Posted on 11/30/2006 11:21:21 AM PST by Froufrou
A record 7 million people _ or one in every 32 American adults _ were behind bars, on probation or on parole by the end of last year, according to the Justice Department. Of those, 2.2 million were in prison or jail, an increase of 2.7 percent over the previous year, according to a report released Wednesday.
More than 4.1 million people were on probation and 784,208 were on parole at the end of 2005. Prison releases are increasing, but admissions are increasing more.
Men still far outnumber women in prisons and jails, but the female population is growing faster. Over the past year, the female population in state or federal prison increased 2.6 percent while the number of male inmates rose 1.9 percent. By year's end, 7 percent of all inmates were women. The gender figures do not include inmates in local jails.
"Today's figures fail to capture incarceration's impact on the thousands of children left behind by mothers in prison," Marc Mauer, the executive director of the Sentencing Project, a Washington-based group supporting criminal justice reform, said in a statement. "Misguided policies that create harsher sentences for nonviolent drug offenses are disproportionately responsible for the increasing rates of women in prisons and jails."
From 1995 to 2003, inmates in federal prison for drug offenses have accounted for 49 percent of total prison population growth.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
But in your scenario it is already too late to do any of that fine citizen stuff.
Stoney, look what Tulane has brought up. We can find a problem with anything. As long as there's no danger of finding a real utopia, we have to live with the danger that liberal socialists will continue to strive for it.
Guess we live a very sheltered life. Of all the people we know, and they are in the hundreds, we know of no one in jail or on parole.
Yes, like those taxes. But remember, used to be cigs were free to soldiers! What kind of thanks is that, giving cancer to our troops?
You're right, bunny! I hadn't realized! [psst, do ya think anyone here is on probation or parole?]
And here is another point:
Stoney seems to think legalized heroin would get rid of the cartels (ok, maybe)...he also thinks the price of drugs would go down (hasn't happened with other state controlled businesses, but I'll play along)...he then makes the point that junkies wouldn't commit crimes because the price of drugs would be cheaper (that's where I call bullsh*t).
Junkies, by definition, cannot hold a job. Employers are well within their rights to discriminate against users. So with out a job, and no income, will junkies resort to crime to pay the rent? to buy food? When that happens will Stoney suggest we pass laws preventing business owners from discriminating against junkies?
Yes, I don't think the government should be giving out cigarettes or drugs to anyone. But I also don't think they should be telling us what we can or can't ingest into our own bodies.
I have represented (in court) plenty of addicts, pro bono. They may be employable for awhile, but guess what happens to most?
Can you say, "You're fired." (Use Donal Trupm Jersey/Manhattan accent).
Stoney, I have to ask: what about FDA approved substances [drugs, red dye #whatever] that are found to be not good for us? By your logic, people should be allowed to continue taking them...?
Now that is a great point:
"No, Mrs. Tulane, you cannot take this promising cancer fighting drug because we are not finished testing it. Instead, would you like some heroin? How about some coke? Could we interest you in a high ball, they are on special!"
Ok, you have your anecdotes and I have mine. I just don't see how legalization would change anything that you talk about. As far as you are concerned, a junkie will be just as unemployable whether or not drugs are legal, right? I don't see the point you are making vis-a-vis drug legalization here.
Most junkies I know cannot hold a job. They steal to pay for the things they can't buy, since all they have is spent on drugs. If you regulate and limit the amount of drugs they can buy, a black market of drugs will show up to fill the demand.
I'd also point out that the addicts you represent in court by definition aren't the functional addicts that I am talking about. They exist. You probably even know one or two.
One of my points is: the state should not sanction something as bad for you as heroin or coke. Yes, alcohol and tobacco will kill you over time...but they are nothing like designer narcotics.
Ok, you win. The world is full of functional addicts. Heroin is only as bad as alcohol, really. Nothing to see here, move along!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.