Obama just commuted

[qazplm]

a small number (80) of non-violent, federal drug offenders.

No dealers in there that I'm aware of.

I propose he didn't go nearly far enough. I don't believe pure use offenders should spend a day in jail.
Fine them, mandate treatment, or even force them into treatment with halfway houses...but jail time is ridiculous, and serves no purpose other than placing them in an environment with folks who do much greater crimes and who are tremendously bad influences.

Violent drug offenders? Throw the book at them. Those who distribute? Hefty sentences. Dealing with underaged? Throw two books at them.

But simple use, whether it is marijuana, coke, crack, or what have you? Society serves no purpose in doing so. What have been the benefits?

 

[SDBoiler1]

a small number (80) of non-violent, federal drug offenders.

No dealers in there that I'm aware of.

I propose he didn't go nearly far enough. I don't believe pure use offenders should spend a day in jail.
Fine them, mandate treatment, or even force them into treatment with halfway houses...but jail time is ridiculous, and serves no purpose other than placing them in an environment with folks who do much greater crimes and who are tremendously bad influences.

Violent drug offenders? Throw the book at them. Those who distribute? Hefty sentences. Dealing with underaged? Throw two books at them.

But simple use, whether it is marijuana, coke, crack, or what have you? Society serves no purpose in doing so. What have been the benefits?

Have you seen the statistics on the % of "non-violent" drug offenders who also happen to be criminals (larceny, car theft, etc.)? These people often commit crimes to support their drug habits. So should we start allowing these people to roam the streets? Their crimes aren't hurting anybody, right?

 

[ecouch]

a small number (80) of non-violent, federal drug offenders.

No dealers in there that I'm aware of.

I propose he didn't go nearly far enough. I don't believe pure use offenders should spend a day in jail.
Fine them, mandate treatment, or even force them into treatment with halfway houses...but jail time is ridiculous, and serves no purpose other than placing them in an environment with folks who do much greater crimes and who are tremendously bad influences.

Violent drug offenders? Throw the book at them. Those who distribute? Hefty sentences. Dealing with underaged? Throw two books at them.

But simple use, whether it is marijuana, coke, crack, or what have you? Society serves no purpose in doing so. What have been the benefits?

Is your position coherent?

What about the nonviolent distributor? You want to throw Joey pot dealer in jail, but not his customers? As a matter of fact, Joey gets hefty sentences while his customers skate.

Why does society benefit from jailing Joey pot dealer?

 

[qazplm]

Is your position coherent?

What about the nonviolent distributor? You want to throw Joey pot dealer in jail, but not his customers? As a matter of fact, Joey gets hefty sentences while his customers skate.

Why does society benefit from jailing Joey pot dealer?

Because there is a difference between someone addicted to something and uses it, versus someone who takes advantage of that to sell them those drugs.

Also the reason why distribution usually carries with a higher maximum punishment than use in most, if not all, jurisdictions.
You treat the users, jail the distributors.

 

[qazplm]

Have you seen the statistics on the % of "non-violent" drug offenders who also happen to be criminals (larceny, car theft, etc.)? These people often commit crimes to support their drug habits. So should we start allowing these people to roam the streets? Their crimes aren't hurting anybody, right?

If they commit an additional crime, then they will be jailed in accordance with that additional crime. My point is that the use of a drug should not, of itself, result in additional jail time.
Nowhere did I say "commit whatever crimes you want, and if you also happen to use drugs, then you get off for all additional crimes" but apparently, that's what you read.

 

[Purdue97]

If said person is just a user, with no additional crimes, do not have an issue with it.

That said, I do think congress needs to write this into law and have it be signed by the President. IMO, and not to digress, there is just to much of a go it alone, I will follow and enforce the laws I choose too, interpret law the way I choose regardless of what law says attitude in all three branches of government right now. Not really the direction a country wants to be headed in IMO.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

I was hoping your post would read: "... by bicycle."