Would you defend or attack this statement about our criminal justice system?

[swkstudent]

"The main purpose of the criminal justice system is to punish criminals for immoral acts, and, since some acts are more immoral than others, the length of incarceration sentences should be in direct proportion to the severity of the crime – therefore, using risk assessment statistics in sentencing is unethical because it may result in two criminals who committed the same severity of crime getting very different sentences."

[hitch0403]

imperfect system run by imperfect men...what else would u expect?

[falcon9]

"The main purpose of the criminal justice system is to punish criminals for immoral acts, and, since some acts are more immoral than others, the length of incarceration sentences should be in direct proportion to the severity of the crime – therefore, using risk assessment statistics in sentencing is unethical because it may result in two criminals who committed the same severity of crime getting very different sentences."

Are you a law student or, is this an "ethics" assignment?

[swkstudent]

"The main purpose of the criminal justice system is to punish criminals for immoral acts, and, since some acts are more immoral than others, the length of incarceration sentences should be in direct proportion to the severity of the crime – therefore, using risk assessment statistics in sentencing is unethical because it may result in two criminals who committed the same severity of crime getting very different sentences."

Are you a law student or, is this an "ethics" assignment?

Neither I found this quote in an article.

[swkstudent]

"The main purpose of the criminal justice system is to punish criminals for immoral acts, and, since some acts are more immoral than others, the length of incarceration sentences should be in direct proportion to the severity of the crime – therefore, using risk assessment statistics in sentencing is unethical because it may result in two criminals who committed the same severity of crime getting very different sentences."

Are you a law student or, is this an "ethics" assignment?

I was a social work student though, I graduated last May.. hence the name.
Neither I found this quote in an article.

[falcon9]

I was a social work student though, I graduated last May.. hence the name.

I see.  Well, the question 'begs' an inherent notion of "relativistic ethics" as it relates to criminal sentencing.  Theoretically, the same crime technically draws the same sentence however, that's not how it generally works in practice.  For instance, depending upon the severity of the crime, some first-time offenders may get off lighter than a repeat offender.

[BlackSheepNY]

I was a social work student though, I graduated last May.. hence the name.

I see.  Well, the question 'begs' an inherent notion of "relativistic ethics" as it relates to criminal sentencing.  Theoretically, the same crime technically draws the same sentence however, that's not how it generally works in practice.  For instance, depending upon the severity of the crime, some first-time offenders may get off lighter than a repeat offender.

Lots of things are in motion when it comes to criminal sentencing.  Is there a jury or is the Judge the only one hearing the case?  How tough is the Prosecutor and defending Attorney?  Does the defendant have any priors, or is this a first-time offense?  The degree of the Felony, or is it a Misdemeanor?  In the end, I agree with Falcon9.

[mgint]

the system we have not perfect but better than the rest of the world just try to help people with their skills and maybe more people will turn from crime.

[kewl4reals]

I would defend the statement because the risk assesment system is much like playing the stock market.  It is not an accurate or even reliable way of conducting important matters at hand.

[mhuffman2]

The punishment has not fit the crime for years.  Why bother now?