Will Drug Lord Do Less Time Than the Average American Nonviolent Drug Offender?
The U.S. government recently praised the arrest of Colombia's top drug lord Diego Montoya when he was captured earlier last month. Law enforcement and military officials say it was a powerful blow to Colombia's most powerful drug cartel, comparing it to the capture of Al Capone during Prohibition. Montoya, who had been on the FBI's top ten most wanted list, is said to be responsible for providing as much as 70% of all the cocaine in the United States. In 1999, a $5 million bounty for his capture and extradition was offered after he was indicted in a federal court in Miami.
There is much talk about how this capture will affect the drug trade and the flow of drugs into the U.S. But the question on my mind is how much time will he serve when he is brought to the United States to stand trial for the death and destruction he has caused? I would be willing to bet that he will get less time than many Americans who are now serving extraordinarily long sentences, many for low-level, nonviolent drug law violations under the notorious mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Some would ask how would I come to this conclusion. If you look at the recently completed federal sentence of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriaga who served a 17-year federal sentence for drug trafficking, it might give you a hint what is in store for Montoya. In Noriaga's case the U.S. attorney negotiated deals with 26 high level drug dealers, including drug lord Carlos Lehder. They in turn received a package of perks that included leniency, cash payments, and were allowed to keep their drug earnings in return for testimony against the infamous general who was once a strong United States ally before he fell from grace in 1989 when the U.S. invaded Panama.
There are many Americans in prison that are serving sentences of more than 17 years for simple drug crimes. These are marginalized offenders that don't have the bargaining chips to establish deals. For example, drug mule Elaine Bartlett, a mother of four served a 20-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller Drug Laws for seven ounces of cocaine. Her husband, Nathan Brooks, was sentenced to 25-years-to-life. The list goes on and on. There are an estimated 500,000 Americans locked up because of the drug war. Many of them are serving lengthy sentences because of a 30-year government campaign to demonize illicit drug use and implement mandatory minimum sentencing.
In 1986, mandatory minimum sentencing laws were enacted by Congress, which compelled judges to deliver fixed sentences to individuals convicted of certain crime, regardless of mitigating factors or culpability. Federal mandatory drug sentences are determined based on three factors: the type of drug, weight of the drug mixture (or alleged weight in conspiracy cases), and the number of prior convictions. Judges are unable to consider other important factors such as the offender's role, motivation and the likelihood of recidivism.
The push to incarcerate drug offenders has been further exacerbated through the current federal sentencing law that punishes crack cocaine offenders much more severely than offenders possessing other types of drugs, for example, powder cocaine. Distributing just five grams of crack carries a minimum five-year federal prison sentence while distributing 500 grams of powder cocaine carries the same sentence. This 100:1 sentencing disparity has been almost universally criticized for its racially discriminatory impact by a wide variety of criminal justice and civil rights groups, and in Congress. Although whites and Hispanics form the majority of crack users, the vast majority of those convicted for crack cocaine offenses are African Americans.
Because of the war on drugs, which mandates mandatory minimum sentencing, average drug offenders are routinely elevated to kingpin status and condemned to serve out long prison sentences that should be reserved only for actual drug kingpins, not individuals that are fabricated to that level. It's time to end these draconian laws and implement a sentencing structure that promotes fairness and justice.
Follow Anthony Papa on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Anthony Papa
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Life in prison
The paper announced that the U.S. Supreme Court pretty well sealed the fate of Weldon Angelos. He is the Utahan given 55 years in federal prison for selling pot while in the possession of an otherwise legal firearm. Absent the firearm aspect, Mr. Angelos would not have, virtually, lost his life.
Have you noticed that we don’t punish routine gun murders any differently than other routine murders? And how about speeding, as opposed to speeding while lawfully in the possession of a firearm?
The same issue of the paper announced that San Francisco city government is now in the process of ranking marijuana law enforcement as a lower priority than the enforcement of every other criminal law. It is clear that they and many, many others would make pot legal, if possible. There is, however, no political constituency for making murder legal. Or even speeding.
So we are faced with the realistic possibility of it some day being said of Mr. Angelos that he sits in prison for possessing a legal firearm while engaged in an act that is not illegal. Like so much of “The War on Drugs”, this is a situation the logic of which is the kind that makes no sense.
We need family "drug" courts that a manned with judges, prosecutors and probation officers as well as social workers who can begin to address the needs of drug addiction.
Just a thought.
"Pirahna dealers"? The vast majority of drug dealers are people who are trying to support their habit, or to scrape out a subsistance-level living, since complications associated with their addiction make it difficult for them to hold a normal job. Of all the people who go to jail or prison for drug dealing, about 1/10 of 1% are what the average person thinks of as a 'drug dealer', someone who is really making money and who might not even use the drug himself. Those people are far less likely to get arrested, because they're not poor & aren't as likely to be hassled or questioned by police.
For the rest, locking them up does nothing but make it that much harder for them to pull their way out of their situation.
And laws like the one denying federal grants to students who've been convicted of dealing don't help. That's got to be one of the dumbest, most counter-productive laws I've ever heard of. People who go to prison or who have a drug sales conviction have about 0 likelihood of ever pulling themselves up enough to go to college, even if they're intelligent or have had some college already. Those who manage to do so should be lauded, not confronted with obstacles that aren't thrown into the path of convicted rapists, child molesters, or murderers.
No one and I mean no one should ever do time for personal private, prudent, consumption of drugs. We consume cigarettes and alcohol. What's the difference. Like these Bozos are capable of drawing a line. And Micheal Vick going to jail for killing an ANIMAL!!!!! And HIS animal!!!!! Jesus what is this country coming to. Or going to I should say. The freakin dogs.
I seriously can't believe that you just equated drug use in the privacy of your own body and your own property with KILLING an animal!
Yes, we should be free to do to our own bodies whatever the hell we want to do. If Michael Vick wants to rape and hang and electrocute and drown HIMSELF and force himself to fight other willing humans, I say more power to him. But when that violence extends to anyone or anything beyond that - we have a problem.
Just an animal, huh? Well, I hope the next time we hear of a living being systematically TORTURED AND KILLED FOR SPORT AND MONEY it's something or someone that YOU love.
A killer is a killer is a killer.
What's this country coming to? Not a whole hell of a lot with people like YOU around who don't mind cruel callous killers in their midst.
Oh grow up. Hunters and fisherman do it every day. Practically the whole country eats meat and last time I checked you gotta kill it before you grill it. We're systematically killing people in Iraq and Afghanistan daily so fat ass Americans can drive their Hummers. The world is the world is the world. It's called a red herring, mock outrage. The fact is that the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave incarcerates more people than any country in the world, on an absolute and per capita basis. There is something to be outraged over, not some pitbulls in Georgia.
Pigs are about as smart as dogs & we kill them all the time for our convenience, for things like pork rinds & footballs. In India, cows are sacred to a large segment of the population, but here we make hamburgers out of them.
In some societies, dogs are unclean & dispicable, fit for being shot. Here we treat them as pets & think of them as lovable.
Face it. We kill stuff all the time, because we can. The things that in this country we choose not to kill are only safe for as long as we consider them to be providing some sort of amusement, or security, or whatever. So there's no need to get o'er-righteous about it.
And don't get mad at me, either. It's not my fault we're at the top of the food chain.
Yes, the supreme court is taking up the issue of unfair prision sentences. Thank goodness.
I certainly do not believe in doing drugs, but when I heard that we have more people in prision than any country, I was stunned. And we are building more prisions.
And don't these people lose their voting rights.|
If the idea of jailing these folks was for rehabilitation , I might agree. But how much of it is to fill the pockets of these private prision contractors.
I admit that I do not know the answer to the drug problem, but there must be a better way than prison. That would make me want to do drugs.
What ever happened to the faithbased thing we threw money at, were they just money laundering. HUMMMMM lining your pocket with oil money and lining your pocket with drug money. Greed is Greed.
What happens to a felon's voting privileges is left up to the individual states. In California, as in most states, felons lose their right to vote whilst incarcerated, as well as during any subsequent period of parole. In a few states, felons never lose their rights, and can even vote from prison. 2 or 3 states remove a felon's right to vote permanently. (As has been the case in Florida -- but I believe that they recently passed legislation allowing many ex-felons to request return of their voting rights; I'm not sure which (if any) classes of felon are barred from the process under the new statute.
The war on drugs will not end until the profit is taken out of it.
No, not the profit of the dealers, but the profit of well connected political friends; the companies who get big money for interdiction equipment, like airplanes and radar domes, like the companies who make drug testing supplies and the group which promotes and builds private prisons to house all those mandatory sentencing victims.
And, last of all, the counties and cities and police departments who profit from confiscated cars, guns, houses, etc., because the profit motive works there as well. It leads to arrests based on what the local police can profit from like more federal funding, new cars, spy equipment and the private companies who supply the training..
I was reminded about the glue sniffing craze. It was started by the Denver Police in the 1970's as a way to refocus public attention away from the arrests and revelations of corruption in the DPD.
The Denver Police created their own drug scare and, after the news came out, kids started sniffing glue. That meant funding for more classes, more officers, new restrictions of sales of model airplane glue(called DOPE)and the arrest of owners of stores where the glue was sold.
Hey...the drug war is good business.
I agree with your comments. I think mandatory sentencing is a crock. We pay judges a lot of money to make judgments, let them do their jobs.
Also when we talk about Kingpins we are speaking of people with a lot of money. If you have a lot of money, the legal system will bend.
As a side note; I had a conversation with a cop friend of mine last week. I for one, think Pot is in the same general family as Alcohol in that it should be sold thru registered outlets, taxed aggressively and there should be laws about operating automobiles under the influence. His argument was not just the same old gateway drug thing, but that Pot it is a buffer zone between legal drugs (Alcohol) and dangerous drugs such as Coke, Heroin and Meth. He said if Pot was legal then what would the rebellious kids turn to instead?
I know it is off subject but I thought it worth noting.
I find that argument specious. There are plenty of people who use alcohol but who never venture into use of marijuana because of its legal status. However, many who might treat treat pot the same way if it were legal are instead made to consider themselves criminals if they use it, and are forced to obtain it via a criminal underground which is also a conduit for harder drugs, making it much more likely that those pot smokers will come into contact with and eventually try them.
Those with a predilection or curiosity towards use of harder drugs will seek them out and obtain them. The fact that pot is illegal will not prevent 'rebellious youth' from experimenting with meth or heroin. On the other hand, many who have no previous inclination to try more serious drugs, but do not consider marijuana to be such, will gradually become less shocked by and more tolerant of use of meth and cocaine, by way of the casual attitude towards those drugs taken by their pot dealers and as a result of a gradual acceptance to themselves of their own status as lawbreakers.
I'm against the whole thing where they go
to other countries and arrest their citizens.
I think if there's a country where there's
things going on that are like the drug thing,
then they should improve the borders. If
you can't ship the drugs to our country to
begin with because they finally figured out
how to secure the border, especially and specifically the US/Mexico border, then the 'drug war' is over, of course then you have to get people out there that used to do all that to get day-jobs..
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
