Consider this: Judge Brown gives Sam Smith a light sentence for a violent crime. Soon Sam Smith is out and brutally rapes and murders Sally Jones. Sally has paid the price for Judge Brown's mistake -- and Judge Brown gets off scot-free.
The reverse situation is too long of a sentence for a minor crime. While I agree in accountability for one's actions, let me explain the result:
Prisons in many portions of the nation are controlled by prison gangs. California is known to have some of the worst (so bad they have started moving some of them to other states just to break up the sophisticated organized gangs), but they exist to some extent most places.
Most of the populations are divided along racial lines, regardless of whether a particular individual is racist.
They are then further subdivided by prison gangs which act as organized crime, often times running the prisons.
They put hits out on individuals who violate ethics or interfere including guards and other prisoners, and provide support to each other.
Prison is full of violent predators, but the deterrent of the most violent form of retaliation (often times a stabbing) keeps many of thier predatory ambitions in check.
So they target members who are not aligned with one of the organized prison gangs, both for things like personal property gain, and to 'earn thier stripes' or show how tough they are challenging or victimizing them.
As a result the loner does not stand a chance. No matter how tough they are.
They either align themselves with one of the gangs, or thier stay will be very unpleasant. They will actually be even more likely to be involved in fights, decreasing thier good time, increasing thier chance of receiving new charges, and hurting thier chances for parole.
(So those who actually try to avoid the negative gang culture will appear much worse to a parole board than those who embrace it, because they will be fighting more and have more disciplinary action taken against them.)
So they have to be a part of those groups which defend eachother, and retaliate (yet another criminal offensive action) against those who victimize one of thier group.
What this means is someone that goes in needs to befriend and be ready to mutually defend criminals who have long ago committed themselves to a life of crime. Criminals that are proud of thier criminal accomplishments, use drugs on a regular basis, and promote and glamorize negative subcultures they believe in.
Ironically members of those violent organized groups will have fewer altercations overall, and so are more inclined to get out on parole. However they also need to get into violent altercations in defense of others of the group when necessary, even when it may have been a loudmouthed idiot of thier group which caused a problem which could have been avoided. They are also part of a group that commits stabbings and maybe even murders in an organized manner on occasion in retaliation.
Even the guards often work on a system of violent excessive (and illegal) retaliation because that is the only thing such violent predatory criminals listen to in order to deter future victimization of other guards.
This means the longer someone is in there, the more they are going to become like the 'friends' who surround them.
They may go in a "kid" who made a mistake but otherwise little different from many other kids, but will likely come out little different than the sum of the crowd in prison.
If they go into prison for many years in thier teens or 20s, and then spend many formative years in prison, in thier 30-40s they are people who have known nothing besides that lifestyle. They will be way behind in career opportunities, behind in experience in normal social relations, and used to socializing within a negative subculture, and otherwise be out of place in society.
Permanently branded on top of that, and it should come as no surprise they revert to criminal activity.
In fact if you took an innocent man wrongly put him in prison for 10-20 years, and compared them to a guilty person who made a mistake but is otherwise little different from many people you know, with the guilty one just on thier way to prison, the guilty one would probably be a better person.
That innocent man would have became more similar to the people surrounding them all those years, while the guilty one would likely not yet be that different from people you already know.
All those people released after many years when DNA evidence or something set them free proving thier innocence...Probably not who you would want as a neighbor. They may have been innocent, but have most likely become little different than all those they lived with for many years.
Prison manufactures career criminals, so the longer the sentence you give, the more you insure they remain criminals for the rest of thier life.
What is the solution? I didn't say I had a solution. People need to be held accountable for thier actions and receive just punishment. I am merely pointing out long sentences actually have an impact you may have overlooked.
Longer sentences actually lead to even higher rates of repeat offenders and more sophisticated (they all teach eachother in prison what worked and what didn't work) and dangerous criminals when they get out.
Yet there is also accountability for one's actions, and punishment for wrongdoing. So what may be the most effective strategy at reducing recidivism may not be enough punishment for the crime committed. Someone who is a victim of a serious violent crime does not care if the person who victimized them becomes the best citizen in the world shortly afterwards and received minimal punishment. Justice is not served.
There is a more to consider than merely the statistical results of different courses of action.
That is an entirely different topic.
The main issue is not the criminals themselves, but the result of giving the government the power to brand anyone unsuitable for rights for life by charging them with a crime. A crime that may not even be serious enough to result in almost any time behind bars when normally prosecuted. If you cannot see the ease with which that can be exploited to remove or reduce the prevalence of rights the government is not fond of, I don't know what to tell you. I am sure the Brady Campaign would be very happy if most people in the nation were a felon for something minor, and they are not the only ones.
