Crime and Punishment Is One of the Hottest Topics in America
Crime and punishment is a hotly debated topic in the United States. Whether or not a person should be punished for certain crimes and how much the punishment should be, varies from cases it case and state to state. The mandatory minimum prison sentence is sometimes applied for certain crimes and mandatory minimum prison sentence is the smallest amount of time your are required to serve in jail for specific crimes. For many years, the criminal justice system has been criticized for its many problems and errors; one in particular that caught society’s attention were the mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
Criminal justice system, like any system designed by human beings, clearly has its flaws. A current debate here in the United States is whether or not the mandatory minimum prison sentence should be abolished.
These minimum prison sentences are punishments that are set through legislation for specific offenses. Abolishing these minimum prison sentencing would discourage potential criminals, keep society safe for longer periods of time, they would punish the offender and they would rehabilitate the offender.
In order to ensure that the punishment fits the crime, the mandatory minimum prison sentencing should be abolished.
Prison is also known as a correctional facility, in which inmates are forcibly confined and denied a variety of freedoms under the authority of the state is where these criminals are being sentenced to. Prisons here in the United States of America, Mandatory Minimum Sentences are Cruel and an unusual punishment for citizens. Each year in America many people received prison sentences for crimes that pose little if any danger or harm to our society.
![](https://paperap.com/wp-content/themes/theme/img-rh/star.svg")
4.9 (247)
“ Rhizman is absolutely amazing at what he does . I highly recommend him if you need an assignment done ”
Jails hold a variety of inmates, those who have been arrested, detained pending trial, sentenced to short terms of confinement for minor crimes, and those being held for administrative transfer to another unit. These facilities face issues such as dealing with unknown offenders, managing medical problems and detoxifications and still provide the court with security and transportation for inmates Mandatory Minimum Sentencing in the American Justice System has long been argued by both Lawmakers and the public.
The purpose of the American correctional system is to keep criminals of the streets who may cause harm to the public, to protect the citizens of the United States and to punish criminals who are found guilty of committing crimes. The United States correctional system is very ineffective. The cost of incarcerating criminals is astronomical; the reason these criminals are in jail is because they need to be punished, and most of the prisoner’s lives are corrupt before and after prison. However, within the United States each state jail crime regulations varies.
According to the Virginia Department of Corrections, the Virginia prisons goals are to enhance the quality of life in the Commonwealth by improving public safety. They plan to accomplish this through the reintegration of sentences men and women in custody and care by providing supervision and control, effective programs and re-entry services in safe environments which foster positive change and growth consistent with research-based evidence, fiscal responsibility, and constitutional standards. Furthermore, the prison system offers a range of programs and services to more than 30,000 state prisoners that support the effective operation of facilities by constructively occupying otherwise idle inmate time and reducing unrest.
Programs also provide those inmates who choose to change criminal behaviors with meaningful opportunities for positive growth. This Prison programs is aligned within the Department so that inmates with long sentences or behavior problems receive programs that promote positive prison adjustment. Those inmates nearing release receive programs aimed at reducing recidivism. Virginia spends roughly $1.5 billion a year to operate crowded jails and prisons. The cost to incarcerate a young person in a juvenile facility is roughly $100,000 per year. With that being said, the following information about prison systems ensures a steady supply for these prison contracts so that all the person that we have continued to be full and profitable.
Throughout US history prison sentences were primarily founded upon what is known as Discretionary Sentencing. Leading up to this period of time sentencing practices weas largely criticized due to the discretionary applications utilized in sentencing. The assessment for sentencing was determined by three separate decisions policy decisions, factual decisions, and decisions applying policy decisions with particular facts. In review of these policies regarding the applications of sentencing, the policy decisions are those that dictate what considerations should affect punishment. The second, which is factual determinations are the means by which a judge determines whether to apply a particular policy to an offender. The third decision, judges make in discretionary schemes is how to apply the sentencing policies to the particular facts. This authority was applied by the judge under the discretionary sentencing system as historically practiced. It was not until the mid-twentieth century that mandatory sentencing was implemented. In short, the difference between mandatory and discretionary sentencing system lies in policy and application decisions.
However, In early April, the news emerged that 46-year-old fast food restaurant worker John Horner, who was sentenced to 25 years in prison for selling $1,800 worth of painkillers.
Sadly, the father of three is just one example of a drug addict put away for decades because of a mandatory minimum sentence. A lot of drug crimes like Horner’s carry mandatory minimum sentences that force judges give harsh punishments even if they want to show mercy to vulnerable defendants.There’s been a push to do away with mandatory minimums, which critics call both unethical and expensive. The criminal justice system focuses on the principle of restorative justice and rehabilitating prisoners. Correctional facilities in Norway focus on the care of the offender and making sure they can become a functioning member of society again. Norway has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world, currently 20%, with approximately 3,933 offenders in prison, and one of the lowest crime rates in the world.
Two decades ago, it was not uncommon for Americans believe they had one of the best criminal justice systems in the world. Unfortunately, with the enormous drug trade coming to a pinnacle and the effects of drugs on more and more suburban youth, the government felt a desperate measure had to be taken. In the mid-1980’s congress passed a series of strict laws to keep illegal drugs off the street. What they did not know was how inhumane, cost ineffective and unconstitutional these laws would be. A mandatory minimum sentence occurs when judicial discretions are limited by law. Those who are convicted of certain crimes must be punished with at least the minimum number of years depending on the offense.
However, these mandatory sentencing laws, however, vary from state to state, and in other countries. Actions which might constitute a crime in one state would not necessarily constitute a crime in another state, or they might constitute a crime of a different severity. A 12-year-old and a 17-year-old having consensual sexual intercourse might constitute a crime in one state but not another. A person possessing cannabis, certain types of firearms, or exotic animals might be committing serious crimes in some states, but are perfectly legal to possess in other states. A burglary might be completed only upon entry into a locked house in one state, but upon entry into an attached carport in another.
Many states have adopted sentencing guidelines which incorporate various factors into a single formula that may or may not constrain the judge’s sentencing discretion. The main purpose of these schemes is to produce uniform and fair sentencing within a jurisdiction, but, they are not necessarily fair because it is not set up correctly. However, since views about the correct approach to criminal justice vary from state to state, these statutory schemes vary enormously. Mandatory sentencing schemes typically require minimum periods of incarceration for certain serious crimes and for individuals who have serious criminal records.
For example; Two people are sent to jail for killing 5 people. However, one of them was recently released from jail within a year or two ago. The offender who has been to jail before would not get the minimum prison sentence, but, the other offender who has never been would have a possibility to receive the mandatory minimum prison sentence. Therefore, that is not a good way to run our court judicial systems, regardless if it is the jury’s decision or the judges. Anyone who commits the same crime as someone should be held accountable for the charges that connects with the crimes, regardless if it is someone’s first time committing a crime or not. The mandatory minimum prison sentence was officially passed by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which was introduced in many states at different times.
According to the American Bar Association, These one-size-fits-all sentencing statutes that were intended to determine crime and punish big-time criminals often backfire, giving drug addicts and small-time offenders enormous sentences. However, the minimum sentencing is making it worst in our society. Because when your crime is subject to a mandatory minimum sentencing law, the judge has much less discretion in setting your punishment. If you plead guilty or are found guilty at trial, you will get at least the minimum sentence set by law. The judge is not permitted to impose a shorter sentence according to, Legal Articles Criminal Offenses. Therefore the minimum prison sentencing should be abolished due to these negative aspects. These prison sentences do not work accurately. They violate the fundamental principle of sentencing criminals, because when sentencing criminals for specific crimes, it must be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime they committed and their responsibility for that offense.
If anyone should know this, it is the judiciary, which has to apply the principles of sentencing, including the principle of proportionality. Therefore, members of Parliament are too far from the practice of the courts to understand the problems created by mandatory sentences. Judges know their task is compromised by the raft of mandatory sentences, which is why they have struck down so many sentences. However, Mandatory sentences also affect the prosecutor’s work. In this case, prosecutors are the ones who trigger mandatory minimum sentences by deciding to charge individuals with offenses that carry those sentences. These decisions are often made early in the process, when the prosecutor does not have all the information related to the case.
When someone is given a court date, there should be a certain sentence number given, regardless if you are being sentenced by a judge or a jury. Furthermore, it should not be a minimum nor should there be a maximum. When being accused of committing a crime or being charged for doing something, there should be one set sentence number that all people are required to serve that are accused of committing the same crime. Therefore, when someone is convicted of the same crime that someone was yesterday, then they should be serving the same amount of years in prison just because they were charged with the same thing. This is because if someone was to go to court today and only have to serve 5 years for killing 5 people just because it was his first time committing a crime or doing anything bad. Then in that case that is unfair towards someone who has gone to jail for convicting a crime before and decided to do it again, but this time they were sentenced 35 years but they only killed one person this time. In that situation, it is unfair due to the history of their background, therefore all people who are sentenced to jail should have a required number to serve due to what they were charged to better our judicial system.
According to PBS NEWSHOUR, The Obama administration took some measures to roll back these mandatory minimums which was for a good cause. Because in 2013, Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memo asking prosecutors to prosecute crimes with mandatory minimum sentences only for the worst offenders. Also, not too long ago Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded that memo and issued his own, which requires prosecutors to “charge and pursue the most serious” offense. The number of prisoners in U.S. federal and state institutions have sharply increased over the past three decades. The punitive sentiment behind Sessions’ memo is a throwback to our failed experiment in mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s.
The number of prisoners in U.S. federal and state institutions make up 25% of the U.S. population. Which makes it the world leader in its rate of incarceration. The most common of these laws deal with drug offenses and set mandatory minimum sentences for possession of a drug over a certain amount. Over the years, jails have been getting more and more crowded with a majority of its offenders being drug users. Drug offenses often receive higher 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. Many of these inmates are sentenced to long and undeserving periods of time to be served due to laws that are set up within the mandatory maximum minimum sentencing.
According to Montreal Gazette, In Canada mandatory minimum sentences violate two key elements of their sentencing which is Individualization and proportionality. Individualization is important because offenders are individuals, not necessarily groups. Every offender is entitled to have a judge consider his own particular circumstance. Proportionality by making the sentence fit the crime and the offender, which are even more important. Therefore, for a court to craft a proportionate sentence, it must consider the specific crime and the circumstances of the offender. Parliament cannot know in advance how serious a particular crime is, or how much blame should attach to this specific offender. So, a mandatory sentence, or a mandatory sentence presumed to apply to all offenders, undermines proportionality in sentencing. Mandatory sentences don’t work well in practice even though every time parliament creates a new mandatory sentence, it undermines the very principle it made fundamental back in 1996.
In the United States, it is against the law to operate a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and drugs. Driving Under the Influence or Operating Under the Influence is often measured by a driver’s Blood Alcohol Concentration. Driving with a BAC level above 0.08 is against the law and may result in criminal penalties such as jail time. The following will consider the effectiveness of mandatory jail sentences used to decrease instances of drunk driving in comparison to other deterrents. Research has been conducted to examine if mandatory jail sentences would decrease instances of DUI. Of the studies, the two most significant support of jail time as a deterrent to DUI were conducted in the 1980’s.
Crime and Punishment Is One of the Hottest Topics in America. (2022, Apr 25). Retrieved from https://paperap.com/crime-and-punishment-is-one-of-the-hottest-topics-in-america/
