Pubdate: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 Source: Pacific Daily News (US GU) Copyright: 2004 Pacific Daily News Contact: http://www.guampdn.com/customerservice/contactus.html Website: http://www.guampdn.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1122 Author: John Chase Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1124/a09.html Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) MANDATORY MINIMUMS DIDN'T CAUSE CRIME DROP Leonardo Rapadas' Aug. 7 opinion piece, "Mandatory minimum sentences keep streets safe," has no scientific basis. Richard Rosenfeld, writing in the Feb. 2004 Scientific American, says that tough sentencing is only one of many contributing causes, and that mandatory minimum sentences may actually do more harm than good in the long run because they "deplete the social capital of those communities hardest hit by both crime and imprisonment." His article is "The case of the unsolved crime decline." He agrees that serious violent and property crime rates tumbled by more than 40 percent in the 1990s, but he does not assign credit to one cause. Serious examination requires that the data be broken out by city size, year of crime, policing practices, sentencing policy and race/age/gender of perpetrator and victim, etc. Possible explanations for reduced youth crime appears to be the shrinking demand for crack in the 1990s, as addicts either quit or died and young users opted for marijuana. The best single explanation for reduced adult crime appears to be the expansion of domestic violence resources, such hot lines, shelters and judicial protection orders. The crime reduction seen as the 1990s unrolled probably had several overlapping causes, but is unlikely that mandatory sentencing was one of them. Rosenfeld is professor in and chair of the department of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. John Chase Palm Harbor, Fla. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake