During 1986 Congress passed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act which created lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug dealing and small possession of crack cocaine. The first sentence for a drug offense is five to ten years. The second offense equates to ten to fifteen years in prison. After that, if a person is caught dealing or with drugs, a life imprisonment is mandatory for the individual. Some may argue the need for the three strike system is invalid because individuals should not be committing the crime in the first place. While that may be true, the issue is the enormous imprisonment distance between people of color and whites. According to a study conducted by the Human Rights Watch during 2000, African-Americans composed 80 to 90
…show more content…
The idea of “The New Jim Crow” is supported throughout much of the book with various studies, statistics and narratives. One similarity between Jim Crow and “The New Jim Crow” is not having the right to vote. In much of the South, obstacles such as grandfather clauses, literary tests and poll taxes prevented African-Americans from voting. This idea is similar to “The New Jim Crow” because once someone is convicted of a felon; their right to vote is forfeited. While it could be argued the removal of all voting rights happens to all felons regardless of their race, it is important to keep in mind the statistics and studies previously mentioned in this paper with regards to the victims in the war on drugs. Although whites do get arrested for drug use, according to Alexander, it is important to keep in mind two things: one, the criminal justice system in some scenarios essentially puts whites into jail to preserve the idea that the war on drugs is not based on color, so it conveys the idea of colorblindness, and second, just because whites may be victims of the war on drugs, it does not mean that they are the drug war’s essential target. Although it may appear that a colorblind society is a good thing, it is not possible because of racial profiling exist in who the police stop. In addition to that, Alexander says colorblindness “prevents us from seeing the racial …show more content…
As mentioned in the book, “once you’re labeled a felon, the old forms of discrimination — employment discrimination, housing discrimination, denial of the right to vote, denial of education opportunity, denial of food stamps and other public benefits” (2). While those rights can be taken away from both people of color and whites, I want to know if whites face the same amount of discrimination that people of color face. When I took Social Problems last year at Truman, an alarming statistic stood with me: that I was more likely to be hired than a black person without a felony. As a black man, it is alarming and I wish Alexander would have talked about it in the book. She really only discussed the loss of public benefits in context with a felony being a person of color. The other problem with the book is the abundant amount of statistics. After a while, it becomes repetitive. I wish Alexander would have offered more personal stories of either herself or other people because I eventually became desensitized to all the statistics. However, my overall enjoyment of the book still allowed me to continue my read and I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who is passionate about issues of race and social
The idea of “The New Jim Crow” is supported throughout much of the book with various studies, statistics and narratives. One similarity between Jim Crow and “The New Jim Crow” is not having the right to vote. In much of the South, obstacles such as grandfather clauses, literary tests and poll taxes prevented African-Americans from voting. This idea is similar to “The New Jim Crow” because once someone is convicted of a felon; their right to vote is forfeited. While it could be argued the removal of all voting rights happens to all felons regardless of their race, it is important to keep in mind the statistics and studies previously mentioned in this paper with regards to the victims in the war on drugs. Although whites do get arrested for drug use, according to Alexander, it is important to keep in mind two things: one, the criminal justice system in some scenarios essentially puts whites into jail to preserve the idea that the war on drugs is not based on color, so it conveys the idea of colorblindness, and second, just because whites may be victims of the war on drugs, it does not mean that they are the drug war’s essential target. Although it may appear that a colorblind society is a good thing, it is not possible because of racial profiling exist in who the police stop. In addition to that, Alexander says colorblindness “prevents us from seeing the racial …show more content…
As mentioned in the book, “once you’re labeled a felon, the old forms of discrimination — employment discrimination, housing discrimination, denial of the right to vote, denial of education opportunity, denial of food stamps and other public benefits” (2). While those rights can be taken away from both people of color and whites, I want to know if whites face the same amount of discrimination that people of color face. When I took Social Problems last year at Truman, an alarming statistic stood with me: that I was more likely to be hired than a black person without a felony. As a black man, it is alarming and I wish Alexander would have talked about it in the book. She really only discussed the loss of public benefits in context with a felony being a person of color. The other problem with the book is the abundant amount of statistics. After a while, it becomes repetitive. I wish Alexander would have offered more personal stories of either herself or other people because I eventually became desensitized to all the statistics. However, my overall enjoyment of the book still allowed me to continue my read and I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who is passionate about issues of race and social