Mandatory sentences stupid ?

[AFB]

I think so. How the hell can lawmakers know the specifics of every case ?

 

[Gunslinger08]

Eh, if you're convicted, you deserve atleast the minimum.

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
Eh, if you're convicted, you deserve atleast the minimum.

How do you feel about a five year prision sentence for a non-violent crime ?

Lets call it "fraud". I won't give you any more information about the crime because thats all the lawmakers get.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Five years sounds good for fraud. You have to realize there are about 5 different levels of every crime. Get a lawyer and get it pled down if it wasn't a major crime.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: joshsquall
Eh, if you're convicted, you deserve atleast the minimum.

How do you feel about a five year prision sentence for a non-violent crime ?

Lets call it "fraud". I won't give you any more information about the crime because thats all the lawmakers get.

Isn't that why there're judges and DAs....they can bargain/lower the charge/sentence if they feel it's due? Or maybe I just watch too much Law & Order.

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
Five years sounds good for fraud. You have to realize there are about 5 different levels of every crime. Get a lawyer and get it pled down if it wasn't a major crime.

But many times the manatory sentence laws covers all levels of the crime.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

 

[mrschunkee]

As a criminal defense lawyer, and a public defender, I can say that there should always be a provision that allows some downward deviation for a judge to take into account mitigating facts that , while not a defense need to be recognized in the situation before the court.

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

people shouldn't go to prison at all for marijuana, but the US is too capitalistic to ever change the reasons behind it.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

I agree. There's always a possible exception. A murder could be in self defense. Statutory rape could be an 18 and a 17-year old.

If they won't legalize marijuana possession, they should at least bump it down to a fine or something.

 

[mrschunkee]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

people shouldn't go to prison at all for marijuana, but the US is too capitalistic to ever change the reasons behind it.

Ain't that the truth- there is too much riding on these laws, money-wise, for them to change the law. I have never represented one person whose a pothead who ever hurt anyone, either while driving, or haha, while they were scarfing down food or sleeping!

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

I agree. There's always a possible exception. A murder could be in self defense. Statutory rape could be an 18 and a 17-year old.

If they won't legalize marijuana possession, they should at least bump it down to a fine or something.

If the murder was in self defense, they wouldn't be found guilty.

Statutory rape is an iffy thing.. it sucks in some cases, but it protects curious 10 year olds from 40 year old pedophiles.

 

[Turkish]

coconut oil goes good on something

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

I agree. There's always a possible exception. A murder could be in self defense. Statutory rape could be an 18 and a 17-year old.

If they won't legalize marijuana possession, they should at least bump it down to a fine or something.

I have no problem putting away violent offenders for a long time, sometimes for life. My concern is that when these laws were enacted they were ill thought out. People are doing hard time forever for relatively minor crimes, because they did something wrong three times. People should pay for their crimes, but in a way that does not make the punishment more criminal than the offense.

 

[Pliablemoose]

The mandatory sentences came about because of bleeding heart judges giving light sentences & legislators wishing to appear tough on crime.

They're a poor excuse for common sense, but judges have no-one but themselves to blame.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
The mandatory sentences came about because of bleeding heart judges giving light sentences & legislators wishing to appear tough on crime.

They're a poor excuse for common sense, but judges have no-one but themselves to blame.

Whoa, how did we get into a serious discussion in OT?

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

I agree. There's always a possible exception. A murder could be in self defense. Statutory rape could be an 18 and a 17-year old.

If they won't legalize marijuana possession, they should at least bump it down to a fine or something.

If the murder was in self defense, they wouldn't be found guilty.

Statutory rape is an iffy thing.. it sucks in some cases, but it protects curious 10 year olds from 40 year old pedophiles.

It depends on where the trial was.

 

[KarenMarie]

Our prisions are full of ppl found guilty of pot possession and violent criminals are going free or being let out early. It is major stupid. But I do agree with manditory sentences on violent crimes. And I believe in the three strikes rule for violent crimes.

 

[MalikChen]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
What we need is reform of "three strikes" laws. People should not be going to jail for small quanties of pot. Puting them there for life smacks of Stalinism.

I agree. There's always a possible exception. A murder could be in self defense. Statutory rape could be an 18 and a 17-year old.

If they won't legalize marijuana possession, they should at least bump it down to a fine or something.

If it is evident that the quantity you have on you is only for personal consumption (here at least), it's usually a fine and a night in jail for the first offense. Of course, the sentences go up as you get more and more prior acts, and jailtime becomes heavier and heavier.

I don't think anyone has ever gotten a life sentence just for possession. Now, if that person is a dealer, and they tack on possession, intent to deliver, rackettering, tax evasion, obstruction, and all the other crimes, it is possible to get a life sentence if they run back to back.

Now, on the subject of the OP, if there were not mandatory sentances, then a jury could, in good faith, find a man guilty of ten murders but give him two years in jail because they felt sorry. They also help the man convicted of possession from getting life because the jury hates him -- the sentences are usually a min-to-max style.