It is obvious that all spheres of social life are greatly affected by the politicians and often by their personal interests. The elections of 1986 probably should be regarded as a source of rising concern about the drug issue. Although we cannot claim that there is a straight relationship between public concern and attention by politicians to a given issue, it is clear that when politicians sense that public concern about and interest in a certain topic (drugs in our case) growing, they will most certainly exploit this issue in their interest. With the media talking about the issue and famous dying athletes, Congress once it started talking about it, realized that all the same things were heard from everywhere and the problem existed or at least was apparent to all. So, clearly when the government became involved in the issue and Nancy Regan began making speeches stressing the anti-drug theme with "Just say no" slogan society was even more stimulated and awaited some concrete moves from the senators.

The entire drug matter and other social problems such as firearms offences required some strict decisions being made on the subject of criminal responsibility for those crimes. The minimum mandatory sentences were to solve the problem of drug abuse and impose tougher punishment. Initially the federal government had forced mandatory minimum sentences with the Narcotic Control Act of 1956 but had turned away from such laws by 1970, when it found that the increased sentences had not resulted in the expected overall reduction in drug law violations. States on the other hand began implementing mandatory minimums on their own; such New York began the trend in 1973 when it passed the Rockefeller Drug Laws requiring 15-year prison sentences for possession or sales of small amounts of narcotics. Michigan followed in 1978 with the enactment of the "650 lifer law," requiring life imprisonment for possession, sale or conspiracy to sell or possess 650 grams (about 1.25 pounds) of cocaine or heroin. By year 1983, 49 of the 50 states had passed some mandatory minimum provisions, usually adding them little by little, instead of major changes. The federal government started reforming its sentencing stipulations in the 1980s in the light pf problems described above, primarily by setting up a system of sentencing guidelines trying to create more uniformity in the sentences given out by judges. Afterwards it intended to impose mandatory minimums, mostly for drug-related offenses. The United States Sentencing Commission, established by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, created a system of guidelines designed to limit judges' discretion in sentencing and to create more uniformity and proportionality in the sentences. Another Drug Abuse Act was passed by the Congress in 1986 in response to criticism of indeterminate, or undefined, sentencing and also about concerns on the perceived link between moderate penalties for drug offenders and increases in violent crime and drug abuse. Under the law, drug linchpins received sentences of at least ten years for a first offense and twenty years for a second. Mid-level dealers and managers face five and ten years for first and second offenses, respectively. In 1988 Congress extended mandatory minimums to reach conspirators in the drug deals as well as principals, thus ensuring that minimum penalties would apply with equal force to secondary players found guilty of conspiracy.

Obviously those drug related acts passed by the government were the answer to the ever rising concerns of the society in the decade of 1980’s. Although drugs were always a big problem, the situation began to look out of control because of various factors and to calm down the hysterical mood, those strict and as seemed at that time "just" laws were ratified. The history showed however that there was almost no effect brought by the mandatory minimums and adopted sentences, except of confusing laws which are judging everybody under same conditions.

Page 2 of 2 :: First | Last :: Prev | 1 2 | Next