Mandatory minimum sentences are a big problem in today's society. People like drug dealers and other petty crimes can get off pretty much scot-free in today's judiciary system. These people are treated with such benevolence that their sentences are virtually repealed or they only have to serve a fraction of the time they are sentenced to. And even then it is not served in jail as it should be, but it is served as community service or under probation instead.
             Although many agree that mandatory minimum sentences are outdated and should not be imposed any longer, there are those who approve and support them. Those in favor of them have two strong reasons for their beliefs. First, they believe that the sentences act as a deterrent to possible criminals. The sentences are especially aimed at drug related crimes. The idea was to deter people, especially teens, from looking to make some money in the drug business by weighing it against the jail time they would receive if the were caught. This also directly makes the streets safer by scaring people away from a life of crime. Another argument people have in favor of the sentencing is it speeds up the legal process. Because many of the crimes are misdemeanors, there are no criminal trials. Therefore, when a person is convicted they go straight to jail without having to wait for a sentencing date. Also, with mandatory minimum sentencing there is no chance of a plea bargain.
             Many people are also against mandating minimum sentences. Their main argument is that there are too many overcrowded prisons. In a time when overcrowding in becoming a very large problem in prisons, they say that mandatory minimum laws only add to the problem. This, however, is not a very feasible argument, as there are other ways to deal with drug dealers and people convicted of petty things.
             An easy alternative to incarceration is the possible use of some reforming programs. One of
             ...