So I just discovered that I have been working next to the waste of oxygen that raped my best friend several years ago. I work in a manufacturing environment and I know that you can’t fire someone just for being a sex offender unless it directly interferes with work duties (in the US). But despite it being a primarily male workforce he does work with several women who have no idea what he is. He literally followed a woman home, broke into her house, and raped her. Him working here puts every female employee at risk. How is that not an unsafe working environment? How is it at even legal to employ him anywhere where he will have contact with women?
I’m sorry but your logic clearly doesn’t track here. If maximum sentences are proof that there is no rehabilitation then why wouldn’t that be true of drug dealers too?
I never said it was. You’re the one who brought up drug dealers anyway. I said maximum sentences aren’t a good way to do sentencing. The sentence should be “until you are rehabilitated”, regardless of your crime.
Okay that’s a bit more clear. The drug dealers thing was a comparison. Now we need to deal with the idea of the indefinite sentence. There’s a real danger that a regulatory agency could just keep increasing that bar until it’s a defacto life sentence. That’s why we have maximums.
I’d love to live in a country I trusted with that kind of power but I don’t. We constantly advise our justice system and the people trapped in it. So I have no confidence an indefinite sentence would result in a release or good faith treatment while incarcerated to work towards a release.
The current justice system already has issues with corruption. It’s just one more problem that needs to be solved in the overall revamp the system needs with how things are done. Just arbitrarily releasing people after a set amount of time is not how you fix that issue.
It absolutely is. Because that way the corruption can’t just turn everything into a life sentence in a sweat shop.