[marron]

As you know the whole reason for mandatory minimum sentences is that people were losing faith in the judges, and we all read endless horror stories of revolving door justice back in the days when judges had their customary discretion.

In a perfect world, judges are mature men of character, and you want such men to weigh all of the factors both human and legal in his ruling. But the system was broke and mandatory minimums was the fix.

We need to get back to a situation where men of character judge cases, and have the discretion their office requires and deserves. But that is the big catch.

As for the three-strikes law, I have seen violent crime fall every year since it went into effect. It used to be dangerous to walk down the street where I live, and now people walk about with no fear. You put these guys away for good, and they neither can attack anyone, nor can they rope their younger brothers into it, nor do they get girls pregnant with the next generation of malefactors.

I would be willing to adjust the threshold at which three-strikes kicks in, but it has done what the judges lacked the will to do. Take repeat felons out of my neighborhood before they can do any more damage than they already have done.

[ColdSteelTalon]

I would be willing to adjust the threshold at which three-strikes kicks in

And only if the person convicted showed a demonstrable will to live clean.

We as a society should only relent if the person offending shows remorse and lives clean for a certain amount of time depending on the type of crime convicted of.