Disparities in sentences.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

In 2005 the Supreme Court case United States v. Booker struck down the provision of the sentencing statute that required judges to impose a sentence within the Federal Guidelines range. So, what impact has the removal of mandatory guidelines had on sentencing?

For years, legal experts have argued over the disparity in sentencing between black and white men. The commission found that the difference peaked in 1999 with blacks receiving 14 percent longer sentences. By 2002, however, the commission found no statistical difference.

Many suspected this improvement was due to the mandatory sentencing guidelines. But, whatever the cause, it was excellent news for federal courts. Since 2005, however, after the Booker decision, “those differences appear to have been increasing steadily,'' with black men receiving sentences that were up to 10 percent longer than those imposed on whites, the commission said.

`People who commit similar crimes should receive similar sentences,'' said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee "Unfortunately, without sentencing guidelines for courts to follow, some individuals have received harsher penalties than others despite committing similar crimes."
Disparities in sentences found, BY MARISA TAYLOR

In separate, but related, news House Judiciary Committee is finally going to do something about the sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine. The have said that the notorious 100-1 ratio has no basis in science and it hits poor people and minorities especially hard. It is one of the mandatory drug sentencing policies enacted in the mid-1980s, that helped triple the nation's prison population. The new policy still gives harsher sentences for crack (more like 20-1, rather than 100-1)

Reforming the prison system will not be swift or simple. In these two stories we see how sentencing guidelines, for example, can work as a double edged sword. Guidelines may protect minorities from discrimination when comparing people of different races who committed the same crime. But, when very similar crimes (possession of crack vs. possession of cocaine) are aligned along racial and income lines of preference, rigid guidelines can become discriminatory. Judges, are for the most, part happier with fewer guidelines, they feel that they are able to be more fair, giving each case individual consideration. Yet, even among judges, there are some doubts about not having mandatory guidelines. The next article is not about racial discrimination, but it gives a sense of the complexities and pitfalls of sentencing.

Filip questioned whether the return of discretionary sentencing is such a good thing. While excellent legal judgment may be a prerequisite to becoming a federal judge, Filip argued that legal judgment does little to qualify a judge to make the moral judgments that sentencing requires.

Accordingly, judges should take a modest view of their own moral judgment before departing from the norms, Filip maintained.

He noted that information available at sentencing is often slanted, and is a poor guide as to whether a defendant will reoffend. While a defendant might present three letters attesting to his good moral character, the judge has no way of knowing whether dozens of other persons were asked, but refused, to write such letters.
Former judge defends sentencing guidelines

What do you think about sentencing guidelines? To they tend to put people in prison for too long-- or can they make the system more fair?

Type of drug	Five Year Sentence Without Parole	Ten Year Sentence Without Parole
LSD	1 gram	10 grams
Marijuana	100 plants/100 kilos	1000 plants/1000 kilos
Crack cocaine	5 grams	50 grams
Powder cocaine	500 grams	5 kilos
Heroin	100 grams	1 kilo
Methamphetamine	10 grams	100 grams
PCP	10 grams	100 grams

5 grams of crack is about 25 "hits" or a 8-day supply for an addict.
500 grams of coke is 3,000 "lines" or, if we say someone is using 35 lines a day (this would kill many people) this is a 86 day supply.

The purpose of the sentences is to put people in jail who have an intent to sell.

Comments

[technocratic.livejournal.com]

Only people who hear testimony in a case should have any say on sentencing.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

A transcript isn't good enough?

[technocratic.livejournal.com]

If they happen to be appellate judges, sure.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I would agree that it seems bad to let judges determine sentences also, but I haven't thought about what a good solution would be instead. Regardless, it would be a major change to the system and thus will never happen until I'm dictator.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

I'll admit that I'm torn and torn terribly. Based upon a lot of personal experiences that I'm not willing to go into here, I see both the benefit and the downfall. Some of the worst crimes (sex offenders on the top of my head) can fare much better then drug traffickers. Both bring great harm to our population, but one gets far more time then another and I feel that rape and pedophilia is far more harmful to humanity as a whole.

I want to say mandatory sentencing could help... but, there are some sex offenders who should not get very much jail time-- Like consensual sex between a 21 year-old and a teen-- That's just the kind of case that need discretion.

In general the sentences for drug-related crimes should be reduced. I'd wager that the social trauma caused by locking so many people up causes more problems than the stability that was supposed to result from locking up druggies becuase they might steal to support their habit and locking up dealers becuase they might get new people addicted.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Yea, crackheads and cocaine addicts are exactly the same thing. Heroin and codeine... same drug.

I can understand the desire to help out but stop deluding yourself into thinking cocaine addiction and crack addiction are the same thing.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

This is about fairness not a delusional desire to help. The House Judiciary Committee said 100-1 ratio has no basis in science. Lastly, this conversation (http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/438277.html) has shown me you are probably not able to talk objectively about matters that involve race.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Actually it clearly demonstrates, along with this, that you can't.

Crack addiction is not the same as cocaine addiction. Your phraseology attempts to pass them off as similar. They're not. Crack is much more intense of a high and more addictive.

I'm related to people who've been addicted to crack. I wish their addiction was only cocaine.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I don't see how criticizing judicial prerogative is really all that productive. We would rather leave it up to the "wisdom" of the legislature? The whole point of a judiciary is to remove these considerations from the knee-jerk purview of the jackass politicians.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Lots of judges ARE jackass politicians.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I think there's at least a third option...

Huh?

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

For example, we sentenced a person for terror-related crimes and they received a substantially longer sentence than if they'd raped a person. That seems incredibly unbalanced.

It depends what the crimes are, I guess. But, I'm havering a hard time thinking of a terror-related crime that I don't find *really alarming* -- but... what is the definition of terrorism?

the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;"

Yeah... I think that's as bad as or worse than rape. Esp. when you consider the fact that the "violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets" mostly kills them.

[thies.livejournal.com]

make it all as legal as alcohol

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Same age limits as alcohol, special stores need a license.
Possibly require consumption on premises?
But tax it like smokes use the tax money for rehabs.

Education factor

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

"The report also found that defendants with some college education consistently have received shorter sentences than those with no college education, but the differences in sentence length remained about the same after the decision."
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/13/1527335/disparities-in-sentences-found.html#ixzz0iLeJsGaE

That quote seems to contridict itself. However, if you take the first part at it's face value; those with college degrees recieve shorter sentences. Then you compare college degrees by race. The numbers are close very close.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Higher_education_in_the_US_by_race.svg

Re: Education factor

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

You are incorrect. It says that defendants with some college education have consistently have received shorter sentences, and after the United States v. Booker decision this was unchanged. However, after the United States v. Booker decision the disparity between black/Hispanic and white sentences increased-- this indicates that the increase is not caused by any education differences by race.

35 lines a day! (The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986)

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Good god who do you party with!?

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986.

Congress justified this 100-to-1 sentencing disparity by stressing the serious social harms with which crack use was associated. Although crack and powder cocaine are the same chemical substance, crack sells more cheaply on the street and can be smoked, which induces a briefer, more intense intoxicating effect. It came into widespread use only in the mid-1980s and was associated with violent street crime. In the summer and fall of 1986, press reports sparked growing popular and congressional concern about a crack "epidemic."
http://www.answers.com/topic/anti-drug-abuse-act-1986

The judges aren't being racist in their sentencing they are following the law. The law was passed on emotion not reason. It was a tragic mistake trying to curb behavior through more stringent sentencing. Sadly so few of our lawmakers understand economics, even the simplest of economic principles such as supply and demand and price motivation seem to be beyond them.

Because of the price of crack, it is easily distributed to the poor. The drug harms the poor and minorities farm more than whites.

Should we be allowed to use drugs? I think we own our bodies. However Crack seems to harm the poor disproportionately. Instead of this harsh law, is there a better way to stop it? I don't know. Rehab isn't going to work. Crack is unbelievable addictive and affordable. Sure there aer lots of coke-heads but the price helps curb behavior.

Re: 35 lines a day! (The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986)

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Price matters

In my area it's $10 for 2 rocks of Crack and $25 for a quarter of a gram of cocaine.

Re: 35 lines a day! (The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986)

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

The judges aren't being racist in their sentencing they are following the law.

You have poor reading comprehension. Please, read my post again. The issue of judges (possibly) being racist is not related to the mandatory sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine.

Both of your responses to this post have been wrong because you misread what I wrote or what an article was saying. It'd be nice if you would acknowledge that-- We all make mistakes but I feel as though you are jumping to (wrong) conclusions about the things that I post. That makes your responses seems a little hasty and unthoughtful.

To move past this I was wondering if you know if there are any data to support the common notion that "Crack is more addictive than coke?" it might be, but I wonder how one might measure that. Everyone say that "Crack is more addictive than coke" but what is this based on?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

You have made some excellent posts lately. While lj-cut may not necessarily be your friend it is to many of us :D.

(note: this is definitely tic rather than snarky, but I really would appreciate your longer posts at leasty partially behind a cut)

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

No problem.

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

I am not sure that making sure white people receive the same excessive sentences as black people is really progress.

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

"excessive" can be a subjective concept. It's possible to defend long sentences, but there is no defense for having what appears to be different standards of punishment based on race.

Though, I do agree that we throw too many people in jail.