Mandatory Sentencing

For the last forty years, women have been steadily increasing the prison populations. The United States has one third of the world’s female prison population. Incarceration rates for females have increased more drastically than for males since the early 1970s. By 2010, the women’s incarceration rate ascended twice as fast as the male prison population. One of the biggest reasons women have become

The number of women incarcerated is growing at a rapid pace. This calls for a reevaluation of our correction institutions to deal with women’s involvement in crime. Increasing numbers of arrests for property crime and public order offenses are outpacing that of men. The “War on Drugs” has a big influence on why our prisons have become overcrowded in the last 25 years. Women are impacted more than ever because they are being convicted equally for drug and other offenses. Female criminal behavior has always been identified as minor compared to Male’s criminal behavior. Over the years women have made up only small part of the offender populations. There is still only a small

women has increased significantly, increasing at a rate double to the rate of male incarceration since 1980 (Covington & Bloom, 2006). Braithwaite, Treadwell and Arriola note that incarcerated women have historically been a forgotten population, and despite the rapid growth of the population, their needs have continued to be ignored (2005). In addition to the stigma that comes with being or having been incarcerated,

The concept of mandatory sentencing is a relatively new idea in the legal field. It was first introduced in 1951 with the Boggs Act, and it made simple marijuana possession a minimum of two to ten years with a $20,000 fine. This was eventually repealed by Congress in 1970, but mandatory sentences came back with the passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. Since then, the scope and presence of mandatory sentencing has only grown, especially mandatory sentences for drug related offenses. Recently, there has been a growing concern over the use and implementation of mandatory minimum sentencing, with many believing it reduces a judge’s ability to give out a sentence that they feel accordingly fits the crime. Many advocates for mandatory

Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against

As far as alternatives go, there are several things that need to be addressed to improve and fix this overcrowded problem. There is no one reason for the overcrowding within the prison system and one has factored in all reasons that can lead up to the cause of overcrowding in order to find a solution to this tremendous issue.

The United States criminal justice system, an outwardly fair organization of integrity and justice, is a perfect example of a seemingly equal situation, which turns out to be anything but for women. The policies imposed in the criminal justice system affect men and women in extremely dissimilar manners. I plan to examine how gender intersects with the understanding of crime and the criminal justice system. Gender plays a significant role in understanding who commits what types of crimes, why they do so, who is most often victimized, and how the criminal justice system responds to these victims and offenders. In order to understand the current state of women and the way in which gender relates to crime and criminal justice, it is first

How beneficial or detrimental is the effects of parenting from the penal system for the children and families involved? How much of an influence is the effects of parenting from the penal system is affecting the child’s developmental skills? Is parenting from the penal system, exposing the children to the risk factors that may increase the chances of them being incarcerated? These are the typical questions and concerns that are being questioned when researchers are gathering their conclusion.

Women are twice as likely as men to avoid incarceration if convicted of a crime. Whether or not this is fair, though, is highly debated. Some politicians argue that women’s prisons be abolished all together, while Men’s Rights Activists push for equal sentencing for comparable crimes. It has been proven that judges tend to give women less time in prison, or no incarceration at all, and the reasons for this support the imbalance in sentencing. Though many view women’s tendency to receive lighter punishments as unfair, it is justified that women receive this treatment because of legal rules that surround the subject, the statistics that show women commit less serious and violent crimes, and how women being incarcerated impacts those around them.

Overcrowding prisons at the cost of the taxpayers’ dollar, people who need rehab sitting in prison for years at a time instead of getting the help that they need, and judges cannot do anything about it. Mandatory minimum sentencing has taken away judges’ discretion when sentencing cases. Drug offenses often receive heavier sentences than they should due to the use of mandatory minimums leaving people to question the fairness of the justice system. The use of mandatory minimums when sentencing drug offenses wrongfully incarcerates the convicted for longer than necessary rather than providing the rehabilitation the individual needs to break their habit and re-enter the public.

Drug trafficking, crack availability, and the Federal Anti-Drug Abuse Act led to mandatory minimum prison for dealers that will be sentenced. Originally, the sentencing for crack versus cocaine was “100:1” (Blumstein & Jonsson-federal sentencing reporter), meaning the amount of crack compared to the amount of powdered cocaine needed to set up a required minimum prison sentence.

“We [the United States] imprison more of our own people than any other country on earth, including China, which has four times our population, or in human history” (Bloom). Due to the decades past between the “war on drugs” and “Get Tough on Crime” which has left a trail of broken tears and a failed system. The mass incarceration boom consisted of several tactics such as just desserts and three strike laws. The model may not have been directed toward the African American community, but the numbers have not lied, a large chunk of inmates are those of color. Surprisingly a lot of people who have been locked up as well as doing time currently are not all violent, actually most of the inmates are incarcerated for nonviolent charges. The guilty,

What is the expectation when someone commits a crime? Many would say that offenders require strict punishment including harsh sentencing moreover that rehabilitation is without value. Two conflicting views are being examined from Eugene H. Methvin, who is a supporter of mandatory sentencing as well as ‘three strikes’ sentencing that can result in life sentences being mandatory for repeat offenders even if they are non-violent crimes. On the other hand, is David Shichor, who supports sentencing that is efficient and fair especially since harsh sentencing does not reduce crime. Two works are reviewed, Eugene Methvin is his paper Mugged by Reality and David Shichor in his Three Strikes as a Public Policy.

This policy brief, intended for top United States policy makers, seeks to argue for the repeal of mandatory sentencing for nonviolent drug offences. The document will argue that current mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines constitute cruel and unusual punishment, something which is in direct violation of the Eight Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and goes against the core ideals of the American justice system which promises fair and equal treatment for all under the law. It will also be argued that while the practice has not succeeded in accomplishing its main objectives (reducing drug use and related crime), it has succeeded in disproportionately burdening minority populations with lengthy prison sentences sometimes exceeding those given

Judges are not utilizing more alternative sentencing options****may merge this one with brown factors bearing****.