REFORMING CRIMINALS IS THE ANSWER

In our nation's war on drugs there have been too many needless casualties
as a result of federal laws that impose mandatory minimum sentences on
certain drug offenders. These laws, popular with politician's looking to
toughen their stance on drugs and crime, often put non-violent, small time
drug offenders behind bars for obscene periods of time, without a chance
for parole. Meanwhile, violent criminals, rapists and murderers, are given
lenient sentences that are rarely served in full.

America's federal prisons are now filled to capacity, mainly with drug
offenders, when they should be housing the violent criminals of our
society. A recent article in Time magazine stated that "more than half of
all American prisoners are nonviolent offenders," with 34 percent of those
criminals sentenced for simple drug offenses. Our country, which ranks
second in the world to Russia in total prison population, now must generate
tax funding from the public to construct more prisons. Each cell built will
cost, on average, $58,000 (Families Against Mandatory Minimums) of American
tax funding.

This money would be better spent on rehabilitation programs for these low
level, non-violent drug offenders. A recent study from the Rand Corporation
in Time magazine found that "treatment reduces about 10 times more serious
crime than conventional enforcement and 15 times more than mandatory
minimums." Politicians must not agree, as funding for these treatment
programs are embarrassingly miniscule. Yet, a majority of these drug
offenders are often small time dealers, just in business to support their
addiction. Common sense would follow that if these offenders were forced to
undergo drug rehabilitation, they would most likely avoid becoming a repeat
offender.

Mandatory minimums, are not just costly and unjust, they are racially
biased as well. Evidence supporting this claim can be found at the very
inception of these laws, starting over a decade ago, in 1986. It was during
this time period that mandatory minimums were passed as federal law in
response to the booming crack epidemic tormenting the urban areas of every
large city throughout the United States. The new drug was being mainly
consumed by minorities, who made up the majority population of the inner
cities. The federal governments answer to this problem was to create
mandatory minimums for offenders convicted of crack offenses.
Unfortunately, the laws they created are grossly inconsistent with other
mandatory minimums, such as cocaine. For example, criminals convicted of
distributing five grams of crack are given the exact same prison sentence
as criminals convicted for selling 500 grams of cocaine. Is this disparity
in punishments merely a coincidence, highly doubtful.

These ridiculous laws strip judges of their power to decide appropriate
punishments on a case by case basis. Clearly, politicians disliked the
disparity between certain rulings and felt that this was the only answer.
But, this type of legislation reduces the role of judges to merely a
spectator, not exactly what the constitution detailed as their role in
democracy. The founding fathers of America sought to escape this type of
unjust law, where the fate of a man is decided by politicians, not
responsible representatives of the law. This is a sobering thought, the
weight of justice rested solely on the shoulders of men who spend half of
their career trying to escape the wrath of the law.

Let's face it, everyone makes mistakes in their life, children and adults
alike. In some cases, people are luckier than others and they drink too
much and learn a rough lesson of life as they struggle through a horrific
hangover. Unfortunately, others make mistakes that will affect them for the
rest of their lives. In the trials of youth, some people choose to get
involved in the drug world, not expecting this decision to result anything
too serious. Studies show that 70 million Americans have made this mistake
in their lifetime, and while some experience the mysteries of euphoria and
move on, others never get the chance. Being caught with a small quantity of
cocaine, under a gram, could happen to any young experimenting person, but
if caught with this amount of cocaine in Texas they would face up to 10
years in a federal prison. It is a nightmarish thought for anyone.

People guilty of these small drug infractions clearly deserve a second
chance to prove their worth to society.

They are not violent criminals, just people who made a small mistake that
can carry incredibly harsh consequences. Instead of locking these people up
for a generous portion of their lifetime, why not treat these people with
rehabilitation programs, and lead them in the right direction.

It is not just the right thing to do, it is the fair thing to do.