Prisoners of War:
Fighting Back Against mandatory minimum Sentences
Jess Brock
Prisoner number 59817-079, Zulima Buitrago. She was charged and convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, even though she wasn’t in possession of any drugs or money. While out at the movies with her children, a friend of hers conducted a drug deal in her garage. When he got busted, in order to avoid a life sentence, he claimed that Zulima was involved in the drug deal as well. At the time of her arrest, Zulima was a single mother of two, eight-year-old Alberto and four-year-old Karina. Zulima was sentenced to twenty-four years, with a five year supervised release. She has no chance at parole, because she was sentenced under a mandatory minimum sentencing law. This is just one example of the injustices brought about by mandatory minimum sentences.
Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to sentence offenders to a minimum term. Offenders cannot be paroled; they must serve the complete sentence. Mandatory minimums were established with the noblest of intentions. Politicians hoped to cut down on drug use and take out drug kingpins. Unfortunately, low-level, non-violent drug offenders have continued to fill our prisons and overload our justice system. Most offenders aren’t like Zulima, and really are guilty. However, the judge should have the ability to tailor the sentence to the offender.
The Essay on Should Drug Convictions Carry Mandatory Jail Sentences
Should drug convictions carry mandatory jail sentences The fact that the United States has a drug problem is indisputable. The amount of people using and or addicted to illegal substances has increased steadily over the years. A 1917 survey showed that almost 11 percent of 12 to 17-year-olds admitted to using illegal drugs in the months preceding the survey. Other survey results were even more ...
I first learned about mandatory minimums from a friend of mine. We often engaged in heated political discussions, and one night, we got onto the topic of mandatory minimums. The injustice of the laws quickly became apparent to me. Shortly after, my sophomore English class was assigned to do research papers. I chose mandatory minimum sentencing as my topic. I saw it as a great opportunity to learn more. In my research, I discovered Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM), a nonprofit organization devoted to battling mandatory minimums. FAMM does not condone the legalization of drugs, and they do not think that drug offenders should go unpunished; they believe that every offender has the right to be sentenced fairly. I joined FAMM, and as a member, have extended my education of the injustices rendered by mandatory minimums.
As I mentioned previously, federal and state governments enacted mandatory sentencing laws hoping to nail kingpins with lengthy prison terms. However, our prisons are full of drug users who could potentially be rehabilitated. Instead, we send them to prison, where some are able to rehabilitate themselves, but most end up involved in the massive prison drug trade. Mandatory minimums tie judges’ hands and leave them no discretion and no room for leniency. Politicians don’t meet the offenders; they don’t review the cases; they don’t see firsthand whether an offender would be better served in rehab; they don’t see if an offender expresses remorse.
The only way a judge can sentence below the minimum is if the offender provides “substantial assistance” which leads to the arrests of more offenders. This is why Zulima’s friend implicated her. Mandatory minimums remove sentencing discretion from the judge’s hands and places it in the prosecutor’s hands. The prosecutor decides what charges to bring up, and whether to accept or deny plea bargains and substantial assistance. Mandatory minimums upset the constitutional balance of power by taking sentencing power away from judges and giving it to prosecutors and lawmakers.
The Term Paper on Mandatory Jail Sentence
Many lives would be saved by car crashes every year. If they are put into jail for at least 48 hours or more, they would learn from their mistakes most likely and won't do it again. Posted by: Anonymous Report Post LikeReply 0 0 * If there was more at stake for people, they would be more hesitant about making bad decisions. Drunk driving is a direct result of bad decisions. It doesn't happen ...
Sentences are calculated by the type of drug, the amount involved in the crime, and the offender’s number of prior convictions. However, this formula ignores important factors such as the offender’s motivation to break the law, their role in the offense, and the likelihood that they will commit crimes again. There are also too many discrepancies within the system. Possession of 4.9 grams of crack carries a one-year maximum, while possession of 5.1 grams carries a five-year minimum. When calculating terms for possession of LSD, the weight of the carrier is included in the term. If the LSD is on paper or sugar cubes (as it often is) the offender will be sentenced to a longer term than if they had pure liquid LSD. There is also a large disparity between the length of the terms for crack and cocaine possession. Statistically, most cocaine users are white, while the majority of crack users are black. Possession of crack carries a much longer prison term than possession of a comparable amount of cocaine. Many feel that the system is racist.
Some argue that mandatory minimums act as a deterrent. This is untrue. Since mandatory minimums are not well publicized, most people don’t know about them. Crime rates continue to have more to do with demographics than laws enacted in the hopes of crime prevention.
Mandatory minimums do not apply to murders, rapists, or child-molesters. They only exist for drug offenders. Since people sentenced under mandatory minimums cannot be paroled, murders, rapists, and child-molesters are released to make room for more non-violent drug offenders. Drug users fill our prisons while violent offenders walk the streets. Prior to the enactment of mandatory minimums, there were guidelines for sentencing which allowed judges to consider the circumstances of each case. We should return to those days, days of fair and equitable sentencing.
I’ve been an active member of FAMM for 3 years now, always doing my part to bring about change. I write letters, sign petitions, and recently I solicited signatures for a petition myself. I hope to be able to work with FAMM’s Community Action Network, to bring FAMM members together to write letters, make phone calls, and visit legislators when important bills come up. I have used FAMM as a gateway to inform my peers about mandatory minimums. I have done multiple research papers and presentations in classes in the hopes that my peers will become more aware of the issue.
The Term Paper on Minimum Wage
Minimum wage is the lowest rate employees may legally pay for an hour of labor (Merriam, 741). The United States has a minimum wage law to guarantee minimum hourly wages and to prevent the exploitation of workers and provide unskilled and part-time workers with a wage floor. People have argues that the minimum wage has become less of a safety net for primary earners in poor families than a floor ...
I honestly believe that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. That’s why I’ve tried to maintain a high level of involvement in the battle against mandatory minimums. I am making myself part of the solution. Even though change doesn’t come easily, I like to think that I am helping and my actions will make a difference. With FAMM’s efforts, continuing to promote public awareness and consciousness, I hope to see mandatory minimums repealed and justice restored.
