Reply With Quote
The war on drugs is re ed. If I want to light up a bong, then thank me for not wasting paper, don't throw me in jail.
If drugs ever become legal, I'm coming out with the dorrito/joint value pack. Oh, and I'm hiring mouse as my salesman.
First of all, despite rumors to the contrary, I've never dealt drugs. I've never even consumed drugs ... well not in the last six years
I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on this subject. To start it off, I think these two articles illustrate the hypocracy in fighting this "war".
Jamal Lewis reports to prison
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/scorec...articleID=6936
Pensacola, FL (Sports Network) - Baltimore Ravens running back Jamal Lewis began his jail sentence Friday, reporting to a federal prison camp in Florida. Lewis was ordered to serve a four-month term for using a cell phone to help set up a drug transaction in June of 2000.
The minimum-security facility holds up to 536 inmates, many of whom are drug offenders.
Lewis was sentenced to four months in prison on January 26 in Atlanta. The sentence issued in federal court matched the terms of the agreement reached with prosecutors in October. That month, Lewis pleaded guilty to federal charges of using a cell phone to help arrange a drug deal.
Under the plea agreement, charges of drug conspiracy and cocaine possession were dropped by prosecutors and Lewis agreed to a term of four months in prison, two months in a halfway house and 500 hours of community service.
Had he been convicted of the conspiracy charge, Lewis could have faced at least 10 years in prison, but would have probably received a shorter sentence under federal guidelines.
Lewis was also suspended for two games without pay this past season and fined an additional two weeks' salary by the league for violating the NFL substance abuse policy. The Ravens ended the campaign with a 9-7 record and failed to qualify for the playoffs.
The NFL's leading rusher in the 2003 season had been accused of trying to help a childhood friend buy cocaine in a deal that turned out to be part of an FBI sting operation in the summer of 2000.
According to prosecutors and the FBI, Lewis was contacted on his cell phone by a "seller" who turned out to be a government informant. Lewis then allegedly took his friend, Angelo Jackson, to a restaurant to set up the cocaine buy.
Jackson and the informant then met several more times over the next several weeks, but Lewis was not part of any of those conversations, according to court papers. No drugs exchanged hands.
Lewis wasn't indicted on the federal drug charges until February of 2004. Meanwhile, Jackson has pleaded guilty to attempting to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and was expected to receive five years in jail.
In 2003, Lewis led the NFL with 2,066 rushing yards, the second-highest single-season total in league history, and also broke the NFL's single-game rushing record with a 295-yard effort against Cleveland on September 14.
This past year, he rushed for 1,006 yards and seven touchdowns on 235 carries.
Lewis was suspended four games by the NFL in November of 2001 for a repeat violation of the league's substance-abuse policy. The suspension did not cause him to miss any games that year because the running back was already out for the season with a torn ACL in his left knee. However, it did cost him $232,941 in salary.
The University of Tennessee product was Baltimore's first-round pick in the 2000 draft (fifth overall) and rushed for 1,364 yards and six touchdowns as a rookie when the Ravens won Super Bowl XXXV.These are two events that came out at around the same time. You are telling me that a guy who killed someone in a reckless manner gets probation, while a guy who setup a drug transaction that never occured was given four months in jail on the word of a drugged out informant?NHL star Dany Heatley gets probation for car crash that killed teammate
Harry R. Weber
Canadian Press
http://www.canada.com/sports/story.h...5-92b521db09ce
ATLANTA (AP) - Graham Snyder lost his son after NHL star Dany Heatley crashed his Ferrari while speeding on a winding road. He asked a judge Friday not to compound that loss by putting Heatley in jail.
Judge Rowland Barnes honoured the wishes of the victim's father as he sentenced Heatley to three years of probation after the Atlanta Thrashers forward pleaded guilty to charges arising from the car crash that resulted in the death of teammate Dan Snyder.
If the case had gone to trial and Heatley was convicted on all counts, he would have faced up to 20 years in prison and fines totalling $5,000 US.
"Forgiveness in our hearts has helped us move on," Graham Snyder said. "We forgive because Dany has shown remorse to our family."
Barnes acknowledged the father's support for Heatley in issuing the sentence, though he noted: "I don't know that I could do this if I were you."
Heatley was also ordered to give 150 public speeches about the dangers of speeding. Prosecutor Shondeana Crews had recommended 750 hours of community service, but the judge imposed the speeches instead.
"The mistake I made that night was speeding," Heatley said at his sentencing. "This mistake will stay with me the rest of my life."
Heatley pleaded guilty to second-degree vehicular homicide, driving too fast for conditions, failure to maintain a lane and speeding for the Sept. 29, 2003, crash in Atlanta.
On the four charges he pleaded guilty to, he would have faced a maximum of four years in jail.
In exchange for his plea, the 24-year-old from Calgary saw the only felony charge - first-degree vehicular homicide - dropped along with a charge of reckless driving.
The state and defence did not have a binding agreement regarding what sentence Heatley would receive, leaving that issue up to the judge. Had Heatley not liked the sentence, he would not have been allowed to withdraw his guilty pleas.
Defence lawyers believe the plea allows Heatley, a Canadian citizen, to avoid any threat of deportation, and therefore should not affect his ability to play in the NHL. Prosecutors, however, said there is no guarantee.
Heatley was driving his black Ferrari convertible on a curved road in a residential area when it ran into a brick pillar and iron fence. Authorities said Heatley had consumed some alcohol, but was not intoxicated.
Snyder, a 25-year-old Snyder from Elmira, Ont., who was a passenger in the car, died after six days in a coma.
Crews said police experts found Heatley was driving at 82 m.p.h. (132 km/h). Defence lawyer Ed Garland said one expert thought Heatley was driving only 55 m.p.h. (88.5 km/h). The speed limit was 35 m.p.h. (56 km/h).
Judge Barnes said he noted the discrepancies among speed estimates when agreeing to the plea.
Under the terms of his probation, Heatley must give at least 50 public speeches each year about the dangers of speeding - nearly one speech a week. The speeches must be conducted at schools, colleges and public events where young people will be in attendance.
No doubt that drugs are evil and they ruin lives, but is the correct way to solve the problem throwing anyone involved in jail? It's not like there is a shortage of poor people who are willing to make money by any means necessary.
And to back it up a little more, is it the governments place to tell us what is and isn't good for our bodies?
Discuss.
The war on drugs is re ed. If I want to light up a bong, then thank me for not wasting paper, don't throw me in jail.
If drugs ever become legal, I'm coming out with the dorrito/joint value pack. Oh, and I'm hiring mouse as my salesman.
The drug war continues to target racial minorities, especially African-Americans. Of all state prisoners serving time for drug offenses in 2001 (latest figures available), over half (57%) were black, 19% were Hispanic and 23% were white (the majority of those in prison on any offense are minorities and the incarceration rates for blacks are about eight times that of whites). This is despite the fact that, according to the latest drug use survey, 72% of all users of illegal drugs are white, with blacks cons uting only 15% and Hispanics accounting for 10%. For all offenses, the incarceration rate for African-American males is almost 8 times greater than for white males and an estimated one-third of black males will serve time in prison, compared to about 6% of white males.
http://www.sheldensays.com/com-five.htm
Ultimately the anti-drug policy is based on preventing children from being exposed to drugs at a young age and becoming hooked, yet it seems like the top place in any community to find drugs are in the schools.
By making it illegal you raise the price for the substance and you increase its cachet. The potentially high profits and the cost of evading the law are bound to attract a criminal element into the 'business'.
The government then repeatedly tries to raise the cost for both suppliers as well as the consumers in the form of fines and jail time as a deterrent. Prices go up and the process repeats itself.
I'd argue that in addition to the cost of the government enforcement action that directly falls on those involved in supplying and consuming drugs there is also the cost that comes from a significant government effort at all levels to wage that "war". In addition to the taxes that are devoted directly, there is also the cost of less liberty through a variety of expansions of government power.
Alcohol is a substance that when abused leads to substantial financial and emotional costs. When was the last time you heard about anyone who smoked weed getting belligerent and killing someone? Or perhaps turning into oncoming traffic and killing 4 or 5 people?
With respect to disparate impacts on groups, think about this: you take a young individual who hasn't committed any violent crime and then you try to deal with their drug use through the criminal system. Eventually you turn an otherwise nonviolent individual into a convict. At some point some of those nonviolent kids turn into violent offenders because you started to limit their options and put them in a position where they are desperate.
With regards to enforcement differences across racial groups I think you are back to the same reasons that you see in general for different imprisonment rates for all crime across racial groups: non-white groups tend to be overly represented at lower income levels, which means a higher exposure to and susceptibility to engaging in criminal activity as well as a greater reliance on a poorer quality of legal representation. I also would find it hard to disagree that there is indeed a little ins utional racism at play.
In general, government policy is almost a perfect failure. It attracts more and more users. It increases violent crime. It exposes users to a greater chance of using an unsafe drug. It increases profits for drug dealers. And it costs a of a lot more to the taxpayers than if the government just legalized it and taxed and regulated it like any other business.
Last edited by SPARKY; 02-10-2005 at 07:36 PM.
Exactly. You can make a case that alcohol is more dangerous than any other drug out there. Hundreds of times more people die each year from alcohol related events than any other drug. Put cigarettes into the equation, and drugs seem almost harmless.
IMO, the "War" is nothing more than the government trying to outlaw substances that they can't tax. Large companies and the government make billions upon billions each year on alcohol and cigarettes. They also are able find a reason to spend billions of tax dollars on a "war" that doesn't make any sense.
I've personally known people who've been killed or thrown away in jail for trying to support their family the best way they knew how. If the government spent the billions they spend on fighting the war in education, prevention and rehab, eventually I believe drug use would become almost a non-issue.
If someone wants to mess up their life by taking drugs and they are aware of the side effects and all other dangers, that should be their choice.
I say...smoke what you want, snort what you want, drop what you want, shoot up what you want.
Indeed. There are all kinds of substances which are harmful to us. And legal. Abuse of red meat and other such foods can lead to disease and death.
I don't really get the point you are making with the NHL player....That is a case of an accidental death of a man's friend. The defendant is obviously remorseful, and the victim's family is so convinced of his remorse that they asked for the court to be lenient when levying the punishment against him. Seems like a case of the court aquiescing to the wishes of the family. I don't see what the big deal is there. It's not like some grave injustice is being done when the victim's family is interceding on the defendant's behalf.
As for the rest of the debate...Alcohol is far more impairing, addictive, and dangerous than pot. This is absolutely true.
It is not totally true to say that it is less damaging than coke or heroin.
I was trying to relate the two stories. They just happened to both come out on the same day. But to me, it illustrates that somehow we as a society now frown upon an attempted drug deal involving an informant with a long list of priors more than we frown upon death.
Nice.
To be fair, it's probable that the reason alcohol causes more driving-related deaths is because it's legal... There are more opportunities because there are far more drunk people driving around on a given night than people high on acid or coke.
I agree with you in premise, though. Ideally, everything would be legal and regulated. But I can't say I'm 100% comfortable with the idea of people buying heroin from a convenience store and driving home.
Mouse would lead all salesmen. On a side note he would also be the largest customer. Maybe you should start a pyramid scheme.
Remember the 2 Robocop?
"I just want to make drugs safe and legal."
Last edited by Useruser666; 02-10-2005 at 08:14 PM.
The example you listed pits a case of accidental death against a pre meditated criminal act...
There is a stiffer maximum penalty for intentionally causing the death of another person than there is for dealing drugs.
You can't accidentally deal drugs...you can accidentally kill someone...that's the reason I don't feel that comarison is valid.
No doubt. Yet alcohol is a substance easily available in our society with a high incidence of abuse and mayhem. That would seem to be grounds for making it illegal.
You can certainly be found to have been criminally negligent for an "accidental death", as in you chose not to have been fully responsible.
You guys are wrong if you don't think dealing and using drugs affects anyone else, presents a danger to society, or is a serious crime.
And as a former drug dealer and reformed drug addict I speak from experience here.
When I was using and dealing(and dealt to support my habit), I carried weapons, I fought with people, I stole from my family and others, and I was a ing s bag. And I was damn middle class kid from the suburbs, you can imagine what things someone from a more desperate background would be willing to do to protect himself or support his habit.
And many of the psychological effects of these drugs are still with me to this day...and I haven't done them since I was 19 years old.
Now I realize casual user probably won't go to those lengths...but it's very hard to stay a casual user of coke and speed etc.
When 16 year old Johnny develops a coke habit, working at pizza hut is not going to generate enough income to support his habit. He's going to steal or deal to support it.
I just want to meet the coke head that says he would never steal.
I can understand giving a young kid a break for dealing or using...and I believe the law does give him a break if he is a minor, and if he is a first time offender as an adult he is usually eligible for deferred adjudication.
But after that first time...no one is doing these guys any favors by going soft on them. I wasn't being done any favors all the times I got off.
The favor was my cop brother telling me he was bring me up on felony charges for drug trafficking if I didn't go into rehab.
Traffickers do deserve a stiff penalty if they are mutiple offenders...and these guys don't become big time traffickers just by chance...they usually have years of experience moving up to that level.
Also...on the subject of the amount of minorities in jail for drug trafficking...
I don't know where you guys live...but here in Texas...if you are hard up in the middle of the night and you want to get a dime bag of cheap weed, or a hit of crack, or bad x...etc...
You don't go out to the white suburbs to get it...you go over to the poor side of town, the black side of town, the mexican side of town, and you will invaribly find some poor dumb mother er standing on the side of the road selling it to total strangers.
And any of you guys that have ever done drugs know I am telling the truth.
It's not that more minorities deal, it's they way they deal. There are more of them that just deal to total strangers right off the street. Of course they are going to get busted more. It was kind of the same way in highschool also.
I only got busted dealing once and even that was by a family member moreso than law enforcement....but as a kid I got busted about 10 times going over to the poor side of town and scoring from one of these corner of the street dealers...and naturally the guy selling it to me got busted too, and got a lot stiffer punishment.
Last edited by whottt; 02-10-2005 at 08:55 PM.
Are you comfortable with the idea of somebody buying booze at a convenience store and driving home?
The war on drugs makes as much sense as prohibition, and attracts the same criminal element, utlimately leading to lives being lost in criminal transactions to buy drugs. You should be free to flush your life down the toilet if you want.
As for driving while intoxicated, I would think that weed would impair you, but would argue that cocaine, as a stimulant, would probably improve some people's driving.
I would also argue that the money spent on the war on drugs could provide free drugs to anyone, and counseling/rehab for any who grow tired of it, and probably immediately eliminate 2/3 of the crime in the US.
You are free to flush your life down the toilet if you want...you are also free to spend the rest of your life in prison if you want.
You could smoke 20lbs of weed and not be as impaired as someone who drinks 10 beers. And stimulants aren't a subs ute for sleep.As for driving while intoxicated, I would think that weed would impair you, but would argue that cocaine, as a stimulant, would probably improve some people's driving.
I agree with this to an extent...Pot probably should be legal(it should be legal before alcohol) and first time offenders should get counseling.I would also argue that the money spent on the war on drugs could provide free drugs to anyone, and counseling/rehab for any who grow tired of it, and probably immediately eliminate 2/3 of the crime in the US.
But to just let people continue to deal and use hard addictive drugs and say they are only hurting themselves...that is naive.
If it's free or sold at the convenience store, there ARE no dealers. That would leave the users, who then truly ARE only hurting themselves.But to just let people continue to deal and use hard addictive drugs and say they are only hurting themselves...that is naive.
I disagree. I think the effects of drugs on individuals vary widely. I can drink 10 beers and not miss a beat; but, with the right weed, it's a scary proposition to put me behind the steering wheel.
You are right when talking about someone who may not be used to a certain drug.
But alcohol has much more of a ulative effect, weed doesn't. That doesn't mean weed can't impair you at a dangerous level, but...alcohol's ulative effect makes it much more dangerous IMO.
I believe that you can only get so stoned...but the more you drink, the drunker(and more dangerous) you will get...on top of that alcohol is physically and psychologically addictive, weed isn't.
I think that you should be free to do what you want as long as you don't harm anyone else or their property and as long as I don't have to pay (too much)* for your mistakes.
*We should provide a helping hand to those who need it, but not throw good money after bad.
I'll probably come off as abrasive for this, but I don't want to "help" somebody who makes the "mistake" of getting hooked on drugs. It's a choice they made, isn't it?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
