Mandatory minimum sentences in many cases fly in the face of the constitutional "cruel and unusual punishment" clause. Even in the NY Times articles, judges have consistently felt forced to impose unfair sentences when all evidence pointed to the requirement for leniency. Judges are appointed or elected based upon their being able parse and judge specific people with specific circumstances. With mandatory minimums, the prosecutors become the judges - they know that the judges hands are bound so they in BAD FAITH negotiate terrible plea deals that the offender either takes or gets the full, often cruel in length for the offense, mandatory minimum. Great way for lazy prosecutors to build their records and run for district attorney, very very bad public policy. In my opinion, TRUST our judges (fire the bad ones or dont reelect them) with rational sentencing using 'guidelines' but dont allow congress to blindly intervene in the courtrooms. I would call for a public referendum on specific mandatory minimums which are egregious, cruel and beyond rational explanation.
5
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a section called The Vent: readers can email a comment on just about anything, from coffee to coughing, from peanuts to prison. A number of years ago, the Sunday paper had an article about crime rates down, and another article about prison rates up. I submitted this little comment and it was printed:
Prison rates up, crime rates down. Makes sense to me.
Across the country, crime rates are below what they were a decade or two ago. Why? In the mid-1990's, Bill Clinton and the Congress passed laws for stiffer sentences. Criminals were jailed, and jailed for longer terms.
Now the push is in the other direction: shorter sentences and/or no sentence at all, probation for many crimes.
What will be the end result? Will crime rates go up?
Be careful what you ask for. You might get it.
Prison rates up, crime rates down. Makes sense to me.
Across the country, crime rates are below what they were a decade or two ago. Why? In the mid-1990's, Bill Clinton and the Congress passed laws for stiffer sentences. Criminals were jailed, and jailed for longer terms.
Now the push is in the other direction: shorter sentences and/or no sentence at all, probation for many crimes.
What will be the end result? Will crime rates go up?
Be careful what you ask for. You might get it.
3
Just as video of police misconduct has galvanized the public around the issue of inequality in policing, brutality, and misuse of force, videos of crimes being committed would go a long way toward sensitizing the public to the fact that the vast majority of people in prison actually broke in the law in a way that wrecked other peoples' lives. America'[s drug policy is a mess, but only 300,000 of the 1.5 million Americans behind bars are there for drug offenses. I don't care if you let them all out and legalize the drugs. However, what about the other crimes? I showed people some security video of a car on my block being stolen by a fake jogger who was using his "run" to case cars, and asked how long the appropriate prison sentence should be. No one said less than five years, minimum for this "nonviolent" crime. After the drug laws are reformed, let's come up with a central federal website for security footage of crimes being committed, let people see these evil perps in action, and then have the discussion about further reform. It might not get as far.
1
The sentencing reform bill is a crucial first step as the editorial states, but additional steps should be discussed to restore justice to the criminal "justice" system.
First, plea bargaining is nothing more than legalized blackmail, by a foe with unlimited resources compared to the defendant.
So remove the wall separating the guilt and sentencing phases of a trial, along with informing the jury of jury nullification. Juries should know the range of sentences when they deliberate. How many juries will be willing to convict a 20-something defendant of a nonviolent minor crime if they knew in advance that such a conviction would result in a mandatory 25 year sentence because of a 3-strike rule?
Let jury nullification be the check on the otherwise unfettered power of the prosecution. The prosecution already has prosecutoral discretion of whom to prosecute. Let jury nullification by a check on the abuse of this power by the prosecutor.
Second, make post-conviction relief easier to obtain, without time limits. DNA evidence shows how unjust are time limits.
Third, every prosecutor who looks in the mirror sees a candidate for higher office, even governor or president. Think Christie, Andrew Cuomo or Spitzer. The incentive is to rack up convictions rather than do justice. Eliminate the near-absolute immunity that prosecutors enjoy, even for false prosecutions. For egregious cases, the prosecutor should serve equal time in prison as a person they falsely and willfully convicted.
First, plea bargaining is nothing more than legalized blackmail, by a foe with unlimited resources compared to the defendant.
So remove the wall separating the guilt and sentencing phases of a trial, along with informing the jury of jury nullification. Juries should know the range of sentences when they deliberate. How many juries will be willing to convict a 20-something defendant of a nonviolent minor crime if they knew in advance that such a conviction would result in a mandatory 25 year sentence because of a 3-strike rule?
Let jury nullification be the check on the otherwise unfettered power of the prosecution. The prosecution already has prosecutoral discretion of whom to prosecute. Let jury nullification by a check on the abuse of this power by the prosecutor.
Second, make post-conviction relief easier to obtain, without time limits. DNA evidence shows how unjust are time limits.
Third, every prosecutor who looks in the mirror sees a candidate for higher office, even governor or president. Think Christie, Andrew Cuomo or Spitzer. The incentive is to rack up convictions rather than do justice. Eliminate the near-absolute immunity that prosecutors enjoy, even for false prosecutions. For egregious cases, the prosecutor should serve equal time in prison as a person they falsely and willfully convicted.
6
The most effective prison sentence is the one that keeps a criminal locked up and the rest of us, therefore, out of harms way.
The problem is not with locking up a "bad" person, it's with the unfairness of the system the throws a "good" person into prison in the first place. It's about a system that makes all kinds of noise about rights but can't properly affix culpability. It's a system where its easier and less expensive to draw conclusions based on race than to be fair and just.
Editorials about making more effective prison sentencing is a classic wag the dog argument.
The problem is not with locking up a "bad" person, it's with the unfairness of the system the throws a "good" person into prison in the first place. It's about a system that makes all kinds of noise about rights but can't properly affix culpability. It's a system where its easier and less expensive to draw conclusions based on race than to be fair and just.
Editorials about making more effective prison sentencing is a classic wag the dog argument.
2
Some are saying mass incarceration is responsible for the drop in crime. There are other theories, as there are other things going on at the same time, such as all the baby boomers getting old. Crimes, especially violent crimes, are primarily committed by the young.
1
Let's see, guns are legal and chemicals are not. That chemical can kill, young man. So consider ceasing the alcohol. Get yourself a nice gun. OK, you're off booze and have a gun but what is that powder? Mighty expensive. No, we don't care about you it's the kids we care abo...oh hang on. My wife is texting that our son has been knocked out again. At least they are winning, they have the troph...hang on. The addicts are begging under the bridge. Let's roll. No it's not unfair. It's the law. The rule of law. Law of the land. You'll thank us someday. He's opening a new needle package, grab him! Alright, I have a doctor's appointment, gonna get my vike script refilled.
2
To reduce the size of a prison population you need to reduce admission by new court commitments, probation and parole revocations as well as returns from work release. At the same time you will also have to increase releases by transferring more people to parole and work release and reducing the length of stay. Reducing the length of stay will result in a slow reduction that will end when those sentenced under the old rules are released.
One of the problems is that the judges and prosecutors do not have much confidence in community based corrections because of structural problems and severe underfunding.
One of the problems is that the judges and prosecutors do not have much confidence in community based corrections because of structural problems and severe underfunding.
Naw, just put them away and toss the key. Or, take them into YOUR home.
The "tweaks," as the Times noted, are indeed infinitesimally small and not nearly enough, but better than nothing, though not by much.
Unfortunately the Editors did not think to include the outrageous and draconian "sex offender" laws that are even more egregiously out of whack, where a person can be labelled a sex offender for LIFE for virtually anything. If any laws in America need to be re-thought, it is these.
Unfortunately the Editors did not think to include the outrageous and draconian "sex offender" laws that are even more egregiously out of whack, where a person can be labelled a sex offender for LIFE for virtually anything. If any laws in America need to be re-thought, it is these.
2
"These may seem like minor tweaks to pointlessly long sentences, and for the most part they are."
That about sums it up. Another failure of the legislative arm of the federal government... jailing people for drug offenses is absurd.
That about sums it up. Another failure of the legislative arm of the federal government... jailing people for drug offenses is absurd.
2
I worry about the impulse to save money by lessening prison sentences. It feels like cost-shifting to impoverished communities. A parallel to closing mental hospitals without sufficient investment in other institutions. I would begin by increasing options for the mentally ill as well as diverting people who don't need prison. Simply having more people on the streets won't make things better if they don't have the means of support.
1
LET THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME, the title of a song in the Gilbert and Sullivan play, Mikado. As a nation we've missed the mark on that one. The Republican rationale for harsh sentencing was that it was supposed to serve as a deterrent to crime. Instead, it likely forced the great majority of prisoners to make false statements to prosecutors in order to avoid destructively long sentences. The major impact of minimum sentencing requirements is that they're great for the bottom lines of owners of privatized prisons. Oh yeah, my GOP friends--when it comes to sentencing, the drain on taxpayer dollars is not part of the equation. While all groups are damaged by imprisonment, some stand out, including children tried as adults and senior prisoners with dementia. Children in with adults are most often raped repeatedly and taught to be hardened lifelong criminals by those who know best. Prisoners with dementia are all disoriented to differing degrees. Some are so severely affected that they have lost any language at all and know neither whom they are or who closest family members are. Keeping such persons behind bars is the definition of cruel and unusual punishment. What is the point if the person suffering from dementia cannot function without help? Talk about inefficient use of taxpayer dollars! With minor crime, parole accompanied by mandatory education produces citizens who can get job and be self-supporting stable, responsible community members. Good deal for all!
1
Next step, abandon prison privatization, increase oversight and vetting.
11
At least it's something, and an opportunity to test the assumptions that attend its creation.
1
But what about the private prison industry and what about the politicians, that love and profit from them.
Think about the private prison industry.
Oh my god what about the private prison industry.
Think about the private prison industry.
Oh my god what about the private prison industry.
7
This is insane. Put the criminals in jail and keep them there.
This isn't mass incarceration! Everyone in jail belongs there.
Society is safer when the bad guys and gals in behind bars.
Stop making excuses for crime and criminals.
The massive drop in crime rates is a direct result of locking up the criminals.
The crime rate will rise and more innocent people will be victimized because of the senseless trend of letting criminals go free,
And this nonviolent criminal nonsense? Gimme a break! By your thinking, a mass identity thief is not a criminal.
Drug dealers need to be in jail! ask yourself this? Do drugs make our country better or worse?
.
This isn't mass incarceration! Everyone in jail belongs there.
Society is safer when the bad guys and gals in behind bars.
Stop making excuses for crime and criminals.
The massive drop in crime rates is a direct result of locking up the criminals.
The crime rate will rise and more innocent people will be victimized because of the senseless trend of letting criminals go free,
And this nonviolent criminal nonsense? Gimme a break! By your thinking, a mass identity thief is not a criminal.
Drug dealers need to be in jail! ask yourself this? Do drugs make our country better or worse?
.
3
And, of course, while continuing to imprison people of color, and people "of poor," do not consider correcting social inequities, nor the imprisonment of wealthier, white business people. That would never do, since they are "job creators," for other wealthy, white people, and that keeps the "system" moving.
1
I like much of what and even agree that in some cases it doesn't go far enough. I think sentencing should be the responsibility of the judge. The responsibility to judge is inherent in the name. And if the judge does a poor job at that, get rid of the judge.
But to state that what they are doing will reduce crime is nonsense on the face of it. The people they release were all criminals once. I am not saying will skyrocket, it may not not go up and all, but that certainly wouldn't make it go down.
These are Federal crimes so they are not simple possession, they are dealing directly with a larger scale of distribution.
But to state that what they are doing will reduce crime is nonsense on the face of it. The people they release were all criminals once. I am not saying will skyrocket, it may not not go up and all, but that certainly wouldn't make it go down.
These are Federal crimes so they are not simple possession, they are dealing directly with a larger scale of distribution.
2
I remember back in the mid-1990's when Bill Clinton made the push for stiffer sentences, particularly for drug crimes.
The NY Times Editorial Board was all for it then.
Could they tell us what made them change their view?
Or is this a case, like for John Kerry, where you were for it before you were against it.
This has all the earmarks of a full flow without any reference to the past, Shame on the Editorial Board...once again.
The NY Times Editorial Board was all for it then.
Could they tell us what made them change their view?
Or is this a case, like for John Kerry, where you were for it before you were against it.
This has all the earmarks of a full flow without any reference to the past, Shame on the Editorial Board...once again.
7
Possibly, they realized that their original stance was wrong and didn't work as they had expected. None of us comes down the chute knowing how to do everything.
2
Not sure why the editorial board chose to reverse itself, but those with any experience - any parent, say - knows that severity of punishment matters much less than certainty, and even then only with mature minds. Swiftness of punishment matters much more. So, while considering sentencing reforms have a little consideration for adding some court staff so people can have their day quickly.
Bill Clinton was president fifteen years ago. Times change. When he was president crimes, especially violent crime was rising. That is no longer the case. Perhaps when facts change policies should change with them.
Obama is only interested in so-called Criminal Justice reform, cynically, all of a sudden, in the interest of creating a legacy. He is not really interested in justice for black people- he's is interested in exploiting them for their votes, while having his administration demean and deny them other civil rights. This is why he and his wife have stated that voting rights is the most important civil rights to fight for, for black people.
3
That is, of course, because of Republican dismantling of the Voting Rights Act, wherever possible.
3
Non-violent drug offenders are a small part of the prison population. Many of those were members of violent gangs or organizations though convicted ostensibly of a non-violent drug offense. Al Capone was convicted of a non-violent offense. That didn't make him non-violent.
13
Great response.
Long prison sentences do not deter crime. People who break the law often times are completely unaware of the possible prison time. Many simply commit crimes due to economic hardships, lack of education or family structure. Long sentences simply is a warehouse solution. People eventually get out of prison and find themselves in a changed world without the skill set to lead a normal -non-criminal life. End up going back to crime and back to prison.
We would be better off - requiring a them to complete a high school education class (GED) and provide some form of job training as a minimum requirement to get out of prison rather then a set period of time- then give them the support they need to reintegrate into society. Prison should be a safe place - not a place for violence and rape
We would be better off - requiring a them to complete a high school education class (GED) and provide some form of job training as a minimum requirement to get out of prison rather then a set period of time- then give them the support they need to reintegrate into society. Prison should be a safe place - not a place for violence and rape
37
Watering down mandatory prison sentences will only prompt criminals to commit more and bolder crimes. Build more prisons, if that's what is needed. Enforce the sentences mandated. The Times editorial board is naive at best to believe that sentence reductions will somehow turn criminals into choir boys when they are released back into society.
2
Average Lawyer Salary in United States: $92,000
Average Probation Officer Salary in United States: $44,000
Average Police and Sheriff's Patrol Officers $59,560
You need a lot of convicts to justify paying all those wages out of citizen's tax dollars.
Average Probation Officer Salary in United States: $44,000
Average Police and Sheriff's Patrol Officers $59,560
You need a lot of convicts to justify paying all those wages out of citizen's tax dollars.
6
Well, we have a lot of criminals. Read the papers.
I don't think the salaries you present (without backup sources) are relevant to the discussion. I do think the numbers of criminal defense and criminal prosecution attorneys would be relevant, but couldn't find any data.
Did find this: fewer law school grads practice law.
"Ten months after graduation, only 60 percent of the law school class of 2014 had found full-time long-term jobs that required them to pass the bar exam." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/25/opinion/too-many-law-students-too-few-...
And this: "Did you know that the federal government employs more than 93,000 attorneys? Many of these positions are legal counsel for federal agencies such as the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Department of Education (DOE), and the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA). And despite the recent recession, the number of federal workers is generally on the rise. According to a September 3, 2009, Washington Post article, the “Justice Department is expecting 4,000 new positions among law enforcement personnel, correctional officers and attorneys in the 2010 budget.” http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/young_lawyer/yld_t...
Using your salaries, and ABA on 4000 new job openings, we the people are spending A LOT more Federal $$$ on
law enforcement since 2010!
Federal law for full employment for law school grads?
Did find this: fewer law school grads practice law.
"Ten months after graduation, only 60 percent of the law school class of 2014 had found full-time long-term jobs that required them to pass the bar exam." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/25/opinion/too-many-law-students-too-few-...
And this: "Did you know that the federal government employs more than 93,000 attorneys? Many of these positions are legal counsel for federal agencies such as the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Department of Education (DOE), and the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA). And despite the recent recession, the number of federal workers is generally on the rise. According to a September 3, 2009, Washington Post article, the “Justice Department is expecting 4,000 new positions among law enforcement personnel, correctional officers and attorneys in the 2010 budget.” http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/young_lawyer/yld_t...
Using your salaries, and ABA on 4000 new job openings, we the people are spending A LOT more Federal $$$ on
law enforcement since 2010!
Federal law for full employment for law school grads?
2
The bill sounds like a small step in the right direction. The longer range solution will require less focus on the length of sentences and more on how much of the time, if any, should be spent in prison. Today we have new technologies which can monitor people in society and almost guarantee that violations of the rules will be caught. These should be encouraged as low cost alternatives to prison. Offenders should be able to propose harsh terms and restrictions for themselves geared to their own plan of rehabilitation and restitution - even where such terms would not be standard items imposed by the court or part of parole. For example, religion or education may play a big role in keeping many on the right track. Recording all forms of communication might even be appropriate for some in order to deter behavior that can lead to crime.
3
What an insignificant proposal to “reform” an insanely expensive, inhuman racket created by lawyers to provide lucrative income for hundreds of thousands of prosecutors, defenders, and judges!
Why should elected politicians, mostly lawyers, acting as legislators categorize criminal charges and specify sentences for complex, nuanced criminal acts? Can't the trial judge and jury, supported by psychological evaluators, best decide the specifics of guilt and the disposition of the case?
Why allow plea bargains? Should a guilty person be tried on a lesser charge for prosecutorial convenience? Should an innocent person be coerced to plead guilty to a lesser charge by the prosecutorial threat of a criminal trial that might result in a longer sentence? Should a defendant who accepts a plea bargain be allowed to testify against a co-defendant?
Why are there few alternatives to prison? Haven’t we learned that prison life nurtures rather than reforms criminal behavior? Doesn’t a prison term doom a person to a lifetime of inferior or no employment, and restricted or no mating opportunities? Don’t ex-cons constitute an underclass of bitter, sullen men likely to re-offend?
Prison is inappropriate for offenders who might be reformed by persuasive admonition, addicts who need protection and treatment, and the mentally-ill who need protection and care. It is appropriate only for dangerous criminals who need to be removed, permanently, from society.
Why should elected politicians, mostly lawyers, acting as legislators categorize criminal charges and specify sentences for complex, nuanced criminal acts? Can't the trial judge and jury, supported by psychological evaluators, best decide the specifics of guilt and the disposition of the case?
Why allow plea bargains? Should a guilty person be tried on a lesser charge for prosecutorial convenience? Should an innocent person be coerced to plead guilty to a lesser charge by the prosecutorial threat of a criminal trial that might result in a longer sentence? Should a defendant who accepts a plea bargain be allowed to testify against a co-defendant?
Why are there few alternatives to prison? Haven’t we learned that prison life nurtures rather than reforms criminal behavior? Doesn’t a prison term doom a person to a lifetime of inferior or no employment, and restricted or no mating opportunities? Don’t ex-cons constitute an underclass of bitter, sullen men likely to re-offend?
Prison is inappropriate for offenders who might be reformed by persuasive admonition, addicts who need protection and treatment, and the mentally-ill who need protection and care. It is appropriate only for dangerous criminals who need to be removed, permanently, from society.
12
Sentences can be amply shortened if administrative law judges would work night shift, weekends and holidays and hold hearings on the street out of a FEMA trailer in any major city. If ample proof by any standard is presented that a defendant was actively engaged in the manufacture and sales of drugs then they are summarily executed by firing squad, problem solved.
1
Ancient Israel had almost no prisons?
It was unheard of to pen human beings in like animals in a cage.
Prisoners were held for a short period of time only until they were judged and either set free, fined, or given stripes or corporeal punishment (for murder).
If they stole money they were given in servitude for a maximum of six years—no matter how much they stole—to the person they stole from to pay off their theft. When it was paid off (or if someone paid else paid the money) they were freed.
By working for the person they stole from they came to know them as human beings like themselves and realize that they had a family to support and feed as well. And they did it legitimately.
And contrary to popular misconceptions "eye for an eye" meant monetary damages or where would the justice be if a person with one eye took out the eye of another person—the other person would be blind if you literally took out his eye.
BTW If the Sanhedrin (Jewish Supreme Court) of 71 sages executed one murderer in 70 years it was called "a killer court."
3
Please explain how the Sanhedrin would deal with Charles Manson.
In Arab countries, they cut thieves' hands off. That is probably a better deterent.
In Arab countries, they cut thieves' hands off. That is probably a better deterent.
Prisons are overcrowded because of all the harmless people serving too much time. Judges put them in jail just for the heck of it. Prosecutors are all sadistic. Cops are all racist. Put all the law enforcement folks in jail. Release all the prisoners. And put the millions of those wrongly convicted in charge. It's time to recognize that the good guys are the bad guys and vice versa. As for the media, forget them. They babble on and on not knowing what they're talking about.
3
Well, it is too late for Kelly Gissendaner. I can't believe the State of Georgia gave the death penalty to someone who didn't do the murder. In God We Trust.
5
But for China, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and North Korea, America could add #1 in executions to exceptional #1 in mass incarceration.
USA! USA!
USA! USA!
1
Why the bother? there is absolutely no chance of this even coming to a vote in the House.
1
A good start. Probably won't get through the House though. Conservatives scream that their isn't money for things like the SNAP program or for education, but they love squandering huge amounts of money for no good purpose by locking up people. Some sanity please.
6
Most people in prison are hard core, incorrigible criminals. You don't have to read the papers every day in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles or Houston to wonder where they are going to put them all.
4
Our prisons have replaced the institutions we used to house the mentally disturbed. It's home to millions of the poor who need a leg up. But with privatization these people have become a valuable commodity and we're paying over $70,000 per prisoner in tax dollars to house them in horrible conditions; all in the name of profits for the few! Who believes that our prison system should be a privately owned for profit scheme? Not I. How about you?
And as many, not all, or even close are hardened criminals how does unfair sentencing serve justice or our communities Mr. Bingham? There are thousands of people serving longterm sentencing on conspiracy charges. There only crime is that someone testified against them in order to have their sentence reduced.They were never proved to have committed a crime. This, only one travesty of justice among many. And yes Mr. Bingham weather you know it or not many involved with drugs are not violent at all nor do they hang out next to elementary schools or give drugs away for free hoping to expand their customer base. Perhaps your views were formed while watch the police blotter in your local media market.
Hopefully we will see articles on the drug wars conspiracy convictions and on forfeiture. Including police arresting people with the goal of stealing their property.
Is it not darkly humorous that the law and order screamers, constitution wavers, and jingoistic patriots do not understand the history behind the laws protecting our rights. That there is a reason for due process, equal protection, and the other rights protecting all citizens. Are these people actually completely unaware of how and why the US was created? Have they no idea of the roll played by unfair prosecution in human history?
Hopefully we will see articles on the drug wars conspiracy convictions and on forfeiture. Including police arresting people with the goal of stealing their property.
Is it not darkly humorous that the law and order screamers, constitution wavers, and jingoistic patriots do not understand the history behind the laws protecting our rights. That there is a reason for due process, equal protection, and the other rights protecting all citizens. Are these people actually completely unaware of how and why the US was created? Have they no idea of the roll played by unfair prosecution in human history?
But the emphasis on real sentences has worked. This will result in more crime.
But as usual, the NYT doesn't endorse the obvious cure for the crime problem:
truly tell people "don't commit crime, and don't look the other way
at those that do".
Instead it and its favored left-wingers always blame crime, including drug crimes, committed mostly by the poor, on the rich. We hav to stop doing that,
and tell poor people "Lots of you are poor because you and your community supports crime, and its all your fault. Nobody but yourselves can get out of poverty until you and your community rids itself of high crime rates".
Reducing sentences won't help with this.
But as usual, the NYT doesn't endorse the obvious cure for the crime problem:
truly tell people "don't commit crime, and don't look the other way
at those that do".
Instead it and its favored left-wingers always blame crime, including drug crimes, committed mostly by the poor, on the rich. We hav to stop doing that,
and tell poor people "Lots of you are poor because you and your community supports crime, and its all your fault. Nobody but yourselves can get out of poverty until you and your community rids itself of high crime rates".
Reducing sentences won't help with this.
4
You, sir, are incredibly wrong. I like how your theory posits that a whole community is inured to crime and another is not and that explains their relative, inequitable economic circumstances. Somehow decades and centuries of disadvantage, of unfairness, of systemic prejudice, of disenfranchisement, of humiliation have no bearing on the circumstance of the community which has borne that. It's true that each individual must make a choice to do this and not that, but it's amazing to me that some people lack the imagination to realize that he, his family, and his community would make the same choices given the right (or wrong) circumstances. This excuses no individual but it has far more explanatory power about poor communities than your 'it's all your own fault."
3
There are way more right-wing conservative Republican white criminals like Cliven Bundy, Kim Davis, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton and George W.Bush who get away with breaking the law.
The poor did not wreck the economy bringing the country to the brink of another Great Depression by fraudulent and criminal acts. Too few corporate plutocrats go to prison for their crimes.
The poor did not wreck the economy bringing the country to the brink of another Great Depression by fraudulent and criminal acts. Too few corporate plutocrats go to prison for their crimes.
1
Legalize drugs and pardon all drug "offenders." The war on drugs has created a catastrophe which makes criminals of those who are not and creates violence here and abroad.
43
This sentencing monstrosity has gone on long enough and is costing the American people about $25,000 a year per inmate. Watch the prison corporations fight these changes tooth and nail. How is it that marijuana can be grown and sold legally in Colorado, but people are spending life in prison in other states for selling it? Next on the agenda should be abolishment of solitary confinement, an inhumane act often used to control mentally ill prisoners. Treat them instead.
17
"So much of American sentencing policy has been driven by irrational, fact-free scare-mongering."
Sorry your are wrong. I lived through NYC with a murder rate of 2,500 a year. 100,000's of muggings a year, Stabbings and beating common place, All the parks were off limits day or night, home burglaries were the norm. There were no safe neighborhoods. The subways were a no go zone. NYC was a city in fear. That was the backdrop for the tuff drugs laws. There was nothing irrational about it.
Time has marched on and the city has been cleaned up and made livable again. The laws need to change to reflect the new circumstances. Re-writing history to make sentencing reform meet the current income inequality - institutional racism meme is dishonest.
Sorry your are wrong. I lived through NYC with a murder rate of 2,500 a year. 100,000's of muggings a year, Stabbings and beating common place, All the parks were off limits day or night, home burglaries were the norm. There were no safe neighborhoods. The subways were a no go zone. NYC was a city in fear. That was the backdrop for the tuff drugs laws. There was nothing irrational about it.
Time has marched on and the city has been cleaned up and made livable again. The laws need to change to reflect the new circumstances. Re-writing history to make sentencing reform meet the current income inequality - institutional racism meme is dishonest.
10
Concur, too many are in prison for far too long. Chuck Grassley, in an effort to show self-importance, continues this travesty of justice. Rigid postures must go.
4
Much more must be done to give petty drug offenders a fighting chance. Once tainted with a criminal record, former prisoners lose many rights and cannot obtain meaningful employment. They are behind the eight ball for the remainder of their lives. They are thus susceptible to further drug abuse and a life of crime after being hardened by their experience behind bars. They form a permanent underclass which is a drag on the rest of society. This new law is only a drop in the bucket. Much, much more must be done to avoid sending so many to prison for minor drug offences.
40
I can't disagree but I don't believe that is the case. I suppose it comes down to how you define petty. I figure user is petty. Guy parting out an ounce of weed to sell to his friends is petty. Anything above that isn't. How do you define it?
2
Three strikes laws are never used against illegal drug use and petty crime in white Wall/ Main Street corporate suites and homes.
The biggest robbing barbarian rampaging and pillaging corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrats get a criminal prosecution pass plus a bail-out.
Prison is the carefully colored carved exception to the 13th Amendments abolition of "slavery and involuntary servitude."
The biggest robbing barbarian rampaging and pillaging corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrats get a criminal prosecution pass plus a bail-out.
Prison is the carefully colored carved exception to the 13th Amendments abolition of "slavery and involuntary servitude."
Can we agree that any "saner, more effective prison sentences" will include mandatory minimum sentences for any crime committed while in possession of a gun? If not, why not?
23
Such laws already exist.
1
It might seem perfectly rational and logical on the face of it, especially when you consider that 30 people a DAY are killed by gun in the US. But approximately almost DOUBLE that are killed by drunken drivers (9,000 yearly vs 16,000. So should we have mandatory minimums for crimes with guns AND crimes with alcohol? Agreement to finally begin to end egregious sentencing for one crime only to immediately bring it back to someone else's favorite crime? Stiff penalties? YES ABSOLUTELY!!! Honest, law abiding gun owners which make up 99.9999% of us, abhor to the max anyone who would use a gun to threaten or injure another. In fact consider carefully that one of the leading reasons the gun owning public even has guns is for protection against these very folks. On these grounds there are enormous reasons to be optimistic about common cause and purpose.
I remember back in the tough of crime/zero tolerance era when talk radio couldn't stop squawking about how good prisoners had it at "club fed," while I, and so many others were being crammed like sardines into cells that were originally intended for 1 person, yet were holding four! I could not understand how the press was so controlled by the puppet masters in DC. Now, comes legislation that leads people to believe that we currently have a system where convicted drug offenders receive, "from five years for a first offense up to life without parole for a third. The new bill would cut the life sentence to a 25-year minimum, and cut the 20-year sentence for a second offense to 15 years." The first SEVEN women on my Top 25 Women Who Deserve Clemency list are FIRST OFFENDERS serving LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE - and nearly ALL of them are minor participants and/or their cases are based almost solely on testimony ALONE. Do these Senators really not know there are LOTS of first offenders serving LIFE or is this intentionally written in such a way as to mislead the public into thinking the system is not as bad as it really is? I started the CAN-DO Foundation to help the women I left behind after Pres. Clinton granted my clemency in 2000 - sadly, some of the first time offenders serving LIFE are still there!!! What category do they fit into? Immediate release - I hope!
26
The types of offenses mentioned in this article, and therefore, I assume, in the "reform" bill itself, are all crimes committed by middle class or lower class people.
Rob a convenience store because you and your kids are hungry? Sell recreational but illegal drugs to a willing adult buyer? You're goin' to the penitentiary for a long time.
But cause far more widespread and grievous harm to the health of society as a whole by causing the collapse of a bank, or manipulating the stock market, or polluting the Gulf of Mexico, or cutting corners on workplace health and safety measures? No, maybe you'll get a plea-bargained fine (but you won't be put out of business). And maybe you'll even "accept full responsibility" (just as soon as you make sure there's not a whole lot of actual liability). Or maybe you'll be sentenced to community service. That's where we're at: we've reached the point where, for the powerful, rich, and well-connected, being sentence to actually doing something helpful to society is considered a form of punishment.
In any case, the most harmful things being done to our nation and the world don't originate on urban street corners. They'll be found in the executive offices of corporations, and in reactionary legislatures themselves.
Rob a convenience store because you and your kids are hungry? Sell recreational but illegal drugs to a willing adult buyer? You're goin' to the penitentiary for a long time.
But cause far more widespread and grievous harm to the health of society as a whole by causing the collapse of a bank, or manipulating the stock market, or polluting the Gulf of Mexico, or cutting corners on workplace health and safety measures? No, maybe you'll get a plea-bargained fine (but you won't be put out of business). And maybe you'll even "accept full responsibility" (just as soon as you make sure there's not a whole lot of actual liability). Or maybe you'll be sentenced to community service. That's where we're at: we've reached the point where, for the powerful, rich, and well-connected, being sentence to actually doing something helpful to society is considered a form of punishment.
In any case, the most harmful things being done to our nation and the world don't originate on urban street corners. They'll be found in the executive offices of corporations, and in reactionary legislatures themselves.
50
Excellent points. And none of it will change as long as rich donors control the politicians they have bought and paid for.
3
I consider myself to be quite conversant with the English language, and I find that this editorial's speculation masquerading as received truth borders on the nonsensical.
Just what does "studies suggest certainty in punishment is more important to effective deterrence than the punishment's severity" mean?
Perhaps this can be interpreted as meaning that plea bargaining should be out, and probation and community service should be out as well. Does it imply that fines should replace prison sentences? Just what does it mean? It sounds nice but what does it offer to a society that currently deals with mass murder all too frequently? Does it mean that any and every mass murderer, by definition, is mentally ill and deserves " rehabilitation" rather than a long prison sentence? Or does it mean that it's time to restore the death penalty for acts that are beyond the pale of civilized society? That suggests the certainty of punishment.
You end your editorial by noting that this bill will provide volumes of data that COULD show how to reduce prison populations and crime at the same time. What a speculation on what this act MAY show. Then again, it may not and who suffers? Innocent passersby and victims of the mentally ill and recidivist criminals who have no business being loose on the streets.
Just what does "studies suggest certainty in punishment is more important to effective deterrence than the punishment's severity" mean?
Perhaps this can be interpreted as meaning that plea bargaining should be out, and probation and community service should be out as well. Does it imply that fines should replace prison sentences? Just what does it mean? It sounds nice but what does it offer to a society that currently deals with mass murder all too frequently? Does it mean that any and every mass murderer, by definition, is mentally ill and deserves " rehabilitation" rather than a long prison sentence? Or does it mean that it's time to restore the death penalty for acts that are beyond the pale of civilized society? That suggests the certainty of punishment.
You end your editorial by noting that this bill will provide volumes of data that COULD show how to reduce prison populations and crime at the same time. What a speculation on what this act MAY show. Then again, it may not and who suffers? Innocent passersby and victims of the mentally ill and recidivist criminals who have no business being loose on the streets.
5
If the NY Times really wanted to reform prison sentences, it would begin with the SEXISM.
Men still get 63% more jail time for the exact same crime.
And when dishing out the death penalty for murder, a female murderer is much much much less likely to be sentenced to death.
Leave it to the NY Times to discuss sentence reform and ignore the sexism.
(But had there been sexism against women, the stats would have been front and center. Feminism: sexism is wrong, unless it is directed at men.)
Men still get 63% more jail time for the exact same crime.
And when dishing out the death penalty for murder, a female murderer is much much much less likely to be sentenced to death.
Leave it to the NY Times to discuss sentence reform and ignore the sexism.
(But had there been sexism against women, the stats would have been front and center. Feminism: sexism is wrong, unless it is directed at men.)
6
Sad that what drives the reform has to be economics, saving money, rather than the gross unfairness of imprisoning so many non violent offenders for so long.
Prison reform must include opportunities for further education.
Prison should not be a business. Saving money is important too.
How have ordinary folks looked the other way for so long re: violence and sexual preditors in prisons. Where are the churches? Dirty little secrets?
Prison reform must include opportunities for further education.
Prison should not be a business. Saving money is important too.
How have ordinary folks looked the other way for so long re: violence and sexual preditors in prisons. Where are the churches? Dirty little secrets?
5
With the 2.3 million Americans in prison making up 25% of the world's prisoners with only 5% of the planet's people the criminal justice system is critically unjust and immoral. Blacks who make up 13.2 % of Americans are 40% of those prisoners and those on death row as well. They are primarily poor non-violent drug users and those in possession of illegal drugs. Focusing on the product of that system at the sentencing phase or imprisonment is way too late.
For decades more than twice as many whites have been arrested for al categories of crimes as compared to blacks. More whites have been arrested for each specific type of crime as well except for robbery and gambling. Arrests are not random events but the beginning of the prosecution process. Blacks are persecuted into prison for an endless cycle. Whites get a pass to family, friends and a rehabilitation 2nd chance. Blacks are profiled and stalked for doing ordinary things while black.
Before deciding upon "saner, more effective prison sentencing" we should first decide what activity warrants prison, who should go to prison, why they should go to prison and what is the purpose of imprisonment. Illegal drugs should be treated as public health problem like alcohol and tobacco. Illegal drugs should be made legal by regulation, taxation and education. Violent, organized and career criminals should be imprisoned. Prison can be a method of punishment or deterrence with the goals of rehabilitation or protection.
For decades more than twice as many whites have been arrested for al categories of crimes as compared to blacks. More whites have been arrested for each specific type of crime as well except for robbery and gambling. Arrests are not random events but the beginning of the prosecution process. Blacks are persecuted into prison for an endless cycle. Whites get a pass to family, friends and a rehabilitation 2nd chance. Blacks are profiled and stalked for doing ordinary things while black.
Before deciding upon "saner, more effective prison sentencing" we should first decide what activity warrants prison, who should go to prison, why they should go to prison and what is the purpose of imprisonment. Illegal drugs should be treated as public health problem like alcohol and tobacco. Illegal drugs should be made legal by regulation, taxation and education. Violent, organized and career criminals should be imprisoned. Prison can be a method of punishment or deterrence with the goals of rehabilitation or protection.
6
Non-violent drug pushers are a myth.
5
Ryan Bingham being "Up there" is a myth.
And these reforms need to extend to state correctional facilities, that house far more inmates than the federal system. You touched on a critical factor in the effectiveness of any sentence-- the concept of "swift and certain" which is being successfully implemented in pilot programs across the country. The plea bargaining system that is at the core of the criminal justice system ends up dishing out sentences that may have little to do with the actual offense, and that months after the offense. Not to oversimplify, but it has the same effect as saying to a 14 year old "remember when you skipped school last April? And slashed your teacher's tires? Well, we'll drop the charge for the tires if you plead guilty to skipping school, and take a 3-6 sentence.". Study after study has shown that a more effective method to deter crime (and deterrence is the point, because they're all eventually getting out) is to rapidly and consistently use shorter sentences, I.e. 3 months for skipping, 6 months for the tires-- and that's the same no matter who commits the charge or where. And THEN utilize that time less as a period of punishment and more of an intensely focused opportunity to correct behaviors that are at the core of criminal activity. The reality is that any sentence longer than five years (with some exceptions) is counterproductive.
11
We would have to dramatically lower the number of 'rights' for accused people in order to do this. I was once an alternate juror at a misdemeanor trial for trespassing, impersonation, and fraudulent accosting. The trial lasted four days and was prosecuted by 3 assistant DAs. Obviously, we can't handle all the crime we have if we do this.
So let's go back a century. Swear in a jury, and have them try a case an hour all day long. No voir dire, no fancy motions, present your case and get your verdict. You get 30 days, 60 days, or 90 days in the can, no hard feelings.
So let's go back a century. Swear in a jury, and have them try a case an hour all day long. No voir dire, no fancy motions, present your case and get your verdict. You get 30 days, 60 days, or 90 days in the can, no hard feelings.
A look at the report in the Washington Post, below, explains why here in America, we have the largest prison population on the planet.
A large and unfortunately not well known fact, is about profiteering by our corporate owned and run government, which never fails to take advantage of any opportunity to capitalize on whatever will keep the lucre flowing in to their overflowing coffers, overflowing with gain from every possible source, and be dammed to societal damage.
Yes indeed, the land of opportunity, and everyone who has money invested in our Stock markets, unless self managed, to exclude certain industries, is capitalizing on our latest and greatest revenue producer, "For Profit Prisons"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/how-for-prof...
A large and unfortunately not well known fact, is about profiteering by our corporate owned and run government, which never fails to take advantage of any opportunity to capitalize on whatever will keep the lucre flowing in to their overflowing coffers, overflowing with gain from every possible source, and be dammed to societal damage.
Yes indeed, the land of opportunity, and everyone who has money invested in our Stock markets, unless self managed, to exclude certain industries, is capitalizing on our latest and greatest revenue producer, "For Profit Prisons"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/how-for-prof...
12
Yes, let us go easy on drug crimes, classifying them as minor offenses, when it is drugs which are responsible for an overwhelming majority of all the gun violence and murders in this country. Anyone (rich and poor, white or blue collar) associated with drugs and gun crimes should get mandatory sentences and they should be strictly enforced. If you don't raise the bar, people will never learn how to jump.
4
"drugs which are responsible for an overwhelming majority of all the gun violence and murders in this country" . Really - where did you pull out this gen of wisdom? The majority of murders and gun violence are committed by family members or friends and people who know each other - not criminals or people who use drugs.
1
Enlighten us: how did you learn to jump?
Agreed.
Also cancel all contracts guaranteeing full prisons for Private Prison Corp.
Stop the lobbying of same said PP Corp.
Legalize Cannabis.
End Debtors Prison for those too poor to pay.
Also cancel all contracts guaranteeing full prisons for Private Prison Corp.
Stop the lobbying of same said PP Corp.
Legalize Cannabis.
End Debtors Prison for those too poor to pay.
12
Yes it's a step forward, but just a baby step. Prosecutors have been getting away with murder with the current sentencing guidelines and many judges have ignored the mandatory guideline for years now knowing they are ridiculous.
We need a serious prison overhaul from top to bottom, much more than this, but it is a start...
We need a serious prison overhaul from top to bottom, much more than this, but it is a start...
5
I actually support this effort strongly, and I’m glad to see bipartisan movement in Congress that recognizes that we incarcerate too many for too long for the wrong reasons, and that it has a disproportionate impact on minority communities that it is hollowing-out.
But SOMEONE needs to play Devil’s Advocate. I’d restrict that charge to two questions. Why is it that we haven’t heard anyone connect the immense number of people we’ve put in prison and kept there with declining violent crime rates all over the country for years? By releasing large numbers of people from our prisons and by ceasing to incarcerate them in the numbers we have, do we risk seeing those violent crime levels spike up?
But SOMEONE needs to play Devil’s Advocate. I’d restrict that charge to two questions. Why is it that we haven’t heard anyone connect the immense number of people we’ve put in prison and kept there with declining violent crime rates all over the country for years? By releasing large numbers of people from our prisons and by ceasing to incarcerate them in the numbers we have, do we risk seeing those violent crime levels spike up?
11
"By releasing large numbers of people from our prisons and by ceasing to incarcerate them in the numbers we have, do we risk seeing those violent crime levels spike up?"
Resulting in a net worse outcome for the community it was intended to help.
Resulting in a net worse outcome for the community it was intended to help.
The retroactive part of this bill siding on justice and mercy is an answered prayer for so many.
Prayer #2, find them jobs.
Prayer #2, find them jobs.
1
Lol, they don't want jobs.
#1: “These may seem like minor tweaks to pointlessly long sentences ... But ... even small changes can make a real difference.”
To be thus grateful for small changes is an extremely weak stance, that only reinforces the success of politicians avoiding real change by making only token efforts. This editorial should have been far stronger, and advocated for the real change that is needed.
#2: “make it easier for older inmates to seek early release — a smart idea because they are by far the costliest to keep imprisoned”
The justification of punishment for crimes should be justice not cost. Should I be kept in prison, while someone else is released, because it’s less costly to keep me there?
To be thus grateful for small changes is an extremely weak stance, that only reinforces the success of politicians avoiding real change by making only token efforts. This editorial should have been far stronger, and advocated for the real change that is needed.
#2: “make it easier for older inmates to seek early release — a smart idea because they are by far the costliest to keep imprisoned”
The justification of punishment for crimes should be justice not cost. Should I be kept in prison, while someone else is released, because it’s less costly to keep me there?
Not a single drug use crime includes a mandatory minimum. Such minimums apply only to drug traffickers and importers. Such folks are the scourge of our poorest neighborhoods. Emptying these prisoners into such neighborhoods assuages liberal guilt while causing great harm to the poor. It promotes a popular liberal law. The law of unintended consequences.
2
Watch Vice's/HBO special "Fixing the System" on prisons and drug laws. These neighborhoods are already emptied of fathers as this insane cycle of incarceration plays out generation after generation. Most are in for non violent drug offenses so please get over your liberal this liberal that argument, this is an American problem
1
"So much of American sentencing has been driven by irrational, fact-free scare mongering."
And profits. Let's not forget those private, for-profit prisons that receive revenues based on "prisoner days" of incarceration. What incentive do such institutions have to engage in parole, rehabilitation, or early release programs when there is so much easy money to be made from babysitting legions of relatively docile, first-time, or minor drug offenders?
I'm especially skeptical that a Charles Grassley is going to buck the prison-industrial complex and the plutocrats -- still predominantly the political donor class on the Republican side of the aisle -- to whom the current system promises further enrichment.
And profits. Let's not forget those private, for-profit prisons that receive revenues based on "prisoner days" of incarceration. What incentive do such institutions have to engage in parole, rehabilitation, or early release programs when there is so much easy money to be made from babysitting legions of relatively docile, first-time, or minor drug offenders?
I'm especially skeptical that a Charles Grassley is going to buck the prison-industrial complex and the plutocrats -- still predominantly the political donor class on the Republican side of the aisle -- to whom the current system promises further enrichment.
9
1. Disband the DEA
2. Legalize marijuana
3. Decriminalize drug use
4. Provide for addict rehab as part of single payer health care
5. Pardon all convicted of drug offenses
6. Outlaw private prisons
2. Legalize marijuana
3. Decriminalize drug use
4. Provide for addict rehab as part of single payer health care
5. Pardon all convicted of drug offenses
6. Outlaw private prisons
15
Brez,
Thank you for adding some sanity to this dialectic . . .
Thank you for adding some sanity to this dialectic . . .
7. Issue all voting citizens automatic weapons.
Inner city shootings are committed by armed drug dealers. Many criminals serving life took a drug plea rather than face trial as a violent predator.
2
For a party platform against wasteful spending and upholding the value of life, Republicans have been mighty quick to throw money at an incarceration system that wastes the lives of nonviolent offenders. Time for other Republicans to follow the lead of Tim Scott, Rand Paul and others calling for much-needed, sane, just sentencing laws.
3
What part of "bipartisan" don't you understand? Please re-read the article
Reform of the criminal justice system is a difficult process and often the results are disappointing and/or there are unintended consequences. A review of the history of the US criminal justice system shows that nothing happens quickly and the the evolution of the system resembles a drunkards walk. Over a 50 year time span one can see significant changes.
In this case the results if any will be mixed.
In this case the results if any will be mixed.
"So much of American sentencing policy has been driven by irrational, fact-free scare-mongering."
And, you might add, inequality between the rich and poor.
The poor are targeted and slammed with drug offenses and convictions while white collar criminals get tax breaks instead of prison terms. White collar criminals are really charged and tried, let along punished.
Once the elites go to prison, sentencing and prison reform will quickly follow.
And, you might add, inequality between the rich and poor.
The poor are targeted and slammed with drug offenses and convictions while white collar criminals get tax breaks instead of prison terms. White collar criminals are really charged and tried, let along punished.
Once the elites go to prison, sentencing and prison reform will quickly follow.
49
You're right. The real crime in this country is what collar crime. Too bad the Republicans run on a fear-mongering platform, which has succeeded so far. Remember Willie Horton? Instead a lot of these white collar crooks, such as the big bankers who brought the economy to its knees, go free with big bonuses and golden parachutes. It's time for a 180 degree turn in how justice is dispensed.
1
"Finally, and critically, many parts of the bill are retroactive"
Most people don't realize that is not automatic. We won't actually see any effect of changes in our lifetimes if unless we make this retroactive, because the prisons are full of people serving lifetimes.
What a waste of humanity. Cruel. Pointless. All for the posturing of politicians, most of whom are now long gone.
Most people don't realize that is not automatic. We won't actually see any effect of changes in our lifetimes if unless we make this retroactive, because the prisons are full of people serving lifetimes.
What a waste of humanity. Cruel. Pointless. All for the posturing of politicians, most of whom are now long gone.
60
Well said. We have inflicted untold suffering on so many people - those incarcerated and all of those in relationship with them. While this is only a small step, it is in the right direction.
9
I can assure you that the crime and violence that prompted the passage of these laws was very real. The Swam of junkies consuming NYC and the 2,500 murders per year - that was a waste of humanity. I don't know anything about Clawson, MI, but rescuing the people of NYC from this cruel and pointless plague was a godsend.
1