Reply #39: This [View All]

[sangh0]

Are you suggesting I am against maximum sentences?

No I'm not, which explains why I said nothing about your opinion of maximum sentences

So are you saying that a lack of constitutional requirement means that it is unconstitutional to create minimum sentences?

No I'm not, which explains why I did not say that. You asked for the difference between minimums and maximums, so I pointed out that the Constitution places maximums on sentences with it's requirement that punishments be commensurate with the crime.

In fact, depending on the exact wording, you could say that there is a constitutional requirement for minimum sentences too

Not true. The Constitution prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment" which has been interpreted, by SCOTUS, to mean that excessive sentences are prohibited. The Constitution says nothing about prohibiting lenient sentences.

I have read your posts in this thread, and it seems to me that your argument, asserting an equivalency between minimums and maximums, is flawed because it does not take into account the principle that are embodied in our Constitution, which places protections for the innocent far above the need to protect citizens from crime.

And just to make sure I'm clear on this, I'll re-phrase my point:

There is a great difference between mandatory minimum sentences and mandatory maximum sentences. One is embodied in the Constitution, and one is not.