Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
No - my argument, as stated earlier: if a main reason for reducing sentencing is to save money, that savings will likely not be realized to the extent that you would expect by simply subtracting that many prisoners from the existing system.
For me, the racial and socioeconomic disparity is enough reason to change the laws on its own - but it still doesn't hurt to take a skeptical eye to any claims, right?
For example, this:
I'm not quite convinced that the fringe benefits are realizable. Seems like a fine point of discussion.
|
Fair enough, I think that removing mandatory minimums is more likely to save money than not, either way it's the RIGHT thing to do. And that matters more than the ancillary claims.