Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« David Kopel on federal setencing guidelines proposal | Main | Gun Mfrs seek cert. on DC decision »

David Kopel on federal setencing guidelines proposal

Posted by David Hardy · 21 July 2005 02:59 PM

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, David Kopel has posted a link to his paper on pending legislation to change the Federal sentencing guidelines. Very interesting material. I thought the original sentencing guidelines were a pile of Draconian trash, and Dave makes a strong argument that the replacement legislation is considerably worse.

Back when I was at Interior, the law enforcement types were lobbying the commission to get sentences for the offenses they went after (mostly rather minor) increased. The motivation was NOT a belief that more punishment was appropriate. Rather, it was an understanding that federal prosecutors used the number of guideline points to assess how serious a case was -- if the offense added up to twenty points, a busy US Atty was more likely to take it than if they added up to ten or twelve. I know of one case where a similar move was made through Congress, and the LEs tesified quite frankly that they wanted certain things made felonies because US Attorneys wouldn't take them as misdemeanors, they just sounded so insignificant. Nothing like justice!

· contemporary issues

Leave a comment