First, the guidelines do not eliminate variables and factors known to be related to deterrence. Instead, the Sentencing Commission has focused on offenses and "just deserts" issues. Second, the commission has relied heavily on past sentencing practices to formulate new sentencing sanctions. The resulting sentences have not produced a categorical escalation in punishment severity. Certainty of punishment has been addressed only as it pertains to receiving specific sentences. The chances of being apprehended and the celerity of sanctions are not addressed by the guidelines. Third, the public's perception of the severity, certainty, and celerity of punishment are similarly unaffected. System actions (such as plea and charge reduction bargaining as well as the going rate) and court actions (constitutional challenges) have the potential to undermine any perceived risks from the guidelines. Although the guidelines may provide more sentencing uniformity, they do not increase crime control through deterrence.