take someones life in punishment of someone else's. "An eye for an eye." There's always another way to deal with this, not greet it with death. If anything, I'd sentence him to jail for most of his life or his whole life in that matter. But the Government itself can also make a mistake and accuse the innocent of murder and then give them death as a punishment. They'd be in the wrong. Death is more drastic to me then spending a few years in jail, (thinking about it in a family way).
  •  
    Keeping someone in jail for their whole life takes millions of dollars paid from the tax payers. If their crime was drastic enough then I am fully in support of the death penalty. Jail is basically a long term time out chamber for people to get clean and think about what they did. If you have already murdered, or raped, or abused someone a thirty year wag of the finger is not going to change their behavior.
  •  
    I believe in the death penalty. Let's say there's a serial killer and he's already murdered a good amount of people. Would you really want that person to go on living his or her life after all the pain he caused for all of those families? I know I wouldn't.
  •  
    I believe in the death penalty because if someone has already done a good amount of harm to others and they have died because of it then the person who committed the crime deserves the same. Keeping them in prison is just a waste of money and giving them to much time. They deserve nothing less and being in prison isn't going to change their behavior.
  •  
    As a very liberal person myself, and the death penalty is a conservative policy for crime, I am happy to see a state so close to home abolish this penalty. We have prisons and judges and laws for a reason that will punish those who do bad things. What are we accomplishing by killing someone publicly for killing others?
  •  
    I belive the death penalty is okay becasue you have to commit a pretty serious crime to get the death penalty and really in that case you almost kind of deserve it because of the pain you caused to multiple people.
  •  
    The death penalty is a tricky subject to talk about, most people are strictly for the death penalty, or strongly against it. However, in my opinion, I believe that everything has a consequence to a set of actions. Is it necessary to kill somebody though? I think everyone deserves a second chance especially if they know they are in the wrong and trying to change their lives around. The type of crime the person committed is the key. Let's say a person committed murder, would you say "an eye for an eye?" and kill them too through the death penalty? If you were to do this, aren't you doing the same thing that they committed? Overall, I think it was wise that Nebraska outlawed the death penalty.
  •  
    I don't believe in the death penalty, because by killing someone who killed someone else it's hypocritical. I think it's wrong to kill anyone, even if they killed someone else. The death penalty also put innocent lives at risk, someone could have been framed for the murder. The death penalty also costs a lot of money, people think that it's okay because they think that it saves the government from spending money but we are still spending a lot. There are a lot better ways to avoid the death penalty, and there a lot of mentally ill patients killed by the death penalty.
  •  
    I believe that outlawing the death penalty is the right thing to do because you shouldn't fight fire with fire. It is wrong to show that killing, or any other act of the sort, is wrong by doing the same thing. It is also a good thing because there have been wrong accusations in the past, and the death penalty cannot be undone. If you argue for a just prosecution, they can live with the guilt of their crime in prison. If they felt no remorse then the person should get pyschiatric help to correct the situation. There is also data that says the death penality costs more than housing the prisoner because of the long appeal process.
  •  
    Spending jail time is to help you become a better person because you did something bad. Killing someone does not help them become better as a person.
  •  
    I believe in the death penalty, if someone has committed a big enough crime.I don't think it should be outlawed becuase If someone has tortured and/or murdered multiple people than they should.
  •  
    Moms freakin out by this she wont shut up about it its hilarious
  •  
    I think it is good that states are starting to outlaw the death penalty. If someone kills someone why does it make it right for them to be killed even if its by the government. Today we see punishments like the electric chair as barbaric and years from now people will say the same thing about the death penalty.
  •  
    I think we should keep the death penalty why should we have people murder other people and live in prison the rest of their lives we should show them what the did to people i mean the deserve so i think we should keep the death penalty
  •  
    We should keep the death penalty because if you take a persons life or multiple peoples lives then yes the state should take yours. Only if it was on purpose, because you get in a car crash and kill someone from the impact that shouldn't really count because it wasn't intended. Also if someone gets life in prison they get everything pretty much handed to them and they don't to pay for it. For example Nikko Jenkins killed multiple people on multiple occasions and no justice happened for the family's who had to deal with the loss of a loved one because hes just going to prison for life.
  •  
    I think the death penalty is okay to have in every state. If you are willing to murder a person then you should be murdered yourself. The crime they commit should be used in the same way against them.
  •  
    but are you willing to take it yourself for a crime that's the question everyone fears.
  •  
    I think its okay if the person that going into it haves killed like 40 people and they in joy doing it but if you just kill some one on accident then its not right just to give them the death penalty, instead they should just be locked up.
  •  
    Bumped for discussion on Political Ideology.
Bryan Pregon

Guantanamo camp burns through $900,000 a year per inmate: Thomson Reuters Business News... - 0 views

  •  
    "It's been dubbed the most expensive prison on Earth and President Barack Obama cited the cost this week as one of many reasons to shut down the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, which burns through some $900,000 per prisoner annually."
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    i think spending $900,000 per inmate is way to much to be spending on every single inmate that is in the prison
  •  
    Since our national dept is beyond high, it would be a good idea to shut this down, and find other ways to deal with these insane people. Obama may actually be doing something right this time.
  •  
    I think Obama is doing the right thing. We are paying over $900,000 a year to keep one inmate in this prison which is way to much. Other prisons cost anywhere from $30,000-$70,000. I don't get why it costs so much to keep inmates there.
Kenzie Pike

Nebraska Sex Offender Sentenced To Federal Prison - 6 views

  •  
    A Nebraska sex offender with a history of registration violations has been sentenced to 33 months in federal prison. A news release from the office of U.S. Attorney Deborah Gilg says 36-year-old Joseph Reynolds must serve five years of supervised release after he leaves prison.
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    Not enough time in prison to me, only a little over 2 years in prison but 5 years of supervised release? Seems a little backwards if you ask me
  •  
    i think he should have more time in prison. just because he does it 5 years ago doesn't mean hes going to stop doing it. once a sex offender always a sex offender.
  •  
    Reynolds is a coward. why have to serve federal prison time when all you have to do is register? not the brightest criminal.
Jeremy Vogel

Massachusetts judge rules for inmate's sex-change surgery - 3 views

  •  
    A federal court judge on Tuesday ordered Massachusetts officials to provide sex-reassignment surgery for a transsexual prison inmate, after determining that it was the only adequate treatment for the inmate's mental illness.
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    I think that from the physiological stand point this court case makes seance. How ever I think that our tax dollars should not be used to make this medical procedure happen.
  •  
    This is a very odd case to say the least. This prison inmate is at 13x the risk of a sexual assault as the average inmate. So, the question is, is the protection of a near-insane murder worth tax payer dollars? I don't think so, but something has to be done about the inmates safety, perhaps being placed alone, or with people of the preferred gender of the inmate? In the event of tax payers paying, is it really that much? The government comes up with about $2,650 billion yearly from income tax alone. To add on, it is really not that often that this expensive of a situation arises. Is it really that big of a deal for something that almost never happens, but may help someone in the near future?
  •  
    This may be what's "best" for the inmate, but he/she (no offense intended, I just don't know what to call them) murdered someone. Don't you think that a murderer should in some way "pay" for what they've done. They don't deserve the best, but they also don't deserve to be sexually assaulted. Also, tax payer dollars should not go towards things like this, that money is for the betterment of the community and/or the country. To fix the sexual harassment problem, the inmate should be put somewhere alone. Yet, another question rises, what about all the other inmates (male or female) who are sexually assaulted? We can't worry about them all, plus they're in there for a reason, they don't deserve tax money to go towards protecting them whenever they put others in danger that led them to be in prison. So, the answer is no, it's not worth it. It's not tax payer's problem.
  •  
    if this person wanted to become a women then wouldn't they prefer men? which means that if they are 13 times the risk, wouldn't that be a good thing since they like guys? well if it was a rape then i understand but there are sometimes in prison when it isn't a rape or sexual assault, both want to do it. in that case that person should consider themselves lucky to be around guys all the time.
  •  
    haha what if this dude was just really straight and thought that if he gets a sex change that he will be placed with da lady's so he wouldn't be around all da dudes n stuff .
  •  
    I agree with Payton just place her alone if its for her safety. If its for her mental condition send her to a prison mental health facility.
  •  
    I just don't understand how a PRISON INMATE is allowed that luxury of sex change surgery. Especially considering the price and how much it really is causing taxpayers
  •  
    I personally think that this was a great decision. I believe that a person's mental health is the most important aspect in the road to any sort of recovery. Even though the transgender inmate did commit a murder, she deserves to have the resources to stabilize her well-being. Should the rest of America have to pay for it? Perhaps not, but I don't mind helping out someone who desperately needs it. Although, I guess that depends on your belief on the importance of mental health.
  •  
    Jenny, this is really not a matter of sexual interests. If this person wants a sex change, it may be because of this sexual interest, but then again, it may not. They may simply want to be a female. The funding should come from the inmate, but the inmate cannot earn funds while behind bars, perhaps the inmate should be allowed to work up to being allowed to have a sex change operation.
Bryan Pregon

What's going on with prison reform in America? - CNN.com - 7 views

  •  
    "In a few weeks, some 6,000 inmates will be released from federal prison because of sweeping changes in U.S. sentencing guidelines for nonviolent drug offenses, approved last year. It's part of a move to overhaul the American criminal justice system, which incarcerates more citizens than any other nation in the world."
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    I agree with what Obama is doing. It can help the prisoners get a job easier and it will save the government money.
  •  
    I agree with what is going on because then they can become productive tax paying citizens, rather than being given everything in prison. If they are put into the real world they will have to shape up to some extent. If they have already done time, chances are the drugs are out of their system now, and hopefully broke the habit.
  •  
    I agree with Tia it will help out the government and then we will have more people working throughout the country.
ataylor074

Virginia move to abolish death penalty part of broader wave of change - CSMonitor.com - 27 views

  •  
    Do you guys think the death penalty should still be around?
  • ...23 more comments...
  •  
    It's hard to say because it's not right to take someone's life. I'm sure morality is a big part of why they're taking the death penalty away in Virginia. However, I've watch a lot of true crime shows to know that there are evil people in this world. Serial killers kill for fun and have no compassion for victims. It gets to the point where one wonders if they deserve their life because they've caused so much destruction. So, I guess, there's too many factors for me to have a set opinion.
  •  
    I do think that the death penalty still has its uses. Though it is still flawed the most recent method of lethal injection is still done incorrectly so I believe that once we find the most reasonable way it should be in play.
  •  
    There are so many different factors that go into whether the death penalty is appropriate or not. Part of me thinks that if you do something horrible enough it's fair for people to want to take your life in exchange for what was taken from them. But part of me says that it's the coward's way out, that rotting in jail for the rest of their life is better than being able to just die and get away from it. You look back on cases like that of Jeffrey Dahmer and think "wow, why didn't he get the death penalty?", but he was beaten to death by fellow inmates later on in his sentence, so either way he was going to die. You look back at Ted Bundy and the horrific murders that he committed and you're glad he got the death penalty, right? A life for a life, it seems fair. There are just so many things that go into it and it's so personal and complicated for everyone.
  •  
    I think that if somebody did something where they truly do deserve the death penalty then it should stick around for those terrible people who only harm society.
  •  
    I think the death penalty shouldn't be a thing anymore. Even this woman who lost her father at a young age doesn't want her father's killer to receive the death penalty. She wants justice, however not in the form of the death penalty. It should no longer exist anyway, it's cruel and people should have to pay for their crimes.
  •  
    I agree yet disagree with the death penalty. First, I would say that it would give certain families who are for it justice for loved ones that were lost or hurt. Second, I would say that it would prevent future crimes from occurring if that person only had received a life sentence. On the other hand, I would say it is an "easy out" and certain families could be against it for that reason. Additionally, if that person was wrongfully killed, that would be completely on the court system and no justice would be served, it would be a longer, more "drug-out" process.
  •  
    I agree with Allison. The killing of a perpetrator is not justice. The death penalty is outdated and should be abolished.
  •  
    I think the death penalty should still be a thing but I think that they need to change what crimes fit the death penalty.
  •  
    I think the death penalty should remain however I think it should only be if you killed another person on purpose or multiple people.
  •  
    I think it shouldn't be abolished because there are still many criminals out there that have done several bad things and but I also think that the death penalty should change the crimes it's in.
  •  
    I understand that there are bad people in the world and that the death penalty is sometimes used on those people. However, I believe that the death penalty is not morally right. The methods that are used can be flawed and not always go right. In the end, it's difficult to pick sides because I can see both reasons as to why it should or should not be used.
  •  
    I agree with Sydney, I don't think the death penalty is morally right. Even though there are awful people in the world, killing them doesn't bring justice to the people they've hurt.
  •  
    The death penalty I feel is an oxymoron on its own. How are you going to prevent killing by killing? It makes no sense. I feel if the crime was super severe, maybe the family of the family could come up with a punishment. I just don't think it should be allowed, especially if it is for a petty crime. We are the only developed nation in the world that still has the death penalty.
  •  
    They should punish the people that do bad things instead of giving them the death penalty because death is not scary
  •  
    I think that the death penalty is a sort of necessity. If we don't have it, then murders and serial killers will be able to live, even though they contribute nothing to society.
  •  
    I think that if someone committed a terrible crime such as murder or rape, the death penalty is reasonable. How can you let someone of that nature still live? I personally believe it would be giving them what they deserve, prevent it from happening again from that same person, and save jails money rather than basically giving them free food and shelter. Of course with major restrictions on why someone should get it, but I think it should most definitely still be around.
  •  
    I have mixed emotions about the death penalty. I know some families would consider the death penalty justice for those who have lost loved ones due to a murder or something of that sort. I also believe life in prison can have more of an effect on the person who committed the crime and they would have to think about what they did for the rest of their life knowing they will no longer have freedom. I don't really have a definite stance on the subject.
  •  
    I dont agree with the death penalty. I dont think that they should have the power to take someones life away. And in some cases people used be given death penalty for things that they did not even do. I think that a life in prison is would be better because the wont be free they wont have a life anymore and they will die there. and in my opinion that is a good punishment.
  •  
    I think the death penalty should still be around. There are some extremely disgusting or disturbing things that people could do that deserve death. The only problem is that they need to be 100% sure the person is guilty so they don't kill someone for no reason.
  •  
    I believe that the accused should be able to decide between life in prison or death in these situations.
  •  
    I think the death penalty should still be around. Personally if I had one of my family members killed I would want the killer to have to suffer for life in prison rather than not having to face their consequences. The death penalty is just way of reassurance to make sure they wont do anything bad again.
  •  
    I believe that the death penalty has its uses in certain situations like on terrorists or mass killers. It's simple they killed many and it shouldn't be allowed to happen again and that's the cruel but necessary action. If someone that I cared about was gone because of someone id want my peace.
  •  
    I think they should have kept it for certain times where it was the best course of action.
  •  
    I think that the accused should be able to choose between life in prison or the death penalty.
  •  
    they should not have the death penalty anymore. If someone does something really bad, they should get life in prison because they will forever suffer.
Melissa Diaz-Aguilera

Juvenile Justice: Too young for Life in Prison? - 10 views

  •  
    I feel like you should be able to charge juveniles as adults. I think it would be absurd to just let kids away with committing crimes, especially the one this kid did. If an adult did something like this no one would even think twice about arresting them, why is it different in this case? I think that he needs to be put behind bars and he needs some sort of counseling because obviously something is not right with him. It might also help to know what kind of background the kid has, to see why he did it. There has to be a reason.
  • ...27 more comments...
  •  
    If we as a society won't allow juveniles, sixteen year olds in particular, to vote or to sign their name to a legal contract and the justification for that restriction is because they aren't "mature enough" or that they "don't/won't understand" the lasting consequences then how can we expect them to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime? If sixteen year olds are old enough and mature enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime then shouldn't they also understand the lasting consequences to the things I mentioned above?
  •  
    I agree with Jermey, we need to not set a double standard. We need to rehabilitate young offenders, because if you are not a hard criminal before you go to prison for 20 years of one of the most impressionable times of your life, you will come out of it as one. These are kids that probably grew up in broken homes, and this was the only path they were going to take, because it was the only one they saw. So lets rehabilitate, and give them productive lives, not ones that are going to keep the cycle going.
  •  
    I agree with you for the most part Natalie. Although if it's a really small crime and the juvenile is unarmed, then they should go to juvenile court. But for crimes bigger than that example, they need to be charged as an adult would be charged. There's actually this reality TV show (that I can't remember the name of) where, in each episode, a group of kids who are on the streets and in gangs, etc. are taken into a jail as a form of rehabilitation, and they go through a day of being in jail and they also hear stories from people who are in jail at that time, and they always say that one doesn't want to end up in jail. I think there was one particular episode where a girl went with her mother to watch her mother plan a funeral for her. It's pretty interesting, and it does seem to help a lot.
  •  
    Jared, I understand what you mean by some kids growing up in broken homes and having bad lives growing up BUT you always have the option to not go down that road. You have the option to try to better yourself and make something of yourself. Although most people don't do that, they don't always pull a gun on a cop. That is a serious offense and I feel like you guys are so focused on the fact that he's our age that you're blinded by what he did. Jeremy, I don't understand what you're saying. I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me so if you could maybe clarify that would be great. Thanks. Kirstina, I do get what you're saying. Most kids need to see what can happen but this kid is plenty old enough to know right from wrong.
  •  
    I realize that, but the people that are the most likely to pull a gun are the ones that have the most messed up life beforehand in most cases. We should try them as children, and try to rehabilitate them. Before your 18, and move, a large part of what you do, and know is influenced by your parents, and other senor figures in your life, and even friends Until you reach adulthood, its hard to be your own person, especially in the environment that generates this type of person. There is the odd person in there that is just a bad person, and it is all there fault, but we need to try to rehabilitate them as a child, not as an adult.
  •  
    Jeremy, there's a major difference between crime and legal contracts. They don't have anything to do with each other. Sentencing teens like adults is important because it protects us. It's a safety issue. Plus it tells other kids, "You break the law, you get in huge trouble." And they don't allow people under 18 to sign contracts without parental consent to protect them from making stupid decisions.
  •  
    Natalie I'm sorry for the confusion. I was replying more to the article then directly to your post. To clarify I disagree with your position about putting juveniles into adult court that commit violent crimes. At least with the current system we have in place. Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting. As long as our society wants to say that sixteen and seventeen year olds aren't mature enough to understand the consequences of something like voting then how can we expect them to understand these violent crimes that they commit. I'm all for placing older teens in adult court when they commit an adult crime but only if they aren't subjected to an unfounded and unreasonable double standard. Either sixteen year olds are on the same maturity level as adults or they aren't.
  •  
    i think it is totally understandable because it shows that this kid is planning on doing crimes in the future.
  •  
    i think that they did the right thing by arresting him if you are 16 then you are old enough to realize that shooting a cop isn't a good idea and you will have a punishment for it
  •  
    Natalie i agree with your point of view on this article. If he is 16 he already knows what he is doing. We are all in high school and know well the consequences if we did that. I also agree with what you said about his background. It seems like this is a record and he already knows the consequences. So in my opinion he should be charged for adult crime.
  •  
    I believe this kid should get charged as an adult because like they said in the article. He is a threat to society and to himself.
  •  
    I agree with Natalie, everyone in the right mind should know shooting at someone; especially a police officer is wrong. And know their will be consequences to follow. So yes, juveniles should be charged as an adult depending on the circumstances.
  •  
    I agree with charging juveniles as adults. People should know the right from wrongs at an early age and receive the consequences though an understanding of what they did wrong.
  •  
    I agree with Melissa, people should know the difference from right and wrong, they definitely know the incentives for doing wrong as well.
  •  
    Jeremy, I don't quite understand where you stand on the issue. You said that you realize there's a difference but then you said, and I quote, "Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting." You're contradicting yourself there and in your original comment.
  •  
    Obviously there is something wrong with society if we have mere teenagers pulling out weapons and assaulting people to the point of felony. I think that the punishment is completely fair for such a sick individual. Criminal behaviors are not taught, but learned so he had to have learned this from someone he knew or a parent with a criminal record. Either way, what he did was wrong and he deserves to be behind bars.
  •  
    I agree with charging minors as adults because this article is one of many where the felon was a minor. I did research over this in another class and i found many articles where they were charging a minor with adult charges because of how brutal the murders they committed where. Like i argued in my other paper "is your loved one's life any less valuable just because they got murdered by a minor"
  •  
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/03/sport/football/dutch-linesman-killed-football/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 Here's another case of teenagers committing violent crimes. They beat this man to death. There were two 15 year-olds and a 16 year-old.
  •  
    they should charge minors as adults because they will be out in the streets again and doing more crimies. its there own fault that they get charged thats why they should face charges alone.
  •  
    I think if you do the crime, you pay the time whenever the government wants you to.
  •  
    i say same charge for everyone no matter what
  •  
    if you're willing to make the decision to break the law and commit a serious crime with the consequences of an adult then you should definitely suffer the same consequences no matter your age.
  •  
    if anyone commits a crime they should be charged the same no matter what age
  •  
    I agree with the idea that no matter your age, if you commit a serious crime, you should suffer the consequences. Say a teenager decides to murder someone... Just because they're a minor, should they be charged with a lesser offense than an adult would have? NO. If you are willing, capable, and have the mental capacity and audacity to commit such crimes, you deserve prison and whatever other punishment you receive.
  •  
    Great discussion guys! Here is some more food for thought. People who do bad things need punishment, but there is plenty of scientific evidence that teenage brains are in a state of development that doesn't excuse bad acts, but can help explain it. http://goo.gl/MXEAd Ask yourself if you are the "same person" you were when you were 5 years old? I can tell you, you will make decisions differently when you are 25, and probably 65.
  •  
    This is a good point i have to say. That's why I think we need to do our best to reform kids, not just punish them. Make it clear that their will be consequences, but try them as hardened, adult criminals is not the way to do it.
  •  
    This is an extremely touchy subject. It's hard to lay out things like this without stepping on toes of other controversial subjects like voting age and military eligability
  •  
    You both make a good point, but when a kid gets charged with a felony, he obviously has done wrong. Sometimes you do bad things, but its not as bad compared to other things. Though when you get older, you can continue to do bad things, and the bad things can turn into crimes, etc. Sometimes charging teens as adults is the way to go, even if it doesn't seem fare. Maybe not fore life, but two years, or even one, wont do any harm.
  •  
    I think if someone did crime, they should be punished no matter their age. so make them realize how bad it is.
Bryan Pregon

Snowden still waiting for U.S. response to prison offer - CNNPolitics.com - 0 views

  •  
    "Edward Snowden says he's offered "many times" to go to prison in the United States as part of a deal to return from exile in Russia but is still waiting for an answer from the American government."
Bryan Pregon

Kate's Law and the Problem With Mandatory-Sentencing Legislation - The Atlantic - 1 views

  •  
    "In July, a group of legislators introduced the Establishing Mandatory Minimums for Illegal Reentry Act of 2015, popularly known as Kate's Law. On Wednesday, the U.S. Sentencing Commission estimated that Kate's Law would expand the federal prison population by over 57,000 prisoners, according to Families Against Mandatory Minimums, a nonprofit organization that supporters sentencing reform."
guillermosolorio

Teen Charged With Murder In Deadly Crash - 21 views

If they have evidence that it was her than she should go to prison,it sounds liken they have no evidence though. they cant just assume it was her.

news

Bryan Pregon

Obama commutes 61 prison sentences - CNNPolitics.com - 3 views

  •  
    "President Barack Obama commuted the prison sentences of 61 people who were serving time for drug offenses, the White House announced Wednesday, furthering his push to reform what he sees as overzealous sentencing laws."
  •  
    I like this because there are people who are committing more serious crimes like rape, etc. and people are wasting spaces in the jail because of their drug offenses that could of been minor and didn't involve violence or anything.
Bryan Pregon

Parole officer "empathy training" leads to a 13% drop in parolees' reoffending rates - 11 views

  •  
    I think this is a really interesting approach and I'd be interested to see if they did this with everyone what the results would be.
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    I really agree with this. I think that we should do more things like this for the public especially with people who are having trouble with the law. Instead of putting people in prison for nonviolent charges they can hopefully learn to live a better life before they commit a worse crime and end up serving life in prison. The purpose of prisons is to rehabilitate those who can't live in the public and I think that to a certain extent it does that but clearly, it's not doing enough.
  •  
    I think this is good because you never really know how somebody could feel until you up them to test and to see if they can feel Normal human emotions
  •  
    I like this idea and I think they should try and implement it in more areas. Helping people try to get better out of prison would do great measures because if no one helps them or tries to point them in the right direction, they will go back to their old ways.
  •  
    I feel like this was a really good idea and should be present in all parole officer's training. It allows them to see from a different perspective and open their eyes up a bit more. Helps people get out of difficult situations.
  •  
    I think this is a really good thing. I think it's super beneficial to the officers and the inmates
  •  
    This is a good idea and is beneficial for all who are involved. It seems like a good thing since it might help those who chose a wrong course of action onto a right one.
  •  
    I hope they'll be able to keep it up, it's super beneficial!
sophiataylor001

Inmates defeat Harvard debate team - CNN.com - 2 views

  •  
    Inmates from the Eastern New York Correctional Facility defeated the prestigious Harvard debate team in mid-September as part of the Bard Prison Initiative, a program run by Bard College to provide college education to qualifying prisoners, according to the Wall Street Journal.
  •  
    This makes me think of the Toffler reading from our Chpt 1. "It is the truly revolutionary characteristic of knowledge that it can be grasped by the weak and the poor as well. Knowledge is the most democratic source of power." The USA imprisons more people than anywhere else in the world. Obviously there is a lot of talent being untapped by people who chose crime instead of channeling their efforts in positive ways.
Bryan Pregon

Obama reducing 102 inmates' sentences - CNNPolitics.com - 2 views

  •  
    "Obama has now granted clemency to 774 individuals, the vast majority of whom were serving time for nonviolent drug crimes. Just in the past year, Obama has granted clemency to 590 prisoners -- the most commutations in any single year of US history."
Jessica Lewis

US Secretly Released Detainees From Military Prison In Afghanistan - 1 views

  •  
    WASHINGTON, May 7 (Reuters) - The United States has been secretly releasing detainees from a military prison in Afghanistan as part of negotiations with insurgent groups, the Washington Post reported in its Monday editions. The "strategic release" program has allowed American officials over the past several years to use prisoners as bargaining chips to reduce violence in restive provinces, it said, citing U.S.
Bryan Pregon

Swiss Company Wants Its Drugs Back - 9 views

  •  
    The death penalty scares me, I have watched movies where they kill people this way and it is cruel. I don't think anyone should be put to death if they are in prison for a crime I think they should do their time. They should sit and rot in prison for the rest of their life, but they are in prison for killing, etc...and then we do the same to them, I don't get it.
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    i feel that the death penalty should stay around as a form of punishment, but only for the most heinous of crimes. As for how we obtained this lethal drug, it is ours legally and can not be taken back. However america should start making our own lethal drugs if we want to take part in executions.
  •  
    I think we need stay out of overseas activities like this. It doesn't matter if we did everything legally, it's still wrong.
  •  
    i dont think anyone should go on death row i think they should give them a life sentence and be kept alive that way they feel guilty later on about what they've done and little by little they'll start going crazy and eventually try suicide because they wont want to be locked up forever but the cops wont let them hurt themselves so then they'll be getting even more crazy go psycho probably.....its like self torture for them:)
Dakota Smith

Sandusky Arrested again - 5 views

shared by Dakota Smith on 07 Dec 11 - No Cached
  •  
    SICKO
  •  
    MY GOD. why cant they leave him in prison for once. He cant get away with it anymore so what is their problem with putting him in prison for the rest of his life???
  •  
    for a man his age, rehabilitation will be near impossible. you cant teach an old dog new tricks. If let out he will continue to molest young boys. The only solution, is life in prison.
1 - 20 of 56 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page