Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The war on drugs incarceration
The war on drugs incarceration
The war on drugs incarceration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
shouldn't be punished the same as a person who has way over the legal amount and had intent to sell. But now with the mandatory minimums it doesn’t matter and they are both treated the same.
When the “War on Drugs” was started this created a big factor to why there is so many people in jail on such small crimes, such as a non violent drug offense. When people are caught with small amount of crack they are many times put to prison for life. Incidentally if that same person is caught with powder cocaine they are treated much differently even though they are the same exact drug under pharmaceutical reports. This type of racism comes from an individual standpoint because lawmakers are the ones who make mandatory minimums, they also know that
This paper will be focusing on the controversial issue of mandatory minimum sentences in Canada. There has been much debate over this topic, as it has quickly become implemented for the sentencing of drug offenders, drug-related crimes and banned firearm offences. I will argue that every case that comes through the criminal justice system is different and deserves a fair trial with a sentence that is not already determined for them. There have been many cases where the judge has no discretion in the sentence due to the mandatory minimum sentences pre-determined for the case, no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors were. I will argue that the mandatory minimum sentences in Canada should be reduced or eliminated as they result in very few positive outcomes for the offender and society, increase recidivism rates, are very expensive, and in many cases are detrimental and unjust. Throughout this essay I will discuss two main cases that represent an unjust sentencing outcome due to the mandatory minimum sentencing laws. I will stress how it should be the discretion of the judge to individualize the sentences based on the offender’s mitigating factors, aggravating factors and background. Leroy Smickle is the first case discussed through the essay, which ended with the judge striking down the mandatory minimum sentences in Ontario due to the possession of a loaded gun. Robert Latimer was also a highly controversial Canadian case about a father who killed his mentally disabled daughter out of compassion to end her severe suffering. I will be using many academic articles throughout this essay to give empirical support to the overall argument.
The majority of our prison population is made up of African Americans of low social and economic classes, who come from low income houses and have low levels of education. The chapter also discusses the amount of money the United States loses yearly due to white collar crime as compared to the cost of violent crime. Another main point was the factors that make it more likely for a poor person to be incarcerated, such as the difficulty they would have in accessing adequate legal counsel and their inability to pay bail. This chapter addresses the inequality of sentencing in regards to race, it supplies us with NCVS data that shows less than one-fourth of assailants are perceived as black even though they are arrested at a much higher rate. In addition to African Americans being more likely to be charged with a crime, they are also more likely to receive harsher punishments for the same crimes- which can be seen in the crack/cocaine disparities. These harsher punishments are also shown in the higher rates of African Americans sentenced to
Human Rights Watch. (2000, May). United States Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the War on Drugs (Vol.12, No.2 (G)). New York: Human Rights Watch. Retrieved April 12, 2005, from Human Rights Watch Web site: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00-01.htm
Most black Americans are under the control of the criminal justice today whether in parole or probation or whether in jail or prison. Accomplishments of the civil rights association have been challenged by mass incarceration of the African Americans in fighting drugs in the country. Although the Jim Crow laws are not so common, many African Americans are still arrested for very minor crimes. They remain disfranchised and marginalized and trapped by criminal justice that has named them felons and refuted them their rights to be free of lawful employment and discrimination and also education and other public benefits that other citizens enjoy. There is exists discernment in voting rights, employment, education and housing when it comes to privileges. In the, ‘the new Jim crow’ mass incarceration has been described to serve the same function as the post civil war Jim crow laws and pre civil war slavery. (Michelle 16) This essay would defend Michelle Alexander’s argument that mass incarcerations represent the ‘new Jim crow.’
The targets of the drug war are certain racial groups just because they are of color, they are targets because the law enforcements have bias opinions about the people of color rather than those who are white.The people of color and whites are both as likely to use and sell drugs, but the people of color have a bigger probability to get arrested, searched, prosecuted, convicted or sent to jail for the violation of drug laws. The drug war isn't only about people of color, it is about every races including white. The enforcement does not look for the increasing of drug activity because But the law enforcement doesn’t focus on the high income neighborhoods in search for drugs, what they do is focus on the poor low income neighborhoods because that is where they think drugs are being abused. The drug policies are very discriminatory and attack those that are non white, or those who live in a neighborhood where everyone thinks drugs are abused there. According to the article “Race, Drugs, and Law Enforcement in the United States” it uses statistics from seattle that shows a clear example of the discrimination of the supposed war on drugs.“A recent study in Seattle is illustrative. Although the majority of those who shared, sold, or transferred serious drugs[17]in Seattle are white (indeed seventy percent of the general Seattle population is white), almost two-thirds (64.2%) of drug arrestees are black”(hrw.org 1). This quote shows what a study found in seattle, that the population in seattle is seventy percent but most of the people in jail are blacks. Seattle has a problem where cocaine and crack are the main drug being abused and sold, but the people who sell it the most is whites but the majority who end up in jail for cocaine or crack charges are african americans. Well this happens because black people do drugs but also white people, but the ones who are the victims of incarceration are
The United States of America has the world’s highest incarceration rates, for several reasons. The United States of America doesn’t necessarily possess any unique strict laws in comparison to other countries of the world, yet we still have the highest incarceration rate in the world. More federal level and state level prisons are built in order to control and hold more prisoners because most are reaching its full capacity. The United States of America’s “crime rates” increased about 40 years ago when there became a new focus in the areas of crime. The President of the United States of America at the time Richard Nixon used the term “a war on drugs” in order to shed light on public health due to substance abuse. Initially, these policies created
The criminal justice system is a system in which no definite, all inclusive racism is existent. The seemingly discriminating factors of the criminal justice system are clearly due to inner city isolation and patterns in drug crimes; racism has no effect whatsoever. Some factors such as the relation between cocaine and severe punishment do not support racism because in all reality crack cocaine is worse than powder cocaine. “The justice system isn’t racist. Black people are arrested more often because they commit more crimes. Period. End of
Michelle Alexander presents three compelling arguments in The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. First, American society is repeating the outrages of the early Jim Crow laws, which imposed racial segregation on the bogus principle of separate but equal; second, our country has a widespread dilemma of increasing mass incarceration numbers, and, finally, that our modern so-called “colorblind” era thwarts multitudes of people from understanding or acknowledging that racist undertones exist beneath elevated rates of mass incarceration as a result of America’s “Drug War”. Michael M. Cohen, author of Jim Crow’s Drug War: Race, Coca Cola, and the Southern Origins of Drug Prohibition, provides support for Alexander’s assertion
No matter the recent trend for politicians to be outspoken in their disapproval of mandatory minimum sentences, the issue is a complex one with both benefits and disadvantages. Prior to doing research on the topic, I didn’t have much of an opinion regarding mandatory minimums and did not fully grasp the important role they play in contributing to the United States’ overpopulated prisons. As I began my research on the topic, I found an abundance of resources presenting the negative aspects of mandatory minimums, and initially I agreed with many of the points being made, however, as I continued to research the issue I came to realize the complexity of the matter, with compelling arguments on both sides of the debate. I recognize that there are
Mandatory minimum sentencing is the practice of requiring a predetermined prison sentence for certain crimes. The most notable mandatory minimums are the ones implemented in the 70’s and 80’s, hoping to combat the rising drug problem. Mandatory minimum sentencing has existed in the United States nearly since its very birth, with the first mandatory minimums being put into place around 1790. Recently, as the marijuana laws of many states have scaled back in severity, the issue of mandatory minimums has caused controversy in the US. There are two distinct sides to the argument surrounding mandatory minimum sentencing. One group believes we have a moral obligation to our country requiring us to do no less than lock up anyone with illegal drugs
Another reason racialized mass incarceration takes place is because of the high rates of poverty and unemployment for inner city African Americans, especially those with low-education and low skill levels. Urban ghettos have been associated with the problem of social disorganization and crime. The biggest reason for this is the war on drugs. There is no substantial proof that verifies African Americans are more involved in illegal drug consumptions than other groups are. However they are arrested more than other groups. Bobo and Thompson stated that blacks are almost 34% involved in drug-related arrests though only 14% of those are among regular illegal drug users. Among drug related convictions, African Americans make up half of the cases whereas only 26% of the white population is convicted. As Bobo and Thompson stated, “Illegal drug consumption seems to know no race. Incarceration for drug-related charges, however, is something visited in a heavily biased manner on African Americans.”
According to the Oxford Index, “whether called mass incarceration, mass imprisonment, the prison boom, or hyper incarceration, this phenomenon refers to the current American experiment in incarceration, which is defined by comparatively and historically extreme rates of imprisonment and by the concentration of imprisonment among young, African American men living in neighborhoods of concentrated disadvantage.” It should be noted that there is much ambiguity in the scholarly definition of the newly controversial social welfare issue as well as a specific determination in regards to the causes and consequences to American society. While some pro arguments cry act as a crime prevention technique, especially in the scope of the “war on drugs’.
Racism within the Justice System. Living in the twenty first century, Americans would like to believe that they are living in the land of the free, where anyone and everyone can live an ordinary life without worrying that they will be arrested on the spot for doing absolutely nothing. The sad truth, with the evidence to prove it, is that this American Dream is not all that it appears to be. It has been corrupted and continues to be, everyday, by the racism that is in the criminal justice system of America. Racism has perpetuated the corruption of the criminal justice system from the initial stop, the sentencing in court, all the way to the life of an inmate in the prison.
Mandatory Minimums: A National Injustice Mandatory minimum drug sentencing is legislation passed by Congress in 1986 to create harsher punishments for drug offenders. These laws were created at a time when drug use was beginning to rise dramatically. This type of sentencing was meant to impose harsh, excessive sentences on any type of drug offense, despite other circumstances. While these laws seem good in theory, they were not well thought out. The creators and supporters did not consider the negative consequences of these strict laws.
In America, blacks make up only 12% of drug users but make up 32% of people arrested for possessing drugs (“Criminal Justice Fact Sheet” n. Pag. ). Even though we are a developed country we still have segregation. We may be a “melting pot” but we still try to exclude certain races because we see our race as superior to others. Although we have laws protecting equal rights we do not treat every race equally. It wouldn't seem like racism would be a problem in such a civilized country as ours, it is spread throughout America.