Mandatory Minimums : The United States Sentencing Commission

seem like the best way at first, in the long run money would be better

The first section is for the mandatory minimum sentence of life in prison for first and second-degree murder and treason. The second section deals with firearms offences. The third section of mandatory minimum sentences address repeat offenders in seven distinct categories, which involve impaired driving and possession of unauthorized weapons (Canada, 2013). The last category of MMS in Canada deals with hybrid offences. These were implemented in the Canadian legislation in 1995. If an offender commits a crime that has been determined to result in a mandatory minimum sentence within the Canadian Legislation, the judge must implement that sentence no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors are. Due to this sentencing legislation, many innocent people are serving time in prison due to a false conviction and the lack of judicial discretion in their individual case. Even though mandatory minimum sentences offer more costs then rewards, some politicians, community members and victims of crime still support it due to the proposed retributive and deterrent effects. There have been many cases and arguments against mandatory minimum sentences especially due to the fact that it restricts the judge’s discretion during the sentencing process. These will be discussed in more depth throughout this paper.

Three salient points from the films/lectures were assessments of change from the five stages of change model (Norcross, j. c., n.d.), the Fair Sentencing Act for mandatory minimum sentences (American Civil Liberties Union, 2010), and eliminating government involvement in regulation of drugs and alcohol substance, while allowing the various states to manage control (ABC News.com, 2007).

I will obtain different peer reviewed sources to examine and interpret both facts and opinions provided by the authors. I will also use some web articles and books to gather more information on mandatory minimum sentencing and its effects on society. With this in mind, I will

The mandatory sentence of two years’ imprisonment is unconstitutional because it is “cruel and unusual punishment” which infringes upon the accused’s right not to be subjected to such treatment. Firstly, it is determined that the mandatory minimum sentence in this case is grossly disproportionate to the accused’s circumstances and would be reasonably foreseeable that the provision would have the same overreaching effect on other offenders. Secondly, the provision in question in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is not saved by section 1 of the Charter as it has failed the prescribed Oakes test. The test gives weight to the law’s objective in comparison to the means of achieving it, which in this case, impaired too heavily on the right of the accused.

Secondly, they should be addressed the needs of offenders and the deficits in their lives that contributed to their offending. And thirdly, sentences should not be severe, intrusive, or damaging to an offender’s later decarceration to live a righteous life than is minimally necessary to achieve valid purposes of the sentence he or she receives (Tonry 508). An addition to these are proportionality, which means that sentences should correspond in severity to the seriousness of the crimes which they are inflicted. Also, regularity, which signifies that sentences should be guided by official standards to make the process clear, procedures fair, and allow judges to be more accountable (Tonry 508). Moreover, the American Criminal Code must be taken into consideration. Two features must be altered if the sentencing is to become fair, effective, and just. Firstly, the harsh sentencing laws must be revoked, and secondly the limits, that matches the offense seriousness, must be put on the lawful sentences (Tonry 514). Moreover, Tonry mentioned about future changes that, “If adopted, they would greatly reduce the number of people in prison in future years, but their adoption would not significantly reduce the scale of American imprisonment in 2015 or in 2020. Doing that will require enactment of new laws authorizing reconsideration of sentences now being served (Tonry 523).

Why are so many violent criminals walking free while so many non-violent offenders are locked up? Although various aspects have fueled this inequity of justice, the factors that have contributed the most to this development are, undoubtedly, the War on Drugs and mandatory minimum sentencing laws which have led to punishment disproportionate to the offense.

Summary: This bill would remove mandatory minimums enacted under the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act invoked by convictions of importing, exporting, manufacturing, distributing, or possessing “with an intent to distribute” a legally-controlled substance. It repeals several mandatory minimums associated with possession, selling controlled substances in a school zone, employing youth under age 18 to distribute drugs, and the adult sale of controlled substances to someone under the age of 21. It also restricts prosecutorial ability to prosecute low-level drug offenses in instances of small drug quantities by requiring the prosecutor to acquire the approval of the Attorney General prior to

First, a sentencing structure should be rational. The sentence should be proportional to the severity of the crime as measured by the harm to the victim and to the offender’s prior record. One of the things I would do to ensure rationality to a sentencing structure is eliminate mandatory minimums. Mandatory minimum sentences don’t serve to eliminate sentencing disparities because they do not eliminate sentencing discretion - they merely shift that discretion from judges to prosecutors.

The correctional field has many things that it does well, and it probably has just as many that it does not do well. The correctional system is always evolving to help protect the people who need it the most. The correctional field is also tasked with many services that it may need to cut spending on, and may things that is should increase spending on. One of the things I believe that our correctional system does very well, and should continue to fund is super maximum security prisons. These prisons seem to work very well in keeping some of the worse criminals in the correctional system tamed. The first start of a super maximum security prison started in a maximum security prison in 1983 when a prison guard was stabbed to

Nonetheless, just as law should be tempered with equity, so should rigid sentencing rules leave room for adjustment in certain cases where a legislatively fixed sentence would be manifestly unjust. No statute can account for every variable in every case, and the attempt to do so with mandatory minimums has given rise to punishments in some small-scale drug possession cases that are completely out of whack with the purpose of the federal sentencing laws.

Although violent offenses may serve longer sentencing however, mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent inmates can as well created to longer sentencing that may raise the aging prison population rapidly. For example, Barbara Scrivner has entered prison at age 29 and was sentenced for 30 years for her character as a minor member in a methamphetamine industry and delivery conspiracy (Families Against Mandatory Minimums, 2014). Sentences that run continuously can indeed increasing the length of staying in prison and can bring an individual into his or her later years. This can be illustrated by Atiba Parker, who committed in selling cocaine and possession of cocaine with total of three sentences (Jose, 2014). He was sentenced for 42 years in

Prisons cost a large sum of money to maintain and operate. This sum is only growing as our population does due to the higher demand and amount of incoming prisoners. More prisoners are coming into prison than leaving. On average, it costs 31,286 dollars per prisoner per year. The average cost per person in New York is about 60,000 dollars. Prisons in different states cost different amount due to the number of people in the prisons as well as the size and number of prisons. The quality of the prison is also a factor in how expensive it is to keep them imprisoned. Almost every state goes over their prison budgets every year. Some states even go over their budgets by as much as 34 percent. States that go over their budget are sometimes even unable

Bernick & Larkin suggest that “mandatory minimum sentences are the product of good intention, but good intentions do not always make good policy; good results are also necessary (Bernick & Larkin)”. You could not described this in a better way. The practice of mandatory minimum sentences ensure any criminal acts carries a punishment. Moreover, the punishment is established resulting in less sentencing disparity for similar crimes. Additionally, mandatory minimum sentences remove unjustifiably lenient sentences. The resulting in firm enactment of mandatory punishment meant to alert the consequences of an individual actions. Basically, if you commit the crime, get ready to do the time. However, there are cons just as there pros to mandatory minimum

Each year in America many people received prison sentences for crimes that pose little if any danger or harm to our society. Mandatory Minimum Sentencing in the American Justice System has long been argued by both Lawmakers and the public. We will go over some of the history of mandatory minimum sentences as well as the many pros and cons to these types of sentences. Some examples of pros and cons are the overall effect on public safety, the effect on the offenders, the cost to taxpayers, the lack of discretion for Judge’s, and whether the law should be repealed.