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):
@9XCL7LD6mos6MO
I think there should always be hearings much later in case an individual was wrongfully accused, however I don't any rehabilitation measures should be allowed - it doesn't work; criminals should be properly punished.
@9TT673S7mos7MO
no, because if the person does it one time. they would still have it in them to do it a second time.
@9KFT4PS1yr1Y
It all depends on the context. Those who have defended themselves have been wrongfully convicted and when evidence comes up later all the court has to say is "Sorry". But those who committed the crime willingly should do their 25 years before thinking about parole.
@9G4WGRG2yrs2Y
It depends on why they did it. It could have been an acciedent or they were trying to protect themselves. If they get the right care and have been good then they can get parole but only under those cercumstances. (with proof)
@95CVJ66Conservative3yrs3Y
Yes, so that we can stop wasting taxpayers' money for their food.
@95CVC5D3yrs3Y
Yes, if they are mentally and psychologically okay to be outside. More rehabilitation should be provided to prisoners
@8YVXJD83yrs3Y
Depending on circumstance and whether or not it was self defence. I believe under some cases they do deserve a hearing especially because judges have different opinions but with violent cases i believe not.
@8YQGHTTNew Democratic3yrs3Y
Depends on what the motive was
@8TTK8C74yrs4Y
No, it is a life sentence for a reason, not a 15 year sentence. They should be in there for their life.
@8RLSYVY4yrs4Y
It depends on the reason the murder was committed
@9CDDXXJNew Democratic2yrs2Y
It should pertain to the specific case
@993S3N42yrs2Y
Did the person kill the other for fun, if so then no parole even after 15 years.If the person acted in self defense then yes.
@8R32NKW4yrs4Y
Yes, they should be allowed parole especially since they will probably learn in 15 years and also provide rehabilitation to help them not repeat there mistakes
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
