The last thing about incarcerations is there are other alternatives. That’s the another point the Smarter Sentencing Act is trying to say other than shorter sentencing times. “The 24/7 Sobriety Project is a court-based program designed to reduce the re-offense rates of repeat Driving Under the Influence (DUI) offenders. Started as a pilot project in South Dakota in 2005, the 24/7 Project requires participants to maintain full sobriety, meaning no use of alcohol or illegal drugs, in order to keep their driving privileges and stay out of jail” (). This states that anyone with a DUI or any other drug offences can seek help to stay out of jail in South Dakota.
A recent trend in the United States Justice System, at local and state levels, is to implement the use of formulas and algorithms to determine sentencing length. In her article “Sentencing, by the Numbers”, University of Michigan law professor Sonja Starr focuses on this trend, and shows flaws that she finds in the system. In the article, she agrees with the actions of Attorney General Eric Holder in criticizing the system for the way in which it determines the risk of future crimes. Throughout, Starr presents the system as something that will, instead of solving mass incarceration, make the problem worse for impoverished persons and minorities. Starr argues that the system discriminates against those with a socioeconomic disadvantage, has
The justice system has to take a new approach to enforce law that place minor drug offenses in jail for long periods of time and actually
Mandatory minimum sentences are sentences mandated by law for
Some of the reasons that policymakers and voters are favoring intermediate sanctions for nonviolent, low-risk offenders are because it releases the heavy economic burden on taxpayers (Schmalleger & Smykla 2015). Building more and more prisons to house inmates cost money, and that money comes from taxpayers. When more and more offenders are sentenced to prison, the prisons become overcrowded very fast. When overcrowding occurs, disorder is not far behind it. Having to hire more staff and train them correctly also cost the taxpayers money.
If we lower the sentences for selling crack cocaine, that does not help our society in any shape or form. It teaches men and women that selling cocaine isn't a big deal. More people may turn to drug dealing such harmful narcotics as a easy way to make money which is not right. Looking
Due to the fact that drug courts are working to reduce crime, the policies and practices of the US government may have to be changed or strengthened in favor of drug courts. For example, in the Journal Do Drug Courts Work? Getting Inside the Drug Court Black Box (Goldkamp, White, Robinson, 2001), the authors say “Nevertheless, these findings also suggest that variation in drug court out comes may be explained by changes in the operation of the drug court and its ability to deliver the treatment and deterrent effects postulated by the collection of components inside the drug court black box”. This clearly shows that in order for drug courts to work and grow in numbers, changes in policies and procedures that are shown to reduce crime need to be implemented everywhere. Weaknesses that can be found in this summary are that all active drug courts in the US did not respond, which could lead to a very different outcome involving the effectiveness of drug courts as a
Drug courts were first implemented in the late 1980’s, this innovative program spawned many other specialized courts like domestic violence courts, juvenile and family drug courts, and even “deadbeat dad” courts. Drug court specializes in the sobriety of the individuals that participate in this program “between one-fourth and one-half of all adult males arrested, and roughly one-half of all females arrested, were at risk for drug dependence; few had been treated for drug or alcohol use in the prior year” (Wilson, 2006). Not all drug courts operate the same way, many times the judge may impose different sanctions depending on the characteristics of the offender; leverage, population severity, program intensity, predictability, rehabilitative are just a few of the characteristics that a judge may use when rendering his/her
Defined as a public policy that imposes an outlined amount of prison time based on the crime committed and the defendant’s criminal history, these sentences dictate that a judge must enact a statutory fixed penalty on individuals convicted of certain crimes, regardless of extenuating circumstances. Such laws have removed discretionary sentencing power from judges, instead focusing on severe punishments in line with national drug and crime concerns. While the original goal of mandatory minimum sentences was to deter potential criminals, reduce drug use, control judicial prudence, the policy has had extreme consequences such as sentencing imbalances and
Mandatory minimums have long been a controversial topic in regard to the United States criminal justice system. Many people who are little to no threat to the public have received long and harsh sentences because of the mandatory minimums. The purpose of these laws was to help prevent future crime, deter people from drug use, and give violent offenders longer sentences. These legislative changes have caused the lengthening of sentences, truth in sentencing laws, and three-strike laws. Mandatory minimums require convicts to serve a minimum amount of time for certain crimes or because of their recidivism.
Despite the fact that mandatory minimums can have negative consequences on first time offenders, I still think that justice is best served with “mandatory minimums” because it prevents judges from being too lenient with the sentences of serious crime. For example, if a violent person commits murder and the judge only sentences them to eight years because they are a first offender, many would agree that an eight year sentence for a murder is too lenient and could encourage the criminal to be a repeat offender. Another reason justice is best served with mandatory minimums is that it can prevent people from committing certain crimes because the consequences for committing the crime may be enough to deter them. For example, if somebody wanted to
The current system that incarcerates people over and over is unsustainable and does not lower the crime rate nor encourage prisoner reformation. When non-violent, first time offenders are incarcerated alongside violent repeat offenders, their chance of recidivating can be drastically altered by their experience in prison. Alternative sentencing for non-violent drug offenders could alleviate this problem, but many current laws hinder many possible solutions. Recently lawmakers have made attempts to lower the recidivism rates in America, for example the Second Chance Act helps aid prisoners returning into society after incarceration. The act allows states to appropriate money to communities to help provide services such as education, drug treatment programs, mental health programs, job corps services, and others to aid in offenders returning to society after incarceration (Conyers, 2013).
This model focuses on the individual needs of the offender and in doing so increases their chance of living sober once they reenter society. For example, indeterminate sentencing allows offenders who exhibit good behavior and participate in prison substance abuse programs to be paroled closer to the minimum sentencing term. This means the offender can be released from prison based on conditions set forth by the court. If the offender violates parole by committing another crime or failing to continue substance abuse treatment, they can be returned to prison. Furthermore, offering indeterminate sentencing for offenders who meet the criteria creates prison space thus helping with the ongoing problem of prison overcrowding (Seiter,
Inconsistent applications of mandatory minimums generate disparate sentences among similarly situated offenders. Some basic facts may trigger the same minimum sentence for a low-level drug courier and a narcotics kingpin, for example, while enormous
The reason I believe that eliminating mandatory minimum sentences is something that needs to be done is because it is necessary in some cases to let people who are incarcerated or soon to be incarcerated to get out of jail before they were sentenced to get out. Sometimes mandatory sentences target people unfairly like for example minorities or younger individuals. According to Chief Editor African Americans pertaining to drug use suffer more than white Americans do and it is causing unjust between the two races. There was also a case of a woman named Tina who set a building on fire by accident, killing two young boys when she was a young girl and was reprimanded for it and was tried as an adult and sentenced to life, even though she suffered
