• ayyy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I think it’s also important for you to understand the context that a non-violent woman is unlikely to serve more than a third of her initial sentence which is where these numbers come from.

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s a good thing, not a bad one. But my objection still stands. It’s a harsh sentence for a non violent crime. Which, if harsh sentences did any good, I wouldn’t object. But they don’t.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        How would you handle someone that intentionally starved thousands of children? It’s not like this was some broke starving person stealing a tampon, they had a stable, well paying executive job and made an intentional choice.

        • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hyperbole isn’t useful either.

          This was not literal starvation. Shitty, underhanded, and illegal, but not starvation. If you’re going to insist on exaggerating the issue, please don’t bother me.

          I’ll say it again, it doesn’t matter what the non violent crime is, you make the justice about fixing what they did. I’m not sure where in the thread I said it, but I suggested a decade of community service working in the very program stolen from, under heavy supervision.