Quote Originally Posted by Lee
Why not? Are there not already minimum sentences for a range of crimes already on the books? 3 strikes and you are out as i recall.

Regards,

Lee
Just because mandatory minimums exist doesn't mean they're right and proper.

Three strikes can not be equated to any and all mandatory sentences. With 3 strikes you have the recidivism concern. Where is that on mandatory sentences for a first time offense? A non-violent, first time offender having their fate rest entirely in the hands of a prosecutor and the judge playing no role in what their sentence should be?

We have federal mandatory minimums interfering with states rights to prosecute; federal mandatory minimums interfering with the role and power of judges; federal mandatory minimums placing way too much power in the hands of prosecutors; federal mandatory minimums making emotions and political motives the driving force behind sentencing rather than actual public interest and justice.

I personally am of the belief, however, that each individual defendant should be tried on the merits of their individual case and punished in accordance with their individual crime and circumstances, not the political climate of the time or some obscure precedent that may not actually have anything to do with them. We have checks and balances for a reason.