Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Essay

Mandatory minimum sentences were created in the 1970s and 1980s in response to concerns about drug dealing and violent crimes involving guns. These sentences were created due to an outcry of victims and victim’s families that some criminals received lighter punishment compared to the crime they committed. Mandatory minimum sentences stated a minimum penalty for a particular offense, and in some cases the use of a gun during the commission of the crime leads to the use of mandatory penalties (Gabbidon, 2013, p. 179). This “get tough” approach was designed to change the indeterminate sentence, which was deemed unfair and often resulted in bias against minorities and poor people (Gabbidon, 2013, p. 178). Prior to the enactment of the mandatory minimum sentences, judges had the discretion to minimize or maximize sentences. In other words, their decisions were based solely on their notion of justice and views (Schmalleger & Hall, 2014,p. 467).

Although these sentences were created to prevent crime from reoccurring, the issue of they are effective is ignored. The undermining issue is that the mandatory minimum sentences produce

Penalties that do not violate the Eighth Amendment are “fines (which cannot be excessive), being placed on probation, given an intermediate penalty (something in-between probation and incarceration), and/or incarcerated, and the death penalty” (Gabbidon, 2013, p. 168). Although judges have considerable discretion in the sentencing process, state and federal legislatures are primarily responsible for determining the proper sentencing for each offense (Gabbidon, 2013, p. 168). The primary reason for the creation of the federal sentencing guidelines was to create a fair and uniform sentencing procedure. That is to prevent judicial discretion from heavily influencing the