http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113088/gun-control-and-mandatory-minimum-sentences-chicago-and-philadelphi
Expanded background checks may have been defeated last month in the Senate, but one area of bipartisan gun-control consensus is gathering steam in American cities: tougher sentences, including mandatory minimums, for illegal firearm possession.
let's be real here if this type of harsh punishment is to do any good they have to find something to go with it, what i don't know i do know two things, death penalty does not stop murders, and people that commit capitol crimes don't plan on getting caught.
so only those not inclined to commit crime can gt caught up in the jackpot as wll as hard core criminals who know ways around the law.
over crowded prisons will lad to less harsh conviction unless they build more prisons enter privatizing, is this a means to an end?
increase mandatory minimums for illegal gun possession from one to three years.In Pennsylvania, members of both political parties are championing a mandatory five-year-minimum sentence for any convicted felon caught carrying a gun, and now a separate bill that would apply a two-year minimum for illegal gun possession exclusively in Philadelphia.Advocates cite New York City's three-and-a-half-year mandatory minimum sentence as a model. “The NRA believes—rightly—that enforcing the law means prosecuting criminals to the fullest extent,” New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote last year.It's easy to see why such laws remain popular: Rampant gun violence persists, and city-dwellers want action. But a more cynical calculation is also at play. Politicians know the policies are ineffective but continue to vote for them lest they be painted as soft on crime. Indeed, research demonstrates that mandatory minimums create unequal and sometimes unjust sentences. They have also helped make the United States the most incarcerated nation on earth.
criminals kow thisas well as politicians looks like they both are playing the game to a tie.
