Would you not agree that the legislator has nonetheless sent a message to the courts by abolishing minimum sentences? Abolishing them means something. It was done for a reason.
In recent months, particularly in Quebec, there have been cases in which the judge has sought the lawyers' opinion on the abolition of the minimum sentence. The defence will of course argue that this means that the offence is not as serious as it was before, while the prosecution will say the opposite.
Does abolishing minimum sentences not have an impact? Does it not send a clear message to the courts? If not, what was the purpose? In your opinion, why did we abolish these minimum sentences if there is no impact?