THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION CALLS FOR MANDATORY MIMINUM SENTENCES WITHOUT PROBATION OR PAROLE FOR BURGLARIES, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, SECOND DEGREE MURDER, CRIME COMMITTED WITH A SERIOUS GUN OR DANGEROUS WEAPON, RAPE, AND ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO THE VICTIM. THE SENTENCE WOULD INCLUDE A 4-YEAR ADDITIONAL TERM IF THE OFFENDER WAS A REPEAT OFFENDER. THERE IS NO MAGIC FORMULA TO DEAL WITH CRIME, BUT PUNISHMENT SOULD BE MADE QUICKLY AND FAIRLY. MANDATORY SENTENCING ARISES OUT OF A NEED FOR DETERRENCE -- SENTENCES MUST BE APPLIED EVEN HANDEDLY TO BOTH THE RICH AND THE POOR. IN MANY COMMUNITIES, STREET CRIME IS STRICTLY A LOCAL PROBLEM. PERHAPS COMMUNITIES CAN MAKE THEIR OWN SENTENCING GUIDELINES, ADAPTED ESPECIALLY TO THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL STATUS OF THEIR RESIDENTS. THE OPPOSING OPINION OF DEMAREST LLOYD MACDONALD POINTS OUT THAT MANDATORY SENTENCES TAKE AWAY THE JUDGE'S DESCRETION BY PROMISING UNIFORMITY AND A GUARANTEE OF PUNISHMENT. IN MANY CASES, THE STATE PROSECUTOR WOULD BE UNABLE TO SAVE THE STATE ANY MONEY BY SECURING A GUILTY PLEA. THE EFFECT OF MANDATORY SENTENCING ON THE CRIME RATE IS UNCERTAIN. CRIMINALS WILL SEE WHAT THE SITUATION IS AND REACT ACCORDINGLY. WITH MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCING THERE WILL BE GREATER COSTS FOR IMPRISONMENT, LESS JUDICIAL ARBITRARINESS, AND CASES WILL BE EXPEDITED, BUT WITH NO DISCRETION OR HUMANITY. (BAC)