Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
I agree, they should not. Neither should the children of the woman he's killed, but they do. And neither should I have to pay his debt, yet I must help to pay for his incarceration as well as for those children, and probably for his children. Yet I don't know any of them and had nothing to do with the circumstances which caused the whole mess. Where's the justice in that?
So if your taxes do not contribute to the incarceration of criminals...exactly where are we to find the funding to hold these criminals if not in state run, tax payer funded, organised, consistent and humane circumstances?

There are charitable organizations and religious organizations which claim to help those in need, and those who feel the need can donate to those organizations. Let these groups handle the needs of those children.
Of course there are organisations of this calibre and I'm sure the family would be more than worthy of such assistance, but charities rely on the kindness of others and their pot of money is never big enough to help everyone. So how do we go about drawing the line? Where do we say yes to one family or victim and no to another?

I really do understand your reluctance to fund the consequences of another man's crime but can we really abandon one life in favour of another? How is that even humane?