Homeless in Arizona

Sadly the laws against drugs with their draconian prison sentences cause much more harm then the drugs do.

I'm kind of p*ssed off because today the state of Arizona is using it's draconian laws against drugs to send Billy Hayes to prison for two years.

Billy Hayes only crimes are victimless crimes involving medical marijuana. It's absolute bullsh*t to send him to prison for two years. Billy didn't deserve to go to jail for 2 hours, much less 2 years.

Source

After former addict changes life, an unexpected return to incarceration: Column

Kevin Ring 4:50 p.m. MST May 19, 2016

Mandatory minimums often force justice system to dole out unjust punishment

An addict who first started using pills given to him as a child by his mother, Leo Guthmiller had numbed himself on alcohol, painkillers and meth for more than a decade before he decided to turn his life around after a 2013 arrest. A few weeks in jail for shoplifting and drug possession allowed Guthmiller to clear his head.

“I didn’t want to live with addiction or fear of not having drugs and just disappointing my family,” Guthmiller said during a recent interview. “So when they offered me a chance to get sober, I took it and I ran with it.”

Two years later, Guthmiller was married, working a full-time job and running Alcoholics Anonymous meetings to help other addicts. He loved his new life and was excited to be making plans for the future.

And then it was over.

Two federal agents showed up at Guthmiller's house one morning last year and arrested him for his role in a drug conspiracy that he says took place years before his sobriety. According to charging documents, at some point possibly dating as far back as November 2012, Guthmiller distributed methamphetamine and heroin. He used the money to feed his former drug habit. In 2015, with few other options, he pleaded guilty. He was sentenced to 10 years — the mandatory minimum prison term for the charge. Last month he started his sentence, and he'll be 38 years old by the time he gets out.

Guthmiller, his family, his boss and his friends were stunned. The former addict had been a model citizen for nearly three years. What confused Guthmiller and his family even more was that the federal judge who accepted the guilty plea, U.S. District Court Judge John Gerrard, did not have the authority to consider Guthmiller's recovery or any other relevant factors when he sentenced him. A federal mandatory minimum sentencing law passed by Congress about 30 years ago dictated the punishment.

Gerrard blasted the sentence. "A 10-year mandatory minimum sentence in a case like this is absolutely ridiculous," Gerrard said. "And the only reason I'm imposing the sentence ... is because I have to. That’s what Congress mandates." The judge said the "addiction-induced crime" warranted prison time, but not 10 years.

Gerrard was right. The public will not be any safer with Guthmiller locked up for a decade. Dealing drugs is a serious and reprehensible crime. Some who traffic drugs prey on the weak and protect their profits and market share with violence or the threat of violence. But others considered traffickers under federal law are people like Guthmiller, addicts who sell drugs solely for the purpose of feeding their addictions. Our criminal sentencing laws should allow judges to distinguish between these two very different types of offenders.

Unfortunately, mandatory minimum sentencing laws make these kinds of common sense distinctions impossible. The idea that the punishment should fit the crime has been replaced with a one-size-fits-all ideology that doesn’t improve public safety or serve justice.

Fortunately, many states are moving away from mandatory minimums. They are reserving more serious prison terms for more serious offenders. Common sense reform has allowed dozens of states to reduce crime while reducing prison populations. They are delivering more safety for less money – a win-win for families and taxpayers.

Congress is considering very modest changes to federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws, like the one that was applied to Guthmiller. Sentences like Guthmiller's make clear that these laws are unwise, ineffective and unfair. It’s time to throw them out and allow courts to impose punishments that fit the crime.

Kevin Ring is the vice president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and author of Scalia’s Court.