Crime and Punishment

Quick Death Penalty

In cases where there is no doubt of the guilty party, the death penalty should be carried out within a week of a qualifying heinous crime. The qualification for this would be a very high level of evidence and proof.

Five highly experienced judges will be called in with short notice to ensure that the evidence is ‘overwhelming’ and no exculpatory evidence is possible. This would be clear video, a perpetrator caught in the act with many witnesses or other overwhelming evidence. This would be far above the reasonable doubt standard. On day six, a one-day trial will be conducted and all five judges must rule that this high bar of evidence is met. Those cases not meeting this high bar should go through
with trial as usual, however, death penalty cases should have higher levels of
evidence then life in prison cases.

It is very pro-life to execute capital punishment on first degree murders.

I have a fundamental belief that jail should be reserved only for those that commit violent crimes. People that commit assault and battery to a certain degree need to be removed from threatening and harming others. Non-violent crimes need to be punished in many other ways outside of prison. The free enterprise system can and should be involved.

The overwhelming goal is rehabilitation. Too often prisoners come out of prison more violent than when they went in. Prison should be very unpleasant, however, very safe. I would like to see private (publicly traded corporations) rehabilitation prisons that are compensated based on long term results of prisoners. People would buy stocks in these corporations knowing their dividends and long term stock price will be higher with better long term results of prisoners.

Many different models would be tried and those with poor results would fade away. Too often prisoners are released without a place to live or a job. Their criminal past hampers HONEST employment and these ex-cons are NOT on the best path, leading to the same problems that landed them in prison. These corporations’ incentives on long term results would lower crime rates and empower people to a productive, honest life.

The state cannot add on to a sentence once given, however, I am in favor of a new law that would require secure GPS be worn by certain ex-cons as part of their sentence. This could also be a condition of early release or parole for certain people. Ex-cons commit a high percentage of crimes, and knowing that the authorities ALWAYS know where they are will act as a deterrent. This is only for those most likely to re-offend.

When a crime is committed, this GPS data would be great evidence to start an investigation. This will also help prevent collusion among ex-cons. Similar ideas about monitoring the internet and mail of certain ex-cons could be a deterrent. Having private groups that are rewarded for better results would incentivize best practices. Government’s monopoly control is very limited on trying out new ideas and knowing the counterfactuals.

Those who have shown violence need to be locked up; however, those who are nonviolent should be punished by monetary means, half-way houses, ankle monitors, and other more strategic approaches that come out of the experiments of those private rehabilitation corporations that are striving to achieve higher ratings of low recidivism.

These corporations would endeavor to teach convicts under their control a trade, and can offset expenses by creating products and doing services. The goal is to punish a convict if someone violated someone’s rights; however, the goal is also to integrate them back into society. Our current system is not dynamic enough, and new rehabilitation corporations competing with innovative ideas and with the right incentives would result in superior outcomes.