Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

justice department will no longer pursue mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenders

63 posts in this topic

Posted

I would rather go through life slightly overweight than fuging mentally restarted.

 

well you've got the money so what's stopping you from getting lap band surgery and achieving your dream of going through life only slightly overweight

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Manditory sentence laws don't allow for prosecutorial discretion. I know thats the point and why the laws need to be changed, but going around congress is not the way to do it. It expands presidential power. In the long run we will all be regretting it.

And could we stop making fun of people for typos? It makes you look stupid and childish.

 

you know what really makes you look stupid and childish? literally making things up and hoping no one calls you on it

 

Manditory sentence laws don't allow for prosecutorial discretion

 

manditory (sic) sentence laws don't even have to come into play. prosecutorial discretion can mean as much as not even pursuing charges. you're aware that this happens a lot already for a variety of crimes, right? lol of course you're not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you this much of a douchebag in real life? Or just behind your computer screen? I see you have no desire to have a civil debate, so I wish you all the best in achieving happiness. Hopefully, it's beyond the 19" of screen in front of you. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Although i agree with the policy, these types of decisions should be done by the legislative branch not the executive. Democrats will regret giving the President this much power. A lot of republicans regret the power they gave to Bush.

Yes but considering the politicians are bought and sold by big pharma,the forest industry,big prison,law enforcement,the cartels,the mob,etc,it's not going to pass and mandatory minimums(stupid laws)will remain on the books!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you this much of a douchebag in real life? Or just behind your computer screen? I see you have no desire to have a civil debate, so I wish you all the best in achieving happiness. Hopefully, it's beyond the 19" of screen in front of you. Thanks

 

yes, now is this time for you to abandon ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's going to continue to happen for at least a few years when the uncertainties around all this stuff settles. I'm a fan of legalization but all of this is happening very quickly and in a slipshod manner and there has to be some entity taking a slower approach to it.

Seems pretty slow to me and there are a bunch of states where I don't see legalization happening,this state being one of them!I wonder how fast the process to legalize alcohol in the 30s took?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yes, now is this time for you to abandon ship

You clearly have disdain for those who disagree with you. I choose not to dedate with people like you, who resort to condescension when presented with a different perspective. When we have laws on the books, passed by our elected legislature, rule of law demands they be enforced. Without rule of law, any president can wipe out laws with the swipe of a pen. I know that in your short sighted world view it seems like a great idea, but looking at a more broader perspective it gives the executive branch too much power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

no, you chose not to debate with me after you made an ass out of yourself with your objectively wrong statement that mandatory sentencing laws do not allow for prosecutorial discretion

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Seriously, some of you need to work on reading comprehension. The article says ABSOLUTELY nothing about changing ANY laws. The legality of the offenses have not been tampered with (even though they should). Instead what he is doing is excersing discretion in the manor in which certain offenses are CHARGED! Hey geniuses, that is the JOB of the Attorney General/District Attorney. This equates to offering someone a plea deal for a particular crime when that same person may be charged to a higher degree. Happens all the time.

What this man did was rightfully take the first step to public acknowledging that these laws are stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

well you've got the money so what's stopping you from getting lap band surgery and achieving your dream of going through life only slightly overweight

 

 

The sad part is that you probably ARE the intelligent one in your family.

 

Your parents must be so proud....their little special guy is the smartest kid riding the short bus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Seriously, some of you need to work on reading comprehension. The article says ABSOLUTELY nothing about changing ANY laws. The legality of the offenses have not been tampered with (even though they should). Instead what he is doing is excersing discretion in the manor in which certain offenses are CHARGED! Hey geniuses, that is the JOB of the Attorney General/District Attorney. This equates to offering someone a plea deal for a particular crime when that same person may be charged to a higher degree. Happens all the time.

What this man did was rightfully take the first step to public acknowledging that these laws are stupid.

 

Imagine that....a bunch of posters on a message board who like to smoke pot and do drugs are happy that the gov't is going to get lax on prosecuting those who are using drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Imagine that....a bunch of posters on a message board who like to smoke pot and do drugs are happy that the gov't is going to get lax on prosecuting those who are using drugs.

 

Do you have a better idea of what should be done or should we go ahead and include you in the drug user category?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites