Mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes haven’t solved the drug problem we face.

It’s time Michigan began to use a more balanced system to reform drug users.

Many times, incarceration has been the only option for these drug-related crimes, and treatment is not given enough consideration, possibly sending people to prison when rehabilitation would be much better suited to their case.

Two state House bills and a proposed amendment to the state constitution may help to bring an end to the practice.

The legislation would give judges the freedom to sentence drug offenders in a similar manner as they would violent criminals, specifically on a case-by-case basis.

The proposed amendment to the constitution would eliminate mandatory minimum sentence for drug trafficking, except in cases where traffickers make a net profit of $500,000 or more, and give judges latitude for individual cases.

Essentially, this allows our judges more power to do what we elected them to do.

While some drug offenders need to be locked away, others do not need as harsh a sentence to get back on track and only need a helping hand to get their footing.

This doesn’t, or at least shouldn’t, support treatment in lieu of incarceration - telling our judges they cannot put someone in jail simply would not work, which would take power away from our justice system.

With luck, this initiative should help alleviate jail overcrowding. Cells burgeoning with drug offenders take space that could be used for criminals who truly need to be locked up.

The key to helping many drug offenders is better treatment, not incarceration.

Often drug users’ problems stem from poor circumstances or an unsettling environment.

These people would be better-served by treatment to help break the need for drugs.

They need a rehabilitation system that truly accomplishes something, instead of one where the only alternatives are a slap on the wrist or shackles on the legs.

A closer examination of Michigan’s tactics against drugs is a wise move, and one that is likely coming nationwide.

The use of mandatory sentences for drug violations has been widely debated for years, and the necessity of such a policy has been questioned repeatedly by other states already.

California passed a similar proposal in a 2000 election.

Placing more power in the hands of judges to make decisions on a case-by-case basis is an idea that almost seems as though it should be a foregone conclusion.

Drugs are a problem, but standardized punishment doesn’t address individual problems. While some may require extended prison-sentences, a regiment of treatment designed to aid an addicted person also could give that person the change they need.

Drug use has never been a cut-and-dry issue.

The legal ramifications of drugs shouldn’t be either.