1. Should one goal dominate how judges assign criminal sanctions? If not, how would you organize the different goals? By the amount of harm that offenders cause? By offender criminal history? By some other factors?
2. Can all offenders be rehabilitated? What kinds of offenders are most likely to benefit from rehabilitation efforts? How should the corrections system deal with offenders who are difficult to rehabilitate?
3. How much discretion should judges, prosecutors, and parole board members have in administering the criminal sanctions? Should one of these positions enjoy higher levels of discretion relative to the others? If yes, what justifies such a view?
4. Suppose you are a state lawmaker. What factors would influence your vote on how criminal sanctions should be used? What factors would you ignore?
5. How would you respond to the argument that individuals who are wrongfully convicted are simply casualties of the war on crime? How would you feel if your friend or relative was wrongfully convicted? If you had a friend who was exonerated of a crime that he or she did not commit, what government compensation would be best?