In May 1997, RAND Corporation completed a study over a period of 15 years of the effects of cocaine reduction through the methods of mandatory minimums, conventional enforcement (i.e., more arrests and shorter sentences), and treatment of heavy users. The study found that mandatory minimum

s reduced national cocaine usage by 13 kilograms, while conventional enforcement reduced use by 27 kilograms, and treatment reduced use by 100 kilograms.2 So from an economic perspective, long mandatory sentences are more costly. With the $1.4 billion that the U. S. spent on the justice system in 1999 3, it would be far better to put the money into methods that get better results.

Mandatory minimum sentencing can be done properly. If judges were given more flexibility with the amount of time sentenced, then each case could be delt with according to the circumstances. The problem isn’t mandatory minimums. The problem is that they are too long and while people are being piled into prisons, millions of dollars that could be used more effectively are wasted away on someone paying a price that is often too harsh for the crime. It has been shown in countless studies that long sentences aren’t as effective as some originally thought they would be. I just wonder how long it will be before mandatory minmums start producing results.

T

Some topics in this essay:
Bureau Prisons, Poverty Massachusetts, RAND Corporation, Drugs Florida, Medical School, , William Brownsberger, mandatory minimum, mandatory minimums, mandatory minimum sentencing, Brad Bailey, minimum sentencing, minimum sentencing drug, mandatory minmums, sentencing drug, mandatory minimum sentences, minimum sentences, conventional enforcement,