There are multiple reasons... in this case getting rid of a seemingly excessive sentence when the 27 year old hadn’t acted up, except for minor skirmishes since he was 17. The anti-Huck people on this thread never liked him and now want him to have had a crystal ball. Last year they attacking him for outlawing price gouging in middle of storms and natural disasters.
I’m sorry - but your social theories are very, very liberal and illogical. “...getting rid of a seemingly excessive sentence when the 27 year old hadn’t acted up, except for minor skirmishes since he was 17” means that these “minor skirmishes” were occurring in prison.
The psychology of your position requires a denial of human nature for it to be true - Clemmons, who was sentenced for violent anti-social behavior, was not as violent in his prison cell, so therefore he MUST be released. I’ll take that bet and cover the spread, so to speak.
With respect to price gouging, do you realize you are making an argument for a MAXIMUM wage? What liberals call “price gouging” is the free market at work, in its purest form. Apparently you don’t care for economic freedom. And to the cries of “It’s not FAIR!”, I reply simply that preparedness - having the necessary supplies and equipment before they are needed - obviates the need to have large sums of money to buy scarce commodities.
Finally, I am an “anti-Huck” person, because I know his record. You believe that circumventing the criminal justice system makes him compassionate and involved as a governor, but what it really makes him is a meddler - one who did so over the objections of anyone standing in his way. His need to be ‘compassionate’ made him “laugh out loud” when the prosecutor objected. I cannot ever support a nanny-statist, especially one who somehow believes that the all-encompassing state has no role in protecting law abiding citizens from criminals.