Sessions issues sweeping new criminal charging policy

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

How do we know what society wants if there is no referendum voting on specific subjects/laws now in place?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Now we agree.

But those are different subjects:

1. mandatory minimal punishment
2. Making sure we have honoust, normal descent laws. In the intrest of the people.

Drug users never were a problem. The drug dealers ARE always the problem...

Marajuana should be legalized and made non-criminal. It's a plant that can be grown and requires no added chemicals. No one has ever died from using weed.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

No. Those laws are a result of a racist policy from a crook President. We have Nixon's recordings that show that the War on Drugs was ENTIRELY a policy directed at liberals and black people. Go learn your history. Just because it is a law, doesn't mean it is just. Slavery was legal at one time too.

Now you are being silly.
A President does not make the law. The legislative branch makes the law.
No one said the laws were just - but they are the law.
You have a process for changing the law, but once again, Sessions job as AG is to enforce the current laws on the books. All very very simple.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

No. Those laws are a result of a racist policy from a crook President. We have Nixon's recordings that show that the War on Drugs was ENTIRELY a policy directed at liberals and black people. Go learn your history. Just because it is a law, doesn't mean it is just. Slavery was legal at one time too.

Now you are being silly.
A President does not make the law. The legislative branch makes the law.
No one said the laws were just - but they are the law.
You have a process for changing the law, but once again, Sessions job as AG is to enforce the current laws on the books. All very very simple.

To enforce the laws in a closed-minded, biased, and unjust way...as the punishment will never fit the crime.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

I disagree. This is wrong on many many levels. Minorities are going to suffer greatly for this.

a reply to: UKTruth

We should be shrinking authority not increasing it.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

No. Those laws are a result of a racist policy from a crook President. We have Nixon's recordings that show that the War on Drugs was ENTIRELY a policy directed at liberals and black people. Go learn your history. Just because it is a law, doesn't mean it is just. Slavery was legal at one time too.

Now you are being silly.
A President does not make the law. The legislative branch makes the law.
No one said the laws were just - but they are the law.
You have a process for changing the law, but once again, Sessions job as AG is to enforce the current laws on the books. All very very simple.

No. I'm not. There is very clear data that the War on Drugs has played out very disproportionally towards minorities. Sessions is a racist and is resurrecting a racist policy. And you are celebrating an act of racism.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Mandatory minimum sentencing is largely a judicial policy which the DOJ has little to do with. DOJ is executive not judicial.

The policy changes how criminal defendants will be charged not how they will be sentenced.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

How do we know what society wants if there is no referendum voting on specific subjects/laws now in place?

Your representatives that you voted for make laws.

If you don't like what they put in place, vote them out.
Society, the people, always have the last word. Even without voting for representatives, laws can be changed by influencing representatives - take the Disability Act as an example.

My point is this - focusing on Jeff Sessions (which is obviously a political focus) - is a nonsense. Focusing on changing the law would be much more useful, then Jeff Sessions would not need to (or could not) worry about these things.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?

For the most part, yes. I see your posts and I usually dismiss them without even reading them.

A few years ago I respected your posts, even if I didn't agree with them. I always took the time to read them.

The past couple years though you have changed in your posting. You have become the fringe left. Drank the cool-aid so to speak.

I never see you point out common ground, it is always just extreme left spin.

I miss the old Krazy, your a smart guy.

a reply to: projectvxn

Time for a history lesson:
Mandatory Sentencing - History US

Mandatory sentencing and increased punishment were enacted when the United States Congress passed the Boggs Act of 1951.[7] The acts made a first time cannabis possession offense a minimum of two to ten years with a fine up to $20,000; however, in 1970, the United States Congress repealed mandatory penalties for cannabis offenses.[8] With the passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 Congress enacted different mandatory minimum sentences for drugs, including marijuana.[9][10]

In 1973, New York State introduced mandatory minimum sentences of 15 years to life imprisonment for possession of more than 4 oz (112 g) of a hard drug.

Separate from each state's own courts, federal courts in the United States are guided by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.[1] (See War on Drugs for more information about US drug laws.) When a guideline sentencing range is less than the statutory mandatory minimum, the latter prevails. Under the Controlled Substances Act, prosecutors have great power to influence a defendant's sentence and thereby create incentives to accept a plea agreement. In particular, defendants with prior drug felonies are often subject to harsh mandatory minimums, but the prosecutor can exercise his discretion to not file a prior felony information. Then the mandatory minimum will not be applied.[11]

Last I checked Congress isn't part of the Judicial branch.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: worldstarcountry

I disagree. This is wrong on many many levels. Minorities are going to suffer greatly for this.

Maybe they shouldn't be dealing dope all day.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

EVERYONE involved should suffer if they are involved with the distribution of these quantities of drugs to the population. Cocaine does not just end up in the clubs for responsible party goers. Much of it is on the table of the single parents who end up neglecting and abusing kids you know. Or the adult children who routinely exploit their enabling elderly parents and leave them penniless.

Just because you can enjoy a few lines and call it a night, does not men that is how the population at large reacts.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

No. Those laws are a result of a racist policy from a crook President. We have Nixon's recordings that show that the War on Drugs was ENTIRELY a policy directed at liberals and black people. Go learn your history. Just because it is a law, doesn't mean it is just. Slavery was legal at one time too.

Now you are being silly.
A President does not make the law. The legislative branch makes the law.
No one said the laws were just - but they are the law.
You have a process for changing the law, but once again, Sessions job as AG is to enforce the current laws on the books. All very very simple.

No. I'm not. There is very clear data that the War on Drugs has played out very disproportionally towards minorities. Sessions is a racist and is resurrecting a racist policy. And you are celebrating an act of racism.

No, I am celebrating an AG doing his job. About time.
The war on drugs catches those people dealing and taking drugs. If it affects minorities then so be it - that must be where the main problem is.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

How do we know what society wants if there is no referendum voting on specific subjects/laws now in place?

Your representatives that you voted for make laws.

If you don't like what they put in place, vote them out.
Society, the people, always have the last word. Even without voting for representatives, laws can be changed by influencing representatives - take the Disability Act as an example.

My point is this - focusing on Jeff Sessions (which is obviously a political focus) - is a nonsense. Focusing on changing the law would be much more useful, then Jeff Sessions would not need to (or could not) worry about these things.

That was impossible to do with the mixed signals given to voters on this specific issue.

www.healthline.com...

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why are you just dismissing this because I'm a liberal?

For the most part, yes. I see your posts and I usually dismiss them without even reading them.

A few years ago I respected your posts, even if I didn't agree with them. I always took the time to read them.

The past couple years though you have changed in your posting. You have become the fringe left. Drank the cool-aid so to speak.

I never see you point out common ground, it is always just extreme left spin.

I miss the old Krazy, your a smart guy.

I don't care about this at all. I don't care if you like me or not. Stay on topic.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

No. Those laws are a result of a racist policy from a crook President. We have Nixon's recordings that show that the War on Drugs was ENTIRELY a policy directed at liberals and black people. Go learn your history. Just because it is a law, doesn't mean it is just. Slavery was legal at one time too.

Now you are being silly.
A President does not make the law. The legislative branch makes the law.
No one said the laws were just - but they are the law.
You have a process for changing the law, but once again, Sessions job as AG is to enforce the current laws on the books. All very very simple.

No. I'm not. There is very clear data that the War on Drugs has played out very disproportionally towards minorities. Sessions is a racist and is resurrecting a racist policy. And you are celebrating an act of racism.

No, I am celebrating an AG doing his job. About time.
The war on drugs catches those people dealing and taking drugs. If it affects minorities then so be it - that must be where the main problem is.

Lol. So you just accept things as they are. No need to question the narrative then? Minorities are JUST bigger druggies (never mind that the same data shows that white people buy and sell drugs at equal rates as minorities or anything). Just stick your head in the sand because you don't have to worry about the danger. "Doesn't effect me, so the policy is A-OK and working!"

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: UKTruth

We should be shrinking authority not increasing it.

Right...and to think that that is what conservatives, aka "the right", the GOP or whatever else you want to call them stand for. They just always fail to mention that it is corporate law they are going to ease up on and deregulate so that their fat cat buddies can gain more money while being more protected from wrongdoing. Meanwhile it us the people that are faced with more and more draconian and authoritative laws but don't worry it's for our own protection.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Nickn3

Sessions is reversing all the progress we've made!

You've nailed it there. Isn't it great!

So you agree with the US having the world's highest incarceration rate? That's not the land of the free at all.

Lol, the land of the free does not mean you are free to commit crime. Good lord.

Don't break the law and you are as free as a bird.

Your argument is like saying if the cancer rate keeps going up, we should stop trying to find a cure for it.

So you are saying the government is correct on things that you agree with then?

Nope. I am saying that the law needs to be enforced. Those laws are what society has agreed upon through a democratic process. Not enforcing laws goes against what the people want, whether you personally like it or not.

How do we know what society wants if there is no referendum voting on specific subjects/laws now in place?

Your representatives that you voted for make laws.

If you don't like what they put in place, vote them out.
Society, the people, always have the last word. Even without voting for representatives, laws can be changed by influencing representatives - take the Disability Act as an example.

My point is this - focusing on Jeff Sessions (which is obviously a political focus) - is a nonsense. Focusing on changing the law would be much more useful, then Jeff Sessions would not need to (or could not) worry about these things.

That was impossible to do with the mixed signals given to voters on this specific issue.

www.healthline.com...

No, it is never impossible to have a law changed. If there are differing views in society and not enough people can be mobilised to change a law then society really doesn't care for the law to be changed.