how many people are in prison for just 'smoking pot'

[PoPPeR]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: PoPPeR
around here, there is no crime whatsoever. That's a good thing mind you, but at the same time the city has come to depend on such bs as 40 in 35 speeding tickets and a billion parking enforcers all over the city in order to get revenue.

On second thought, I have no idea wtf this has to do with the thread. i'm hung over 🙁

continue on

Geez, if it's known that the cops give speeding tickets for going 40 in a 35 then why not go 35 in a 35? I must be really simple. I want to go 100 in 35's but I don't want to pay the stupid tax that gets handed to you when you're parked on the side of the road with some fat sherriff looking inside your car.

that's an interesting idea. I'll look into it and get back to you

 

[Thraxen]

Geez, if it's known that the cops give speeding tickets for going 40 in a 35 then why not go 35 in a 35?

You have to admit that that is rather picky. Your speedomoter could be off by that much, or the radar detector, or a combination of both. I know when I drive by one of those roadside radar detectors that flashes your speed up as you drive by my speedometer reading has differed by a couple of MPHs every single time. I have never seen it match up.

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: chrisms
Every experience I've had or heard about from someone I know, the cops just take the pot away and do nothing else. Even when my dealer got caught with a ziploc bag (one of those big ones) nearly filled with pot, the cops just took it away and didn't arrest her.

I think pot is used as a tool to arrest people either out of spite (if you're an ass to the cops) or if they think you did something else and can't prove it yet.

gee, or maybe its just against the law? Yep...cops are out to get people alright. Not like that's what they're paid to do - enforce the law.

As someone who has had experience with cops and marijuana, I was making a point that it is unlikely you will be arrested for having a joint in your pocket.

Yes, I know it's agaisnt the law. No need to be sarcastic.

Funny how we can outlaw a plant that used to grow all over this country naturally. The system at work.

And the comment about 'crack dealing being okay too' is so ignorant... the two don't even compare. Someone after you made it but I don't want to make another post quoting the same stuff.

the fact that it's felony and you aren't arrested generally as it is means everyone is already being lucky. No need to bitch about it, it's very lax as it is

Posession isn't a felony generally; in NY (as of about 7 years ago when I was caught with a joint) a small enough amount isn't even a misdemeanor - it's a violation; on par with speeding tickets. You'd have to have intent to distribute, I believe, to have felony posession (ie. a very large amount).

well he said his dealer with a bag full of pot....

Big 'heads can go through a good amount of it, and I'm sure police know this... When I say a lot, I mean a LOT.

 

[BAMAVOO]

What do you "just"? It is illegal, so you should spend time in jail.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Nebor
The DEA does not fly over everyone's house with a heat sensor, you crackpot. That's against the law in this country, although not in England.

Correct. Although they did try it, and the case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who ruled that using heat sensing equipment did constitute a search and as such required a warrant. I'm not going to look it up, but (if you want to) the defendant lived in Florence, OR (a small coastal town).

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Maybe those RIP letters you were placing after the famous names is why a lot of those drugs are illegal. And let's not forget that it costs me money every time some indigent crack head shows up at a state run rehab clinic or a state run food shelter, etc., etc.

I just wrote a report relating to the subject and it costs about 5 times as much annually to lock them up as it does to treat them. This is in prison fees or rehab fees alone... this does not include the DEA operations, such as flying over everyone's house with a heat sensor.

So if it's your tax dollars you're worried about then drug laws are certainly not your friend.

And maybe those RIP letters he was placing after the famous names is showing that making these drugs illegal doesn't stop the problem.

Post the report with the sources used? BTW, you're right that it costs more to jail people than it does to treat them. However, does you report cover estimated increases in treatment costs if the drugs are legalized? One can assume that legalization would lead to greater consumption and greater consumption would lead to a higher treatment bill.

I hope that last sentence isn't suggesting that the numbers would stay constant or decrease if all drugs were legalized.

 

[sxftdeep]

You know what would be awesome? If everybody stopped debating and somebody found him an answer, from a reliable and credible source, to his question.

I tried a Google search and an Ask Jeeves search. I couldn't find exactly what you were looking for, but according to this source, about 15,000 people are imprisoned each year for simple possession of marijuana.

 

[chrisms]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Nebor
The DEA does not fly over everyone's house with a heat sensor, you crackpot. That's against the law in this country, although not in England.

Correct. Although they did try it, and the case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who ruled that using heat sensing equipment did constitute a search and as such required a warrant. I'm not going to look it up, but (if you want to) the defendant lived in Florence, OR (a small coastal town).

It happened before, so I see it as a valid example of your tax dollars are spent fighting the war on drugs.

What a crackpot I am.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Maybe those RIP letters you were placing after the famous names is why a lot of those drugs are illegal. And let's not forget that it costs me money every time some indigent crack head shows up at a state run rehab clinic or a state run food shelter, etc., etc.

So should skydiving be illegal too? To me, something is criminal when it adversely affects other people. As far as who pays for rehab, I'm not suggesting we pick up the tab. A mandate for those who can to pay for their own, and those who can't to make up for it in community service, would be far more ideal.

Hrmm, skydiver = cokehead? I'm slower than the average poster so someone please clarify the formula.

He's suggesting that heroin is and should be illegal because it can kill the user, despite the fact it's harmless to others. I countered with the example of skydiving, which fits that criteria as well.

Edit for clarification: I'm not suggesting it be legal, just that users be rehabilitated instead of jailed.

Yah well, I could get killed walking my dog in the park too. 😉

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Maybe those RIP letters you were placing after the famous names is why a lot of those drugs are illegal. And let's not forget that it costs me money every time some indigent crack head shows up at a state run rehab clinic or a state run food shelter, etc., etc.

I just wrote a report relating to the subject and it costs about 5 times as much annually to lock them up as it does to treat them. This is in prison fees or rehab fees alone... this does not include the DEA operations, such as flying over everyone's house with a heat sensor.

So if it's your tax dollars you're worried about then drug laws are certainly not your friend.

And maybe those RIP letters he was placing after the famous names is showing that making these drugs illegal doesn't stop the problem.

Post the report with the sources used? BTW, you're right that it costs more to jail people than it does to treat them. However, does you report cover estimated increases in treatment costs if the drugs are legalized? One can assume that legalization would lead to greater consumption and greater consumption would lead to a higher treatment bill.

I hope that last sentence isn't suggesting that the numbers would stay constant or decrease if all drugs were legalized.

Don't think anyone advocating rehab over prison is also advocating legalization (of anything other than marijuana, which isn't physically addictive in the first place - unlike alcohol and tobacco). At least, I'm not. Two different issues.

 

[Pex]

smoking it is one thing, but having enough on you and youll get slapped with intent to distribute and thats why people go to jail.

 

[Ausm]

I think they should legalize drugs and tax the sh!t out of them and the national debt would be paid off in a year 😉


Sysadmin

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: sxftdeep
You know what would be awesome? If everybody stopped debating and somebody found him an answer, from a reliable and credible source, to his question.

I tried a Google search and an Ask Jeeves search. I couldn't find exactly what you were looking for, but according to this source, about 15,000 people are imprisoned each year for simple possession of marijuana.

cool thanks.

btw, 15,000 arrested. says most don't serve time.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Maybe those RIP letters you were placing after the famous names is why a lot of those drugs are illegal. And let's not forget that it costs me money every time some indigent crack head shows up at a state run rehab clinic or a state run food shelter, etc., etc.

I just wrote a report relating to the subject and it costs about 5 times as much annually to lock them up as it does to treat them. This is in prison fees or rehab fees alone... this does not include the DEA operations, such as flying over everyone's house with a heat sensor.

So if it's your tax dollars you're worried about then drug laws are certainly not your friend.

And maybe those RIP letters he was placing after the famous names is showing that making these drugs illegal doesn't stop the problem.

Post the report with the sources used? BTW, you're right that it costs more to jail people than it does to treat them. However, does you report cover estimated increases in treatment costs if the drugs are legalized? One can assume that legalization would lead to greater consumption and greater consumption would lead to a higher treatment bill.

I hope that last sentence isn't suggesting that the numbers would stay constant or decrease if all drugs were legalized.

Don't think anyone advocating rehab over prison is also advocating legalization (of anything other than marijuana, which isn't physically addictive in the first place - unlike alcohol and tobacco). At least, I'm not. Two different issues.

Ahh, my fault. I read into your post a little further than I should have and thought you were advocating legalizing all drugs because they only hurt the user. My apologies. 🙂

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: sxftdeep
You know what would be awesome? If everybody stopped debating and somebody found him an answer, from a reliable and credible source, to his question.

I tried a Google search and an Ask Jeeves search. I couldn't find exactly what you were looking for, but according to this source, about 15,000 people are imprisoned each year for simple possession of marijuana.

cool thanks.

btw, 15,000 arrested. says most don't serve time.

15K for the entire year in the entire country? Wow, I must admit that I would have expected a much greater number of arrests.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Nebor
The DEA does not fly over everyone's house with a heat sensor, you crackpot. That's against the law in this country, although not in England.

Correct. Although they did try it, and the case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who ruled that using heat sensing equipment did constitute a search and as such required a warrant. I'm not going to look it up, but (if you want to) the defendant lived in Florence, OR (a small coastal town).

It happened before, so I see it as a valid example of your tax dollars are spent fighting the war on drugs.

What a crackpot I am.

If it weren't a violation of our rights, I'd support it. I'm really kind of suprised that the DEA lost that one, since drug dogs are illegal, and they "search" everyone around.

In England, it's kinda funny, you're required to have a license for each television in your house, and they use thermal sensing gear to check to make sure everyone has their licenses. Well they started going to bust people for having too many TVs, and they find them growing weed.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: chrisms

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Nebor
The DEA does not fly over everyone's house with a heat sensor, you crackpot. That's against the law in this country, although not in England.

Correct. Although they did try it, and the case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who ruled that using heat sensing equipment did constitute a search and as such required a warrant. I'm not going to look it up, but (if you want to) the defendant lived in Florence, OR (a small coastal town).

It happened before, so I see it as a valid example of your tax dollars are spent fighting the war on drugs.

What a crackpot I am.

Well they started going to bust people for having too many TVs, and they find them growing weed.

Ahaha! That's awesome.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: DougK62
My brother goes to court in a couple months for possession. It's his second offense (he was on probation from the first) and so it's very likely that he'll spend some time in the clink. There's really no laws dumber then those against marijuana. Putting someone in jail for smoking pot is like putting someone in jail for not wearing a seatbelt. Insane. A lot of pot smokers are good people (like my brother) and jail could really mess them up - even if just for a short time.

If he is dumb enough to get caught TWICE then he needs to spend some time in jail.


"how many people are in prison for just 'smoking pot'"

Not enough

 

Despite greater danger, hard drugs aren't as criminal as they're made out to be either. Although I don't think there are many crackheads with socially redeeming qualities, quite a few well-off people use cocaine without much in the way of adverse effects; there are quite a few junkies (heroin addicts) out there who don't rob people to pay for their habit or anything; indeed, some of our time's greatest musicians are/were junkies; Brad Nowell (Sublime, RIP), Layne Stayley (Alice in Chains, RIP), and Scott Weiland, for example. Dangerous, yes - but to themselves only. Rehab isn't just a better option - it's the only option. Addicts for the most part need help, not jailtime. If they get to the point where they're committing crimes to support their habit, then yes - they have to pay the piper. But according to drug war propaganda, all drug users get to this point, not the small percentage who do in reality

Gurck, you crack me up, I swear to god.

Look at your statement carefully;

quite a few well-off people use cocaine without much in the way of adverse effects

indeed, some of our time's greatest musicians are/were junkies; Brad Nowell (Sublime, RIP), Layne Stayley (Alice in Chains, RIP), and Scott Weiland, for example.

They have the cash to support their habit, therefor they have no need to go rob some one.

It's the average joe who lives paycheck to paycheck or the ones that have no jobs at all are the ones out robbing and killing people.

Your example is only a very small portion of drug users, you really need to wake up.
Have you ever in your life been in a bad neighborhood ?
Dealt with gangs in your neighborhood ?
Ever see a shooting over drugs ?
Ever see businesses broken into because a crackhead is desperate for money ?

It's a lot more prevalent than you could possibly imagine, go walk the streets of New York city at night, that might change your mind.

I don't know where you live, but it must be close to fantasy land.

 

[Thraxen]

Your example is only a very small portion of drug users, you really need to wake up.
Have you ever in your life been in a bad nieghborhood ?
Dealt with gangs in your nieghborhood ?
Ever see a shooting over drugs ?
Ever see businesses broken into because a carckhead is desperate for money ?

You do realize that all of those problems were created or made much worse by the fact that the drugs are illegal? Being illegal drives up the cost because of the risk to produce them. The cost is what drives people to steal to support the habit and is also what causes the shootouts over drugs.

 

Explain why then in the early 1900's when all this was legal there were murders and robberies over drugs then.

I cannot understand why you people think drugs are OK, they are not, they destroy your mind, kill your ambitions and cause depression and do not tell me they don't, I have first hand experiance.

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: Roger

Despite greater danger, hard drugs aren't as criminal as they're made out to be either. Although I don't think there are many crackheads with socially redeeming qualities, quite a few well-off people use cocaine without much in the way of adverse effects; there are quite a few junkies (heroin addicts) out there who don't rob people to pay for their habit or anything; indeed, some of our time's greatest musicians are/were junkies; Brad Nowell (Sublime, RIP), Layne Stayley (Alice in Chains, RIP), and Scott Weiland, for example. Dangerous, yes - but to themselves only. Rehab isn't just a better option - it's the only option. Addicts for the most part need help, not jailtime. If they get to the point where they're committing crimes to support their habit, then yes - they have to pay the piper. But according to drug war propaganda, all drug users get to this point, not the small percentage who do in reality

Gurck, you crack me up, I swear to god.

Look at your statenment carefully;

quite a few well-off people use cocaine without much in the way of adverse effects

indeed, some of our time's greatest musicians are/were junkies; Brad Nowell (Sublime, RIP), Layne Stayley (Alice in Chains, RIP), and Scott Weiland, for example.

They have the cash to support thier habit, therefor they have no need to go rob some one.

It's the average joe who lives paycheck to paycheck or the ones that have no jobs at all are the ones out robbing and killing people.

Your example is only a very small portion of drug users, you really need to wake up.
Have you ever in your life been in a bad nieghborhood ?
Dealt with gangs in your nieghborhood ?
Ever see a shooting over drugs ?
Ever see businesses broken into because a carckhead is desperate for money ?

I don't know where you live, but it must be close to fanatsy land.

So you really think all drug users are guilty of crimes other than using drugs in the first place? Do you also think all pot smokers have long hair and say 'dude' a lot, and that all gays talk in high, nasal voices? These are called "stereotypes". The reason you don't see the 95% of pot smokers who don't say dude every other word or gays who speak in normal voices is because you likely assume that anyone who doesn't do these things isn't a part of the respective group. As far as fantasy land, I'm in Westchester county, NY. So maybe not that far off 😉 I'm sorry I offended your rosy memory of Ronnie Raygun, but please try to keep it in the proper thread.. better yet, start a thread about how much I suck in P&N.. unfortunately what you really want is to argue, and since you know I wouldn't touch P&N with a 10 foot pole, you'd have no reason to...

 

[Thraxen]

Explain why then in the early 1900's when all this was illegal there were murders and robberies over drugs then.

You have stats on drug related crimes back then compared to now? I bet it's much worse now. Care to explain why countries where these drugs are legal now don't have the same drug related crime problems we do?

 

OK guys, drugs are great, they should be handed out to any one who asks for them, happy ?

Care to explain why countries where these drugs are legal now don't have the same drug related crime problems we do?

You pulling this out of your ass or what, back that up with some facts.

Hey Gurck, you did not answer my question nor respond to my posgt, you are just pissed at me.

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: Roger
OK guys, drugs are great, they should be handed out to any one who asks for them, happy ?

You're the only one who said that.