Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
Mandatory sentencing guidelines are an issue, of course, but the solution isn't to make special case courts, but to change the guidelines to give judges more latitude. For that matter, it's my understanding that most of the crimes dealt with here were non-violent, which would eliminate most of the (non-drug) cases with mandatory sentencing anyways. These courts are not solving the underlying issue, so should not be adopted as a band-aid.
Yes, but people like the tough-on-crime-mandatory-sentencing bullshit, but love veterans. This is probably easier to sell?

Which reminds me, there are people advocating mandatory sentencing here as well And last week or so there was a big report done on sentencing. Contrary to popular belief, judges have not been more lenient lately, average sentencing for murder and manslaughter has risen by about two years in the past 5 years, complying with sentencing guidance. The piece also yet again showed the stupidity of certain politicians again.. Turns out that sentences are on average about two years lower than what the prosecutors asked for. When asked, politicians expressed surprise, outrage, and want this to be looked into. On the contrary, the prosecutors (who, of all people, would be upset about this if there was any reason), said they'd be more worried if there was no difference at all, because that would indicate serious issues with criminal defense system.