Although it is a good idea, and a more democratic option, in this day and age, whether a judge or a citizen, once given a little leeway, people take advantage of the new power and abuse it. We have seen examples of that many a time in our history and we know it.
Predators give victims a life sentence and more often than not re offend. Sentence should be minimum of 7 years after a reduction for early plea.
We need to protect children and if that means locking predators up long enough to make sure they are rehabilitated.
More victims will come forward if they feel they are getting some form of justice. Remember they are PREDATORS
You don't have to be able to drive it is not a law what so ever. You are given an advantage as soon as you get behind a wheel. Its a matter of choice, chance and careless thoughts when you are intoxicated past a legal limit and behind a wheel. When you drive drunk you put so much at risk your life, many other people's life's and your risking basically your whole life. You should definitely have a mandatory sentence to set you straight and also to keep others safe including yourself. I believe if we would do that it would happen less.
Yes, there should be mandatory sentencing, because there is more justice when people who have committed the same crime are treated equally under the law. There are too many judges who are either not competent to do their jobs, or who inject their own personal opinions into their decisions. The result is a very flawed system that needs to be as black and white as possible.
Mandatory sentencing keeps judges and juries from giving longer
sentences to those who look strange and thuggish. It prevents the young and
cute form getting away with murder, figuratively or literally. It prevents
those with good lawyers from walking away because of a judge’s carefully
manipulated sympathies. Obviously all robbers who steal the same stuff in the
same way should get the same sentence. Mandatory sentencing distributes justice
more equally to everyone convicted of a crime.
Especially for violent crimes, mandatory sentences should be implemented. Otherwise, judges may hand down lighter sentences for criminals who don't deserve them. Mandatory sentencing gives judges across various jurisdictions guidelines for how people should be punished for convictions. Obviously, a burglar won't get as much time as a rapist or murderer, which is why guidelines are there in the first place.
No,there should not be mandatory sentencing.Whenever a criminal is sentenced the judge should have the freedom to use the individual circumstance to make a specific appropriate decision about sentencing.The needs of one defendant may be much different than the needs of another and their crimes may be much different as well.
There should not be mandatory sentencing. Mandatory sentencing is a process in which the court system is limited by the law. I think it should be the courts decision depending upon the case and the actions of the parties on what the sentence is. The mandatory sentencing limits the judges final decision making process.