Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Abstract
Although many individuals may argue that the obligatory sentence orientation has achieved a lot as far as crime taming is concerned, the entire process has many flaws; something that jeopardizes its mandate. In this regard, the paper will explore the ethical dilemmas relating to this form of a sentence, whereby research findings have indicated that the entire system has many biases (economically, racially, and socially) hence, the failure to achieve justice for all. In addition, the system has contributed to many economic and social problems because of the enormous numbers of prisoners in most penitentiaries, a fact that questions the credibility and reliability of this form of sentencing orientation.
Introduction
The effectiveness of any sentencing law; as concerns the achievement of justice, depends on how effective the law is, when it comes to ensuring a judicial system achieves justice for all. That is, the main reason behind the adoption of certain sentencing laws is to ensure that, all individuals convicted of any criminal offense receive proportional sentences for their crimes. The same is the scenario when it comes to mandatory sentences. Although many may argue that, the adoption of the mandatory sentence has many advantages, which include the lessening of court expenses; because of its procedural measures, and giving all criminal offenders required sentences, the same has not been the case. This is because; the entire sentencing procedure has achieved little, as far as justice is concerned, something that is clear with the increased prisoner numbers and the prevalent discriminations associated with mandatory sentencing. On the other hand, there exist clear indications of flaws in the mandatory sentencing scheme, because of the nature of external influences; more so political, that is clear in the federal mandatory sentencing system. The fact that currently there is an outcry from members of the public, judicial system, and state governors, as concerns overhaul of the entire system, surely indicate that the system has many problems, which require serious consideration (Gabor & Crutcher, 2002, pp. 21-26).
Ethical Dilemmas of Mandatory Sentencing
Endorsement of the mandatory sentencing law had a single intent; provision of criminal sentences proportional to the nature of criminal offense perpetrated by individuals, regardless of their race, political, social, or economic affiliations. To some extent no one can deny that the sentencing mechanism has achieved its objectives, although the many ethical flaws associated with the system, make the system void of its mandate. As Wilkins et.al (1991, pp. 25-26) argue, the entire system has many structural and performance hitches that make many questions the validity and reliability of the entire system as concerns achievement of its mandate.
One main ethical dilemma facing this sentencing mechanism is achievement of fairness to all individuals. For example, consider individuals convicted of crimes whose punishment falls below the set mandatory sentence; a case that is prevalent in the narcotics sentencing laws. In reality, it is unfair to compare those offenders, with criminals whose offenses deserve the desired obligatory sentence criteria to crime perpetrators whose offenses are lacking. That is to say, there should be the incremental validity concept in any sentencing measure or system. In addition, from research findings, there exist clear disparities when it comes to individuals convicted of specific criminal offenses, which require the application of this form of a sentence. This is because, in most prisons, the number of black criminals is more, when contrasted with the number of whites who the courts have convicted of the same criminal offenses (Newton, 1992, p.1). Many proponents of mandatory sentencing attribute such numbers to the fact that most criminals are black; a fact that is questionable in terms of validity. This in many ways jeopardizes the fairness concept, something that is engrossed in the fundamentals of any sentencing criteria.
In addition to the degree of fairness in such laws, the incapacitation of judges makes the entire sentencing protocol lacking. This is because, in most plea-bargaining, the passing of sentences, more in cases that require the effecting of the obligatory sentence, depends primarily on the verdicts of the prosecutors. This in ways can affect the case outcome in terms of quality, because play minimal roles when it comes to such cases; their duties are to concur with the plea hence, affecting the required sentences. This is an issue of concern because; most prosecutors judgments are inclined either racially or economically, hence making the entire process a flaw. Most economic disparities manifest themselves when it comes to hiring attorneys to represent one. This therefore makes it important, for adoption of the discretion concept on judges, a concept meant to ensure that, the entire justice system achieves justice. Although this is essential, a still need arises to formulate mechanisms of eliminating errors that may result; something that is possible through adoption of sentencing guiding principles (Issues in Mandatory Minimum Sentence, (n.d.), pp. 7-8).
On the other hand, many questions arise as concerns the control of crime rates; a factor that adoption of obligatory sentences targeted. For example, as concerns eliminating the drug trafficking syndicates, the governments targets were to properly deal with the real perpetrators of the crime. However, because, majority of the criminals serving obligatory drug-related jail terms are low-level sellers, makes the entire process is a disgrace to the justice system. Hence, the entire system has failed in achieving its mandate. The fact that most prisons have many inmates serving this form of sentence makes the whole scenario worse hence, eliciting many questions of the competence of the judicial system to handle crime and control prison expenditures economically.
Conclusion
In conclusion, because of the many dilemmas associated with the entire obligatory sentence system, there is need for serious reforms; reforms that will ensure not only does the system achieve proportionality in sentencing, but also a system that will ensure the crime rate declines. In addition, there is need for the adoption of mechanisms, which will ensure the limiting of external influences on the quality and type of mandatory sentences passed by courts.
Reference List
Gabor, T., & Crutcher, N. (2002). Mandatory minimum penalties: their effects on crime, sentencing disparities and justice system expenditures. Web.
Issues in Mandatory Minimum Sentencing. Considering the traditional and alternative methods of crime control in the United States Justice System. 2010, Web.
Newton, J. (1992). Harsher Crack Sentences Criticized as Racial Inequity: Narcotics: Mandatory penalties are unfair to blacks, critics say; Terms are stiffer for smokable cocaine. Los Angeles Times. Web.
Wilkins, w., Carnes, J. E., Corrothers, H. G., Gelak, M. S., Mackinnon, G. E., Mazzone, D. A., Nagel, I. H., Getty, P. C., & Maloney, P. L. (1991). Special report to the congress: Mandatory minimum penalties in the federal criminal justice system. United States Sentencing Commission. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.