Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

Long imprisonments won't bring anyone back.

Neither will a short imprisonment if you don’t want to go to jail don’t break the law. Plus, long sentences may act as deterrent for the next loser who makes a choice to drink and drive.

Long sentences clearly don’t deter crime, otherwise we’d have empty jails.

Long sentences keep dangerous people away from the rest of us. If all it does is keep selfish idiots off the road and away from innocent people I’m cool with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

Long imprisonments won't bring anyone back.

Neither will a short imprisonment if you don’t want to go to jail don’t break the law. Plus, long sentences may act as deterrent for the next loser who makes a choice to drink and drive.

Long sentences clearly don’t deter crime, otherwise we’d have empty jails.

This is so hypocritical. We have people being robbed, car jacked and shot at, and they don't even get arrested. I'd argue that when you steal someone's car (particularly when they're still in it), you're threatening their life. But I'm sure that kid didn't mean to run him over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

Long imprisonments won't bring anyone back.

No prison sentence ever brings a dead victim back. But if you kill someone you need to accept appropriate consequences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

Long imprisonments won't bring anyone back.

Neither will a short imprisonment if you don’t want to go to jail don’t break the law. Plus, long sentences may act as deterrent for the next loser who makes a choice to drink and drive.

Anonymous wrote:I suspect DUI is a historically rich white guy crime, or many of them are, so they have to deflate the punishment and “importance” of the crime to fit. I mean, all these poor men who just had an extra small drink at the country club!

OP here and I suspect you’re right this has a lot to do with it. This is a “relatable” crime that the politicians making the sentencing guidelines could see themselves or their frat boy college kid getting caught up in. And then on the other hand you also have the restorative justice people who think anything longer than a 2 year prison sentence is unfair treatment.

I’ve read that there are now interlock devices with facial recognition software. I wish this would be installed on all cars going forward or at least for everyone with a past DUI. Second DUI should equal a lengthy sentence just for the sake of getting them off the road as a hazard. Habitual DUI offenders don’t seem to stop even with multiple arrests and there’s too many sleazy lawyers out there who make it their bread and butter to get these things pleaded down.

Anonymous wrote:I support these levels of sentences. They did not mean to kill anyone. There is not a need to lock them up for decades like murderers.

You mean the technical definition of murderer? Because they absolutely are a murderer and deserve to rot jail. The. AST majority of people are perfectly capable of drinking and not driving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

Long imprisonments won't bring anyone back.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Well the victim’s “sentence” was losing her entire life. Her family will live with this pain way beyond 3.5 years. It’s absurd how we treat people who choose to drink and drive with such kid gloves. Why should they get to go on and live out the rest of their lives as if nothing happened?

I suspect DUI is a historically rich white guy crime, or many of them are, so they have to deflate the punishment and “importance” of the crime to fit. I mean, all these poor men who just had an extra small drink at the country club!

I have a sibling with multiple DUIs. The system is an absolute joke.

They get a slap on the wrist for their first and even second DUIs.

The fact that there's no law that makes them have an interlock device on their car for the rest of their lives is ridiculous to me.

I agree, OP, and thank you for posting. You drive drunk, you don’t get to drive anymore. You kill someone due to your choices, a large chunk of your life is spent in prison. You sexually abuse your kids, you don’t get to see them again. You have a mentally compromised kid and a gun at home, you are responsible. It’s about morality and justice, but also there IS a powerful deterrent effect for the general population (as opposed to habitually criminal) and that needs to be maximized.

There are a bunch of armchair reformers who conflate this issue with larger-scale prison reform and mandatory minimums for minor drug offenses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly I think our sentences are WAY too long in the US. They used to be 2 years for most crimes and now we have people locked away for 25+ years.

Good. Some people shouldn't be reintegrated into society.

Well if that were the solution then we would have the lowest crime in the developed world with our rate of imprisonment. Data tells a different story.

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s right and fair. Sentences in the US are far too long. For someone lacking the intent to take a life, we should have short sentences. We should also have more 10-20 year sentences for intentional murders.

+1000

We are so hateful and cruel in this country. It's sick.

I strongly believe that all cars should be equipped with Interlock. I agree that most drunk driving isn't an "intentional" crime in that you have a desire to hurt someone. So universal interlock would be a win-win. Save people both the grief of losing someone and the guilt of being responsible.