The April 12 Mirror article “Five Blair prison inmates overdose” should have done more than raise the eyebrows of those reading it.

The article should have been an incentive for those readers to ponder what more can be done to deter smuggling into the prison items that are forbidden — items often referred to as contraband.

Some of those readers probably wondered what the Pennsylvania Legislature might be able to do, and whether the legislative delegations of Blair and surrounding counties would be able to build support among their other state governmental colleagues in Harrisburg for a tougher stance against such crime.

But first a recap of what led to the April 12 article and the subsequent concern, anger and inconvenience — yes, inconvenience — for which the incident was no doubt responsible:

As the article reported, five inmates of the Blair County lockup had to be transported for hospital treatment on the night of April 10 after they were found to be overdosing on what initially was an undetermined substance but later was suspected to be fentanyl and “some sort of liquid.”

Ambulance crews and officers from Hollidaysburg and Logan Township plus personnel from the county sheriff’s department were among the responders to a report of overdosing inmates on the county prison’s E-block.

Upon those responders’ arrival, they ascertained that, yes, a total of five inmates were displaying overdose symptoms and the decision was made almost immediately for all five to be checked at Altoona Hospital.

One of the five was described as nonresponsive, and that inmate ended up being admitted to the hospital. After treatment, the other four were returned to the prison.

All of the inmates were given the same quality of treatment as any other human being needing the hospital’s services, although some people waiting in the hospital for treatment that night might not have appreciated having to wait longer while those irresponsible individuals supposedly paying their debt to society were moved, presumably, to the front of the treatment line, or nearly so.

It was a situation unfair to the non-inmates, but it was a situation that was necessary nonetheless.

Nor was the situation fair to responders whose well-being or lives were placed in danger while rushing to the prison initially and then during transport of the inmates to Altoona Hospital quickly for emergency care.

Nevertheless, that is not all that needs to be reflected upon in regard to the April 10 situation.

For example, there is that individual “out there” who delivered the illegal substances to the prison — illegally — and who deserves to be arrested and punished.

But do the state’s current sentencing guidelines address that person’s crime adequately? It is reasonable to think maybe not.

What is being suggested here is that there be a state government level examination of criminal statutes related to contraband delivery to prison inmates, and where it is deemed that changes should be made, make them.

Obviously, the person who delivered the illegal substances to the five inmates in question on April 10 was not deterred by fears of getting caught — and with what punishment might be in store, if he or she were apprehended.

That weak — or lack of — concern must be reversed, and the General Assembly holds the power to accomplish it, if it commits itself to doing it.