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."

[batmobile]

yeah..? if your saying the justice system sucks yes i agree... its like you need money for a good lawyer or your screwed or the judge makes a bad choice in deciding punishment...its not fair never will be

[swkstudent]

yeah..? if your saying the justice system sucks yes i agree... its like you need money for a good lawyer or your screwed or the judge makes a bad choice in deciding punishment...its not fair never will be

that's not my opinion but thanks for the response.

[vickysue]

Sometimes i think it is how deep is your pocketbook as to what you get as a sentence. Those that don't have anymoney get the pd, they are the lawyers who just don't quite have what it takes to be big time lawyers. I have seen it  afew times . this is my 6th. time of having to be in the Jury pool. Hopefully the last.

[anitchman]

Well, in theory our justice system is meant to "rehabilitate," but it doesn't do that very well at all

[southernhorizons]

The current justice system in this country is not based on justice, but only on how rich the lawyers can get. The criminal justice system should punish proportionately to the crime, and it should be in direct proportion to the severity of the crime.
One other problem besides the greed of the lawyers, is that the prisons are not punishments, but rather handouts. A lot of people who are too lazy to go out and work for their own living, commit a crime so they can go to jail and be taken care of. They should have to work full time in prison, and not get all the entertainment perks.

[skrogman]

I think the statement is a good assessment.  It takes into consideration that the same crime in the same severity committed by one person as a first offense is not truly the same as that same action committed by a habitual offender.

But, I totally agree that the justice system in this country is anything but just.  I have been there when true hurtful unproductive decisions were made in the interest of being beneficial to the state.

[6265AT99]

"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."

I think using "risk assessment statistics" for the purposes of sentencing is very unethical.  First of all, the punishment should fit the crime - so, if one criminal stole from a bank, he's a thief and should be dealt with accordingly.  If another criminal raped and murdered someone, he's a totally different kind of criminal and again, should be dealt with accordingly.  Each should be punished ACCORDING TO THE CRIME THEY COMMITTED NOT BECAUSE STATISTICS SAY SO!!!  I, personally, feel that some criminals should never be incarcerated for LIFE, since this is a burden on the tax-paying public.  Why should we feed, clothe, shelter, medicate, etc. someone who has no RESPECT FOR LIFE, whether it be human life or animal life.  If a criminal is found guilty in these circumstances CAPITAL PUNISHMENT SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED SINCE IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE COST-EFFICIENT!!!!!  After all, if an animal kills a human, what do they do to it??!!!

[southernhorizons]

Yes, I support the death penalty too. And not after they sit on death row for 30 years, living off our tax money.

[dmatthewstewart]

"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."

I agree with the statement unti we get to "risk assessment statistics". Ive never heard of sentencing based on that. Can you explain that?