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):
@9STPBP68mos8MO
Depending on their reason for the crime, and whether they have rehabilitated and imporved in prison, depends on the situation
@9KM39XY1yr1Y
Yes, however if their behaviour and views on the matter have not changed, the death penalty should be reinstated for these reasons
@9JQ8T5J1yr1Y
Yes, provided they are constantly observed & placed under restrictions to reduce the risk of recidivism.
@8GBYNJQ5yrs5Y
Yes, but only after psychological evaluation and rehabilitation.
@96D6BR23yrs3Y
@95YCPNM3yrs3Y
Depends on why they commited first degree murder
@95YCKNY3yrs3Y
i dont it depends on what they did and who they killed.
@94S2DZP3yrs3Y
if they have proof of why the crime happend then it should depend
@8ZM4JK53yrs3Y
They should be sent to death
@8Z3PR9Z3yrs3Y
Depends on the circumstances and reasoning
@8VN478G4yrs4Y
If found without a doubt. Death If a police officer killed. Death Mass murder. Death
@8TWMPTP4yrs4Y
@8KV93LF4yrs4Y
They should be in jail for the rest of their lives.
@989ZJ932yrs2Y
No unless they were guilty without a fraction of a dought.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
