Tough On Crime Policy Analysis

In addition to greatly affecting the otherwise unlikely citizens of America, Tough on Crime policies have greatly affected minority groups in America; perhaps more so than of any other group of citizens. To begin, from the 1980 on through the year 1995, the incarceration rates among drug offenders increased by more than 1000 percent. Notably, by the year 1995 one out of every four inmates in any given correctional facility was a drug offender. In addition of that 1000 percent increase, drug offenders accounted for more than 80 percent of the total growth in the federal inmate population and 50 percent of the growth of the state prison population from 1985 to 1995 (Stith, web). In addition, once in the system, the probability of receiving harsher

A study conducted by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services undertaking claims of sentencing disparities studies the felony sentencing outcomes particularly in New York courts between the years 1990 and 1992. Astonishingly, the study concluded that approximately one-third of minorities sentenced to prison would have received a shorter sentence with the possibility of a non-incarcerative penalty if they had been treated similarly to their white counterparts. Consequently, other sentencing data is consistent with the results of this study’s findings. On a national scale, black males specifically, who were convicted of drug felonies in state courts 52 percent of the time, while white males typically receive prison sentencing approximately 34 percent of the time. In addition, these figures are not constrained to gender given the similar ratio among black and white women as well. To explain, 41 percent of black female felony drug offenders on average are sentenced to prison, as compared to 24 percent of white females. Similar to drug offenses, violent crimes typically boast a 74 percentile of black male convicted felons serve prison time, whereas approximately 60 percent of white male convicted felons do time. And finally, with respect to all

As a result of the increasing animosity of law enforcement authority and justice officials within our society, it has become apparent that the time for Congressional action is now to aid in calming the social fire storm of recent social anti-police movements, increased deadly ambushes upon unsuspecting police officers, and hateful rhetoric in the form of rebellious movements. So where should our nation’s leaders begin? Professor Paul George Cassell J.D. professor of Law at the University of Utah and former Unites States federal Judge suggests by starting with a reexamination of congressionally mandated mandatory minimum sentencing. In Cassell’s publication titled “Sense and Sensibility in Mandatory Minimum Sentencing” Cassell argues the unreasonableness of forcing mandatory minimum sentencing upon state courts when oftentimes, the punishment far exceeds the severity and/or social impact of the crime. As he explains within the text, “In practice, statutory minimums can distort the processes and outcomes of the federal system. 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