Thoughts on mandatory sentences?

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Wed, 20 May 2015 22:07:56 -0400

http://famm.org/michael-giles/

The story of an AD Airman serving a mandatory 25 years for what so view as self defense.

FAMM - » Michael Giles

On Feb. 6, 2010, active duty air force serviceman Michael Giles was invited to a Tallahassee nightclub by a few of his friends. Giles, a young father, was stationed in Tampa at the time, after spending the previous six years on tours of duty in places such as Iraq and Kuwait.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 20 at 2015 10:14 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 May 2015 22:14:48 -0400

This is outrageous! If a judge and prosecutors are of the opinion that the sentencing formula doesn't meet the circumstances of a given case, there should exist a process within the system for a waiver or an exemption to the mandatory minimums, which are really little more than campaign fodder for some state legislator's "Tough on Crime" record for reelection purposes. Regardless of the fact that someone is found guilty in a court of law, leave sentencing to the judge and the prosecutors, and even the defense attorneys, if they have mitigating circumstances for a more lenient sentence, as is the case here. Hell, second-degree murderers get less time in most states than this poor kid was sentenced to here!

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made May 20 at 2015 10:29 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Wed, 20 May 2015 22:29:03 -0400

Mandatory sentences take away a judge's ability to take mitigating circumstances into account. They also create some horribly lopsided sentences ... take this young man's sentence, he could end up serving more time on an aggravated battery charge than someone else will serve for actually killing someone.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 20 at 2015 10:39 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Wed, 20 May 2015 22:39:34 -0400

I would like to see mandatory sentences for committing crimes with a firearm. Like 10 years, non negotiable for using a firearm (whether or not it's fired) to commit a crime - brandishing it, aiming it at someone, etc. The judge can then look at the facts surrounding the actual crime and determine the sentence of the crime. Once that is determined the mandatory gun penalty gets tacked on. Just MHO.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made May 20 at 2015 10:53 PM

SPC Charles Brown — Wed, 20 May 2015 22:53:35 -0400

Mandatory sentencing is pure bs. From what I just read this young man was only defending himself, many of us here would have reacted the same way. This is something that needs to be addressed across the nation to make sure that injustices such as this don't happen anymore.

"It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one."

Voltaire

Response by SFC Tyrone Almendarez made May 21 at 2015 1:57 AM

SFC Tyrone Almendarez — Thu, 21 May 2015 01:57:25 -0400

That sucks. Mandatory Minimum serves no purpose. The judge should have discretion on sentencing.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 21 at 2015 8:24 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 21 May 2015 08:24:56 -0400

They seem good in theory, horrible in execution.

The first cases I remember of mandatory minimums were crack vs "normal" cocaine. It disproportionately affected a specific segment of the population. The best of intentions gone astray. As I started looking deeper into the concept, you realize how badly they can be abused, like the example in this article case.

It completely removes necessary discretion from prosecutors, and judges. What could have been a plea or a parole, turned into prison. We made a Citizen into a Felon. That is Wrong on so many levels.

I have a real problem with Law that is Wrong at its core.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made May 21 at 2015 12:50 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Thu, 21 May 2015 12:50:14 -0400

I'm opposed, significantly.