posted January 22, 2013 08:18 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted January 23, 2013 07:22 AM            

Obama should make it so that your father is released from prison.

posted January 23, 2013 08:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Sorry to hear about your dad's situation.

Obama should make it so that your father is released from prison.

I don't understand your point here about Obama, really...the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders is, in my opinion, equivalent to modern-day slavery. As I was saying here.

---

Totally, totally agree!!

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted January 23, 2013 01:19 PM            

However, here comes my unsympathetic jackazz statement. It's blatantly simple.

Drugs are bad. Don't do drugs.

I seem to be the *only* person on the whole LL forum with that point of view. Even forum management seems just alright with narcotics.

You speak as though narcotics are peaceful and non violent, and consuming narcotics has no violent component.

Where I came from, they sentence people with possession of narcotics to death. So, don't expect me to be sympathetic to any causes for narcotics.

As for assault weapons, I don't own any weapons for my own reasons, but mostly because I don't like the danger behind weapons, but if I were a weapons hobbyist, I would own H&Ks and Colt rifles (none of that Bushmaster junk). I wouldn't want any of you to infringe on my rights to own the weapons I want to own, regardless of what you think I would want to use them for. And you can't use the "not qualified" excuse on me because I am well qualified to use military weapons.

I appear to be the one of the very few true blooded conservatives on all of LL, and so be it.

posted January 23, 2013 02:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
^ i agree 100% that drugs are bad... but the vast majority of people in our prison system are non violent drug offenders. why lock those people up for years when you can rehabilitate them and at a cheaper cost? it just seems stupid and pointless to me...

---

I agree. I do not take drugs, thankfully, but the people who do should not be imprisoned. I think pot should be legal. Maybe, other drugs should be, too. I don't know, but the people who take drugs are not criminals imho

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted January 23, 2013 03:38 PM            

Another myth is that those who want to decriminalize or even legalize drugs are promoting them. No way. We just see the "cure" of prohibition as worse than the disease. When criminals control the markets and peddle it to our kids then it spreads (kids can get pot easier than they can get alcohol), and imprisoning people who offend us for getting a buzz makes it harder to put in REAL threats (sometimes even murderers & serial rapists have been let out of overfilled prisons so someone could serve their mandatory minimum sentence) as well as turning people into burdens on society when they otherwise would not have been (complete with criminal training & connections, connections that include people on the outside of prison, while also finding it near impossible to find real work once getting out, and they've been hardened as well, oops society has now become more dangerous thanks to hardline prohibition).

And that's not even getting into the medical side of it, the dying cancer patients hauled out of sick and death beds at gunpoint to die choking on their own puke in jail because they're denied what their doctor prescribed. How does that make society safer?

So much for the conservative principles of small government, being aware of unintended consequences of government intervention, the Bill of Rights (4rth & 5th are especially violated in the War on Some Drugs), the claim that America is one of the freest on Earth (hardly, and having the most people of any nation locked up as a result of the Drug War is one more rebuttal to that claim as are the Bill of Rights sacrificed in fighting it), responsible budgets, and claiming not to want to come between you and your doctor.

A judge against pot explains why it needs to be decriminalized:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKgY5eOlhEc

And what happened in Portugal after they decriminalized (despite predictions that they'd become the next Amsterdam, it pretty much worked out like that conservative judge claimed decriminalization would do):
http://www.businessinsider.com/portugal-drug-policy-decriminalization-works-2012-7

posted January 23, 2013 03:49 PM            

I respect your well laid out points. However, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Everyone else,

Everyone in this thread so far wants de-criminalization. I want an increased criminalization and much, much harsher penalties.

It's a matter of point of view. Mine is that making penalties significantly harsher removes all possible incentive and any equivocation. No breaks. No paroles. No half way houses.

Makes you think twice about using a gun to hold up a convenience store if the penalty is death by execution.

If the fine for speeding were $10,000 instead of $120, would you speed?

If the penalty for insider trading were 30 year in jail of hard labor without parole, there would probably be no stock trading hanky panky.

There is nonsense like minimum security Club Fed. That is such a waste of time.

And don't give me the nonsense of the increased cost of imprisonment. How much do we spend on the rotating door of programs to "reform?" There are a whole lot of ways to slash spending that are significantly more efficient and drastic, but I won't get into those right now.

"Non-violent crimes" are, above all, still crimes against society. If narcotic consumption is non-violent, then by extension neither is prostitution or illegal gambling or financial market manipulation.

Just today, Indonesia sentenced a British grandmother to death for cocaine. She knew the laws but still decided to flout it. No amount of cajoling by the British, even from the Queen, will save that woman from hanging.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/22/world/asia/indonesia-uk-death-sentence/?hpt=hp_t3

posted January 23, 2013 05:26 PM            

Second, YTA, I appreciate that you have your opinion, but I think that you are misguided in terms of the facts. It has been shown many times that the ultimate penalty, death, does not change the number of offenders in the states which authorize it. The link below shows a study carried out which basically shreds the arguments of those who argue that the death penalty does deter criminality. The only thing it deters is recidivism, but that's because the person is dead!
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=870312

There has never been any substantial evidence showing that the death penalty deters crime so your statement that harsher penalties will do the trick is not in line with the research. Harsher penalties also means more jail time which equals more taxpayer dollars.

People who are addicted to drugs are just that - addicts. Sticking them in a prison, as though being an addict is a crime worthy of punishment, works against everyone - the addict, the state and the tax payer. (And believe me, if you have ever met an addict, you would realize that being addicted is a horrible punishment all on its own.)

The addict does not get the help s/he needs in prison and the drug culture in prison is just as prolific as it is on the street, leading to a continuation of addiction. That addict also becomes criminalized which prevents his or her chances of getting work on the outside, assuming that they have support or that they've even been able to get some kind of help to quit. Once someone is labeled a criminal, it affects their self image even further and the recidivism rates are incredibly high.

In addition, people in prison for extended periods of time often become 'institutionalized', meaning that living on the outside can seem like a foreign experience and/or completely overwhelming. Suddenly the prison can seem like a safer place, because at least they know how they fit in within that culture and often they end up back there for all those reasons.

If you don't feel compassion for people with addiction, then consider the financial aspects of it. The taxpayer's money is going to be spent several times over if you factor in recidivism rates, which are extremely high, especially when there is addiction involved. If people were sent to state-funded addiction centres in lieu of prison, there could be a lot of money saved by helping people to actually get clean and work on their self image through mandatory therapy.

posted January 23, 2013 05:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
PixieJane,

I respect your well laid out points. However, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Everyone else,

Everyone in this thread so far wants de-criminalization. I want an increased criminalization and much, much harsher penalties.

It's a matter of point of view. Mine is that making penalties significantly harsher removes all possible incentive and any equivocation. No breaks. No paroles. No half way houses.

Makes you think twice about using a gun to hold up a convenience store if the penalty is death by execution.

If the fine for speeding were $10,000 instead of $120, would you speed?

If the penalty for insider trading were 30 year in jail of hard labor without parole, there would probably be no stock trading hanky panky.

There is nonsense like minimum security Club Fed. That is such a waste of time.

And don't give me the nonsense of the increased cost of imprisonment. How much do we spend on the rotating door of programs to "reform?" There are a whole lot of ways to slash spending that are significantly more efficient and drastic, but I won't get into those right now.

"Non-violent crimes" are, above all, still crimes against society. If narcotic consumption is non-violent, then by extension neither is prostitution or illegal gambling or financial market manipulation.

Just today, Indonesia sentenced a British grandmother to death for cocaine. She knew the laws but still decided to flout it. No amount of cajoling by the British, even from the Queen, will save that woman from hanging.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/22/world/asia/indonesia-uk-death-sentence/?hpt=hp_t3

And I'm no great Bush 43 or Bush 41 supporter. But question the rationale behind the Patriot Act, however misplaced the intentions have been.

---

I think we need to get "petty crimes/ lesser crimes" out of prison. Leave prison there for people who are a danger to others. I hate when I see a person arrested for drugs, myself. I think someone is trying to keep the prison system going and there is money and corruption, somewhere behind it. But I agree with you 99.9999 % of the time

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted January 23, 2013 06:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ami Anne:
I think we need to get "petty crimes/ lesser crimes" out of prison. Leave prison there for people who are a danger to others. I hate when I see a person arrested for drugs, myself. I think someone is trying to keep the prison system going and there is money and corruption, somewhere behind it. But I agree with you 99.9999 % of the time

---

posted January 23, 2013 09:11 PM            

I apologize but I wholeheartedly disagree with whatever studies you have presented. You wouldn't be able to sway my opinion, so let's just leave it at that and agree to disagree.

My point of view is that felonious activity is injurious to society. You want to reform individuals, and that is your honorable objective. My objective is just to remove the element from society and prevent exposure of my children and grandchildren from such harmful influences.

Am I selfish? Perhaps. But I intend to secure my security interests, just like I operate to secure my own economic interest in a capitalist economy.

As far as compassion goes, my compassion is for the individual and not the act. As far as I am concerned, felonious behavior removes all privileges and rights, including that of the right to bear arms. In that sense, I believe that aspect of the Patriot Act didn't even need to have been legislated. It is already implicit, if not explicitly denoted in federal and state statutes.

As far as finances go, from my perspective, keeping a well established prison system is money well spent to ensure the internal security of the nation, just like maintaining a defense infrastructure to ensure the national security of the nation.

Sorry, but rehab makes no sense to me. My view is that prison in America is far too cushy and lenient. I happen to be in agreement with Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona and his methods of incarceration as an effective deterrent to crime.

posted January 23, 2013 09:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:

If the fine for speeding were $10,000 instead of $120, would you speed?

If the penalty for insider trading were 30 year in jail of hard labor without parole, there would probably be no stock trading hanky panky.

---

Who wants to live in a world like that?

What's worse, to have people speeding or have them dead broke all their lives for one mistake? To have people smoking pot or have them working as slave laborers in the prison system all their lives, for smoking one joint?

"Might makes right" is hardly ethical, much less Christian.

posted January 23, 2013 09:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
Sorcha,

I apologize but I wholeheartedly disagree with whatever studies you have presented. You wouldn't be able to sway my opinion, so let's just leave it at that and agree to disagree.

My point of view is that felonious activity is injurious to society. You want to reform individuals, and that is your honorable objective. My objective is just to remove the element from society and prevent exposure of my children and grandchildren from such harmful influences.

Am I selfish? Perhaps. But I intend to secure my security interests, just like I operate to secure my own economic interest in a capitalist economy.

As far as compassion goes, my compassion is for the individual and not the act. As far as I am concerned, felonious behavior removes all privileges and rights, including that of the right to bear arms. In that sense, I believe that aspect of the Patriot Act didn't even need to have been legislated. It is already implicit, if not explicitly denoted in federal and state statutes.

As far as finances go, from my perspective, keeping a well established prison system is money well spent to ensure the internal security of the nation, just like maintaining a defense infrastructure to ensure the national security of the nation.

Sorry, but rehab makes no sense to me. My view is that prison in America is far too cushy and lenient. I happen to be in agreement with Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona and his methods of incarceration as an effective deterrent to crime.

If what I have written engenders ill feelings, then I cannot help it. I'm just providing my honest opinion. Again, nobody has to like me or respect me. It's up to others to deal with me in their own way because I'm not changing my mind, and they are not repressing my opinion.

---

posted January 23, 2013 10:07 PM            

Praying for your dad.

I know it does get unspeakably worse than that.

posted January 23, 2013 11:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:

Don't preach spirituality because you haven't such a basis when fundamentally don't even believe in it.

---

Of course I believe in spirituality.

*notice my screen name*

And I'm free to state my beliefs...I happen to believe this wholeheartedly:

posted January 23, 2013 11:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Of course I believe in spirituality.

*notice my screen name*

And I'm free to state my beliefs...I happen to believe this wholeheartedly:

---