Mandatory minimum sentences have a deep history in the American criminal justice system. There have been mandatory minimum sentencing laws pres

ent in America since the late 1790’s. One of the original offences that carried a minimum penalty of death was “robbery by pirates” (Schlosser 84). Present day mandatory minimum sentencing laws were established during the early 1970’s. As stated in Grayson, “…. Mandatory minimums sounded like a great idea when they were passed…” (4). There are currently mandatory minimum sentences present throughout the U.S for minimal drug crimes. They range from the intent to sell narcotics to possession of narcotics. In the state of Michigan there is “the so-called 650 Lifer Law” (Fannon 48). This law state that any individual caught in possession with intent to sell 650 grams of cocaine or heroin must receive a life sentence without a possibility of parole. As stated by Fannon, the purpose of this law is to “…put away drug kingpins” (48). This law does work when it is actually applied to large drug dealers. The majority of laws like this one usually fail at accomplishing their goals. Laws like this one bring about many other questions about the efficiency of mandatory minimum sentences.

There are a variety of alternatives that could have a better effect on reforming drug offenders then sending them to jail for mandatory periods. Not only are the sentences extremely costly to taxpayers, they do not usually affect those who are targeted. The majority of those given mandatory sentences for drug offences have had no prior criminal background. They occasionally result in an unduly harsh punishment for a marginal offence. Mandatory sentencing in drug cases could be effective, but only if selectively applied. “More can be achieved by spending additional money arresting, prosecuting and sentencing dealers to standard prison terms, as stated in the RAND results, than by spending it sentencing fewer dealers to longer, mandatory terms” (qut in Grayson 2). If mandatory sentences were applied selectively to large dealers, a significant impact would be made in the drug trafficking world. If some of the power is given back to the state and federal judges in mandatory minimum cases, then the sentences could be fairer for the defendants in each drug case. A December 1996, report from the New York State Court System’s Judicial Advisory Committee on Alternatives concluded:

It is apparent that each year thousands of persons who present no, or a minimal, threat to public safety are being committed to state prison. And this is being done despite the exorbitant costs involved and despite the fact that community-based programs may well be as effective, or appreciably more effective, in rebuilding these offenders…the penal laws should be amended to eliminate mandatory terms for Class B and Class C second felony drug offenders… (Qut in Grayson 5)

Mandatory minimum sentences are imposed solely because of the amount of the drug in question. It is well establishe

Some topics in this essay:
Department Justice, According Caulkins, Law” Fannon, Parole Imagine, United America, Lifer Law, Committee Alternatives, Bar Association, mandatory minimum, Stanley Harris, mandatory sentences, minimum sentences, mandatory minimum sentences, Class Class, criminal justice, criminal justice system, drug offences, justice system, grayson 2, mandatory sentence, minimum sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, qut grayson, life sentence possibility, amount cocaine consumed,