Prisoners in the USA

A buddy of mine is an assistant DA down there and he told me most murderers down there get off on probation also. The juries down there are just really lenient.

 

Nah..... in the words of the late, great Peter Tosh....."Legalize it....yeah and I will advertise it." Make weed legal and simply decriminalize the other drugs. I don't support blanket legalization, but at least make it a straight trip to rehab for chronic abusers of hard drugs if convicted.

 

Decriminalization does not allow us to take advantage of the huge profits that SOMEONE will make for selling these chemicals. Either the vaious mafia will continue to rake in an estimated $60 billion a year in this country alone or we will reclaim that money to be given to the government and legitimate businesses.

The way I would do it would be to initially reclassify mar1juana and regulate it like alcohol. I would still have penalties for outrageous behavior in public, much like we now have public intoxication laws for alcohol.

I would also have the federal government set up a system where the states can experiment with their own laws, given the requirement that we study the program in order to track the effect different policies have on drug use and abuse, particularly by minors.

This type of system would allow us to find the policies that actually reduce drug use, initially by minors, and in the long term by everyone.

If we had a regulated system where sales and usage data are provided anonymously to health care professionals, we could target treatment to users who exhibit characteristics of abuse. In addition, the user will have paid for the treatment center with the tax money we collect from sales.

Drug users, as a rule, are responsible people. I know that most of you have in your mind's eye the image of the "stoner" or "druggie" acquaintance who appears to have done so many drugs that the synapses just don't fire anymore. Keep in mind that for every one of those, there are three that hold down jobs, pay taxes, have mortgages, and raise kids. These are people whose biggest problem is that their choice of intoxicants is politically incorrect.

The drug war has become so entrenched that they are dug in like an Alabama tick and, unfortunately, they are not going to leave quietly, they will fight, claw, spend money, exert influence, bend and break laws, and if all that fails they will just proclaim from on high that it is "for the children."

 

From my perspective, there is even more crime created by prohibition than just the crime of posessing or selling drugs. I posted this picture in another thread, it is a graph of the murder rate over the 20th century to 1997.




This shows an elevated level of homicide in two different periods of our history, during alcohol prohibition and during the current war on drugs. I would also argue that the militarization of our police forces has increased the perceived levels of violence in our society. Street gangs, flush with weapons and money from selling black market drugs, simply would not have the power to recruit our young people if they did not have the money, weapons, and bling that prohibition hands them on a silver platter.

I have a feeling that the end of prohibition will see a drastic reduction in the number of people incarcerated for crimes having very little to do with drugs.

 

That's always a favorite one to use....."It's for the children." When you think about the history of mar1juana prohibition, you wonder how much longer something so harmless will continue to be prohibited and what impact it would have on the burgeoning prison population in this country.

But the "drug war" has become an institution that exists only to serve itself. If there was no drug war, there would be no need for the DEA or for Customs to have Blackhawk helicopters and AWACS planes. Their jobs and toys would go away, along with their ability to seize your property without due process and I just don't see it happening. I hate to be such a damned cynic, but local police departments and sherriff's departments make far too much off confiscating and selling the property of drug offenders.

I wish I had more optimism, but neither party offers much hope. The Republicans are dead-set against any sort of softening on this issue, while the Dems are trying to out-do the Repubs in this area. I guess mar1juana law reform does not play well in middle America, where they think most pot smokers are hippie rejects trying to relive the sixties or urban gang bangers hitting the "chronic".

 

That is, of course, unless you consider people who break laws that carry prison terms to be irresponsible. Otherwise, you could say serial killers are responsible people. Heck, they do the same thing the exact same way over and over again.

 

Why is it, that whenever a comparison is made, somebody has to immediately equate the two things being compared. Yes B-Bob, drug users and serial killers are both criminals, and no they are not equal. Hitler and StupidMoniker are both white, both have European ancestors, both are right of center politically, heck even both have pretty crappy mustaches. Yet somehow Hitler and StupidMoniker manage to be just a little bit different. I haven't yet implemented my plans for global domination. As you might guess though, I have chosen pot-smokin' hippies as my scapegoats, muhahaha.

 

I see several other solutions to the problem Jorge.
Capital punishment for all. That would greatly decrease the number of people in prison.
As for going to "theese areas" and teaching them right and wrong. I don´t think that would do much good. Poor people are more criminal. Why? Because they don´t like bein poor? Rich people made the laws? If everyone where the same class and economic stature, would the same people be the crminals???

 

And as ever, you continue to duck the real issue here, the one that I am actually debating, about whether these laws are justified. These laws are supposed to reduce overall drug use, but they haven't. These laws are supposed to make it harder for our children to get drugs, but they don't. These laws are supposed to make our society safer, and yet they have the opposite effect.

If you continue to try to change the subject, I will continue to ask the relevant questions until you can't avoid it anymore. If you actually support prohibition, defend it. What justifies the massive problems created by this Frankenstein of a policy?

 

A white guy getting off doesn't mean the poor, brown, or black guy should walk too. The white/rich guy getting off doesn't mean the PBB guy didn't commit a crime. Interesting but irrelevant.

OK, you're bbs poll is not good enough. If most or even a majorityt of citizens believed as you do then the laws would be changed. They don't, and so they aren't.

The massive timber industry conspiracy....uh, i mean pharmaceutical industry...uh, i mean the....Oh grow up. Most people don't think having drugs legal is a good idea. They could be wrong. I think they're wrong. But it is not intuitively obvious that they are wrong, and that is why they still believe it.

Ah, right. What I am smoking...It is not delusional to say that we enjoy so many more freedoms than other high incarceration states that the comparisons are silly. You can boo-hoo the Patriot Act all you want, but the acts it allows the government to partake () in are things even governments in Western Europe have been doing forever. The comparison of the US and a China or a Cuba is just a gross exaggeration.

The 'most' freedoms? Not sure how you qualify that. But I don't see boatloads of US citizens taking 3 month journeys in containerships to sneak into China. Don't see lots o' US citizens strapping on 6 pairs of swimmy's and trying to float to Cuba.

We agree that WOD is counterproductive. But the simple fact remains that the solution is changing the laws. Until they are changed those who are convicted are criminals and society says they go to jail. That is not unjust. That's the way democracy is supposed to work. You can't disregard the laws society has put in place because you don't agree with them, and then say its unfair when society punishes you for it. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Simple.

 

I don't support prohibition, as I have stated on numerous occasions. As far as I am concerned, every drug should be legal and as available as Tylenol. What I disagreed with was your statement that people who use drugs are typically responsible. I stated why I felt that way, and that was really my only concerns on the issue. You can ask whatever questions you want, relevent or otherwise, but you are pretty much preaching to the converted as far as your crusade against prohibition goes. It is really only some of your tangential statements that I disagree with.

 

So, I guess that having the single most racist policy this country has seen since slavery is interesting but irrelevant. Because of this policy, 1/3 of the black men between 18 and 34 are under the supervision of the criminal justice system in some way, shape or form. My point is that the drug laws are unjustified and that nobody, black or white, should go to jail because of their chioce of intoxicants.

Actually, that is not true. There are states in which the majority of people have passed medical mar1juana, but the federal government has made it impossible to implement. Nevada came very close to passing a decrim bill last year, but saw the US drug czar come in and campaign against the law, despite the fact that he broke Nevada election laws to do so.

I know that my BBS poll is not enough. I admitted in my post (the part you cut out of your quote) that it was not scientific. I also maintain that the only reason that the majority of people in this country do not support regulation is because of the lies and propaganda foisted off on us by the DEA and ONDCP.

I posted an article just a little while ago that showed that in a recent poll (a scientific one by Gallup), 41% of respondants thought MJ use should not be illegal. This is despite the ads on TV by the PDFA, the speeches by Karen Tandy (new head of DEA) and John Walters (drug czar), and all the other garbage that the government is putting out. These laws will be overturned, but until they do, people will continue to be arrested because of a politically incorrect intoxicant.

Actually, I believe that drug use is not a good idea. I have repeatedly stated (in other threads about prohibition) that drug use will limit your potential, reduce brain cell count, and could kill you. It is BECAUSE drugs are so dangerous that they need to be reulated. These are the most dangerous chemicals in the world and we have ceded their distribution (and profits) to criminal organizations.

What European countries have made it possible to do the things the Patriot Act allows? I haven't heard of any, and I distinctly remember several EU member states make comments about the chilling effect this act could have on our freedoms. The editorials in Europe (before we passed PA) slammed the US for creating the possibility for another Gestapo.

Holland is one of the countries that affords its people the most freedoms in the world and they have a very low incarceration rate, an extremely low crime rate, and the lowest rate of teen drug use in the world. We are not the country that allows the most freedoms anymore. Other countries have passed us in the freedom department.

Actually, there has been a long tradition and history of civil disobedience, including the underground railroad, labor unions and strikes, civil rights protests, and Vietnam war protests. Some laws should be disregarded.

If you can't do the time is a fine statement to make when you are one of the ones in this country that can afford to hire lawyers to get them out of the jam. By your logic, our President should have done some significant time in Texas as cocaine (the drug W has been accused of, and never denied, using) is a felony. Do you think W deserves to have been jailed for his "youthful indiscretions?"

 

For every Jeff Spicoli, there are three others like Asron Sorkin, Woody Harrelson, and John Lennon who are responsible about their drug use. You don't see these people because they have become marginalized to the point that they cannot speak out for fear of their jobs, livelihoods, and freedom. You may not want to accept it, but the vast majority of illegal drug users (most of whom smoke pot) go to work, pay their taxes, and raise families. In other words, they are responsible adults who YOU put on the same playing field as serial killers.

I'm glad that we agree about the efficacy of prohibition. It seems that nobody (at least nobody on this BBS) has any logical arguments in favor of prohibition. Just that should tell us something. When a collection of intelligent people, like many of you on this BBS are, can't argue a position, that position is probably indefensible.

 

I understand your point, but the fact that rich and white get off is irrelevant to whether or not those IN jail should be there. Your argument really is that to be fair there should be MORE people in jail, not less. The blacks/poor you speak of still committed a crime and got caught. You don't let them go because of uneven enforcement. What someone else did is irrelevant to their crime/punishment.

We'll take these three together. The majority still do not believe in legalization (regulated or no). None of these points show they DO believe in legalization. Yes, attitudes are changing, and a higher percentage now that ever believes it should be legal, but not enough to change the laws. That's the way the democratic process works. You can make whatever arguments you want about WHY people believe what they do, but the reason that makes the most sense, imo, is that legalizing something bad is not intuitively good. That is why mom and pop out there do not support legalization. What info the government puts out etc is really irrelevant. Otherwise things like Nixon's commission would have changed lots o minds. It didn't because it doesn't make sense to the average person.

This is irrelevant to whether or not the people in prison for breaking laws should be there.

Search and siezure, detention without a hearing, wiretapping: these are all things practiced by France, the UK, Germany. All allowed for a long long time for the exact reason that the Patriot Act was passed, to combat terrorism. And oh my, a European editorial slammed the US? What a shock!

Well, my comparison point is a real police state, like Cuba or the PRC. Yours is Holland. We're closer to Holland than Cuba or the PRC, so I take that. And even Holland is not as liberal as you mnight think. Check their recent crackdown on Muslims, and their population's opinions of Muslim immigration.

You do the crime, you do the time. Pure and simple. Selling crack on a corner is hardly the same as participating in a Woolworth sit down, or the March on Washington, lol. By that standard I'll go rob a bank and say I was lashing out at capitalist oppression. Don't think too many people would find that convincing.

Sad. Don't assume I'm a Bush supporter because I say you should pay the penalty when you commit a crime. If he got caught, then hell yes he should have paid the penalty. Again, whether some people got off is irrelevant to those that didn't. Me escaping penalty for my crime does not mean YOU should get off for yours, it means I should have to pay the penalty as well.

 

Yes, that fact is very relevant. The laws are unjust and thus, nobody convicted under those laws should be in jail. This is even more true due to racial disparities in sentancing and enforcement as these disparities violate anti-discrimination requirements in the civil rights acts from the 60s.

The fact remains that our country spends billions of dollars spewing their propaganda, including outright lies designed to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt in order to keep their dirty business running. Nixon's commission (along with every other scientific study to broach the subject of the efficacy of prohibition) was simply swept under the rug by the politicians. Nixon started the drug war based on mistaken observations and a determination that was made before the commission even released its report (http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/229/nixontapes.shtml).

Mom and pop do not believe in regulation of the industry because they have been deluged by "Reefer Madness" propaganda since the 1950s. That is why I tell the truth about this issue at every opportunity, because when presented with actual facts, people cannot help but believe that the direction we are headed is wrong on many different levels.

People in prison for unjust laws should not be there. Patients should not be in jail for using mar1juana for health reasons (especially when the states they live in have approved medical mar1juana laws). Doctors should not be jailed for prescribing opiates to patients in horrible pain.

I remember Germany doing these things in another era, but I would be surprised if you can support your claim with actual ordinances that are in effect in Europe today.

I never said we were as repressive as some of the other states, but as far as the PRC goes, our incarceration rate is higher than theirs. Our rate is higher than Cuba's too, for that matter. I agree that we are closer to Holland than the other two, but I would love to see information about the muslim crackdown. I keep up with news from that part of the world and I haven't seen anything about that.

And smoking pot in your living room is very different from selling crack on the corner, but people get arrested for that as well.

The real point is that he never would have gotten caught because of who he is. Any program that discriminates as egregiously as the WOD is unjustifiable, racist, and deserves to be overturned on the basis of equal protection under the law.

BTW, how do you respond to the fact that there are arguably thousands of people who are in jail on drug charges where the charges were trumped up and supported by a single eyewitness. The Tulia mess (http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/256/tulia.shtml) and the abuses in the Rampart division (http://dir.salon.com/news/feature/2000/09/27/rampart/index.html) in LA illustrate the abuses fostered by prohibition. Police officers have coined a phrase, testi-lying, to describe what goes on in most drug cases.

I am not encouraging people to break the law (especially given my beliefs regarding the negative impact drugs can have on them), but I am saying that prohibition, as a policy, is an abject failure that needs to be repealed. Until it is repealed, we will continue to try to incarcerate and interdict our way out of a problem that can be solved if we change our tactics. Prohibition causes more harm in our society than drugs themselves have ever caused.

 

Uh, no. That is sheer lunacy. Poor, brown, blacks etc. are more likely to be prosecuted and jailed for murder as well. Should we overturn our laws against murder? That makes no sense. The laws are not unjust because the majority of people believe drugs should be illegal. The enforcement may be unjust, but just as with murder, you don't legalize it, lol.

Don't have time for the rest of your post but I'll get to it later.