21–30 of 119 posts
They have 2 options: RoR (release on your own recognizance) and hold until trial.
Although not perfect, this is much better than a bail system.
I would hope that these days no rational individual could support jail time for any non-violent drug crime, with the possible exception of cross-border smuggling, which treads on some different areas of the law.
Even the most invasive surveillance system is more humane that the US prison system.
While I agree it's unconstitutional to park someone in jail for eight years without bail or a trial, this particular guy is probably ecstatic at how it all worked out: >As a parolee with a previous drug charge to his name, Smith was looking at a sentence of 20 years to life if convicted as a habitual offender, according to one of his lawyers.
Smith’s saga behind bars began on Feb. 11, 2010, when State Police and federal drug agents said they discovered baggies of crack cocaine inside a safe in his Carrollton residence.
To me that sounds like he was at the customer end of the distribution, dealing on the street. A potential life sentence for that is bonkers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I to assume you mean to legalize drugs?
I'm pretty confident he's not suggesting a rapid death-penalty for drug-offenders
It's not easy, but we can work toward a compromise that recognizes both that drug use can cause harm to society, and that it often does not. We can punish people who push opioids, while leaving harmless users alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The simple solution being what? You left a cliffhanger
look to Portugal, the legalization is not the main thing. (shorter sentences, because prison doesn't work, and treatment above all) It's no cliffhanger - really any action would do wonders. Instead we see systemic failures at multiple levels.
i think he means to use these imprisoned drug users as free labour to make money for the state. i believe some private prisons already do that.
The concept of bail negatively affects the poor. Washington DC has a new system where they got rid of the bail system. They have 2 options: RoR (release on your own recognizance) and hold until trial. Although not perfect, this is much better than a bail system.
I thought that was intentional :) afaik bail isn't used much outside the US, Canada and UK.
The US for-profit bail industry is the usual case of Americans taking a bad idea to the extreme in the search of a little profit.
I would give as an example the patent trolls. They abuse of the court and fill motions after motions (or dismiss early) for the sole purpose of making their case expansive to defend against. A knowledgeable inmate or greedy public defendant could use the same tactics and delay the case only for the deadline to pass. If it can turn a life sentence into a 24 months one, then procrastination and delays are the quickest way out of jail.
That being said, for recurrent inmates, the failure of the system is definitely in the rehab process. In some US states, it seems like the legal system exists only to sustain itself, its elected officials and the industries (lawyers, penitentiary, investigators, forensic) that runs it. This case is apparently a blatant example of bureaucracy indifference. If the fact were shown in their face, they would blame the weather or the defendant own motions to have his rights taken into account. I am not a socialist, far from it. However when it comes to absurdities such as this, it is a clear sign that a proper social net is necessary to avoid a slippery slopes where the incarcerated population will grow and grow and grow. So do the expanses associated with it. Better solve the problem instead of the consequences.
I would hope that these days no rational individual could support jail time for any non-violent drug crime, with the possible exception of cross-border smuggling, which treads on some different areas of the law.
As I see it, we need both a propaganda campaign pointing out how nuts the drug laws are in addition to some recognizable way of incrementally easing the laws and adjusting to it. That’s the rational thing an individual would do anyway; i am more aware than ever you need to parcel these things into 2 year steps for american power transfers between parties.
To the person who downvoted me, this is distinctly less useful than contributing the conversation in a meaningul manner.
I would hope that these days no rational individual could support jail time for any non-violent drug crime, with the possible exception of cross-border smuggling, which treads on some different areas of the law.
Crime of consumption or mere possession, I fully agree. Even distribution of something like pot, sure. But at the same time, I'm not sure that a rational individual has to agree with the proposition that somebody who's peddling fentanyl should not be put in jail. (I don't think, from what I know, that distribution of crack would be in that latter group.)
Cops can arrest you for any reason, and if you can't make bail, then they place you in jails with convicted violent felons, some on murder trials.
In LA jails, you have to be racist. Depending on your pod and program, you have special requirements.
You often have to fight, especially if you are black or Hispanic. If there's a brawl inside the pod, you have to fight other races or you will be beaten by your own.
I sat in a tiny room for 11 hours with 50 inmates, half of which had face tattoos and were gang members. A room where inmates had been beaten to death and the others just cover up the cameras.
Multiple times I wasn't called to court, they were "dry runs". Mental torture and real risk required just for due process.
These types of systems only create more criminals.
The deputies act like psychopaths, taunting and roughing up inmates. But not as bad since now the FBI has cameras watching them.
The person who interceded in my misdemeanor case and put me in jail was the former head of California Homeland Security.
His lawyer, also a former federal prosecutor, was in every court appearance lobbying the prosecutor. He also represented the Chief of Police, the City Council and the Sheriff.
Their boss is a secretive billionaire whose former lawyer became the new Supreme Court Justice this year after he lobbied He is a very powerful person who hires former federal officials as political mercenaries.
This all happened because they wanted to protect a wealthy sex predator. In 2-weeks, the Homeland official is actually testifying for the sex predator for his civil trial. He is presumably testifying against my credibility.