Should prisoners on drug charges be given a shorter sentence for voluntary drug test?
Debate Rounds (3)
In a sense, it is like the domino effect, and guess what the first one is, the lightening of drug sentences because of voluntary drug test. Prisoners, who are as ruthless and stoned as the can be, will start willing taking drug tests and getting off easy with a shortened time, despite failure of the test. Then after that, the second domino, drug laws are not taken seriously. Prisoners go back into the community spreading the corruption of drug through the very schools and harmonious neighbors we live in. Influencing our people with the peer pressure or temptation of drugs, causing those individuals to get caught up in the system. The third domino, the supplier begins make crap loads of money off of the mental deterioration of our children, which leads to... the fourth domino. The supplier will start to make more money, demand increases, people start experimenting with new drugs, and now more drugs are floating around our cities and schools. Now, the angel, straight A son of yours is getting exposed to those drugs by friends, family, or whomever, and is passed out, naked behind a gas station or something. Or in some instances, a family is torn apart because a parent or child becomes addicted and dope fiend. Some could even die from overdoses and experimental drugs.
I know it may sound a little harsh, dramatic, a worst scenario (I wish it was just a worst case scenario), or completely ludicrous, but it isn't. It's the cold truth. This stuff happens everyday in our communities. If we, the justice system, or the U.S. don't take action and take this drug war seriously, these problem will only grow bigger and more destructive. We have to take into account the children and communities we call home. It's not just a drug test - it's our community.
Whereas it is often difficult and costly to prosecute suspects who plead innocent in a court of law,
Whereas decreased sentences of even six months are very attractive to suspects,
Whereas drug treatment has a positive influence on convicted prisoners and the community as a whole, and a prisoner who has completed such a program is far less likely to engage in the sales, trafficking, or possession of drugs after he is released into society,
I present my plan for reforming drug law, addressing cocaine possession as a specific example:
1. Suspects convicted of cocaine possession should receive a misdemeanor charge and a base sentence of 36 months.
2. Suspects who plead guilty serve six months less time.
3. Suspects who plead guilty after submitting to a voluntary drug test at the time of arrest serve nine months less.
4. Suspects who submit to an official drug treatment program during their sentences serve eighteen months less, though the total prison time may not resultingly drop below twelve months.
5. Crimes related to sales or trafficking are punished according to the California cocaine code, though #6 in my plan applies. See the link at the bottom of the argument.
6. Repeat offenders receive twenty-four additional months base time. A repeat offender is any person who is convicted of any charge related to the possession, sale, or trafficking of drugs, having already been convicted of any drug offense.
7. The Contender reserves the right to clarify the plan.
I will now respond to my opponent"s domino approach. The first domino falls, of course, because sentences are lightened under my plan to as little as a year. Yet the second domino, and thus all dominoes thereafter, do not fall, because of the repeat offender provision. Upon a second violation, a convict could not receive less than three years of prison time. If the convict does not get the idea that he is supposed to stop peddling or taking drugs, he would receive longer and longer prison times. The societal breakdown of the further dominoes does not happen because the drug sales and trafficking are punished even more strictly.
I also notice that my opponent did not cite his source for his opening claim. He merely posted two videos, and the claim is found in neither video.
In conclusion, my plan gives us a way we can account for both the societal breakdown that occurs when drug laws become too lenient and the enormous administrative cost associated with bringing criminals to justice. It seems that the Instigator may have simply failed to consider repeat offender provisions. I urge all voters to cast Pro ballots at the end of the debate. Thank you.
svggitarian forfeited this round.
svggitarian forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.