In many nations, there is a debate about the effectiveness of using longer prison sentences to tackle crime. In my opinion, giving longer prison sentences to criminals is advantageous as crime would be punished more severely; however, it may be violative from an ethical perspective.
Longer prison sentences for miscreants is a step toward assuring justice to a greater extent. Criminals may commit any type of crime imaginable, and there are instances where the justice system has let them off the hook with a flick on the wrist by providing reasons and eventual judgments that consider external factors or conditions, such as health, wealth, race, etc. For example, there has been massive criticism regarding the Diddy case that was concerning sexual misconduct taking place at the white parties and freak-offs, as the judges shortened Sean Combs’ jail term from 10 years to only 4 years and 2 months, and many analysts highlighted that this may have been made possible as he is a hip-hop mogul.
However, imposing longer prison sentences violates the human rights of criminals. Criminals are also human, which is a point often raised by the defence lawyer and supporters of the criminal and jail terms should be awarded based on the circumstances and nature of the crime, as it may not be so serious that they need to be treated with impunity in the guise of chasing total justice. For example, there was the case of a butcher going to jail for cow slaughter in Mumbai recently, and he was given a maximum 5-year sentence along with a fine for the same as per state laws; however, this led to a massive uproar as people stated that this was harsh, as it is not concerning the killing of a human but the killing of an animal that happens to be sacred for Hindus.
In conclusion, giving longer prison sentences to criminals is a positive step as it ensures that no criminals are spared, and this would be seen as them paying the price for their actions; however, this needs to be implemented in such a way that it doesn’t violate human rights.