In 2010 the Conservative government introduced a crime bill which would kill the so-called faint hope clause that allows some people serving life sentences to apply for parole after 15 years (instead of the usual 25 common for first-degree murder and other life sentence convictions). Opponents of the crime bill argue that extended prison sentences are cruel and will cost the government tens of millions of dollars per year.Proponents argue that 15 years is too short of a prison term for people serving life sentences.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Electoral District (2011):
@57LPWS94yrs4Y
no, life is life. Bring back public trials and corporal punishment and watch the crime rate drop!
@96FCYNK3yrs3Y
MURDER IS UNACCEPTABLE but cool
@96FC9LZ3yrs3Y
yes, if it was self defense
@8VZCYB64yrs4Y
It Depends on how the victim was murdered.
@8VYCMCY4yrs4Y
No, instead wait longer and then do it.
@8VYBCSX4yrs4Y
If they killed alot of people are aren't good in prison then no, If it was a minor crime that got them a life sentence then yes
@8TXF8JKConservative4yrs4Y
Case by case basis after thorough professional examinations and tests to determine danger
@996MBWHConservative2yrs2Y
First 5 years than in the next 10 years if still in jail, do another hearing
@8NW2YKB4yrs4Y
They should but the likelihood they get approved for parole should be extremely low.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.