Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think the American penal system is to harsh.

34 replies

borderslass · 09/01/2011 22:46

sisters released if one donates kidney

Jamie and Gladys Scott were locked up in 1993 for their part in an armed ambush that netted them just £7 in Mississippi.

OP posts:

reratio · 09/01/2011 22:48

I don't know if you go round threatening people with guns then I think there does need to be quite severe consequences

charliesmommy · 09/01/2011 22:49

the fact that they only got £7 is irrelevant, they were armed.. pity we dont have such lengthy sentences here..

frgr · 09/01/2011 22:54

they took part in an armed robbery?

no sympathy in this case, and yes i have read the link.

what, in your opinion, OP, would be considered a "fair" punishment for these people?

i genuinely believe that in the UK they'd have got a few years. i'm tempted to write that the American penal system is fairer. what if your mum, or dad, or sister, or son had been killed by them during their robbery? fuck them, they deserve to rot.

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 22:55

life though, for a robbery where no-one was hurt?

LookToWindward · 09/01/2011 22:56

Per head of population the US locks up more of its people than any other country in the world.

It doesn't seem to be working very well...

frgr · 09/01/2011 22:58

Buzz, my moral compass isn't of the utilitarianism stream

Intention matters, IMHO. Not outcome.

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 22:58

yeah but LIFE? Really? What do you save for the serial killers then?

frgr · 09/01/2011 22:59

Capital punishment.

charliesmommy · 09/01/2011 23:01

Buzz, they went armed, I doubt the people they threatened that day have ever recovered from the fear.. they made the choice to commit the crime... tough shit if they get life really...

frgr · 09/01/2011 23:05

Buzz, i should probably have added to my post - i used to consider myself to the left, politically. but having been the victim of a crime (i don't want to go into details here) earlier this year, i genuinely believe that society cannot recover from some of the evils that people commit in this world. i don't know whether you are for or against capital punishment, but I do know (from my own direct, recent experience) that the justice system in this country is an absolute joke.

I'm rapidly, this year, beginning to realise why people become so desperate they resort to vigilante action. I wouldn't endorse it, but I can understand it.

Seriously, those two women can rot in hell for all I'd care.

huddspur · 09/01/2011 23:25

American justice is renowned for being highly punitive.

WhenPaperclipsAttack · 09/01/2011 23:39

From the crime rate in the US I'm not sure that their sentencing system is terribly effective.

If you're going to get life for carrying a gun during a robbery and someone resists or the police show up then you might as well start shooting - the sentence you get is likely to be the same (unless you're in a state with the death penalty, in which case you're likely to spend 20 years on death row before they get round to doing anything).

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 23:41

Oh I understand Kantian ethics and I can certainly understand the appeal to someone in your situation frgr, but I can't personally agree, if even for the rate of mis-conviction. The thought of innocent individuals being murdered by the state is just too abhorrent to me.

tinkertitonk · 09/01/2011 23:56

Wikipedia reveals that about 50 prisoners in the UK have been given whole life tariffs (i.e., sentenced to die in gaol), while in the US there are about 40,000. (I found it amazingly hard to get precise data, sorry.) The populations of the two countries are 60 million vs. 300 so either the OP is unreasonable or the UK is too lenient.

tinkertitonk · 09/01/2011 23:57

Oops, 300 million. Duh.

DioneTheDiabolist · 10/01/2011 00:02

Whoa. In my opinion a whole life sentence for this crime at this time in life is wholly inappropriate. This is just nasty.

The US system is much more punative than ours and does not act as a deterrant given the crime rates.

musicmadness · 10/01/2011 00:08

I don't really like the fact that armed robbery where no one was hurt and serial murder gets the same punishment disregarding capital punishment (I think capital punishment is just state sanctioned murder and truly abhorrent - whether or not the person is guilty) but on the other hand I think the UK is far to lenient with some sentences. I do think some crimes should be life imprisonment without parol but not where no one was physically hurt.
Dunno, I guess I think a mixure of parts of the UK and the US system would be best.

charliesmommy · 10/01/2011 01:08

I would disagree. They had a gun, and could very easily have used it. It was premeditated so they have no defence at all.

They knew what the punishment would be when they set out. Luckily they were caught, otherwise they would probably have gone on to do it again.

In the UK, our punishment system is so lenient that people rarely fear getting caught the first time now.

MadamDeathstare · 10/01/2011 01:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

allnightlong · 10/01/2011 01:44

As a victim of gun crime I actually feel that in this case the sentence was excessive.

My attacker spent 8 years in prision which I feel was fair.
8 years is fairly significant and life changing (he also has a small child so missed out on his life too which I know was fairly devastating to the family) and has life long pain within him like his crime has in me.

That said I would be very supportive of a harsher justice system just not this type where prisoners could end up being blackmailed in using their bodies for medical purposes.

PlentyOfParsnips · 10/01/2011 05:48

'From the crime rate in the US I'm not sure that their sentencing system is terribly effective.'

As a business, it's very effective ...

"The private contracting of prisoners for work fosters incentives to lock people up. Prisons depend on this income. Corporate stockholders who make money off prisoners' work lobby for longer sentences, in order to expand their workforce. The system feeds itself," says a study by the Progressive Labor Party

from The prison industry in the United States: big business or a new form of slavery?

TyraG · 10/01/2011 06:45

I'm American and I will openly admit that our justice/penal system is greatly flawed.

But then to be fair I don't think anyone has it down to a science where there are no repeat offenders.

Wow POP so you really believe that in the US we just go rounding people up to shove into prisons? Are you fucking kidding me? The prisons are overpopulated as it is, perhaps if you spent some time there (the US not prison) to see how things are done (they're not perfect, I've already stated that) you'd have a better view of things.

belgo · 10/01/2011 06:58

I'm more concerned about only being realised if one of them donates a kidney; they are either a danger to society, or not a danger. The kidney should have nothing to do with it.v354070

PlentyOfParsnips · 10/01/2011 08:00

Just reporting what I've read, TyraG. Are you saying the figures in that article are false?

I believe it's a bad idea to mix profit-making with the penal system.

xstitch · 10/01/2011 08:12

I agree with belgo.

Flip

1 2