Is prison the best way to punish criminals?
10 years for rape .25 years for murder e.t.c
Answers:
I would say it depends on the severity of the crime - originally the Jail or Prison idea was more about protecting the public, by locking away violent offenders. Now that is not a consideration - $$$, punishing and abusing people seems to be the goal - the government makes lots of $$$ off every inmate, so the system is designed to make even those who's crimes are not as severe, fail and return to prison. do not get me wrong -I do believe that people should have to pay the consequences of their actions and I even believe in the death penalty in some cases- I just think that in alot cases their are other options. a person who has probation for drunk driving (no injuries - hit a parked car and stop sign while under 21 - missed a p.o. appt and got revoked) sent to prison for 3 yrs in - 4 yrs. out - they were asking for 10 in) gets more time than a 1st time murderer/rapist. In Nevada you will get out sooner if you kill someone than if you got caught dealing marijuana. HMMM I would rather have the pot dealer out than the murderer..
DEPENDS UPON WHAT TYPE OF CRIME IS DONE.
prison is not for punsishment. it is the place
where one has to think about his guilty. and he should realise andhe should not repeat the same
mistakes etc. it is otherway to be called as
a rehabilitation centre for the criminals.
Arrest,bail and imprisonment have become part of criminal justice system, he world over. There are of course, voices raised about the efficacy thereof. More and more civil wrongs are made as offences by statutes.
If the offences are of such a nature that the free movement in society of the convict being apprehended as a threat to the person and property of the law-abiding citizenty, then incarceration is justified, on the principle of greater good of the greatest number of people.Otherwise, unduly, the State's money is being wasted. Imprisonment of a skilled person, by compulsion to do hard labour, wastes the talent of the person as not being useful to the society.
A system of heavy penalties, compensation for victims if any, probation, compulsory social service in tune with the skill of the person, a regulated and restricted movement condition, etc can be thought of as alternative to jail sentences. In the present system, support withdrawal devolving on the hapless family of the convict is not given any regard. The alternative would have to be evolved by a multi-disciplinary think-tank and left by statute to a review committee after the finality of the verdict.
Also, the system of undertial custody too requires to be reviewed. Bail should not be made to be sought by an accused. Bail should be the rule and custody should be an exception. It should be the onus of the prosecutor to seek judicial custody as against the present system of axiomatic remand to judicial custody and then accused seeking bail, with dates for filing objection by the prosecution, adjournments, arguments and orders, which all unnecessarily take away the liberty of a person. Also, bail, once granted should be operative, till all appeals are exhausted or cancelled by the court for violation of bail conditions. Humiliating condition of signing at police station, periodically, should be dispensed with. Various other forms of ensuring the presence should be made acceptable. Also, if an accused authorises his counsel to represent him during trial with an undertaking that he would not raise any objection at a later date and seeks exemption from personal presence during trial, it should be allowed invariably.
Above all, the dignity of the individual should be upheld, even by the courts, as against the present indignity in all civil and criminal courts. The witnesses as well as the accused should be allowed to remain seated instead of the present humiliation of standing. Only at the time of "charging" and "sentencing" the accused may be directed by the court to "rise". The present indignity is not sanctioned by law but has come to stay by practice.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: