I'm definitely in favor of rehabilitation. I think prisons should be operated for the purpose of reforming prisoners, wherever possible, and returning them to society once they are rehabilitated. I support parole (which has been abolished in Wisconsin, and not by liberals) and humane conditions in prison (instead of mediaeval abominations like Supermax, which was not a liberal idea). I hope the drunk driver, Sheila Burr, has access in prison to programs that will help her deal with addiction to alcohol (we liberals tend to like stuff like that, even though they cost taxpayers money). But overcoming alcoholism is very hard, and I would prefer not to have her on the streets until she has made sufficient progress. She already had one drunk driving conviction on her record, in 2002, when she ran over those bicyclists.
But this is beside the point. I support rehabilitation and shorter sentences in general, but I object to focusing on the sentence in this particular crime. Americans have a custom of showing severe approval for seriously unacceptable behavior by sending the perpetrators to prison for long terms. I went to Google News again today, and found: --- a sentence of 11 years for bank fraud, misapplication of bank funds, money laundering, perjury, etc., leading to the collapse of a bank in Blanchardville (http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/273495) --- a sentence of 15 years for armed robbery of a convenience store in Plover (http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080219/WDH0101/802190497/1981) Granted, these are crimes against property, which must be protected at all costs. But getting *exremely* drunk and killing a bicyclist is not exactly a peccadilo. If this driver got a slap on the wrist while others, who didn't kill anybody, went to the slammer for long terms, what would that say about the value of bicyclists' lives in our society? _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
