|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:29 PM Original message |
Poll question: Are mandatory minimum sentences unconstitutional? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Idioteque (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:31 PM Response to Original message |
1. I don't think they are unconstitutional. They are ridiculous and unfair, however. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:36 PM Response to Reply #1 |
7. So, you don't think the legislative branch is overstepping its bounds... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bowens43 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:45 PM Response to Reply #7 |
17. Where in the Constitution does it say |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:46 PM Response to Reply #17 |
20. Doesn't the Constitution define the branches of government? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Swamp Rat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:32 PM Response to Original message |
2. Evil n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:37 PM Response to Reply #2 |
8. Certainly in practice. - n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:33 PM Response to Original message |
3. Legislators define the law including the penalties. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:37 PM Response to Reply #3 |
9. Mandatory minimums have only existed in American law for 30 years... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:40 PM Response to Reply #9 |
14. Doesn't make it unconstitutional. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:48 PM Response to Reply #14 |
23. Agreed... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:50 PM Response to Reply #23 |
26. "...violation of the separation of powers..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:38 PM Response to Reply #3 |
10. Well, they set a range of penalties. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:44 PM Response to Reply #10 |
16. Sure, but that range has a lower limit. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:49 PM Response to Reply #16 |
24. Well, you're making my case, then. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:53 PM Response to Reply #24 |
28. It is not the court's job to define penalties. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:57 PM Response to Reply #28 |
31. I'm not suggesting judges define penalties, but they should have the power... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:10 PM Response to Reply #31 |
36. Right. Here there are ranges of penalties for specific offenses. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:33 PM Response to Original message |
4. While I believe they are flagrantly unconstitutional... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:39 PM Response to Reply #4 |
11. Well, it make it moot, anyway. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
acmavm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:33 PM Response to Original message |
5. People are getting mandatory life sentences for non-violent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bowens43 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:39 PM Response to Reply #5 |
12. the Constitution allows citizens to be deprived of liberty |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:42 PM Response to Reply #12 |
15. What about how it takes judgement out of the hands of the judge? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:40 PM Response to Reply #5 |
13. I'm leaning that way. - n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:45 PM Response to Reply #5 |
19. What non-violent crime gets a defendant life? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:50 PM Response to Reply #19 |
27. 1000s are serving life for nonviolent crimes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:55 PM Response to Reply #27 |
29. I see. This state (OH) does not have a 3-strikes provision. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:00 PM Response to Reply #29 |
34. OK. But I would argue that application of 3-strikes laws to such individuals... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:14 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. You may be right. No one asked my opinion before passing it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
acmavm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:00 PM Response to Reply #19 |
33. Ask a 21-year old in Michigan (I think it is) who got life for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:21 PM Response to Reply #33 |
38. Yes, we discussed the 3-strikes thing elsewhere in this thread. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Shrek (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:36 PM Response to Original message |
6. Does the constitution vest judges with the power to determine sentences? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:45 PM Response to Reply #6 |
18. Where are a judges powers defined then? - n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:47 PM Response to Reply #6 |
22. No. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSdemocrat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:47 PM Response to Original message |
21. They're insanely stupid, but not unconstitutional |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:55 PM Response to Reply #21 |
30. That makes sense, thanks. - n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Odin2005 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:49 PM Response to Original message |
25. They're not unconstitutional, but they are stupid. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 03:58 PM Response to Reply #25 |
32. I think we're all pretty much in agreement that they're stupid. - n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
On the Road (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:06 PM Response to Original message |
35. I Understand that Congress Can Define Penalties |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:23 PM Response to Reply #35 |
39. Federal sentencing guidelines are now discretionary. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
On the Road (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:49 PM Response to Reply #39 |
42. I Missed The Change to The Guidelines Now Being Discretionary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 08:50 AM Response to Reply #42 |
45. Based on right to trial by jury. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
On the Road (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 01:07 PM Response to Reply #45 |
52. Thank You. I Didn't Know That |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nye Bevan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:34 PM Response to Original message |
40. Not one of the "yes" voters has explained what part of the constitution... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:57 PM Response to Reply #40 |
43. What about the separation of powers? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
patcox2 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:39 PM Response to Original message |
41. Why have a poll when there is a verifiable answer: No. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Nov-16-06 04:59 PM Response to Reply #41 |
44. Deleted message |
ck4829 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 08:55 AM Response to Original message |
46. Certain mandatory minimum sentencing laws are in violation of the 14th Amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Donald Ian Rankin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 09:18 AM Response to Original message |
47. No more than maximum sentences are, surely? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Donald Ian Rankin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 09:20 AM Response to Original message |
48. The result of this is interesting. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 09:46 AM Response to Reply #48 |
49. "Unconstitutional" is a buzzword |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProfessorGAC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 09:52 AM Response to Reply #48 |
50. Posted Twice. Sorry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProfessorGAC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-17-06 09:53 AM Response to Reply #48 |
51. What About The "I'm Not Sure" Crowd? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 02nd 2024, 01:34 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC