It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sessions issues sweeping new criminal charging policy

page: 19
45
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kali74




People that want to use drugs, will use drugs whether they are legal or not. Personally I'd rather people have sovereignty over their bodies as well undercut cartels and street dealers by letting it into the market.


People do have sovereignty over their body. They can put in it what they want. While we're at it, we should undercut those who distribute child pornography too by letting child porn hit the market.


First time I've ever seen anyone attempt to compare cannabis to child porn.

Unreal.




posted on May, 13 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Man your thread turned into a crap show very quickly due to ignorant people not addressing the topic at hand, and only reinforcing their archaic ways and not caring at all about what freedom really means.

Fewer non-threatening people in jail is a good thing, people. Decriminalization of drugs would be good for all - even those mentally and emotionally stuck in the dark ages.

Lower incarceration, less "crimes" being committed and thus less tax money being spent on basically nothing - right now millions and millions are being spent on, once again, basically nothing.

Less organized crime, gangs, and the like - cartels and such only exist because of the legality of drugs. Remove the law, remove the criminals.

Less success for the extremely corrupt prison system that's been capitalized on in major ways...

Oh yeah, more freedom to the people - if that much matters to all you critics.

A government who can decide what we do with our personal lives, actions in our own homes that hurt no one else - is way too overbearing of a government.

Oh well, probably talking to a wall by now.

Embrace ignorance, fellow members. At least your consistent.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

How is this accurate equivalence?

Marijuana... Has about zero side effects. Friends tell me it relaxes them and they feel like eating.... Oh, the horror?

Child porn makes me sick to even bring up - it has been deemed by most of the world as extremely immoral, wrong, bad - it's not a religious idea, it's a human idea that children are sacred and we need to preserve their innocence and not allow them to be extorted in such ways. Such lines of thinking also apply to non-consenting adults - trafficking and forced prostitution of any kind is an infinite amount worse than a plant that will reduce anxiety.. And can help with many other ailments.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?
I don't think anybody cares you're a liberal. Just a sensationalist. Nobody takes that hype seriously. Come back with a serious post and you'll be taken seriously...



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, now is the time to invest in the private prison system, again?



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 01:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth


The horror is that you think non violent crime does not affect others.

How exactly does someone possessing a single joint negatively affect anyone else but the person who just got sent to federal prison?

The fact that they're going to do mandatory sentences for something that's already legal in many states... you don't see *anything* at all wrong with that? Nothing?

This is pandering to the private prison system big wigs, nothing more. Keeping very minor offenses on the roster of 'go straight to jail, do not pass go' is how they keep the money rolling in. It's not about justice or punishing crime. It's pure profit driven motive.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 03:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Sessions issues sweeping new criminal charging policy
Well it begins. Sessions has just declared war on the people. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions overturned the sweeping criminal charging policy of former attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. and directed his federal prosecutors Thursday to charge defendants with the most serious, provable crimes carrying the most severe penalties.

The Holder memo, issued in August 2013, instructed his prosecutors to avoid charging certain defendants with drug offenses that would trigger long mandatory minimum sentences. Defendants who met a set of criteria such as not belonging to a large-scale drug trafficking organization, gang or cartel, qualified for lesser charges — and in turn less prison time — under Holder’s policy.

But Sessions’s new charging policy, outlined in a two-page memo and sent to more than 5,000 assistant U.S. attorneys across the country and all assistant attorneys general in Washington, orders prosecutors to “charge and purse the most serious, readily provable offense” and rescinds Holder’s policy immediately.

That's right folks. Mandatory minimums are BACK! Now you know why Sessions has been reopening private prisons. He needs a place to put all the enemy combatants *ahem* civilians *ahem* minorities *ahem* "druggies". Phew. Had a coughing fit there.

So is it any surprise that a Senator from Alabama wants to restore one of the most racist policies in American history next to slavery and Segregation? The War on Drugs.

Look at how Sessions blatantly lies to the public to cover his obvious racism:

In speeches across the country, including his first major address as attorney general, Sessions has talked of his belief that recent increases in serious crime might indicate that the United States stands at the beginning of a violent new period. He has noted that the homicide rate is half of what it once was, but he has said he fears times of peace might be coming to an end if law enforcement does not quickly return to the aggressive tactics it once used.

Lol the murder rate is down but HE believes (minus the evidence mind you) that murder rates are about to skyrocket. In any case, this is grade A bull#. If the murder rate was really poised to skyrocket, antagonizing the public and declaring war on them isn't the way to decrease them. This will only escalate the already raw tensions between minority communities and the police.

Cannabis may not be safe either:

Sessions recently ordered the Justice Department to review all its reform agreements with troubled police departments across the country — which he says stand in the way of tough policing — and marijuana advocates fear he might crack down on the drug even in states that have legalized it.

America needs to put its foot down on this. We don't want to reescalate a failed policy!


Hmmm...locking up criminals? What an interesting idea. Maybe we should also lock up criminal, illegal immigrants? Maybe we should send violent offenders to prison? Maybe we should take killers off the street?

Hey! That may make America safer for law abiding citizens



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Good. Don't do crime if you can't do the time. Can you please explain what's wrong with mandatory minimum sentences?

If your argument is "our prison population is too high" don't bother. That's a non-argument to me. Why would I care about that? Don't say taxes.

Because, much like the border wall I want, a price has to be paid for both a clean and sovereign nation. The trade off of the tide of illegal drug trafficking/human trafficking from South of the border being stemmed will more than make up for the taxes we have to pay to jail criminals as far as I'm concerned.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: Krazysh0t


What "war against the people " are you talking about?

It's good. Use drugs, go jail.

Also, you posted "marijuana advocates fear he might....".

Nothing happened, don't panic.





It's good. Use drugs, go jail.


It's comments like this that have me worried.

If they are going to punish people for using drugs, and dealing drugs that injure people let's level the playing field and make alcohol, prescription drugs, and anything else like that Illegal.

As a society we somehow justify and dismiss one drug because it's legal, and then other drugs are bad and people need to go to jail.

Blind hypocrisy is a mental illness.

Time for a critical thinking reality check for the masses.
edit on 14-5-2017 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

Dudette, I am a home brewer. It took from Prohibition, all the way to Pres. Carter for the ingredients to become legal to possess. Don't think for a minute that no one brewed at home from 1934 to 74. What makes my blood boil is that the E. Holers of this country ( Freudian slip ), don't use Federal Laws to knock around criminals with illegal guns, but try their D#$%mdest to make legal firearms owners culpable.

Today, there really isn't any Marijuana anymore. Mary Jane has gone bye bye. Genetics have created a newbie Hashhish out of what used to be a weak intoxicant. Idaho State Police tested some buds, that they thought were laced with meth or something. Naw! its just the newly genetically enhanced M.J.

In the North Africa of the early Seventies, I noted that the authorities left the locals to their Kif Kif, mixed with camel dung, but get caught peddling Katama Black, or Lebenese Red Leather, Hash Hish, and away to a really nasty prison you go.

The really stupid Feds had a plantation in Louisiana, which supposedly worked with M.J. But just like the Global Warming Fraudsters, they towed the party line, and sat on their a345es. So no medical ( NO Turn on ) pot, came along until some illegal growers developed it, when the public revolted over the long prison sentences for small amounts of Pot. But the criminals are now using those same genetic mods to create a very nasty Hash, out of simple M.J. plants.

So , I believe a sliding scale is needed based on the % of THC. Large amounts of Medical M.J. = no problemo. Small amounts, with extra high THC, and away you go, the same as being caught with a stick of "Red Leather". There are way too many of our brothers and sisters dying from Opiods, to allow the High THC, to proliferate, along side the Medical M.J.

The M.J. from the Sixties, is no more. But paranoid dealers will also leave their guns at home, if they know for sure, that getting caught with one, and some high THC pot on the street, means a bad, bad, next five to ten years, in a slammer, somewhere.

My bottom line is that who will take the time and risks to brandish a firearm in order to plunder someone's medical, non intoxicating, M.J.?? Just like selling regulated liquor in a State Run or licensed Store Front, Medical pot can be regulated, while any violent behavior behind illegal high THC nuevo Hash Hish can be nearly, but never completely, stamped out.

Licensed liquor, will never completely stamp out moonshine either. licensed tobacco won't completely stamp out cigarette smugglers, as long as the States tax tobacco to death. So it's a multi pronged campaign, where all of the partners need to be more reasonable. It's difficult to sneak American cigarettes into Canada, simply because the Cannucks use a twenty five cigarette pack, and then they tax the dickens out of them.

NYC can do the same with cigarettes, and most States could package a reasonable THC M.J. reefer, and make sure they stay inside their own State lines. If the "Heads" keep on scr#$ing things up, I can foresee signs at State Lines, forbidding entry, for anyone with any DUI, or Cannabis infraction, listed, or accessible, from their driving licenses. Canada has been doing this to us Americans, forever. So when I imbibe at the local micro Brewery, I never, never, drive, after imbibing more than three pints of Craft Brews. And I weigh 300 lbs. +. and stand well over six feet tall.

What the "Heads" are leaving out of this discussion, is that having one too many beers, a few times a month, won't drive you to become paranoid. And most folks I know, won't pack firearms around, if they are going to drink even one beer, or have one shot of whiskey. As for plain old tobacco, forget it. Unless you're distracted while lighting one up, while driving, it's not going to affect you, period. Modern, High THC weed is a quantum leap above the common intoxicants we're used to in this country. Add in Kif Kif, from North Africa, if you can possibly enjoy smoking camel dung.'
'


edit on 14-5-2017 by carpooler because: remove Javascript text

edit on 14-5-2017 by carpooler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: RainbowPhoenix

Generally speaking, even those who support Team Trump and the regressive policies they support will want leniency for loved ones when they face criminal charges. It's easy to ask for austerity and draconian policies when it does not affect your life or those you care for; not so easy otherwise.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: EyeKyu
Good. Don't do crime if you can't do the time. Can you please explain what's wrong with mandatory minimum sentences?

If your argument is "our prison population is too high" don't bother. That's a non-argument to me. Why would I care about that? Don't say taxes.

Because, much like the border wall I want, a price has to be paid for both a clean and sovereign nation. The trade off of the tide of illegal drug trafficking/human trafficking from South of the border being stemmed will more than make up for the taxes we have to pay to jail criminals as far as I'm concerned.

I guess I'll post these in the thread again even though you are too lazy to look it up yourself. You'll have to read them yourself though, I'm not going to snip any key points.
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing and Black Males

The Nation's Shame: The Injustice of Mandatory Minimums

PAUL: The madness of mandatory minimums

The truth about mandatory minimums: The left’s painful—but necessary—conversation about crime & punishment



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Yeah imagine the scenario. Instead of dumping LARGE chunks of money into a proven failed policy that creates untold amounts of contempt for the police we focus on jailing ACTUAL violent and dangerous criminals? We'd have more funds to pursue and investigate their crimes, people would be willing to talk to the police so it would be harder for them to go into hiding, prison populations would be down, and our cities wouldn't be warzones between the police and gangs. Horrifying right?



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: Krazysh0t
I'll liquify his body in my blender, or incinerate him into ashes**, and use him to fertilize a new strain of cannabis named "Smoke Sessions", kind of like on the movie "How High" with Method Man & Redman, and then when the buds are ready to harvest, I'll hang them out to dry, and then when they're ready, we'll have ourselves a nice little series of nice little smoke sessions, smoking Sessions.

I'd say that would be the harshest hit ever. A session that really fights with you as you inhale.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?



Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.



Why can't you get it through your head that some people are not rehabilitatible?



Since when do our prisons rehabilitate?
Recidivism

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

- Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
- Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.

edit on 15-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?



Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.



Why can't you get it through your head that some people are not rehabilitatible?



Since when do our prisons rehabilitate?
Recidivism

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

- Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
- Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.


So what is the solution? No punishment for breaking the law?



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?



Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.



Why can't you get it through your head that some people are not rehabilitatible?



Since when do our prisons rehabilitate?
Recidivism

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

- Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
- Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.


So what is the solution? No punishment for breaking the law?

How about decriminalize all drugs and treat addiction like a disease?
Why hardly anyone dies from a drug overdose in Portugal

Portugal decriminalized the use of all drugs in 2001. Weed, coc aine, heroin, you name it -- Portugal decided to treat possession and use of small quantities of these drugs as a public health issue, not a criminal one. The drugs were still illegal, of course. But now getting caught with them meant a small fine and maybe a referral to a treatment program -- not jail time and a criminal record.

Whenever we debate similar measures in the U.S. -- marijuana decriminalization, for instance -- many drug-policy makers predict dire consequences. “If you make any attractive commodity available at lower cost, you will have more users," former Office of National Drug Control Policy deputy director Thomas McLellan once said of Portugal's policies. Joseph Califano, founder of the Center for Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, once warned that decriminalization would "increase illegal drug availability and use among our children."

But in Portugal, the numbers paint a different story. The prevalence of past-year and past-month drug use among young adults has fallen since 2001, according to statistics compiled by the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, which advocates on behalf of ending the war on drugs. Overall adult use is down slightly too. And new HIV cases among drug users are way down.

Now, numbers just released from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction paint an even more vivid picture of life under decriminalization: drug overdose deaths in Portugal are the second-lowest in the European Union.

If we did that then we could free up tons of money to go after ACTUAL criminals and can restructure the prison system to treat the underlying problem that causes the person to act out instead of blindly punishing the crime. For that I have another example of a more successful implementation than the US:
Why Norway's prison system is so successful

In Norway, fewer than 4,000 of the country's 5 million people were behind bars as of August 2014.

That makes Norway's incarceration rate just 75 per 100,000 people, compared to 707 people for every 100,000 people in the US.

On top of that, when criminals in Norway leave prison, they stay out. It has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world at 20%. The US has one of the highest: 76.6% of prisoners are re-arrested within five years.


Based on that information, it's safe to assume Norway's criminal justice system is doing something right. Few citizens there go to prison, and those who do usually go only once. So how does Norway accomplish this feat? The country relies on a concept called "restorative justice," which aims to repair the harm caused by crime rather than punish people. This system focuses on rehabilitating prisoners.

Take a look at Halden Prison, and you'll see what we mean. The 75-acre facility maintains as much "normalcy" as possible. That means no bars on the windows, kitchens fully equipped with sharp objects, and friendships between guards and inmates. For Norway, removing people's freedom is enough of a punishment.

Like many prisons, Halden seeks to prepare inmates for life on the outside with vocational programs: woodworking, assembly workshops, and even a recording studio.


As Bastoy prisoner governor Arne Wilson, who is also a clinical psychologist, explained to The Guardian:

In closed prisons we keep them locked up for some years and then let them back out, not having had any real responsibility for working or cooking. In the law, being sent to prison is nothing to do with putting you in a terrible prison to make you suffer. The punishment is that you lose your freedom. If we treat people like animals when they are in prison they are likely to behave like animals. Here we pay attention to you as human beings.

edit on 15-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

The solution as it has been unfolding for the last two decades is to allow judges to use their discretion on individual basis for non violent felonies. As the supreme court has been ruling now for almost a decade.
Sessions stupid memo is going to just create gridlock in the courts and once again tie up the supreme court.

As it is legal precedent is to allow judges to make tell call and to have very strict guideline requirements for the mandatory min sentencing. The two rulings in the supreme court from 2011 and 2013 give the defense an argument that man min are no longer legal the vague and broad way sessions has given.
edit on 15-5-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?



Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.



Why can't you get it through your head that some people are not rehabilitatible?



Since when do our prisons rehabilitate?
Recidivism

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

- Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
- Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.


So what is the solution? No punishment for breaking the law?


Because that's exactly what people are suggesting.

I swear, some people just make up the most outlandish and ridiculous premise for an argument and say "so that's what you're saying," when that's not what is being said at all.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trueman

Seriously do you people not know the history behind mandatory minimum sentences? Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?



Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.Because gang bangers are commiting violent crimes with guns and are back out on the street just weeks later commiting more crimes with guns.



Why can't you get it through your head that some people are not rehabilitatible?



Since when do our prisons rehabilitate?
Recidivism

Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that:

- Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
- Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
- Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.


So what is the solution? No punishment for breaking the law?


Because that's exactly what people are suggesting.

I swear, some people just make up the most outlandish and ridiculous premise for an argument and say "so that's what you're saying," when that's not what is being said at all.

I know right? I've been told I overuse the word "strawman" before, but not really. They are everywhere.



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join