He shouldn't have committed the crime in the first place. End of story. If he knew that bank robbing was a crime and he committed it anyway, he deserves whatever punishment was meted out to him. People could (or may) have been killed over his greed for money.
That being said, I have no problems with the notion of helping ex-cons try to turn their lives around, after they've paid their debt to society. I am a supporter of Delancey Street organization in SF, which helps ex-cons reintegrate with society by giving them jobs in the moving industry, cooking, selling Christmas trees, etc.
He "deserves whatever punishment was meted out to him"? What if the law dictated life in prison, or the death penalty, or for him to be drawn and quartered?
People, particularly young men in their early 20s, mess up. He certainly needed to be put in prison for years, but decades? The person someone is when they're 30 is wildly different from who they were when they were 20, biologically.
Even if his crime actually ended in someone being injured or killed.
We're not talking about Jean Valjean who stole a loaf of bread to feed his family. It's someone who committed a violent crime of robbing a bank because they wanted someone else's money, and they didn't want to earn it the slow, hard way. They knew what they were doing was wrong. They need to accept the consequences of their actions, including 18 years in jail. I'm sure the person in question has done this, and that's why I have problems with any efforts in rehabilitating him now that he has served his time.
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. It's as simple as that. If the punishment were death for robbing a bank were death, and you still went ahead and did it, whose fault is that? People need to take responsibility for their own actions. They didn't accidentally rob a bank, or they weren't somehow tricked into robbing a bank. They knowingly decided to do it. If the sentence was 18 years, then I'm satisfied that justice was served.
So, suppose the crime were downloading academic articles, and the punishment was to be up to 35 years in prison...
What you're arguing for is the inherent rightness of State violence. But the government can be wrong, and it often is wrong. If it's wrong, it's not moral to say, "Well, the government said it would do [wrong thing] to him, who am I to question it?" Instead, you question it and call it into doubt, not try to make a descriptive consequence into a prescriptive consequence.
Rarely are the minds of people who will go to this level as simple as greed. Often times it's to save a life that is falling apart, the stress of the situation leading you to make decisions that turn out to be bad. Is it selfish? Sometimes. Is it greed? Maybe to an extent. Is it simple? Never. In fact that's the only thing that is simple, that these things are always complicated.
What does Afghan insurgent mean in this context? Do you mean an Afghani citizen robbing a bank in the USA? Or an Afghan insurgent who also decides to rob an Afghan bank? Or an Afghan insurgent who robs a bank in the USA (presumably in an attempt to further the insurgency)?
It certainly would influence my hiring decision. Not a show stopper, but certainly a minor negative. Probably the damage done by lost opportunities for experience would be worse than having a record, though. That even functions as an excuse of sorts--I suspect I'd actually like someone who was in prison for five years and got a degree over someone who lived off a trust fund for five years and did nothing.
All depends on the person, though, and what exactly I'm hiring for. And someone coming out of prison after 20 years? The fact that they committed a crime is long past, but it's hard to overstate how damaging decades in prison is. People have a really hard time adjusting, and any hire of someone like that I did would be out of charity, not out of expecting to get any value out of the person. If they manage to do well, I'd take that as an unexpected plus.
> he deserves whatever punishment was meted out to him
Ok. So if we chopped off a hand from every thief, would have he deserved that? Or how about hanging? We used to hang horse thieves; if we hung bank robbers, would that be just?
It's true that he shouldn't have committed the crime in the first place. But we aren't just allowed to consider whether punishments fit crimes; as citizens, it's our duty. Our government is of, by, and for the people. It's entirely reasonable for eduardordm to question the length of the sentence.
I'm glad, and I hope he is able to reintegrate back into society easily. There are programs like the Delancey Street program in SF that help ex-cons reintegrate by providing them with jobs and support. And then he should try to go to school and further educate himself at night time. Hopefully he gets a break, but he needs to realize it's a tough road ahead, since many people without criminal records are still unemployed, and having a felony conviction will likely make it very hard for him. If he joins a religious organization, maybe he can get help through them as well.
Unfortunately, SF is infinitely more progressive than rural Indiana, so those types of programs will be harder to come by. But this suggestion will definitely go on the list.
OK, I have to ask though, did he use a gun or a threat of a gun? Or was this just one where he had a note that said put the money in a bag this is a robbery?
> People could (or may) have been killed over his greed for money.
Yes, but according to the OP, noone was injured. This is not Minority Report.
> That being said, I have no problems with the notion of helping ex-cons try to turn their lives around, after they've paid their debt to society
The thing is: he hasn't! We was locked up, so we could not pay for anything. The only thing that he lost was time, and society gained nothing - and incurred in even greater expenses.
If he was instead forced to pay his debt by working off, then we could say that the debt was repaid.
And, from his point of view, his debt will never be repaid, as he is now unemployable because of his police record.
I have never been convicted, arrested or even questioned by the police (US or otherwise), but the system horrifies me.
I'm taking a wild guess and claiming that you have no idea about spending about a quarter of your life time (that's if you're lucky) in prison. End of story. You cannot possibly understand what it means to be in prison for such a long time and not being free but as if you could you're claiming that he deserved what he got.
That being said, I have no problems with the notion of helping ex-cons try to turn their lives around, after they've paid their debt to society. I am a supporter of Delancey Street organization in SF, which helps ex-cons reintegrate with society by giving them jobs in the moving industry, cooking, selling Christmas trees, etc.