Progressives’ Next Target: Life Without Parole

by James A. Bacon

Progressives have all but won their battle to ban the death penalty in Virginia. Both houses of the General Assembly have voted to abolish Virginia’s death penalty, and Governor Northam is likely to sign the legislation. I’m OK with that. Our justice system is flawed. History has shown that too many innocent people have been condemned, and there is no walking back an execution if exculpatory evidence is found. But now the move is afoot to curtail life without parole.

The number of Virginia inmates serving life sentences now constitute 14% of Virginia’s prison population (and 15% of the nation’s). Since 2003, the number of such inmates has risen 66%.

Life-long imprisonment, progressives argue, does not add to public safety because the majority of violent offenders “age out” of criminal conduct as they get older.

Funny thing about that. Murder victims don’t “age out” of anything. They’re dead. But in the minds of progressives, murderers are, in their own way, victims, too. Victims of society.

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch,  4,239 Virginia inmates are serving life sentences with the possibility of parole; 1,628 are serving life without parole; and 1,326 are serving “virtual” life sentences of 50 years or more. The number of Virginia inmates serving life has increased 90% from 1970 to 2020.

Writes the Sentencing Project in a report on Virginia:

The dramatic expansion of the prison system over the past four decades has had a variety of disturbing effects, particularly on disadvantaged communities of color that have suffered the heaviest burden of these policies. People of color, particularly African Americans, are over‐represented at each stage of the Virginia criminal justice system. Though they are less than 20% of the general population, Blacks are arrested at nearly 3 times the rate of whites. African Americans are incarcerated at 6 times the rate of whites.

Here’s something else that’s happened over the past four decades. The crime rate soared for years. The number of murders has declined since its peak but still remains troublingly high. And guess what. The vast majority of crime victims are “people of color, particularly African Americans.”

According to the 2019 Crime in Virginia report, 253 African Americans were victims of murder or non-negligent manslaughter, compared to 153 whites. (Only two Asians were homicide victims that year.)

Sixteen victims (of all races) were under the age of 10. There’s no second chances for them.

As far as I’m concerned, a life sentence without the possibility of parole is a sign of leniency. Anyone guilty of first-degree murder deserves the death penalty but society in its mercy, mindful of the possibility of an unjust conviction, settles for locking him up and throwing away the key. I don’t care if aged killers are no longer a threat to society. I don’t care if killers are undeterred by the death penalty. I don’t care if it costs taxpayers money to maintain them in state facilities. There is one simple rule: If you commit first-degree murder, you forfeit your your freedom for the rest of your life.

There may be a handful of less-horrific criminal offenses where it may make sense to rethink the policy of life without parole. Fine. Let’s examine those on a case-by-case basis. But a sweeping abolition of mandatory minimum sentences, as the Sentencing Project seems to advocate, would be a moral abomination.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

24 responses to “Progressives’ Next Target: Life Without Parole”

  1. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    “If you murder someone, you forfeit your own right to your freedom for the rest of your life.” Well, but that is not the situation now. Juries and judges do not always recommend life without parole, especially not for a single first offense. I guess the problem with me is I’ve been hearing these arguments and seeing this pendulum swing for 40 years. It will swing back.

    Memory is tricky, but my recollection is that the “three strikes” sentencing rule was being pushed in the 80s by Democrat AG Mary Sue Terry and opposed by some of the Republicans in my caucus. The partisan positions can surprise….(Wait, we cannot mention Terry, because Amanda Chase is now convinced she is the first woman to run for Governor in VA…)

    1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      Does that go for 14-year old kids too?

      I doubt that Terry’s run will change Amanda’s claim.

  2. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    There are 8.5 million Virginians in 2020. In 1980 the population was 5.3 million. Seems to be a correlation. As population increases so does life without parole.

  3. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    “If you murder someone, you forfeit your own right to your freedom for the rest of your life.” Well, but that is not the situation now. Juries and judges do not always recommend life without parole, especially not for a single first offense. I guess the problem with me is I’ve been hearing these arguments and seeing this pendulum swing for 40 years. It will swing back.

    Memory is tricky, but my recollection is that the “three strikes” sentencing rule was being pushed in the 80s by Democrat AG Mary Sue Terry and opposed by some of the Republicans in my caucus. The partisan positions can surprise….(Wait, we cannot mention Terry, because Amanda Chase is now convinced she is the first woman to run for Governor in VA…)

    1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      Does that go for 14-year old kids too?

      I doubt that Terry’s run will change Amanda’s claim.

  4. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    There are 8.5 million Virginians in 2020. In 1980 the population was 5.3 million. Seems to be a correlation. As population increases so does life without parole.

  5. I am thoroughly against MANDATORY sentences, as opposed to non-mandatory life without parole. “Without parole” should be reserved for the very worst of the worst. “Mandatory” sentences do not allow for distinctions to be made between the bad and the really bad and dangerous. Mandatory sentences can yield really crappy results that do not fit the crime. A guy who sits in his basement and looks at child porn, then transmits the picture to a friend. Distinguished from the guy creating the child porn and transmitting it to a friend. With apologies to the crowd who considers any possession or sharing of child porn to be a continuing victimization of the child, these two are not the same, yet the law treats them the same for purposes of mandatory sentencing. In the industry, we call them both Iccky Grandpa, but there’s a difference in the two offenses. Mandatory sentencing removes any judgment that might be exercised to distinguish them. Sentencing guidelines at the federal level accomplish the same thing, only worse, because they inhibit the exercise of the right to a jury.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      Crazy, doesn’t the switch to judge sentencing in jury trials (as an option) negate part of your argument? And what I fear is a return to a situation where judges, because of different values, sentence similarly situated criminals in vastly different ways. Commit your crime in NoVA and you’ll get a significantly lighter sentence than if you commit the very same crime in rural Virginia.

  6. I am thoroughly against MANDATORY sentences, as opposed to non-mandatory life without parole. “Without parole” should be reserved for the very worst of the worst. “Mandatory” sentences do not allow for distinctions to be made between the bad and the really bad and dangerous. Mandatory sentences can yield really crappy results that do not fit the crime. A guy who sits in his basement and looks at child porn, then transmits the picture to a friend. Distinguished from the guy creating the child porn and transmitting it to a friend. With apologies to the crowd who considers any possession or sharing of child porn to be a continuing victimization of the child, these two are not the same, yet the law treats them the same for purposes of mandatory sentencing. In the industry, we call them both Iccky Grandpa, but there’s a difference in the two offenses. Mandatory sentencing removes any judgment that might be exercised to distinguish them. Sentencing guidelines at the federal level accomplish the same thing, only worse, because they inhibit the exercise of the right to a jury.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      Crazy, doesn’t the switch to judge sentencing in jury trials (as an option) negate part of your argument? And what I fear is a return to a situation where judges, because of different values, sentence similarly situated criminals in vastly different ways. Commit your crime in NoVA and you’ll get a significantly lighter sentence than if you commit the very same crime in rural Virginia.

  7. Looks like Jesse Mathews is soon to remove his name as a reason to maintain capital punishment.

  8. Looks like Jesse Mathews is soon to remove his name as a reason to maintain capital punishment.

  9. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    Eliminating life without parole and the death penalty signifies that Virginia, through its elected officials, believes that the life of a convicted murderer is more valuable than the life of the murder victim. The “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” principle that comes first the Code of Hammurabi and then from Hebrew Scriptures is a critical part of human civilization that indicates the life of the victim is equal to the life of the murderer.

    It walked away from the idea that not only should the guilty party pay for the life of the victim, but those connected to the guilty party should also pay. But it also made clear that the victim was important. Isn’t that what Black Lives Matter means?

    So now we are moving from an nascent attempt to make all lives important, including those whose race or ethnicity was valued less by society, to another world where convicted murderers are more important than those they murder. But then Biden thinks that illegal aliens are more important than immigrants who follow the rules.

  10. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    Eliminating life without parole and the death penalty signifies that Virginia, through its elected officials, believes that the life of a convicted murderer is more valuable than the life of the murder victim. The “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” principle that comes first the Code of Hammurabi and then from Hebrew Scriptures is a critical part of human civilization that indicates the life of the victim is equal to the life of the murderer.

    It walked away from the idea that not only should the guilty party pay for the life of the victim, but those connected to the guilty party should also pay. But it also made clear that the victim was important. Isn’t that what Black Lives Matter means?

    So now we are moving from an nascent attempt to make all lives important, including those whose race or ethnicity was valued less by society, to another world where convicted murderers are more important than those they murder. But then Biden thinks that illegal aliens are more important than immigrants who follow the rules.

  11. Baconator with extra cheese Avatar
    Baconator with extra cheese

    I could care less if the powers in charge decide to let violent offenders out. This is what Virginians voted for the Dems were open about that.
    Most violent crimes happen within the same neighborhoods and typically within the same groups as the perpetrators.
    If people want violent felons in their neighborhoods and less police more power to them.

  12. Baconator with extra cheese Avatar
    Baconator with extra cheese

    I could care less if the powers in charge decide to let violent offenders out. This is what Virginians voted for the Dems were open about that.
    Most violent crimes happen within the same neighborhoods and typically within the same groups as the perpetrators.
    If people want violent felons in their neighborhoods and less police more power to them.

  13. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    I agree entirely with CrazyJD.

    As for the specific topic of the post, three comments:
    1. Getting rid of life without parole is moot in Virginia because parole for all offenses has been abolished. A life sentence means a life sentence.
    2. As Steve indicated, this position goes beyond current Virginia law. Murders other than capital murder are classified as either first or second degree murders. First degree murder is a Class 2 felony, punishable by 20 years to life. Second degree murder is punishable by a sentence of 5-40 years. In summary, not all murderers get life sentences even under current Virginia law.
    3. Life sentences are “available” for offenses other than murder. Examples in Virginia would be: aggravated malicious wounding, rape, forcible sodomy, 2nd offense of distribution of a Schedule I or II drug; third conviction for distribution of marijuana. The data cited in the report referenced in the post included all life sentences, not just those for murder.

    1. Like I said in the post, it may be justifiable to go through the criminal code to see if certain mandatory life sentences are still justified. I would not oppose that. Let’s debate each one on their merits. The clear implication of the study, though, was that all life sentences should be abolished.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        But you also said that a murderer should get a life sentence, no exceptions. “If you murder someone, you forfeit your own right to your freedom for the rest of your life.” That position plainly goes beyond current Virginia law.

        1. Once again, you make a reasonable point. I’ll change my post to say that every first-degree>/i> murderer should serve the rest of his life in prison.

          1. Steve Haner Avatar
            Steve Haner

            This is why I tend to stay away from these….and the rest of you leave the SCC to me! S%$#t’s complicated….

          2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            If you think s%$#t’s complicated, Steve, you should try taxes.

  14. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    I agree entirely with CrazyJD.

    As for the specific topic of the post, three comments:
    1. Getting rid of life without parole is moot in Virginia because parole for all offenses has been abolished. A life sentence means a life sentence.
    2. As Steve indicated, this position goes beyond current Virginia law. Murders other than capital murder are classified as either first or second degree murders. First degree murder is a Class 2 felony, punishable by 20 years to life. Second degree murder is punishable by a sentence of 5-40 years. In summary, not all murderers get life sentences even under current Virginia law.
    3. Life sentences are “available” for offenses other than murder. Examples in Virginia would be: aggravated malicious wounding, rape, forcible sodomy, 2nd offense of distribution of a Schedule I or II drug; third conviction for distribution of marijuana. The data cited in the report referenced in the post included all life sentences, not just those for murder.

    1. Like I said in the post, it may be justifiable to go through the criminal code to see if certain mandatory life sentences are still justified. I would not oppose that. Let’s debate each one on their merits. The clear implication of the study, though, was that all life sentences should be abolished.

Leave a Reply