life prisoners and medical advances that prolong life

[Antonio the Sixth]

The maximum prison sentence should be 20 years unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the person being released would represent an imminent danger on the community (and even then, such an inmate should probably be institutionalized rather than jailed).

[Antonio the Sixth]

The maximum prison sentence should be 20 years unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the person being released would represent an imminent danger on the community (and even then, such an inmate should probably be institutionalized rather than jailed).

"Beyond reasonable doubt" implies a high enough standard for proof that we would release large numbers of people who we know are probably dangerous.

It is possible to keep an eye on former inmates who might or might not be dangerous through means less invasive than prison. This should be enough of a deterrent in most of the cases.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The maximum prison sentence should be 20 years unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the person being released would represent an imminent danger on the community (and even then, such an inmate should probably be institutionalized rather than jailed).

"Beyond reasonable doubt" implies a high enough standard for proof that we would release large numbers of people who we know are probably dangerous.

It is possible to keep an eye on former inmates who might or might not be dangerous through means less invasive than prison. This should be enough of a deterrent in most of the cases.

So you support exporting the power of the prison into ordinary life?

...I really don't think that's the right way to look at it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

But what do you do with the truly impulsive or those with a pathological and nearly irresistible desire to inflict physical harm on others?  Things like electronic monitoring can only help after the fact, but would do nothing to help the public in situations like these.

As I said, these people don't even belong in prison in the first place, but rather in a mental institution where their condition can be treated.

[Antonio the Sixth]

But what do you do with the truly impulsive or those with a pathological and nearly irresistible desire to inflict physical harm on others?  Things like electronic monitoring can only help after the fact, but would do nothing to help the public in situations like these.

As I said, these people don't even belong in prison in the first place, but rather in a mental institution where their condition can be treated.

This is where we disagree. I think that because of human nature being depraved, someone without a mental illness can give themselves up so completely to evil that there is no turning back.  I think punishment is more appropriate for them than a fruitless attempt at treatment.

I'm not the one to make that argument, but to use total depravity as a rationale to refuse extending mercy and forgiveness seems pretty antithetical to what I know of Christian teaching.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I don't think your distinction between "interactions between individuals" and social sanction makes much sense, honestly. Society is made up of individuals, and the interactions between these individuals is what creates social norms and customs. Criminal sanctions are only a subcategory of that. It really doesn't make sense to tell people to be merciful to each other in one-on-one interactions but at the same time draw up draconian laws that don't leave any room for forgiveness.

As for your second point, you began this discussion talking about people "with a pathological and nearly irresistible desire to inflict physical harm on others". It sounds like you're talking about something else now. Again, pathological sadism can and should be treated (even if of course that doesn't mean it can always be "cured"). If you're talking about the garden variety of rational, mentally sound evildoers, then yes, I do believe that at some point all of them deserve a second chance.