In following the LWOP debate, I have a few thoughts.

One is that there is a difference between certain types of murder, all of which could be considered first degree.

Where I would allow parole:

1. Murders where there is significant but treatable mental illness--but parole must be contingent on medication and therapy.

2. Armed robbery where someone panics and shoots or participated in the robbery but did not actually do the killing--felony murder.

3. Murders linked to psychiatric drugs. Apparently, a few previously non-violent people do become violent on these drugs.

4. Murders of the convict's own child. Hormonal swings and sleep deprivation can make people truly crazy.

Murders deserving LWOP:

1. Any murders involving sexual crimes, torture, or degradation of the victims.

2. Sex crimes similar to the above but without murder.

3. Deliberate murder of someone else's child.

4. People who commit violent acts at different times and not as part of the same incident.

5. People who have spent weeks and months planning a murder. This happens a lot in marriage. Someone found another partner and does not want to lose assets. Here, the guilty party had plenty of time to think about this and back out. Of course, a prerequisite is that there was no abuse by the dead party. Abusive partners are often worse AFTER the victim leaves, so it does no good to say "She should have just left him." Of course, abuse should be documented.

I like the Canadian system. A life sentence is usually 25 years, at least, but there is a "ray of hope" provision that allows parole after fifteen years, contingent on good behavior. However, a person who has committed multiple murders at different times is not eligible.

I believe the Canadian approach strikes a good balance between deterrence and compassion.