Typical tea party logic, complete misinterpreting/misunderstanding my point. Read my comment again since you missed what I said. I said the Alexander case shows that judges have too little discretion, not too much. Particularly in Florida which is where the episode occurred. The judge in her case should have taken into account the specific circumstances of her situation, she a relatively law-abiding person – a woman with a master's degree – who was making positive contributions to society. She had a restraining order against her husband for previous episodes of domestic violence, and was protecting herself from another domestic violence episode when the incident in question occurred. Even the Republican who crafted the "10-20-life" bill said Alexander's sentence is not what lawmakers intended with the law. For example, the law was meant for thugs who were robbing a liquor store and had a gun in their possession or pulled out the gun and threatened someone or shot someone during the commission of the crime. Mandatory-minimum laws especially for certain low-level drug offenses, have done much more harm than good to all races particularly to African Americans in this country.

Mousie's case is completely different in a completely different jurisdiction and state, he is a career offender (21 arrests and two felony convictions by the mid-80s, a record dating over 40 years) who was convicted of racketeering conspiracy. Even though Massimino was acquitted of specific counts of gambling and extortion, his conviction for conspiracy made him accountable for the underling crimes committed on behalf of the crime family. Mousie made money by leveraging the participation of other members of the racketeering conspiracy and the mob's well earned reputation for violence. His sentence was warranted.