Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Abolishment of mandatory minimum sentencing practices
Justice is the bedrock of sentencing institution. Offenders deserve to be punished so that the
occurrence of that crime reduces. Punishment ranges from fine to life imprisonment depending
with the severity of the crime committed. The critical duty of justice institution is to ensure that
offenders get equal punishment for their crimes. However, the legislature amended some laws
such as mandatory minimums that were meant to deter people from being involved in some
crimes such as drugs possession that infringe on justice (Gill n.p.). This paper will describe how
mandatory minimums will be abolished being a member of the legislature.
First, mandatory minimums dehumanize the offender by giving unfair punishment. For
example, mandatory minimum states that for any offender caught with five grams of cocaine
serves for five years in prison without any fines or parole. The problem with this is that the court
does not examine the situation around the possession of the cocaine. The offender might have
possessed cocaine for the first time and still receives the five year imprisonment. The court,
however, might have given the offender a less sentence if it had examined how the crime
occurred (Gill n.p.).
Second, the mandatory minimum was intended for special cases, but today it is a law, for
example, Leandro Andrade was sentenced for life just because he stole videotapes worth 153
dollars after having committed another two felonies. Andrade case was a minor case, and he did
not deserve to lot in jail because Andrade never used violence in his crimes. Furthermore,
Andrade was an addict, but also he had responsibilities. Andrade was a father and a husband, and
