FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3126037487> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3126037487 endingPage "326" @default.
• W3126037487 startingPage "293" @default.
• W3126037487 abstract "I. THE POINTLESS FOREST AND THE POINTLESS MAN Around 1970, singer Harry NUsson went on an acid trip. He later reported that during this experience, he looked at the trees and . . . realized that they aU came to points, and the little branches came to points, and the houses came to a point. [He] thought 'Oh! Everything has a point, and if it doesn't, then there's a point to it.'1 Nilsson put these insights to good use, later producing an album and an animated film, both entitled The Point!.2 In ehher format, The Point! tells the story of Oblio, who along with his dog, Arrow, is thrown out of the land of Point because Oblio does not have a point on top of his head Uke everyone else. They are banished to the scary Poindess Forest, where they encounter the Pointless Man, another banished soul who welcomes them as they begin dieir journey. The Poindess Man, as drawn, has several pointy faces and actual arrows emanating from his torso, all pointing in different directions. Once Oblio enters the Poindess Forest and actually meets the socalled Pointless Man, Oblio has a radical change in perspective: You see the Pointless Man did have a point; in fact, he had hundreds of them, all pointing in different directions. But as he so quickly pointed out, 'A point in every direction is the same as no point at all.'3 Which (of course) brings us to Congress and federal sentencing. Congress has issued at least thirty-one separate directives setting general policy goals in criminal sentencing.4 While each of these policy goals has an individual purpose, when taken together they are as pointless as the Pointless Man. This Article contends that the federal sentence guidelines are directed in too many ways at the same time; as a result they reflect conflicting policies and have no moral center. The guidelines should be rewritten in accordance with a few well-articulated policy goals. Part II considers some of these thirty-one policy directives, which all point in different directions with different degrees of specificity, clarity, and import. In setting out what some of these policy directives seek, it becomes clear that federal sentencing policy resembles nothing so much as Nilsson's Pointless Man. Part III, in turn, describes some of the underlying conflicts between these principles. It then describes the effect of combining a thirty-one-point policy directive together with a strong mandate for uniformity. This project-putting a pointless mish-mash of policy directives together with a demand for uniform punishments-does not make much sense. Without a clear policy goal, uniformity is as likely to be uniformly wrong as it is to be uniformly right relative to any understandable principle or set of principles. What is the sense in having consistent and uniform sentencing if it is consistently and uniformly wrong? To insist on uniformity without principled directives to create those uniform results does nothing less than rob sentencing of any sense of real authority by making it morally indeterminate.5 Finally, Part IV suggests a do-over for federal sentencing, in which a new Sentencing Commission would start with a small number of reasonable policy goals and then re-make the guidelines in a way that meets those goals. Opponents to re-making the guidelines would no doubt (justifiably) the specter of greater discretion for judges being a feature of any new system. This fear of judging, as Stith and Cabranes called it,6 is our modern equivalent of the Pointless Forest-we (through our legislators) are scared to enter a world where judges exercise independent discretion because we do not know everything that may lie in wait for us there. After aU, individuals, even individual judges chosen expressly for their superior discretion and judgment, can be unpredictable. Given the poindessness of current policy, however, the prospect of reformed guidelines with individual judges more actively evaluating cases becomes more appealing. …" @default.
• W3126037487 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3126037487 creator A5042272195 @default.
• W3126037487 date "2009-03-01" @default.
• W3126037487 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W3126037487 title "Policy, Uniformity, Discretion, and Congress's Sentencing Acid Trip" @default.
• W3126037487 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W3126037487 type Work @default.
• W3126037487 sameAs 3126037487 @default.
• W3126037487 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3126037487 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3126037487 hasAuthorship W3126037487A5042272195 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C12713177 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C153349607 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C2777632292 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C28719098 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C12713177 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C142362112 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C144024400 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C153349607 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C17744445 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C199539241 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C2524010 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C2777632292 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C28719098 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C33923547 @default.
• W3126037487 hasConceptScore W3126037487C95457728 @default.
• W3126037487 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W3126037487 hasLocation W31260374871 @default.
• W3126037487 hasOpenAccess W3126037487 @default.
• W3126037487 hasPrimaryLocation W31260374871 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W1532094126 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W1850245674 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W1981120972 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W1982830980 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W1986617282 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2043976030 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2048212064 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2274676147 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2314927165 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2322864841 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2325989380 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2327035879 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W233929968 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W2477425732 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W262675305 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W273093362 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W3121665826 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W348303401 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W780243217 @default.
• W3126037487 hasRelatedWork W94028563 @default.
• W3126037487 hasVolume "2009" @default.
• W3126037487 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3126037487 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3126037487 magId "3126037487" @default.
• W3126037487 workType "article" @default.