Essay On Mandatory Minimum Sentences

There are no benefits from mandatory minimum sentences when the crime is not severe. We should not be putting people in jail when they are not hurting themselves or others, because its taking money from tax payers yearly just to keep them locked up. "Weston Angelos who was 23 years old and had not had a criminal history received a mandatory minimum sentence for selling $350 of marijuana why having possession of a gun. His actions gave him a mandatory minimum sentence that will have American taxes pay $1.5 million to keep him locked up" (Leahy). Our taxes that could have been spent on things such as our schools and city’s infrastructures are instead going to prisons to keep someone locked up for a few years. There are so many minor crimes committed that do not deserve sentencing. Such as "hunters who mess with a guns muzzle break, folding stock, or imported rifle can be defined as a criminal street gang and face a mandatory minimum sentence for 5 years" (Sullum). Tax payers should not

America needs to come up with a different punishments instead of giving out mandatory minimum sentences because it ends up being super expensive. Giving people mandatory sentences for a few years in hopes on making a difference doesn't seem to be benefiting the government financially. "The government chooses how $800 million will be used to fund prions" (Lisa Peng). $800 million could be spent on more important things such as advancing our technology or discovering new medicines to fight diseases. There are other places in the world who do not choose to be as strict with mandatory minimum sentences as we are. "America has 8 to 10 times more prisoners per a capita than any other democracy" (James). This shows that we are putting to many people in jails and that we need to find a way to cut down on prisoners. Which concludes one more reason why we need to get rid of mandatory minimum sentences once and for