So he had already been convicted of at least two felonies, and on his conviction of the third (felon in possession), he got probation.

I think that judge should be held responsible for any further crimes he committed while out of prison.

The problem with this is that they'll probably only get him for stolen vehicle and drop the stolen gun on a plea bargain.

Stolen vehicle is a low level felony in Minnesota, so he won't get much time away.

We'll have to wait until he implements the handgun/mask/handcuffs stuff and then gets caught before he gets put away.

Thanks to Ninnesota's Mandatory Sentincing Guidelines, which the proponents thought would solve these situations by taking discretion AWAY from judges, we now need at least one more kidnap/murder victim here, then if we can catch him again, his career is over.

Our judges are not the problem in Minnesota, they would be the solution if we'd let them judge. In this case, however, the Guidelines must be followed. The (low) severity of the conviction will control, not the facts and circumstances of the case which indicates a very dangerous defendant.

Of course, that's not the world according to our favorite talking heads, who have no criminal justice experience but are able to stir up a noisy crowd of self righteous ninnies who pass this kind of law.

You know more about this than I do, so please straighten me out: isn't there a provision in the sentencing laws for judges to depart, either upwards or downwards, from the guidelines?

Most of the talking heads I've seen seem to be in favor of mandatory minimums, not sentencing guidelines, btw; I don't think the two concepts are the same, although they obviously do overlap. (I've got real mixed feelings about both, both in theory and in practice, but don't know enough to have an opinion on what should be done, much less how it might be made to happen.)

There are upward and downward departures, but the upward departure doesn't add much time. And there have to be specific things proven. Sitting peacefully in a stolen vehicle is probably not one of them.

If they can charge the gun possession and stolen vehicle only, they'll probably want a plea bargain because going to court, he can claim not to know about the gun, it belonged to somebody else etc., the same arguemnts could go for the car, he didn't know it was stolen, maybe he could beat the rap entirely. He probably can't make bail, and will get free counsel, why plead guilty, see if they can prove it.

If his criminal history is "4" (3 priors and currently on probation) they may do better violating his probation and sending him to prison on a prior than sentencing him for theft of a car. He'd probaly get local jail (year or less minus good time.) and more probation.The prison is full, theft criminals will get bounced out to a halfway house pretty soon I think.

The Sentincing Guidelines are a bit complicated and change every year and I don't work with them anymore. But I see no way to avoid the possiblity my family meeting this guy after a couple years.

The Sentincing Guidlines are driven by people who think every criminal is the "same" and should get the "same" punishment for the "same" crime.
Life is not that simple; and we have the highest incarceration rate ever but still let people go everyday who obviously are not fit for society, while locking up a drug offender's girlfriends for a long time.

We "know" what the gun, mask and restraints are for but we can't "prove" it here. Any innocent person may have the same items in his car.

But if the judge had the discretion to look at the case, the facts and circumstances surrounding the case, and consider who the defendent really is, and his background, and have the discretion to either give him a strong lecture, or 10 years in prison, I'd feel better.

Instead this guy will get out, do something horrible and the Ninnies will blame the current judge. That's completely wrong.

I think we should start with stiffer penalties for stealing cars. To me, stealing a car is a big deal and should be treated as such. Unfortunately, this career criminal will be out shortly and prbably end up killing someone.

After all, MN ranks 49th when it comes to putting these democrat buddies behind bars... Catch and release reins supreme in MN....

Our prisons are full, there is nowhere to put everyone. So the low level property offenders either don't go in or get out quick. Stolen car is a low level crime.

Current fashion is to sentence all the druggies and sex offenders to mandatory prison sentences and let property offenders go. So we've got lots of drugies we don't need in prison and lots of people on the street who should not be.

I live in a little town. One local kid did go to prison at 16; he driveby shot up a policeman's house. Now he's out. His next caper was to steal a car, get into a police chase, go cross country and intentionally crash into a camper. (Mine.) He escaped on foot, stole a pickup truck, ran it about 40 miles through farmer's fields and in and out of ditches. Then he set the truck on fire.

He denied involvement for about 6 months, finally got his DNA from windshield blood. Pled to 1 count of stolen vehicle, 6 months in county jail, wrote me a letter of apology,(as required) gets out to work, doesn't pay any restitution for the car, the pickup, the camper or the crops.

I think he'll kill somebody some day, but there's no room at the prison for these guys now. But we send peaceful druggies to prison all the time.

No new taxes means no new prisons, I think. Don't blame the left.

Shit. Thats only six months in prison? Shooting at a persons house does not net a felony conviction? Being an obvious danger to self and others doesn't get one put away?

I must have missed something. Maybe how the heck did things get this way?

I don't put all the blame on the left, but they seem to have plenty of money for the black holes like LGA for Murderapolis, St Punk, welfare for thugs coming here from out of state, education, stadiums for billionaires, etc... Don't tell me there isn't enough tax money to pay for prisons, even without no new taxes. MN priorities are in the wrong place and there is more than enough blame for the left and right. And the left has always had a policy of coddling criminals. The Catch and release state and the word has gotten out that MN is the place to get your welfare and when you do get caught breaking the law, this state is soft on crime when it comes to putting their worthless hind end behind bars.

No he did go to prison as a juvie for shooting up the house. (Pretty serious offense A GUN was involved.) Then he came home and was discharged from parole.
Then this was the next offense.

For a night of incredibly dangerous and destructive staged crashes and arson he now got 6 months in county jail. (But no guns.) Life got easier, not harder for him.

What's significant about his earlier prison term is that the experience did nothing to reform him.

The jail probably won't help him either. So, he's dangerous and on the loose, and smarter about not beiing caught at stuff.

Without sentencing guidelines, he might have received some structured rehabilitaion while in his community, along with a year in jail. (while everyone rolls their eyes remember the prison did nothing to change him). We're kind of out of options now.

And now, he causes more havoc again and almost gets away with it, and 6 months later when he gets caught, much less happened, again, because of sentencing guidelines.

It's not the Courts, it's the laws. Prison is the now only option available; there isn't room for everybody in prison, so the system can be worked pretty well.

The solution is to let our judges actually make judgements rather than work off the grid in the Sentencing Guidelines. Judges are lots smarter than they are protrayed on the News.

The problem is people who are very good at one thing (getting elected) thinking that because they are good at what they do, they know better then people that do another thing (judging). This is dangerous.

Dick: thank you for the info.

Was it the "right" that deemed Prisoners shouldn't "feel" imprissoned? Prision is currently but an extension of the welfare state. Make it so people who have been to prison DO NOT WANT to go back and I think we would see a decrease in repeat offenders. Bring back the chain gangs to mow the grass in the ditches, and pick up the meth "droppings" in pink jumpsuits - take away their TVs, radios, and library... maybe they won't want to come back.

IMHO ... another "simple" solution

Mostly-

Make the current prisoners build new prisons out of bricks they make themselves? Nah, that would make too much sense. It would insult the dignity of the prisoner to make him pay for his crime and learn a trade.

And somebody wouldn't let them have any straw with which to make their bricks.

And the unions would bitch that they can't compete with slave labor. </satire>

The only thing that deters somebody with no moral compass from committing a crime is whether they think they can get away with it. The pink jumpsuit crowd, no AC, hard work just makes for headlines. And it teaches them that if you're strrong, you can humiliate people.

If you don't catch someone young and encourage them to have values to live up to, they are sociopathic and need to be kept away from society if they are violent.

But sending EVERYONE to prison for a set time according to the crime is what is NOT working. If you're stuck in a hole, stop digging. Yet that's what the public wants, deeper holes.

Criminals do not think like the rest of us. They are not rational. So the "rational" solutions never work.

Most people on the gun forum obey the law because it's the law, and we see ourselves as law abiding. But, if we wanted to see how much we could get away with, we'd be the crooks. It's hard to relate to the crooks, and we usually get it wrong because we want to work on the premise, that "they're just like us" or "that would make me behave". but it doesn't.

So you need an individualized approach to criminals. They're not all equal.