(The graphs in the first tweet are from page 55 of the linked PDF.)
Which isn't applicable to the law being proposed. Moreover if the idea is "threaten them with the full 20 years to serve as an example", then the mandatory minimum kinda works against that? If you catch some guy and then he serves 10 years, you haven't really proven much. You're just acting in line with expectations.
Source? My impression is that in basically all of those cases, it's either because:
1. the guy is a repeat offender and/or on probation
2. the guy decided to wanted to fight to the bitter end and they threw the book at them
I'm not saying either are justified, but the implication that someone will get 20 years just because he downloaded deepseek through ollama or whatever is still false.
“It was for two or three quarter ounces of weed!” isn’t the defense you imagine.
