U.S. Officals cut the length of sentences for crack users?

Question

Please see article from yahoo below.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 11 — The United States Sentencing Commission voted unanimously today to lighten punishments retroactively for crimes related to crack cocaine, a decision that could affect some 19,500 federal inmates.

The decision, which was made over the objections of the Bush administration, takes effect on March 3, 2008, and it will not mean automatic release for those serving time. But it does open the door for them to apply for sentence adjustments and possible earlier release.

The sentencing commission earlier had said that applying its new guidelines retroactively could reduce the average sentence by about 27 months and that about 2,500 prisoners could be released within one year. The remaining eligible inmates could receive proportional reductions, depending on the length of their sentences, with most getting fewer than 24 months off, but some getting 49 months or more trimmed from their sentences.

NO WHERE IN THE ARTICLE DOES IT SAY ONE WORD ABOUT THESE DRUG OFFENDERS GOING TO A REHAB, DRUG COUNCELING, SOBER LIVING HOMES, OR BEING OFFERED CAREER TRAINING OF ANY SORT. THEY CAN'T JUST BE RELEASED TO GO BACK TO THE SAME TYPE OF LIFE AS BEFORE. THIS SHOULD BE MANDITORY FOR ALL DRUG OFFENCERS, NOT JUST CRACK OFFENDERS.

Answer 1

The reason it's only for crack is racially motivated, that's why other drugs aren't covered. I don't want to go into the details, the PC police might report me. But basically it's a PC gesture.

As to why no rehab, the intention here is not to help anyone, it's to change the demographic profile of prisons. Funny thing is that if a person does not get some sort of treatment, they will probably end up back in prison again. So instead of one long sentence for crack the same guy might do an equal amount of time on 3 shorter crack sentences. And the net effect will be no change in prison demographics. But that's politics. Too bad, I think treatment should be part of the program.

Answer 2

It's very expensive to keep prisoners in jail for petty offenses such as minor crack sales for five plus years at a time. Moreover, when they get out of prison the only job they can get is selling crack. It's a failed strategy.

Now that the war on drugs has been preempted by the war on terror the government is giving Judges the discretion to decide how long a person should be sentenced to prison based upon individual factors like: do they have priors, was their violence involved, are they gang affiliated ect.

Long prison sentences have been shown to be totally ineffective in the war on drugs.

The Judges are faced with the reality that they only have so much prison space and studies of mandatory sentencing have shown it has no positive effect in reducing drug use or sales.

Law enforcement studies show that the most effective policing strategy has been for the police to close down open air drug markets by concentrating on collecting incriminating information on a small number of habitual dealers and meeting with the dealers. The Police tell the dealers either stop dealing in this area or we will arresst you and charge you with everything we can. Police departments report that this type of strategy has actually had a positive effect in reducing street drug sales.

Long sentences have been a total failure. (Of course failed policies have never stopped the Bush Administration from perpetuating them with the delusion they will get different results by doing the same thing over and over.)

The reality of tough sentencing for all offenders shows that as soon as one person is put in jail another one goes down to the corner and takes thier place.

Answer 3

I would imagine it's because the laws are deemed racist. To quote a book: The ratio per capita of white to black drug users in the U.S. is roughly one to one. But the sentencing rate of whites to blacks for drugs possession is one to ten. The amount of crack you need to get a five year mandatory sentence is five grams, but for powder cocaine it's five hundred grams -- which is interesting when you learn that 75% of those arrested for powder cocaine are white, and 90% of those arrested for crack are African America.

Answer 4

Well we surely can't afford to pay for treatment, when we already have spent hundreds of thousands to catch them, prosecute them and house them.

As long as we keep prohibition alive and running this farce will continue.

Unless you just want to pull a $20 out of your check and send the rest to the government. We ain't far from that anyway.