LONG SENTENCES FOR NON-VIOLENT CRIMES VERY COSTLY

     NYT - An editorial in the New York Times raises the question of the costs of long confinement of non-violent prisoners whose early releases would have little risk to public safety and would save $billions of dollars in the long run.  Ask someone who has been fleeced of life-time savings, whose children have been deprived of a good education, whose life styles have been severely altered by "non-violence"  crimes. Their "penalty" is a changed life style.  Madoff's ponzi caused at least two suicides, and who knows the effects of many other "non-violent" crimes.  Today's sentences may be questioned, but isn't living a degraded innocent life destroyed by a crime worse then incarceration for life?  The non-violent crimes are committed by those who should know the consequences, whereas many victims of such crimes unknowingly are at risk. Who should deserve the long penalty?  Certainly not the innocent. A crime deserves a punishment but when is enough? - when is too much?  Tough questions.