oh, I don't know that our foundations are all that different.
Perhaps not all together that different. However, from your previous statements, there certainly are numerous presumptions or beliefs we have which are incompatible and would dictate where our versions of logic would lead us.
you think (as I perceive) that one of the end results of governmental incompetence and inefficiency is that a some relatively large number of people are in jail that probably don't belong there, or at least don't belong there for as long as they are sentenced to be there.
at some very broad level or another, I'll concede that one to you, since I think governmental incompetence and waste is a universal truth.
While not necessarily a conclusion I'd advocate. It's close enough for discussion's sake to go with, for the interim.
but then the question becomes, "how do you expect the exact same incompetent government that put the wrong people in jail to suddenly become competent enough to only let out the right ones"?
While numerous government entities as well as the public were involved in the incarceration of an individual. Numerous
other government entities, will be involved in determining their candidacy for release. This is beneficial, by my belief, as with an accepted level of inherent incompetence. Separating these functions allows some measure of a check and balance system, which can handle a level of incompetence.
As for the actual analysis of whom to release. Distinguishing between violent and non-violent offenders, should not be excruciatingly difficult.
If you're requiring an infallible level of selection. By the mere aspect of human involvement, you're making an impossible demand.
