Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 88 posts

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#71

Post by ams6110 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #15
ams6110 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article states that the DA's action "does not apply to any cases where a defendant was convicted"

I’m aware of that. I’m curious if further action can be taken. It’s insufficient that these proceedings are dropped when others will continue to serve out sentences for equivalent crimes.

I do agree. But every day, decisions are made that result in no prosecution of charges against "guilty" people, while others may be in prison serving sentences for the same offense. We don't vacate convictions just because there's an example of another person who was charged but not prosecuted for the same thing.

In this case, where the DA has made a blanket pronouncement that the office is not going to prosecute minor drug possession charges, I think there is a stronger argument to apply that retroactively. It seems to me like the right thing to do. But that would need to be done by a judge or perhaps the governor, not the DA. And you'd have to look at each case. There are really very few people serving significant time for simple possession. There's usually large quantities, intent to distribute, weapons or violence, prior offenses, or some other aggravating factors.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#73

Post by jdanp »

hnmcQIOoQUDv wrote: post #63
digianarchist wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuomo's polling numbers are up today but even last week he was 40 points ahead. She hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning this primary.

She's not going to win, but Cuomo is going to lose reelection. He's so thoroughly fucked up the subway he's lost NYC.

God I hope so. I'm in for Larry Sharpe all the way.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#74

Post by heavenlyblue »

lacker wrote: post #56

I support dropping these cases, but it's a tough incentive that people who simply didn't show up for court are getting their case dropped, whereas people who got convicted will keep their convictions. I guess there is no totally clean way to make this transition and the sooner it happens the better.

You’re absolutely right to say that in an ideal world that would be a better option. But I can also see that freeing convicts from the prisons may be perceived way more negatively than this. Even though semantically there’s 0 difference.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#75

Post by forapurpose »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #67
forapurpose wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Goverment officials can just ignore financial efforts of private companies, when their reelection campaign is not dependent on that money. I'm not sure what you mean. Isn't the whole problem that winning elections is heavily dependent on money?

In a one party state like NY all you have to do is win the primary.

Agreed about one party election districts (statewide or otherwise), but winning the primary still depends on money. It's an interesting question about whether it depends on money more or less than in districts decided by the general election.

Many fewer people vote in the primary, but perhaps those people are harder to reach, or perhaps who shows up depends heavily on money (or perhaps something else).

Also, I observe that politicians want money for more than their elections. They provide funds from their treasure chest to other politicians and groups. I wonder how much that use of money affects their fundraising and money's influence on them. (I think it seems like a source of corruption, and that money donated for the election should be spent on it or returned.)

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#76

Post by mike10010100 »

notafraudster wrote: post #42
digianarchist wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuomo's polling numbers are up today but even last week he was 40 points ahead. She hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning this primary.

I agree (and have advised friends to make money on PredictIt soaking up the liquidity from people emotionally investing in her chances). However, that's often not the point. If you are progressive (conservative) there is a strong incentive to challenge incumbents on your own side because any impact you have on the ideas discussed is likely to work in your favor; and indeed it's possible the incumbent agrees with you…

Precisely. Her value stems from her efforts to shift the Overton window, not from the chance she will win.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#77

Post by mike10010100 »

jdanp wrote: post #73
hnmcQIOoQUDv wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She's not going to win, but Cuomo is going to lose reelection. He's so thoroughly fucked up the subway he's lost NYC.

God I hope so. I'm in for Larry Sharpe all the way.

Yes, because nothing says "fix public transit" like electing a Libertarian.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#78

Post by lolc »

ams6110 wrote: post #69
lolc wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He knew how illegal it was. Oh yes the police had to arrest him. The judges just apply the law anyway. And the executioners hanging him will be following orders. Looks like the only guy left to be be blamed here is the guy, because he had the choice, didn't he? Let's turn this around! Everyone of those involved knows what that law does. All of them could have walked away and said: "Fuck that law, I'm not enforcing…

> Everyone of those involved knows what that law does. All of them could have walked away and said: "Fuck that law, I'm not enforcing it." You'd like to think. But then those people would hang too. Sure if life in Malaysia were completely horrible there might eventually be a revolution all the way up the chain of command, but it's not. They live by laws that were enacted in a purportedly representative system of gove…

> But then those people would hang too.

I don't believe it.

Are you saying people in Malaysia are hanged over quitting their jobs? That would truly be horrible.

Edit: At no point did I advise going against the law of a country. I'm just putting the blame where it belongs.

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#79

Post by dfxm12 »

forapurpose wrote: post #38
true_religion wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goverment officials can just ignore financial efforts of private companies, when their reelection campaign is not dependent on that money. If by fighting a private company, you make voters happy then those votes directly gotten can be worth more than any votes that added campaign funds would possibly give.

> Goverment officials can just ignore financial efforts of private companies, when their reelection campaign is not dependent on that money. I'm not sure what you mean. Isn't the whole problem that winning elections is heavily dependent on money?

heavily dependent

So even you concede that it's not totally dependent. Boiling elections down to one problem is a gross oversimplification. Yeah you need money, but you also need a platform people want to vote for. You need good faith with your electorate.

What good is cash if you've alienated your base? What good is cash if you've already got 32x more than your opponent (Cuomo's $16MM to Nixon's $500k)[0]?

Right now, Cuomo's at a greater risk losing progressive votes than running out of money. The memories of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez v Joe Crowley are still fresh in everyone's mind. Money didn't help Crowley there...

0 - https://nypost.com/2018/09/05/cuomo-spent-8-million-in-three...

Re: Manhattan DA's office drops more than 3,000 open marijuana cases

#80

Post by creaghpatr »

charmides wrote: post #58
notafraudster wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree (and have advised friends to make money on PredictIt soaking up the liquidity from people emotionally investing in her chances). However, that's often not the point. If you are progressive (conservative) there is a strong incentive to challenge incumbents on your own side because any impact you have on the ideas discussed is likely to work in your favor; and indeed it's possible the incumbent agrees with you…

I have not found much opportunity on PredictIt to exploit that sort of thing. Seems like most people there attempt to make rational investments.

You need at least a 3x return opportunity to make it worth the time. They charge a 10% vig and a processing fee to draw your winnings, plus you get taxed as gambling winnings.
Post reply on HN