What do you think of these sentences?

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Raoul-Moat-Gunmans-Accomplice-Karl-Ness-Jailed-For-40-Years/Article/201103315952702?f=rss
 
In the context of other sentences handed out for similar (and worse) crimes in the uk, do these sentences not seem a little harsh?
 
Plus, in light of such lengthy sentences being handed out with this case, can we look forward to longer sentences in general, keeping the general public safe from such menaces?
 
Osagi

Seriously back to front based on other crimes but logical on what i'd want, if that makes sense?

Dav

Agree with Papa, very high compared to what is/has currently being handed out but imo this is where sentencing should be. We've almost been "reprogrammed" to beleive that 10-15 years (which is commonly handed out for murder once taking parole into consideration) is a long time, so everything else is taken into context in this way.
 
Take a life then you serve life etc... so in this context these sentences are ok, hope that this is a sign of things to come.

I agree, 100%, longer sentences are required (and bollocks to the released early for good behavior rule) however we know that to not be the case when it comes to sentencing in the UK.
 
So why this exception I wonder?
 
Osagi

Bizarre, no doubt in a month or two we will see a rapist get a year or two, and maybe a person guilty of defrauding the government get a lengthy sentence.

I'm not anti harsh sentencing, far from it. This is just showing how entirely inconsistent the UK system is.

SecondRow

why do people get released early for good behaviour anyway? 'Well yeah, he raped 3 children a while back, but he hasn't raped or stabbed anyone since he's been here, can't we just give him a break?' I don't get rewards for not killing people in a set period of time, why should people who are convicted of crimes?

They should just call it what it really is - early release because we can't afford the £80,000 a year to keep you in jail.

and it would cost a lot more than that if people had no incentive to behave, and nothing to lose if they didnt

if you want to double jail sentences, and cancel time off for good behaviour, are you prepared to pay the taxes necessary to fund that (which could be considerable)? and have you factored in the probability of criminals becoming significantly more violent as they are more desperate not to get caught when facing much longer sentences (since the '3 strike' rule came in in the USA they have seen a significant increase in the number of incidents where witnesses/victims are shot to prevent any chance of them being able to later identify the perpetrator or assist the police)?

SecondRow

I don't see your point. Why not just sentence the guy to 10 years, and then let him out after 10 years, rather than sentence him to 20 knowing that in all likelihood you're going to let him out after 10, providing that he doesn't commit further serious crimes whilst in prison? 

The incentive to behave should be, you will be here longer if you don't, not you will be here less time if you do.

I'm no expert but I think we currently do a bit of both mate

Time off for good behaviour is an incentive for prisoners to behave and comply etc

But if that fails and they do commit crimes inside they also get time added on. Think about someone like Charles Bronson who's spent most of his life in prison because of things he'd done inside

drab4

Think about someone like Charles Bronson who's spent most of his life in prison because of things he'd done inside

To be fair, he also killed an awful lot of people in Death Wish 1-5.
 
Osagi

skewed 'justice'.

I think the sentencing and time off for good behaviour is pretty perverse, how about if you are good you'll only do your alloted time as there's no ordinary or middle ground is there its either good or bad and if you're bad then the time is added on.

SecondRow



The incentive to behave should be, you will be here longer if you don't, not you will be here less time if you do.

i could be wrong, but isn`t that system aleady in place?
take that thug who calls himself charles bronson.
wasn`t he supposed to have completed his sentence about fifteen years ago,
but the authorities hold onto him because he is being a naughty boy.