Should Hillary be prosecuted for security violations?

If it is found she is in violation and clearly she knew and broke the law...then HELL YES...but unfortunately I feel even if she is found guilty without any doubt....she'll somehow avoid jail/prison time.

using a personal server and not the designated government server for ANY emails is unlawful....it's against the law....why are they only looking for classified documents...bottom line is SHE BROKE PROTOCOL...SHE BROKE THE RULES.... PERIOD!

General Petraeus did far less, in my opinion with his pillow talk than Hilary did with her emails not being secured.....and he was punished for it.

When does the question that even if it wasn't marked with a classification that the sender or receiver reasonably knew that the information had a classification come into play?. Her defense seems to be based upon the assertion that the info was not classified at the time she received it. Just because the football doesn't have a TS/SCI banner on the briefcase doesn't make the codes within any less classified.
Just because I put a red sticker on a piece of paper doesn't make the info secret. It implies that the paper should be treated as such based upon what I know of the information. I personally don't have the ability to say that one thing is actually classified but I can recognize that it has been declared as such by a proper authority. With that in mind, failure to classify something appropriately or failure to report that something was inappropriately labelled is a security violation at the least.
We also have a problem of overclassifying information as it is (by mistake or as a broad brush trying to protect) which makes FOIA more difficult.

When was the material found?
According to the article....
"There’s still a lot we don’t know about Hillary’s Emailgate. Exactly how many emails contained TOP SECRET//SI information is unclear. We may never know since thousands of emails were already destroyed by Clinton. Who exactly placed the classified information in emails—it may not have been Hillary Clinton—and how did they access the information in the first place? How many of Hillary’s staffers at Foggy Bottom were also using her personal server?"

I think that this is one of those cases where nobody wants to be caught napping so they are reporting without waiting for the investigation to develop. If Classified information was sent to her, my question is "who the fuck is putting classified information in an E-Mail?" If it was generated by her, then I want to know "Why the fuck are you putting classified information in an E-Mail?"
The other problem is that some of the information was not marked as classified, but was deemed that it should have been marked classified. If it should have been marked as classified, why wasn't it marked as classified before this scandal started breaking.

This morning NBC was reporting that there were messages that contained Top Secret information in them. IF that is the case, not just Hillary needs to be taken to task for that. Everyone who had anything to do with those messages is equally culpable. If I send an E-Mail with Top Secret information in it to an outside source, you receive that information, and don't report that a breach in protocol (at the least) or security (most likely) has occurred, you are no less guilty than the person who sent the information. Operational Security is not a one person show. It is everyone within a chain of information's responsibility to maintain the security of information. This means that Hillary is at least in part culpable for this debacle.