That's an excellent question.
I can only speak from what I feel and from my personal experiences. Your points are very valid. I too have been a victim of crime. I've had my house broken into three times. I've had my wife cry. I've had my dog stolen. I took those acts all very personally, and I don't forgive the people who committed them either.
That being said, if those individuals are ever apprehended and are tried and convicted, after they get out of prison, if they remain conflict-free for five years, I think they should have an opportunity to get a pardon, regardless of whether or not I personally forgive them. It's personal. It's malice. It's petty. It's spiteful. Yes, they broke into my home, took my stuff, violated all my property, and everything like that. I am entitled to feel angry, and I'm entitled to hold a grudge against them. But I'm not entitled to turn around and prevent those people from becoming better. That's really how I look at it.
If we talk about crimes that are of even greater gravity and that are much more heinous, the area becomes even greyer. I agree. There is a portion of me that would really say to just lock them up and throw away the key. Once they get out, let them try to figure it out.
But at the end of the day, we're a society of compassionate people. We're a society that is generally forgiving. We give second, third.... I'm a big believer in third and fourth chances, and this is a country that gives third and fourth chances. I just think we would take on an awful lot of responsibility, and therefore an awful lot of consequences, if we were to turn around and just say, “You have four indictable offences. Regardless of what they are, you won't get a pardon.”