You imply they would have been successfully prosecuted for something else, but present evidence for just the opposite. Why would they settle for drug charges if they could prove actual crimes (vices are not crimes)? Efficiency’s sake, yes, but of course efficiency is an empty goal if the end result isn’t just. What the drug war makes more efficient is putting more people behind bars with less effort, which was the article’s point in the first place. You have demonstrated it well.
Possession is a sort of catch-all that’s easy to prove, especially with a nonexistent 4th amendment, and easy to offer as reprieve for larger charges hanging over their heads. Without it cops, prosecuters, judges, etc. would have to do their real jobs and convict on real crimes.
About the nonviolent thing, assume the are all rapist murderers. Nevertheless they are behind bars for nonviolent “crimes.” You come at it from the perspective of there are a lot of bad people out there, they need to be locked up, and it’s a good thing to get them anyway we can. That is how most Law and Order types think, I’d bet. It is thoroughly unjust. We should be locking people up for acts which are malum in se, not other acts that aren’t as proxies.
Oh, and were drugs legal at least people wouldn’t be killing eachother over tlcontrol of the drug trade, which would wipe out whatever benefit we get from jailing violent criminals on nonviolent charges right there.
Try working as an LEO or prosecutor. We couldn’t even convict OJ of murder. Getting a conviction on most crimes is an impossible task even with eye witnesses. If the local burglar stealing my stuff never gets caught for stealing but gets arrested for possession and goes to jail at least he is not stealing my stuff any more. After 3 convictions he qualifies for lifer status. Feel free to substitute child molester and the act of molesting in this scenario.
Sure they are, if there is a law against them.
I understand your point, but it's not that these aren't crimes, it is that they should not be crimes, a point for which I think there are good arguments.
A crime is anything that is against the law, and a criminal is someone who breaks that law. Unjust laws have been and will be passed. In Europe during WWII it was a crime to hide Jews.