To: paul51
The sentence should should be in proportion to the crime. This sentence clearly is not. Unjust sentencing like unjust laws foster disrespect for the law.
8 posted on
12/04/2006 2:34:20 PM PST by
Smogger
(It's the WOT Stupid)
To: Smogger
This sentence clearly is notthe court disagreed, as do I.
17 posted on
12/04/2006 2:43:04 PM PST by
paul51
(11 September 2001 - Never forget)
To: Smogger
Not only "unjust" laws, but too damn many laws. It seems that we're all criminals, but the state just hasn't had the time yet to lock us all up. But when they decide to focus on you...
To: Smogger
The sentence should should be in proportion to the crime. This sentence clearly is not. Unjust sentencing like unjust laws foster disrespect for the law.
As a long-term outlook on this nation's legal system, you're absolutely correct. Once the crimes are no longer proportional to the punishment, criminals take little to no care about which crimes they commit. Had this guy murdered the informant, the sentence wouldn't have been much different, so the law has in essence created an incentive to take out a witness. If you're going to get 55 years just for the drugs, why the hell not?
25 posted on
12/04/2006 2:50:13 PM PST by
July 4th
(A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
To: Smogger
>The sentence should should be in proportion to the crime. This sentence clearly is not. Unjust sentencing like unjust laws foster disrespect for the law.<
Word.
To: Smogger
Unjust sentencing like unjust laws foster disrespect for the law. Amen.
101 posted on
12/04/2006 6:15:18 PM PST by
Finny
(God continue to Bless President G.W. Bush with wisdom, popularity, safety and success.)
To: Smogger
Agreed. 5 years at most for this.
127 posted on
12/05/2006 9:27:14 AM PST by
zendari
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson