Truth in Sentencing Debate

627 Words3 Pages
Truth in sentencing debate Truth in sentencing act requires any person convicted of a crime to serve no less than 85 percent of the sentence imposed. This Act would also requires any person convicted of a violent crime to serve no less than 100 percent of sentence imposed by the court. It is important to examine the broad range of goals, objectives and ideologies that are tied to the truth in sentencing concept "" (2011). In recent years, truth in sentencing has gained much prominence at the federal level. This has been developed in a variety of ways, in part of efforts to abolish parole, to adopt certain kinds of determinate sentencing guidelines and to put into practice other sentencing reforms. "" (2011). I believe truth in sentencing is a deterrence of recidivism when using good time and work time credits. I believe every person deserves the opportunity to pay off their debt to society and prove that they will not be a repeat offender. Once a criminal has been convicted and has been sentenced to do their time, this is where they are able to show society and the criminal justice system that they have learned their lesson from their mistake. Knowing at sentencing that they will be able to get out a little bit earlier if they behave while incarcerated gives the criminal incentive to focus on negative behaviors and change their way of thinking. On the other hand, after sentencing, criminals are also aware that if they cannot behave while incarcerated they will be serving 100% of their sentence. This idea gives the criminal the option and information to avoid stronger consequences therefore deterrence. Parole is granted to convicts who are able to prove they can behave while incarcerated and they deserve another chance to prove that they can be a productive part of society, and hopefully live productive lives
Open Document