Related to post +166, I found later that there is no parole in the federal system. So does it seem fair that that guy and others in similar positions spend their lives in prison like those who killed other people? From their reaction after sentencing, it seems as if even the family that suffered from being held hostage itself were not that enthusiastic about the apparent severity of that sentencing, as expressed by saying that they are just glad it is over or something like that. Why is it that all the thoughts of mercy and forgiveness only fall on a person after he crosses the line of killing another person? I don't only think this behaviour is wrong but I see it probable that inside it called for by that establishing identity behaviour to which I keep referring (However, again, do not forget that I am permitting myself to talk about that identity thing at the level one may point to a box as the intended target even though it could be what is inside it). Why is it that the no cruel and unusual punishment part of the constitution is not sought to be applied on situations like this instead of the unimaginable argument of applying it on death penalty implementing an eye for an eye punishment for the act of killing another person (still targeting only equality at the level of the end result of taking a life and not the pain associated with that) which is what has been understood as justice probably since the beginning of humanity. Also, I wonder how much the constitutional power given to the president to pardon and commute is taken as intended to be a helping chance of a safety net for the system that should be sought in terms of appropriate use instead of merely how more or less it gets used. If it were me I would ask congress to either take responsibility on that or authorize funding for me to create entitie(s) helping me in carrying that authority as a responsibility.
