"Sometimes prison sentences -- even the most severe -- are a rational response to crime. But often, sentences are the product of a political process in which politicians are scared of appearing soft on crime so they do not even question the reasonableness of a proposed criminal law. It is the norm, not the exception, for politicians to reflexively push for harsher sentences without considering empirical evidence about what level of sanction is necessary for deterrence or what impact a sentence will have on communities. It is an environment long on rhetoric and short on reflection."
The author expresses that the Eighth amendment needs have a clearer standard on cruel and unusual punishment. She feels that many of the serve sentence are allowed or acceptable because politicians don’t want to seems soft on crime . The author also notes that it is regular for prosecutors to ask for harsher sentences without concrete evidence to convict and without considering how it will affect the communities because it better the winning record and reputation too.
I feel that there should be a higher standards for the amount of concrete evidence needed to convicted someone and send them to prison for a lifetime or over 20 years. Reason being that this person if wrongly convicted will miss of on changes in society, their family growing up, their liberty and the ability experiencing the world. For instance; an Ohio man convicted of murder was released after 39 years wrongful imprisonment on November 13, 2014 which is the lifespan of some. The world seems strange to him because so much has changed such as ; the way people talk, dress, live and people that he know maybe died or have forgotten him. No amount of money can replace or erase the lost time and freedom that was taken from a person.
