WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Sentencing Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to allow some 19,500 federal prison inmates, most of them black, to seek reductions in their crack cocaine sentences.
GO HERE for more.
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
13 comments:
Go figure...why don't we just make drugs legal? Then the guilty don't have to have any culpability as to their actions.
Nah, they just are short this year on the budget. So, they let the Crack dealers out and confiscate the money and cars from them...
Yeah well this is obviously another truth showing of the united states and its governmental ways. Ok well it is only drugs and they have not harmed anyone, for now! But who is to say that they wont in the future under influence. If these crackheads are willing to ruin there lives this way then they obviously dont care if they ruin others lives since most people are selfish in this world. They need to make a seperate prison for all the crackheads and druggies and keep them there. or just let them get doped up and die, which is probably better
It's an overall decision regarding the practice of mandatory minimums and the (sometimes) ridiculous nature of punishment vs crime.
YES - if you break the law, you need to be punished according to the seerity of your crime. NO - crackheads are not generally good people. However, most discussions about "mandatory minimum" sentences agree that the system is broken.
From my understanding of the issue (and not just a reaction to a headline) the Court took a sober approach to the issue and actually empowered judges to show more discretion on their own cases.
Is that bad?
Actually this is a fair and just decision when you consider that they sentence people differently according to the WEIGHT of the drugs in grams,ounces,etc.A single rock of crack weighs as much as a HUGE amount of powder cocaine-get the picture?Since typically it is wealthier,white people who use powder cocaine and lower income,predominantly minority people using crack,you can see why they made the difficult decision to change the sentencing methods.Rolling Stone did an excellent article on this very subject a few years back explaining the whole thing.Using the old sentencing guidelines,a person with one rock of crack is going to get more time than the guy with 2 or 3 lines worth of powdered cocaine.Joe,check with Mike Lewis if you want to verify this,but Im sure this is what it boils down to.
Tougher sentences for powder cocaine would meant no pictures of Salisbury society in the Metropolitan, can't have that now could we?
ROFLMAO Anon 8:32
Now I know why they always look so damn cheerful in those pictures
8:31-so true...so true...
And by the way...10:26: You can look at it as "just drugs", but how do you think "just drugs" get into the country? It takes murder and corruption and payoffs and etc...then, when a person decides to use "just drugs" for the first time, and then get addicted and lose their house, car, job etc...etc...they have to start stealing, murdering and etc...etc... So, it's "just drugs" has a ripple effect that destroys lives and community. It not just ruining their lives, it breaks down society. Yes, they are selfish, but unfortunately it flows every which way and effects persons that don't even realize it. I do like your idea of a separate prison and let them die, but I think the smugglers, dealers and cartels should be knelt down and disposed of properly. It'd cost about .22 cents each.
9:17 I think bananas was being sarcastic about the "just drugs" comment. I did not stop reading there.
12:15, neither did I. If you would read the context, and possibly passed grade school reading, you'd realize that there wasn't sarcasm in that statement.
We all know how prevalent drugs are in our society, ask any schoolage kid, they will tell you it is easy to buy drugs. So the logical conclusion is that alot of drug dealing occurs right under our very noses by people you would LEAST suspect. Think about a business that deals mostly in cash. Think about a business that either serves or employs a "certain segment of society." The type of transient that is hard to trace or identify.Think about how some of the landlords and landscapers in Salisbury live, the sudden and obvious displays of newfound wealth.Beginning to connect the dots??
Dan....I think discretion for judges can be a good thing....but not always. On one hand, for sentencing purposes, if it were not for discretion, everyone who ever stole something worth more than $500.00 would be sentenced to as much as 15 years. On the other hand, liberal judges using thier discretion and sentencing second and third offenders to probation sends the wrong message.
I am very conservative and I tend to believe that a harsh punishment on the first offense will, in many cases, "enlighten" the person to the err in his/her ways. Having been in the courtroom more times than I could ever remember, I have stood in absolute disbelief at the light sentences handed out by certain judges for relatively serious crimes. I have also seen these people in the courtroom time and time again for the same or similar crimes. Then there is the issue of "truth in sentencing. With early mandatory release and good time, a fifteen year sentence is quckly reduced to 4 years in real time with parole for the remainder. What the hell is that all about?
I see it like this - People are people whether they are 3 years old or 30. If you tell your child not to do something when they're 3 and they do it anyway, yet you just continue to tell them no with no other consequence, they will weigh the negative consequence against the gratification of doing what they know they're no supposed to do. If "no" over and over is the only negative consequence, the child will do what they want to do. HOWEVER, tell them "no" he first time, then heat that ass real good on the second time, you can actually watch the wheels turning inside the childs head as he/she decides whether or not to do it again. Most times they won't...especially once they learn the "process" that they only get one warning. The same is true with adults - give em a break the first time...but after that - drop the hammer. They'll get the picture. But a judges discretion of time served here, 30 days there, 6 months, then 30 days ....is a joke. That type of discretion actually permits the development of the criminal mindset.
grandad...couldn't have said it any better myself!
Post a Comment