Yes, but that hasn't changed, so it really makes no difference. The maximum sentence is still the same. What has changed in the judge's mind is that they have more discretion to impose, not stricter sentences, but more lenient ones. The judge can hand down less than the minimum sentence that was in place previously, whether it was six months, a year, two years or whatever the case may have been. That still sends a signal from lawmakers to the judge who is hearing the case. It could suggest that the requirements have been relaxed, that lawmakers are less stringent than they were before.
What can we, as lawmakers, do tocounter that negative effect and avoid giving the impression that we no longer consider certain offences to be serious, offences such as discharging a firearm with intent and sexual assault?