Mandatory Sentencing And Strict Enforcement Of True Sentencing

798 Words Oct 30th, 2015 4 Pages
As a result of the vast amounts of initiatives conducted on behalf of the federal government and state governments as well as a handful of interest groups and political associations, crime rates in the United States plummeted significantly and prison populations shot up astronautically. Accordingly, at the time, prison expansions and long term prison sentences as characterized by the implementation of minimum mandatory sentencing and strict enforcement of true sentencing became a viable option in mediating our nation’s criminals and as a result, states needed more space to house their incarcerated criminals. As a result following the massive implementation of justice reform, in 1993, Paul J. McNulty (then the Executive Director of the First Freedom Coalition who now serves as Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee) outspokenly rejected the Clinton Administration’s proposals to combat violent crime for its lack of resolve in keeping career criminals off of the streets. Essentially, McNulty argued that the plan to implement incarceration alternatives like boot camps and structural punishments would only distract the root cause of crime in America and thus prove fruitless in the war on violent crime. So, he aided and supported the push to provide funding to build large regional prisons that would house significant more numbers than that of traditional prison complex’s to aim in keeping violent offenders locked up on long term sentencing in hopes of correcting America’s…

Related Documents