Skip to comments.
Unintended Effect Of War On Drugs Found In Study
LA Times ^
| 20 September 2002
| EDDY RAMIREZ
Posted on 09/20/2002 10:23:20 PM PDT by JediGirl
WASHINGTON -- More than half of convicted drug offenders at state prisons have no history of violent crime or serious drug offenses, and a disproportionate number of them come from poor, minority communities, a study to be released today has found.
The study by the Sentencing Project, a Washington- based advocacy group that promotes alternatives to prison, offers a detailed look at state-incarcerated drug offenders, who made up almost a quarter of all inmates. It is based on information collected in 1997, when the last federal survey of state drug prisoners was conducted. An estimated $5 billion is spent each year to keep drug offenders locked up.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: jail; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
1
posted on
09/20/2002 10:23:20 PM PDT
by
JediGirl
To: Wolfie; vin-one; WindMinstrel; headsonpikes; philman_36; Beach_Babe; jenny65; AUgrad; Xenalyte; ...
ping
If you'd like to be added or taken off of this ping list FReepmail me
2
posted on
09/20/2002 10:24:02 PM PDT
by
JediGirl
To: mhking
ping!
To: JediGirl
"More than half of convicted drug offenders at state prisons have no history of violent crime or serious drug offenses..."
To what degree is this due to plea bargains, where the prosecutor convinces the lawyer of the accused to plead guilty to the lesser charge of the drug convinction, rather than endure the trial for the violent charges?
"...a disproportionate number of them come from poor, minority communities..."
What is the significance of this, beyond the notion that a disproportionate number of offenses are made by people from poor, minority communities?
4
posted on
09/20/2002 10:26:55 PM PDT
by
Schmedlap
To: JediGirl
Damn shame that so many innocent productive citizens were plucked from the bosom of a society that is blind to their contribution to family, community and nation. What a travesty.
To: JediGirl
6
posted on
09/20/2002 10:27:48 PM PDT
by
Schmedlap
To: JediGirl
"Unintended Effect Of War On Drugs Found In Study"
Are we to assume that imprisoning people found guilty on rug charges is an "unintended effect" of the War on Drugs?
7
posted on
09/20/2002 10:30:02 PM PDT
by
Schmedlap
To: Schmedlap
Make that drug charges. I'm sure imprisonment on rug charges would be an unintended effect.
8
posted on
09/20/2002 10:31:00 PM PDT
by
Schmedlap
To: Texasforever
Damn shame that so many innocent productive citizens were plucked from the bosom of a society that is blind to their contribution to family, community and nation. What a travesty.you cynical f**ing bast**d.
lol.
!
9
posted on
09/20/2002 10:33:38 PM PDT
by
johnboy
To: johnboy
you cynical f**ing bast**d. Gosh did it show?
To: Schmedlap
What is the significance of this, beyond the notion that a disproportionate number of offenses are made by people from poor minority communities?There was a study done several years ago that indicated that minorities more often received harsher sentences than whites who committed the same crime. The word racism has been tossed around so much by race hustlers like Jesse Jackson, that it has lost a lot of its impact. But if this study was accurate (and the authors had no hidden agenda), then there is a lack of fairness in our courts in this situation.
To: JediGirl
"More than half of convicted drug offenders...have no history of...serious drug offenses."
Ummmm??? Were they were convicted of jay-walking and reclassified as drug offenders? That's as far as I could stand to read. Another Jesse Jackson advocacy group.
To: bjcintennessee
I don't understand how your response answered the question that you cut and pasted.
When you refer to "this study" are you referring to the study in this article, or the study regarding the comparison of sentences between whites and other minorities?
"But if this study was accurate (and the authors had no hidden agenda), then there is a lack of fairness in our courts in this situation."
Why is this conditional upon the authors having no hidden agenda?
To: KingKongCobra
I think the key word is "serious".
To: Texasforever
You conservative drug warriors are such hypocrites. I've suggested on many threads that you turn in the co-workers, family members and friends you have that are druggies and you all put your tails between your legs and hide. Trust me, I'll fly right out and find some of your friends who are druggies and help you turn them in, if you are really sincere.
The fact is, you want other people arrested just so you can feel superior, not because society would change one lick with decriminalization. As long as it is poor people getting wrenched from their families you can feel good, but when it comes close to your yuppie friends, the silence is deafening. What a bunch of cowards.
To: FastCoyote
The fact is, you want other people arrested just so you can feel superior, not because society would change one lick with decriminalization. As long as it is poor people getting wrenched from their families you can feel good, but when it comes close to your yuppie friends, the silence is deafening. What a bunch of cowards. Blah, blah,blah.
To: FastCoyote
We should keep spending billions on the war on drugs so that when we don't prevent the next guys to blow buildings because FBI/CIA is underfunded, we can at least be sober enough to be mad.
17
posted on
09/20/2002 11:29:19 PM PDT
by
breakem
To: Schmedlap
The study I was referring to was the one done several years back comparing the sentencing of minorities compared to whites. You had indicated that more minorities are in jail because they commit more crimes, and I was attempting to make the point that if the sentencing was done fairly, and not along racial lines), fewer minorities would be in prison (or more whites would be) -- Sorry that I didn't make myself clear (and reading this, it still is a bit muddled).
As for the authors possibly having an agenda, I was referring to the prior study. We all know how statistics can be slanted. In fact, 76.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot (lol).
To: Texasforever
Blah, blah,blah Wow! What an IQ! Proves my point, you can't put up real arguments, you won't turn your own brothers, sisters and family members in if they are doing drugs, so all you can spout is 'blah, blah, blah'. Hypocrite, coward!
To: FastCoyote
"I've suggested on many threads that you turn in the co-workers, family members and friends you have that are druggies..."
Why?
"Trust me, I'll fly right out and find some of your friends who are druggies and help you turn them in, if you are really sincere."
Why?
"The fact is, you want other people arrested just so you can feel superior..."
What are the grounds for this statement?
"As long as it is poor people getting wrenched from their families you can feel good..."
How do you know this?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson