Do you believe felonies should be free of statutes of limitation?

  • No responses have been submitted.
  • Felonies should not be free of statutes of limitation

    It is my opinion that felonies should not be free of statutes of limitation because these statutes work well enough to keep the major law breakers under strict penalties without punishing the lesser law breakers under the same clause. The statutes set up a system of checks and balances that work well.

  • No, they should not be

    There are so many different kinds of felonies, how can you clump them all into one. If you look at murder compared to a blue collar crime alone, it would need consideration. The issues are right in your face, some I would say, yes and some I would say no.

  • Not in a broad spectrum.

    I could only agree to this in the case of certain felonies. A person should not have to be forever alienated for a past mistake. If someone committed a petty crime like theft when they were younger, I do not feel they should still suffer for it well into their senior years.

  • No They Shouldn't

    I do not believe felonies should be free of a statue of limitation. I believe these statues are important because after time has passed witnesses are less reliable and evidence is usually insufficient. With these two important points it is easy to see why these limitations are so important. Our system isn't perfect the way it is, but this is one safe guard we do not want to remove.

  • No, felonies should not be free of statutes of limitation.

    Felonies lost their freedom when they committed the crimes. If they wanted freedom and rights they could have made a better decision and not committed the crime. They have the right to basic human needs such as food, shelter, education and medical care. But they are in prison they should not have rights beyond the basic needs.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.