Mandatory Minimum Sentencing

In 1986, Congress sanctioned the Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Laws. These laws were created primarily to stop "big time" drug dealers by discouraging them through the mandatory minimums they would face if caught. However, due to these obligations, small time drug users, and those who are not linked to major drug trade were also sentenced with mandatory minimums, regardless of the severity of their crime.

One group, Families Against Mandatory Minimums (http://www.famm.org/), brings up the point that mandatory minimums takes the control away from judges. Not only does it make it impossible for judges to control the sentencing, but judges can also no longer consider the individual or the individual's crime. Regardless, kingpins and small time drug users and dealers are tried in the same manner.

The article provided by FAMM goes on to state that 56% of adults no longer favor mandatory minimums.


As a Sweet Briar student, you may be wondering how this affects you, or why it is important.
Here's why:
In April 2007, in the middle of Hampden-Sydney College's "Greek Week," the DEA and local police department went into H-SC and made arrests. As Sweet Briar students, most of us have close ties with the all-male college members and most of us, knew someone, whether personally or as an aquaintence, that was arrested. I personally new a few, one of which was my boyfriend, pictured above, second from the left. He was federally arrested and found guilty of selling 1.8 grams of marijuana. 1.8 grams. Less than a cigarette. Due to mandatory minimums, he has been in prison since June 13, 2007. His release date is April 25, 2008. Over 10 months due to something that was created to bust big drug dealers. Is this justice? Let me conclude with this: not only was the jury crying when they found him guilty, but so was the judge because he couldn't stop an injustice from happening.