Land of the free

[Pho King]

Evidence?

Here's mine:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/12/li...-ounce-of-medi

Its called ratting on your supplier. Which is exactly how law enforcement gets to the big guys.

[Pho King]

Gotta go make some panang for my wife. Keep up the good work. Those poor victims of a despotic and evil criminal justice system are relying on you.

[Malcolm Wright]

This link provides a map of pot laws.

http://norml.org/laws

If you look for the smallest infraction that will result in a felony and minimum jail time - you'll see it doesn't take much in a lot of states. Missouri which isn't even ranked as the top 5 worst states, gives a felony and a minimum jail sentence of 5 years for the sale of more than 5g of pot.

M.

[BooRadley]

I have informed you that individuals in prison have very long histories of criminal behavior behind them. Convictions. Or they are violent. They are not just people "who were unfortunate enough to get busted with some smoke". They are repeat criminals. Unrepentant.

"I have informed you that I FEEL THAT individuals in prison have very long histories of criminal behavior behind them. BASED ON MY FEELINGS ABOUT THEM AS A GROUP, I ASSUME THEY ALL HAVE PRIOR NON DRUG RELATED Convictions. Or, I FEEL, they are violent. I FEEL THAT They are not just people "who were unfortunate enough to get busted with some smoke". I FEEL THAT They are repeat criminals. I FEEL THAT THEY ARE Unrepentant. "

You're just going to state your gut feelings about it without bothering to find any supporting evidence. That way, you never have to debate, and can continue happily trolling.

My understanding of the prison population comes from working in the courts, understanding sentencing laws, court procedure. Knowledge. Not some dumb-ass statistic that can be tweaked a million different ways.

"I just feel that I'm right, and I'm not going to do some dumb-ass research to find out if it's true".

Just because you feel so superior to people in less fortunate circumstances, even if you feel it very strongly, that doesn't make it a fact. Most of the petty crimes that come with drug addiction are directly related to attempts to acquire the drugs, the prices of which are artificially inflated by the War on Drugs. Without the increased risk associated with production, distribution, and retail marketing, the prices would become considerably more reasonable, and the associated crimes would not be as necessary.

Doesn't mean there wouldn't still be people who steal for the money to get drugs, just means that there would very likely be a hell of a lot less of it. You can look at other countries that have done the same thing to see what results you could expect (I mean, you could if you had any sense, but we've already seen taht you won't).

[kellyb]

Do you need me to repost the link to AZ's sentencing guidelines? Or can you do that on your own. The aversion to some of looking at evidence- hard evidence, not statistical bullshit- is seriously supicious.

Do you disagree with this?

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...es/arizona.htm

Possession for Sale

As with possession for personal use, penalties depend on the amount of marijuana involved.

Possession of less than two pounds of marijuana for sale is a Class 4 felony, punishable by a sentence of one to four years.

[BooRadley]

Its called ratting on your supplier. Which is exactly how law enforcement gets to the big guys.

"I'm dismissing any evidence that my gut feelings on teh matter aren't correct."

[Going Postal]

When I was in college, there was an incident where I got busted for Ganga. The judge gave out probation for people who had jobs or going to college. I was doing both. The others and I quote, "you others, since y'all aren't doing anything constructive with your lives, can spend some time in my jail."

That's why I don't take much stock in statistics of diverse sentencing of the same crime...

[Malcolm Wright]

When I was in college, there was an incident where I got busted for Ganga. The judge gave out probation for people who had jobs or going to college. I was doing both. The others and I quote, "you others, since y'all aren't doing anything constructive with your lives, can spend some time in my jail."

That's why I don't take much stock in statistics of diverse sentencing of the same crime...

Thanks for the telling - which state was this, so we can continue racking up a picture of how things play out in courts? Pho claims Arizona is the strictest... I'm betting you weren't in Arizona though.

M

[Going Postal]

Tyler, Texas.

[kellyb]

When I was in college, there was an incident where I got busted for Ganga. The judge gave out probation for people who had jobs or going to college. I was doing both. The others and I quote, "you others, since y'all aren't doing anything constructive with your lives, can spend some time in my jail."

That's why I don't take much stock in statistics of diverse sentencing of the same crime...

Do you think it's ok for people to go to jail for possession if they happen to be unemployed?

[BooRadley]

Do you think it's ok for people to go to jail for possession if they happen to be unemployed?

By the way, a pack of cigarettes is over a half ounce, and cost about 4 bucks a pack, nearly half of which is taxes. How much is a half ounce of weed, how much is taxes, and why is there a price difference?

Same thing applies to other drugs. The extreme majority of the price is the cost of dealing with law enforcement. If we weren't so hell bent on wars on things that make no sense, the price of those drugs would be considerably less, and not only would the crime associated with manufacture, distribution and retail instantly end, but a hell of a lot of the crime associated with trying to meet the price would also end.

[Capricorn]

http://www.libertariannews.org/2011/...on-population/




http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...#ixzz1qKEJuDod


The war on drugs really needs to end. Honestly, it's stupid, authoritarian gibberish that only made sense in Nancy Reagans crazy head.

This is what happens when authoritarian rightwingers are left to their own devices. Like everything conservative, their policies always stink of hypocrisy and double standards.

[Pho King]

Do you disagree with this?

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...es/arizona.htm

Why would I disagree with that? In fact, I already posted Arizona's sentencing guidelines, which I will do again, for your review, and as a defense to your claim that I have failed to back up my arguments with any evidence. Indeed, I went to source evidence.

http://azcourts.gov/Portals/0/aoc/pd...Guidelines.pdf

[Pho King]

So Boo, I should have begun by asking you to clarify your emotions.


Do you feel that courts regularly sentence first-time non-violent offenders to prison?

Also, when you say you feel that the war on drugs should be ended, what do you mean?

[Going Postal]

Have y'all took in to account gang affiliation (see link) or being armed (but didn't discharge firearm)?

http://www.shouselaw.com/street-gang.html

I read somewhere before just being armed in commission of a crime in Virginia was +5 years. So, say, you raped a girl, but didnt pull the gun on the girl or threaten her with it, but she saw it...

So an unarmed white guy rapes gets 15 years whereas an armed gang banger black guy rapes gets 15+5 (for being armed) + 10 (for having gang affiliations) = 30 years for doing the same crime.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Used to be (don't know if it still is) in my state that using a deadly weapon in the commission of a crime doubled the sentence for the crime itself.

[9ball8]

I spent half a life in the criminal justice system. Contrary to what you want to believe with all of your heart, mere drug offenses-particularly possessory offense- do not land people in prison.
...And here is the link to the full sentencing guidelines:
http://azcourts.gov/Portals/0/aoc/pd...Guidelines.pdf

Do people go to prison for their first or second drug possession offenses in AZ-the toughest state in the country? No. It is not even permitted. By the time an individual is facing prison time for a drug offense they have done some pretty spectacular things. Like import and distribute tons of marijuana. Which would still be a crime if the war on drugs was ended.

To top it all off, you seem incapable of understanding how the plea process greatly skews the statistics.

So we still don't have details on the plea bargain angle? Not very helpful, even if one can easily understand why a prosecutor would use a drug-tainted bag to send up a robber, when that route is easier than proving the robbery.

-I get that part.

What I don't understand is the economics of it, nor the criminology -read sociology- behind that method. If we know that many thieving, violent criminals have a habit of doing drugs, then what is the solution? Place them in prison on a drug rap, you say. Fukkup #1 with that method: They get crappy drug treatment in prison. Besides setting them up with their future partners in crime, prisons are a great place to find new dealers or clients for drugs after they get out. How many freed prisoners that were drug users are now drug free? Stats have to be used to guage the success of programs. Sorry if that is offensive, but there are few other methods to measure the success of criminal rehab programs. A major criminology black hole in this "easy" prosecution also presents itself: If we don't know the "hidden" crime that the DA is prosecuting, what long-term good does it do to plea bargain on the drug charge? How many of these career criminals were sent up (really) for robbery? Rape? Murder? We'll never know. At least, we won't know from people who "don't trust statistics". Fukkup #2: I don't want a rapist going up the river on a cocaine charge. Does the sumbitch get out in 5-10 years, even if he's a repeat drug offender? 25 to life on a rape charge is much better.

The solution lies partly in economics: Send violent types up for longer time on violence charges, and spend the extra money to do so. Where does that money come from? It comes from sending druggies to a real rehab that keeps real statistics -and therefore are accountable for their budget. Stupid shits that get into trouble because they love to be intoxicated in the public square need a shrink, not a DA. Shrinks that can demonstrate a reduction in stupid drug behavior get a very generous retirement package. We'd see results, much better than the revolving door nightmare of our state and federal prisons. We would see just how many violent people are that way because their "career" requires it, versus how many are violent (or thieving) because that is part of their personal drug use problem. Apparently, the nation's DA's don't care or can't handle that question, no matter how important the answer is to our survival. Money comes from savings in the prison system, lower rates of recidivism, and increased general productivity.

[Going Postal]

Here's guys doing drug crimes.

http://nation.foxnews.com/chicago-vi...t-white-people

[Pho King]

So we still don't have details on the plea bargain angle? Not very helpful, even if one can easily understand why a prosecutor would use a drug-tainted bag to send up a robber, when that route is easier than proving the robbery.

-I get that part.

What I don't understand is the economics of it, nor the criminology -read sociology- behind that method. If we know that many thieving, violent criminals have a habit of doing drugs, then what is the solution? Place them in prison on a drug rap, you say. Fukkup #1 with that method: They get crappy drug treatment in prison. Besides setting them up with their future partners in crime, prisons are a great place to find new dealers or clients for drugs after they get out. How many freed prisoners that were drug users are now drug free? Stats have to be used to guage the success of programs. Sorry if that is offensive, but there are few other methods to measure the success of criminal rehab programs. A major criminology black hole in this "easy" prosecution also presents itself: If we don't know the "hidden" crime that the DA is prosecuting, what long-term good does it do to plea bargain on the drug charge? How many of these career criminals were sent up (really) for robbery? Rape? Murder? We'll never know. At least, we won't know from people who "don't trust statistics". Fukkup #2: I don't want a rapist going up the river on a cocaine charge. Does the sumbitch get out in 5-10 years, even if he's a repeat drug offender? 25 to life on a rape charge is much better.

The solution lies partly in economics: Send violent types up for longer time on violence charges, and spend the extra money to do so. Where does that money come from? It comes from sending druggies to a real rehab that keeps real statistics -and therefore are accountable for their budget. Stupid shits that get into trouble because they love to be intoxicated in the public square need a shrink, not a DA. Shrinks that can demonstrate a reduction in stupid drug behavior get a very generous retirement package. We'd see results, much better than the revolving door nightmare of our state and federal prisons. We would see just how many violent people are that way because their "career" requires it, versus how many are violent (or thieving) because that is part of their personal drug use problem. Apparently, the nation's DA's don't care or can't handle that question, no matter how important the answer is to our survival. Money comes from savings in the prison system, lower rates of recidivism, and increased general productivity.

All one needs to do is look at Arizona's sentencing scheme for drug offenders to see that first time drug offenders do not do prison time for their drug offense. And Arizona is extremely tough on drug offenses, relative to nearly every other state. Of course, if you are caught with a bag of marijuana while simulataneouly entering a residentail building at night with the purpose of committing a felony- you may well do time. Also, if you get busted with a bag of marijuana and have multiple historical felonies- you may do time on the drug charge. But in both examples, it is not merely the drug charge that leads to incarceration, but a much wider path of criminal activity.

[9ball8]

All one needs to do is look at Arizona's sentencing scheme for drug offenders to see that first time drug offenders do not do prison time for their drug offense. And Arizona is extremely tough on drug offenses, relative to nearly every other state. Of course, if you are caught with a bag of marijuana while simulataneouly entering a residentail building at night with the purpose of committing a felony- you may well do time. Also, if you get busted with a bag of marijuana and have multiple historical felonies- you may do time on the drug charge. But in both examples, it is not merely the drug charge that leads to incarceration, but a much wider path of criminal activity.

What that "wider path of criminal activity" is, apparently, will never be confirmed. Unless you can demonstrate sentencing for multiple charges, drug possession/dealing being only one among them? Otherwise, we need to know if sending up criminals on drug charges alone helps reduce rates of other crime.
I have no doubt that it helps remove thieves and those who assault people, when those criminals have a significant drug habit. However, if that is the modus operandi of prosecuting criminals, then a whole slew of criminals who do little or no drugs are not being sent up at high enough rates. The other points of my previous post were not addressed, yet. Light sentences for drug possession, compared to repeat offenses for assault convictions? Crappy drug rehab programs in most prisons? Reducing those crimes inspired by poor judgement, brought on mainly by drug use?
Depending on drug laws to sentence serious criminals is failing to solve the problem. It fails to resolve drug abuse (a massive problem in the US). It fails to send up professional criminals who keep their drug use in check. It fails to separate the serious criminal who is a drug user, from the multiple repeat drug offender who violates petty theft (stealing food) and trespass laws (to sleep or "crash"). Depending on this method guarantees a conviction rate for the local prosecutor, based on the "usual suspect" list of local druggies. Easy money, and it illustrates how lazy and incompetent some local DA offices have become.