Parole

There is a show about Parole Board interviews. Before watching this show, I believed that someone should serve their entire sentences that they were given. If given 20 years, they should serve 20 yrs.

After watching this show, I gained a greater appreciation for parole. Once a person serves his time, the state no longer has any right to track him or control him in any way. however, a parolee has almost not rights. Their residence and property can be searched without warrants, associating with other felons or partaking of criminal activity violates parole and sends them back to prison. There is a lot more pressure on a parolee to stay on the straight and narrow, than on a released con who served a full sentence.

What is your take on parole vs serving a full sentence?

And it's really nothing new. When Clyde Barrow's sister-in-law Blanche Caldwell wrote her story My Life with Bonnie and Clyde, she went to prison in the 30s and when she got out on parole she was hassled every single time she moved to a new place or did anything. Even I think 10 years later, 20 years later, and her friends were outraged that she still had to be harassed like that after all that time. I don't think she ever got off parole.

I understand when you're not out of the woods yet there's going to be a lot of pressure to make sure you don't blow it but what is the point of getting out early for good behavior when it obviously doesn't mean anything in the real world?

There is greater risk on the parolee because he/she can flee, something that an incarcerated person can't. So, I'd say that it isn't much to ask for their freedom. But are they truly free, you may ask. If they're on the straight then, yes. They simply aren't free to err.

If you're eligible, then you're eligible. I think people can be rehabilitated in a shorter time than they were sentenced to.

The offender is still considered under sentence when they're paroled. You're released back into the community to serve the rest of your sentence. That's why they still have to follow certain rules. If they serve the full term of their sentence in prison, it's over.

right... but do you think that it is perhaps more beneficial to parole someone and allow them to live with the rules as part of adjusting to society again... or make them serve full terms with no one over seeing their adjustment period?

I have no problem if violent people serve their full sentence. I think Richard Allen Davis was out on parole when he kidnapped and murdered Polly Klass. He's one of those that I think are too evil to live.

There are some who serve their time or are released on parole, learn their lesson & become responsible citizens. Then there are those who should be locked up forever to just spare the public from their bullshit because they will never get it.

And I agree about Davis.

Parole for non-violent offenders must be cost the state much, much less.

I have to say that from what I have seen parole lenghth is too short. And I base this on my son's paternal uncle. After 18 months on parole, he was back to drinking like a fish and being a shit ass dad.