Do you feel that there should be minimum sentences on all criminal related crimes?

Question

In Canada, we mainly have maximums and are just starting to legilste into law minimum sentencing - judges usually follow case law.

Answer 1

Minimums create a system that is too rigid. Legislatures are never able to incorporate every possible situation, and thus something that is not as serious inevitably falls into their definitions of various crimes and judges are powerless.

Answer 2

WELLLL, Crimes are by definition criminal related. Personally, I don't think there should be minimum sentances. This removes any leeway the judge may have for case details, or mitigating circumstances. An enforced concrete minimum sentance removes the "scales" from Madam justice's hand and ties it around her back. So being, justice is now "blind" and "bound". The minimum may end up being fair for all cases of a certain crime, but this wll be the result of luck, rather than design.

Answer 3

Fox News is now broadcasting in Canada. You can watch Bill O'Reilly's show, THE O'REILLY FACTOR.

Bill's big crusade is "Jessica's Law", mandating minimum sentences for sexual crimes against children.

Our criminal justice system needs to be completely revised. I don't mean reforming our present system, I mean coming out with a completely, radically different way to treat criminals.

There will always be people who need to be incarcerated: violent people, psychos with anti-social tendencies. They are dangerous and cannot be among the regular population.

But our prison population has just exploded. Putting someone in prison only keeps us safe as long as that person stays behind bars. If the criminal comes out of jail the same, or worse, we've only delayed the day of reckoning.

How about this: we institute huge work programs like they had in the Great Depression. Instead of languishing in jail, prisoners can build roads, maintain forest preserves, build ranger stations, etc. Instead of pure incarceration, their punishment should include working to improve the infrastructure of our society.

You may think this idea is not feasible, but each prisoner costs taxpayers about $40,000 a year to keep them locked up.

Answer 4

Yes on violent crime. My business was burglarized, they had to tear up the inside for fun, and then found keys to our company vehicle and stole it. They used it for a burglary spree of 3 more burglaries in the middle of the night and the cops caught up with them in the vehicle and had to chase them. These guys commit 5 felonies in one night and we're caught red handed. They didn't even get a year in jail; 300 day sentence and 50% off if they behave....they will be out by the end of summer and one lives right across the street from my store.

Answer 5

no I think it should be on a case by case basis. We recently had a case where a 16 year old boy got a 14 year old girl pregnant, he wanted to marry her and be a dad, but her parents pressed charges. Due to mandatory sentencing he will be spending the first three years of his childs life in jail for statutory rape.

Answer 6

We don't have such laws in CA, otherwise, we'd penalized all the companies who hire illegals(aka criminals), and deport all the illegal immigrants. They are law breakers and the US is protecting and rewarding them...

I wish it'd be more like Canada where we the criminals would be given the maximum...

Answer 7

Depends on the crime.There is a difference between a parking ticket and Vehicular Homicide or for that matter Manslaughter and an child molestation.I believe that they should get mandatory life or death.so yes i believe in it

Answer 8

For major crimes yes, otherwise, it should be up to the judge

Answer 9

No, just on criminal un-related crimes.