No, everyone that will be eligible for parole regardless of how long their sentence is.
Just as he usurped the appeals court request that the trial court resentence Peters, pre-emptively usurp the parole board’s decisions on who should or should not be paroled.
What are you talking about? The Governor has total authority to Pardon or Commute. He didnt “usurp” anyone’s authority.
Yeah, if the rule is “just let them out today if they’re going to get out eventually anyway” logic had any credence to it whatsoever, then anyone who isn’t in prison for life should just be released today.
This logic shows a gross misunderstanding of what a prison even is.
A place where too many people are? He seems to understand that.
So now your argument is that it’s an effort to depopulate the prisons? You are bouncing around all over the place here.
Per your link, he gave great consideration to who he grants clemency to, and your suggestion that it’s because there are “too many people” seems just plain wrong.
Your arguments here aren’t making his decision seem any better; they just make it seem worse.
No, I am defending Polis as a liberal.
Polis says he did it because Trump was going to withold Fed money. The money that is ours.
I’ll take shitty roads and would like to keep prisoners in, well, you know, prisons.
Peters spent 20 months in prison. If not for Polis, it probably would have been more like 21.
I guess the link above is the sort that goes to convince me I am right about the futility of making, or attempting to make, lawbreaking Trumpers into long term prisoners – and will go to convince most others here the opposite.
Does anyone seriously think that her risk of recidivism would have declined with a longer sentence (but not the draconian nine years, which was properly struck down)?
If not, what would be the purpose of keeping her in longer? Punishment for punishment’s sake?
You keep on missing the point. Everything you keep arguing makes it worse for him, not better. If she would have gotten basically the same outcome anyways, that’s all the more reason he should not have acted.
He could have stood up to Trump. He could have held out just a little longer until she was freed with no action on his part. That would accomplish his stated goals.
But he didn’t. He clearly did this to appease Trump. Which, I know, you support (based on previous discussion about appeasing). But you also know the rest of us don’t. And he knows that too, which is why he won’t say that’s what happened.
You’re not going to convince us that appeasing was the right move. The only way to defend Polis to most of us is to convince us he didn’t do this to appease Trump.
She collaborated with traitors. We used to know how to deal with treason.
So your contention is that if criminals are just going to commit a crime again when they get out, you may as well just let them out now? Prison sentences in the US tend to be overly punitive, but even I call the line at time off for future bad behavior.
That’s what most of the US prison system is about.
Penal incarceration, as in, state-mandated confinement and separation from the outside world against your will, is punishment.
Punishment is baked into the Penal System starting with the very word we use to describe it.
Do any jurisdictions in the US actually use that term officially, though? I thought it had been supplanted by “corrections”, which implies that the purpose of incarceration is remedial rather than punitive.
It’s just another example of the euphemism treadmill. One day we’ll decide corrections has negative connotations and start using another word. But @Crown_Prince_of_Irony has it right, incarceration in and of itself is a form of punishment. We can be hopeful about rehabilitation, but punishment is part and parcel of the criminal justice system.