Due to the mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines, Weldon Angelos (a 25 year-old father of 2), has been sentenced to 55 years in prison for selling drugs while in posession of a gun. Many call the sentence extremely harsh, and even the judge who had to hand down this sentence said that it was, "cruel, unjust, and even irrational."
I have always advocated stiff penalties for crime. Yet, even I agree that in this case a 55 year prison term for this offense (in which the gun was not even used, but was present) is probably much too harsh.
We have a problem in this country. Or sentencing guidelines are too complicated, and in some cases flawed. What's worse, people who get sentenced to a long prison term often get out much earlier due to things such as overcrowding. We need to come up with simple, fair, and enforceable prison sentencing guidelines. Someone should be sentenced to an exact amount of time, and good behavior should be able to get them out a little earlier, but not a lot.
When you go to the grocery store, do you see a price tag that says "$5.99 - $15.99" on anything? Of course not! And do you also think that you'll be able to take it to the checkout stand and have a good chance of only paying $2.99 for it? Not a chance. Each crime statute should have a specific sentence. Mathematical modifiers should be tacked on for repeated offenses. Good behavior should only be able to get you out of 10% of your sentence, at the most. For a 5 year-term that is a whole 6 months. If you're convicted to 5 years in prison, you should spend 5 years in prison (minus up to 10% for good behavior), not 2 years, not 5 to 15 years. What kind of message are we sending? And what kind of an unfair system are we sponsoring here that can reward people because too many others have committed crimes and so there isn't enough room in the jail for them?
