News & Events | Yahoo Answers

Benjamin Harris was a maverick in the early days of journalism. He was not alone but he definitely stood out from the crowd.

I would certainly have no problem with whole life sentences being available to courts to use against those who abuse children, or if fixed term sentences are used, for release to be withheld if they are felt to pose any threat to children. Best answer: There are a number of aspects here to be considered.

.

Many suggest these people can't be cured or rehabilitated, my worry about that line of thinking is that it suggests these people are not in control of what they do, and to some extent not responsible for their actions. If an abuser knows that he will get a mandatory life sentence, he might feel it in his interest to remove the only witness to his abuse, and we may see more children killed at the hands of...show more Best answer: There are a number of aspects here to be considered. A mandatory life sentence might, paradoxically, make children less safe. A mandatory life sentence might, paradoxically, make children less safe. I think sentencing has to reflect the fact that there are different degrees of offence - a seemingly consensual offence involving a 14 year old is very different to an offence involving a 5 year old. But I do agree, the worst offenders should never see freedom again.



But I'm not sure a mandatory life sentence would work. I think these people know what they're doing, understand it's wrong, and are in control of their actions and could choose / learn not to offend. I'd reject that argument. If an abuser knows that he will get a mandatory life sentence, he might feel it in his interest to remove the only witness to his abuse, and we may see more children killed at the hands of these monsters



http://goofyartist1091.sosblogs.com/The-first-blog-b1/9-11-anniversary-America-remembers-tragic-day-b1-p290.htm