Crystal ball
Kid out in suburban San Diego gets 50 years to life for offing a couple of classmates in a shooting rampage last year. He'll be eligible for parole in 2052. This leads me, as a student of human behavior, to ask: Why?

In 2002, this kid will be 66. He will probably not be a danger to society at that point. He will have spent his entire adult life and the last few of his formative years in an institution, having been told when to eat, when to sleep, when to pee, when to think and when to shut up. His influences and mentors will be have been the dregs of society. He will probably get a decent education, courtesy of the taxpayers of the state of California, but that will have been 40-some years before he is released. In 2052, this guy will be a hollow-eyed, wrinkled, grizzled old man with little idea of how to live on his own.

Why bother releasing him at that point? Who's going to feed him, clothe him, take care of his medical needs? Will his prison wages be subject to Social Security tax, earning him a little nest egg for those golden years?

It's interesting to be part of a society in which everyone must be satisfied. People on the right want this kid and his ilk to face the firing squad. People on the left believe in "rehabilitation" and believe every soul can be saved and every wayward life can be kicked back on the right track with the proper treatment. The truth falls somewhere in the middle and must be gleaned on a case-by-case basis, but there's little room for case-by-case in our world.

This leads me to a story I'd like to pursue: Are there any high-profile criminals from the past -- say, 35 years ago or more -- who are up for release soon? Is parole even granted to these individuals? If it isn't, why bother making them eligible? If it is, what's done to make sure they integrate into a society that isn't exactly welcoming them with open arms?