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):
@9FNQFNW2yrs2Y
It depends how they act in prison and they would need regular check ups with social services.
@8YCH5XM3yrs3Y
No, they should be given a life sentence unless the reason of the murder was for their own safety.
@8VTBKRX4yrs4Y
Provide rehabilitation programs to prepare them for re-entry to function well in society and only after strict psychological evaluation shows they are able to function well and not a threat to society.
@8VH9R5VNew Democratic4yrs4Y
Depending on the muder, if it was a accident then yes, if it wasn't then for life.
@8T9FLTG4yrs4Y
yes after going to therapy and it is their first offence of that scale
@8RLLTHJ4yrs4Y
yes, however we should bring back the death penalty
@99HF3Y92yrs2Y
I think everybody deserves a second chance but I just don't how long yet
@99F2Y982yrs2Y
Yes but with really good behavier
@8FRH4LD5yrs5Y
If it was in self defence than yes. People who deliberately murder should NOT get parole
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
