Elimination of Mandatory Drug Sentences in Massachusetts - Essay Example

Submitted: Elimination of Mandatory Drug Sentences in Massachusetts That there is an urgent need to abolish theminimum mandatory drug sentences in Massachusetts is a fact. According to Beckett and Theodore (166) the aforementioned sentences were enacted in the said state during the 1970s. At the time, it was largely believed by the law markers that the enactment of these drug sentences would provide the much needed impetus to the fight against drug peddling within the state. In particular, these law markers were of the firm belief that the enactment of the minimum drug sentences would be very useful in terms of helping to curb drug use as well its demand within this state. This can be attributed to the fact that they held the view that it would be effective in dealing with the drug kingpins in Massachusetts. As of today, it is imperative to note that this theory did not succeed to its bare minimum. Indeed, according to FAMM (1), it has been noted that instead of Kingpins, this sentencing has ended up putting the low-level couriers behind bars. Addicts on the other hand have not been spared. In a nutshell, this has resulted into the state correctional facilities being filled to capacity while the Kingpins continue to operate at will. Consequently, this has become a burden too much to bear by the taxpayers. Statistics on the other hand indicate that the use and demand for drugs within Massachusetts has been on a steady increase. Simply put, the use of minimum sentencing has only served to be effective among the low level users and sellers of drugs. Indeed, the use of this mode of sentencing has been cited to be harsh to this group yet it was to deal with the established personnel in the drug business. At this point, one can not stop and wonder why these laws were introduced in the first place. As is stated by FAMM (1); Massachusetts mandatory sentences imposes an imprisonment term ranging between 3 for 14 grams of heroine or cocaine and 15 years for 200 grams of the said drugs for the first time offender. Of importance to note is the fact that this drug weight is actually composed of the total amount of the respective drug as well ant other substance with which it might be combined with. On a positive rejoinder, these laws have given the prosecutors so much power that they determine the sentence since they are charged with the responsibility of determining the charge. Massachusetts has a drug-free zone law which carries an additional and mandatory two year sentence which is usually served together with the other sentence. This is aggravated by the fact that this law normally takes precedence even if minors have not been involved. Just as it is the case with other the federal governments as well as states within the country, the courts are usually prohibited from imposing sentences which fit the punishment to the crime in question. Instead, the primary focus is usually placed on the potential by the defendant to be rehabilitated in addition to the individual facts in the case at hand. Perhaps this explains why the minimum mandatory sentencing has given so much power to the prosecutor in terms of determining the sentence in such instances. With this in mind, there are various reasons which have been put forward by opponents of these laws. One of these reasons is that the mandatory minimum sentences have shown themselves to be unfair. As it was stated above, these laws though they were intended to curb the issue of drug use and selling by the major players, more often than not, they have tended to go for the non-violent and low-level drug users within the city. A closer look into the prisons within this state shows that it is actually this group of offenders who are the majority. According to May, Kevin and Rick (222) most of these persons are normally convicted harshly irrespective of the facts of their case. It has emerged that the use of minimum mandatory sentencing is having disproportionate impact on the Latino and African-American citizens. According to the findings of one study conducted in the state of Massachusetts in 2006, it was found that approximately 80 percent of the persons incarcerate under the minimum sentences are actually persons of color as put forward by FAMM (1). Unless this trend is reversed then there is the possibility for these laws to result to social fragmentation among the various communities. The fact that these communities are also faced with a number of social and economic challenges would compound this situation even further. Furthermore, statistics from the same survey show that more than about 75 percent of individuals convicted under the mandatory minimum sentencing were from the minority. It is ironical that the Mass Sentencing Commission Survey of Sentencing Practices of 2006 found this statistics although the minority group only account for about 15 percent of the state’s total population. The other reason which has been provided by opponents of the continued use of these laws in Massachusetts is that they are very expensive. This was evidenced by one of the studies which showed that it costs the taxpayers about $ 43, 000 per annum to see to it that that a convict under the mandatory minimum sentence is incarcerated within the state. As the numbers continue to increase one can not contemplate what would be the total cost within the next ten years. Suggestively, Samaha (374) is of the view that such amounts would be greatly saved in the event that the state considered taking these illicit substance victims or addicts through comprehensive treatment plans. This is backed by statistic which actually shows that the use of a comprehensive treatment plan for these illicit substances abusers would save up to $7 of the taxpayers’ money in the United States of America. This group is also of the view that the use of minimum mandatory sentences has greatly contributed to the aspect of recidivism. This can be justified by the fact that Massachusetts minimum mandatory laws do not have the option of parole. A detailed analysis of these laws also brings to the fore the fact they inhibit re-entry as well as training programs. These programs are very useful since they provide a platform for the prisoners to prepare for their return into the society upon completion of their respective sentences. According to the findings of the above survey of 2006, it was found out that the absence of these programs accounts for approximately 50 percent of recidivism which tends to occur within the first three years upon release (FAMM: 1) With respect to the public, it was found out that a considerable cross-section of the public is totally against the idea of minimum mandatory sentences in Massachusetts. A poll into the public attitudes conducted by the Doble Research Association in the state in the year 2005 captured public perception and attitude on the use of these laws. The research findings showed that an over whelming 88 percent of total population in Massachusetts was against the use of such laws within the state. In addition, the same research revealed that 76 percent of the same population thought that the use of substance treatment was the most appropriate strategy for dealing with this problem within the state according to FAMM (1). As stated by Samaha (413) it appears that the law markers are living in denial of the open truth that the use of these laws since their inception in the 1970s has brought more harm than good to Massachusetts. From an economic standpoint, it is apparent that these laws have been a burden to the tax payer all along. Matters have been made much worse by the fact that they have nothing to show for it since they were introduced. The drugs kingpins have continued to rule and operate undetected as is evidenced by the steady increase in the use and demand for drugs across all age groups. Each passing day, more and more low-level drug offenders find their way into the prison walls. This excludes the knowledge that there might be persons who opted to plead guilty to the zone charges in order to be able to avoid the mandatory sentence in the first place. This cost to the state has turned out to be staggering. At the same time, Massachusetts budget deficit has been growing steadily in the recent past. In this regard, it is both fiscally and ethically necessary for the state’s legal stakeholders to institute radical legal reforms which would see to it that the trend of incarcerating minor offenders is reversed sooner rather than later. Looking at the statistics, one wonders whether these laws were actually created to punish the low-level drug users and sellers or the bigger players within this drug business. According to Spohn (243), with the soaring population within the prisons across the nation growing budget deficits as well as unprecedented recidivism rates, states should be challenged to come up with a comprehensive and proactive approach to dealing with this issue of abuse of illicit substances. What a better way than devoting such resources towards measures or strategies aimed at treating these persons. Most notably, this shall require a paradigm shift in states such as Massachusetts. The transformation from prison to treatment oriented programs carries a number of benefits. One of these benefits is that it helps to reduce the use of illicit substances through early intervention. Closely related to this is the fact that this strategy also reduces the number of crimes which are associated with the use of such substances. In addition, the use of treatment programs helps to significantly reduce the burden on the legal system since it shall avoid or greatly reduce the possibility of recidivism. The other merit of using a treatment -based approach to solve the challenges associated with the continued use of minimum mandatory sentences is that it shall translate to massive economic savings by the taxpayers. This money can then be re-invested into other pressing issues in accordance with the needs of the respective states. For instance, such money can be channeled into health care, energy, education or security for the greater good of the society. According to Fatema (1) the use of these laws has resulted into drug discrimination by the security forces. This can be attributed to the fact that more often than not, the security agencies tend to focus on the most common drug based on the statistics from the convictions. By so doing this creates an ideal environment for the continued use of other less common but equally illicit substances. In most cases, the law enforcement officers have focused on marijuana at the expense of other illicit substances. For instance, it is estimated that there are approximately 2100 arrests across the city of Massachusetts every year. In addition, since these arrests translate into considerable time being spent by police on one particular crime, the state is highly predisposed to the other types of crime. Among the proponents, these laws have been effective in terms of ensuring that the primary objective of incarceration is actually achieved. In this regard, they hold the view that these laws have helped to punish those who have been convicted. Also, through the use of these laws it has been easier to keep such persons from the community from where they would have committed more crimes. This group is also of the view that it has helped to deter other individuals from committing such crimes. However, from the above discussion, it is justifiable to state that these laws have dire consequences in comparison to their benefits. (Word count =1950) Works Cited Beckett, Katherine and Theodore Sasson. The Politics of Injustice: Crime and Punishment in America. New York: SAGE, 2003. Family Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) Homepage: Why Massachusetts mandatory Sentencing laws must change. Accessed on December 15, 2009 from: http://www.famm.org/StateSentencing/MassachusettsFAMMCampaign/WhyMassmandatorydrugsentencesmustchange.aspx Fatema, Gunja, Criminal Justice Policy Coalition: Drug Policy. Accessed on December 15, 2009 from: http://www.cjpc.org/Issues_DrugPolicy.htm. May, David, Kevin Minor and Rick Ruddell. Corrections and the Criminal Justice System. Washington, D.C: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2007. Spohn, Cassier. How Do Judges Decide? The search for fairness and justice in punishment. New York: SAGE. 2002. Samaha, Joel. Criminal Justice. 7th Ed. Cengage Learning: 2005. Read More