Posted on 12/04/2006 2:25:37 PM PST by kiriath_jearim
Amen.
More and more things are becoming felonies these days. Coming soon: Felony jaywalking.
I do think that the punishment should fit the crime, as do most people. That suggests that make a risk/benefit analysis as they contemplate committing crimes. This is especially so in drug and morals crimes, such as prostitution. The punisment in this case may in fact be harsh, but it was determined by the will of the people through their lawmakers. I guess we don't make all penalties so harsh because we want to do the least necessary to limit that crime being committed. Work to get the law changed if you don't like it, but in the meantime avoid that criminal act if you think the price is too steep.
Pot use is not harmless, it isn't good for you, in fact smoking pot is just as bad as smoking cigarettes, many of the same chemicals are the same, it often leads to other drug abuses and alcoholism. It leads to crime, it leads to failure in life in general. And it leads to death.
I know it's not harmless, since users tend to hold their 'hit' in longer, they get even more tar than cigarettes. Pot heads also seem to have absolutely no ambition other than to sit around, get high and listen to music. My other point is: Why are cigarettes and alcohol legal when pot isn't? If the laws really meant anything, either pot would be legal or cigarettes or alcohol would not be legal.
I'm still waiting for that link that shows the U.S. gets its pot from Afghanistan. I guess no one in Europe or Asia smokes pot so it all must be coming here huh?
what we need to do is have minimum mandatory sentences for rape, murder, child molesters... then drug thugs won't feel so special...
reminds me of a little event in the past, while in the ER. 3 fellers were brought in by local police and a two Texas Rangers... they had resisted arrest and were being evaluated.
the thugs were joking around a bit as they were cuffed and being sent back to jail... they thought.
the Ranger turned and said, "I don't know what you boys are laughing about. We ain't going to country lock up. We're going to San Antonio so ya'll can appear before the Federal judge."
They were caught with meth, cocaine and a half a shopping bag full of vicodan, percodan, tylox, fentanyl patches. Unfortunately for them they were caught on "school property" at the local Air Force education area.......bwahahahahahaha crossing the park to get to their truck.
so they weren't busted for possession, but for intent to distribute ,all three had pistols and two of them had 2 priors..and at the discretion of the locals were remanded to feds...
the look on their faces was just so..... "precious". One of the Rangers told me the minimum mandatory was..... probably up to 40-50 years for 2 of them and 20 or so for the "lucky" one.
no parole, no get out of jail free card, no sympathy from a judge for being "misguide" choir boys..
sucks to be a criminal sometimes...
Another thing to consider is that in a lot of cases there is more circumstantial evidence of more crime or more serious incidents in which there is not enough evidence for the prosecutor to bring charges on. A good example would be tax evasion on mobsters. Even though they were involved in more serious activity, the best evidence that the prosecutor had was on tax evasion. They go for what they believe will stand up in court. I do not know what other activity this individual was involved in and until I know I won't make a call on this. I do believe that this individual believed that his case would be overturned and therefore turned down a plea bargain of 16 years. You play with fire there is a good chance you're going to get burnt. In most cases I do not have sympathy with the criminal. We just had a case of a person who has been in and out of prison 9 times shoot a policeman in the head at point blank range and kill him and our governor (Gregoire) says that this needs to be reviewed to see how better the state can conduct rehabilitation. Just plain assinine. Incidents like this lead me to have little or no sympathy for the criminal. I would be more than inclined to give the criminal in the drug case a choice. The 55 years in prison or 15 years at hard labor, preferably by that sheriff in Arizona who makes it labor.
Well said dead. Well said.
Umm, don't you suppose they searched him after they arrested him for the pot?
Perhaps not. From the article, I can't tell if the Court denied cert, or ruled against the man. Big difference, although not for him as an individual.
Yeh, wearing a watch is not a Constitutionally protected right.
Opium, yes. Pot, not bloody likely. The stuff is bulky, hard to ship out of a landlocked mountainous country. Profits not nearly so high as with the poppy product. Opium and it's derivatives do indeed support the Talibunnies, but not pot to any significant degree.
Not relevant. He wasn't convicted of the those other crimes. He was convicted of selling pot. The sentencing was "enhanced" because he was carrying a firearm. If he was illegally carrying, he should have been charged, convicted and sentenced for that. The punishment should fit the crime one is convicted of.
BTW, I don't think judges or legislatures should be setting individual sentences. That's a job for a jury. In many states, Texas included, they do it. They tend to be pretty harsh, but also flexible to individual circumstances.
If he was a convicted felon, possessing a gun, let alone carrying one, is a federal offense in and of itself. The issue at hand however is the sentencing for the pot.
The sentence for a simple misdemeanor possession would also be enhanced, should a firearm be present.
Soon it will be an enhancement to speeding and jaywalking too, even it you do have a CHL permit. It is for trespassing for instance, at least in some states.
Why do you hate guns so much? If the gun had nothing to do with the crime then why do you care if he had one or not?
Hash and oil are not raw MJ. You asserted Pot, which is MJ in most folks vernacular, was being moved from Afghanistan to the US. Now you admit its the much more compact, and much stronger, Hashish and Hashish oil.
As a criminal drug dealer, and minority member, he was much more likely to vote for a DemonRat than take a shot at one.
Well, I agree with you, but it's clear to me that currently the legislature gets more scrutiny in elections than judges do. So not only is the legislature more responsive to the people than the judiciary, but under the constitution, it's the legislature that writes the laws, not the judges. For better or worse, the minimum sentences have been properly legislated, and we do not want judges overturning proper legislation and mandating their own law without a proper legal cause.
If you think the law is too strict, take it up with the legislature. But don't give the judges the ability to overturn every law that they happen to think is unwise. Overturn "unconstitutional" absolutely, but "unwise" is so subjective, that you will cede all legislative power to the whims of the judiciary, and that destroys the checks and balances.
Remember, the guy can STILL be charged at the state level for the same offenses.
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.