Hacker News Reader

Comment by SubuSS | Hacker News Reader

I can sympathize with how this will work out for non-career criminals.

How do you see this working out for repeat offenders? Seattle today has a mini-version of this FWIW: We have offenders who have 44+ counts of 'minor' arrests and a felony conviction on the street [1] getting involved in public shootings.

Overall I like the part where folks who have paid their dues get their life back through a measured re-introduction back into regular society (from jail). Even over here, we will need oversight from professionals who have insight into both the worlds who can help with the transition. I don't think commuting sentences by 90% is the answer.

[1] https://komonews.com/news/local/who-are-the-alleged-downtown...

View on HN

Perhaps it would be as simple as making punishment scale with the number or recurrences? Maybe not even linearly.

Not necessarily in a "received 4 counts of xyz" situation, but maybe increasing punishment nonlinearly in situations like "received a 4th count of xyz in the past 10 years". Chronologically/temporally separate incident #4 should carry more weight than #1, since the offender probably should've learned their lesson after #2.

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

The very notion of a "career criminal" is driven by the lack of a social safety net and inability to secure a job on release. I can imagine if you're homeless and targeted by the police it would be very easy to rack up 50 arrests in a year.

If it was possible for everyone to make a living wage the vast majority of "career criminals" would choose a less dangerous way to make a living.

somewhat echoing sibling (jsjsbdkj), 44 minor convictions tells me something else is going horribly wrong in that person's life, possibly from lifetime systemic injustices. without really understanding the person and their situation, we shouldn't pass judgment from selected tidbits in a news blurb.

we all make mistakes and break laws (often unknowingly) all the time. (harsh) punishment escalates the resentment cycle, pushing it to fester and metastasize, and is counterproductive to stable and harmonious societies. as such, you'll never completely segregate away injustice-fueled resentment, so the better strategy is to dissipate it away using compassion and care. much less than 1% of humans (and probably less than 0.001%) are truly irredeemable, requiring segregation from the rest of us. most petty crimes are of immediate, and often temporary, circumstance.

the crimes that need harsher punishment are those committed from positions of power that affect many people (like environmental disasters and corruption). by harsher, i mean take away all the money and status garnered from the crime and provide full restitution to victims (not lawyers), not longer prison terms.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com