Measure 11. This is the law that gives people a mandatory minimum sentence starting at 5 years and 10 months and going up to 25 years in prison. The law lists around 21 crimes which, if committed by a person, involve a fixed period of time that must be served day by day by the offender, without any opportunity for free time, work or the possibility of a second look. Applying to ages 15 and up, this law takes the power out of the judge's hands when it comes to sentencing someone and forces the judge to issue a mandatory minimum sentence regardless of the specific circumstances involving the case in question. Measure 11 laws, which range from arson to murder, carry a hefty minimum sentence ranging from 5 years and 10 months to 25 years in prison. This law, while well intentioned, was poorly written and has had some serious side effects on our state budget and, more importantly, today's youth. In 1994, when Measure 11 was placed on the ballot, there was talk of many pros and cons that would result from passing the law. They told us that Measure 11 would keep our communities safe and even lower our state's violent crime rate. But the most important benefit of Measure 11, however, was the fact that it would give repeat offenders plenty of time. Time after time, victims of heinous crimes were tired of the perpetrator getting away with a pat on the hand. So, with what victims said in mind, Congress decided to introduce a bill that would give offenders a mandatory minimum prison sentence if they committed specific crimes. On the other hand, however, there were also many disadvantages that accompanied the bill. Some of these disadvantages were the obvious fact that the prison population would increase over half the paper for all the right reasons. The bill, itself, was intended to protect our communities, keep our children safe, and be an affordable solution to crime. But because of the bill's ambiguity, large numbers of Oregonians, especially minors, were affected in unexpected ways. I personally believe that the bill should be amended in such a way as to put the power back in the hands of the judge when dealing with specific cases. This could prove useful in avoiding injustice when it comes to convictions of juveniles, by giving judges the opportunity to assess the circumstances of each case before issuing mandatory minimum sentences. Works Cited-http://www.repealmeasure11.org/-http://www .oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2011/03/report_on_oregons_measure_11_incites_fierce_debate.html-http://www.crimevictimsunited. org/measure11/index.htm