Sessions issues sweeping new criminal charging policy

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I was waiting for someone to say I was off topic before I connected the dots now you ruined my surprise.

Wow so much whining about muh weed gets taken away. You know what drugdealers deserve far worse as a prison sentence. The gorification of weed always bugged me. Maybe it is because the whole reason for this bs is to keep the population docile. Stoned people usualy don't care about anything. I never got the appeal why someone would feel the need to take drugs in the first place. Hey look at me i'm so hip and cool because i smoke weed every day. I got nothing against medicinal weed but this moaning and bitching because drugdealers now need to think twice if they risk a deal is moronic. F#ck drugdealers. Killing them would solve the problem a lot faster but hey i'm too extreme. Boo hoo.

a reply to: UKTruth

It does actually. States are legalizing it fast enough to make your head spin. To now crack down on what is clearly a tidal wave of public opinion is draconian and morally objectionable, especially when considering the main reason for the inability to change federal law is driven by moneyed interested heavily vested in keeping it illegal (private prisons, alchohol/tobacco, pharma). The will of the people is clear and the will of the government is contra to it.

Your argument is akin to arguing that the Nazi's that followed their governments orders to execute folks were in the right. News flash - they still caught a bullet at the Nuremberg trials for their confident miscalculation.

a reply to: Tardacus

I love how you ignore he was a leading senator for the laws, and now wants to see them executed as fully and broadly as possible, and that he has a career history of cosying up to unions and private prisons who are the lobbysists for these laws.

a reply to: Tardacus

Yes because upholding Holders' memo was SUCH a Constitutional crisis and all. It needed to be rescinded immediately! Right?

I mean really. Are you even listen to the crap you are saying? It's like you are just desperate to defend this schmuck at any cost. Never mind all the evidence that shows that mandatory minimums are ineffective, racist and unpopular. Never mind that the War on Drugs is racist at heart. Never mind that the American public is trying to deescalate the War on Drugs. Sessions thinks otherwise so THAT'S the end of the discussion.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

You sound like the kind of person that neither drinks nor smokes. You also avoid fast food, exerciser regularly, go to your yearly health checkups. Also you have no hobbies to distract you from your true human purpose - Avante!

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Wow so much whining about muh weed gets taken away. You know what drugdealers deserve far worse as a prison sentence. The gorification of weed always bugged me. Maybe it is because the whole reason for this bs is to keep the population docile. Stoned people usualy don't care about anything. I never got the appeal why someone would feel the need to take drugs in the first place. Hey look at me i'm so hip and cool because i smoke weed every day. I got nothing against medicinal weed but this moaning and bitching because drugdealers now need to think twice if they risk a deal is moronic. F#ck drugdealers. Killing them would solve the problem a lot faster but hey i'm too extreme. Boo hoo.

There were a minority of posts here relating to weed. It sounds like your whining.

a reply to: muzzleflash

drug dealers should be pooling their money and hiring high priced lobbyists to get the laws changed, profits from illegal drugs is probably equal too or more than the profits of the pharmaceutical companies.if the pharmaceutical companies can afford high priced lobbyists why can`t the drug dealers?

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Wow so much whining about muh weed gets taken away. You know what drugdealers deserve far worse as a prison sentence. The gorification of weed always bugged me. Maybe it is because the whole reason for this bs is to keep the population docile. Stoned people usualy don't care about anything. I never got the appeal why someone would feel the need to take drugs in the first place. Hey look at me i'm so hip and cool because i smoke weed every day. I got nothing against medicinal weed but this moaning and bitching because drugdealers now need to think twice if they risk a deal is moronic. F#ck drugdealers. Killing them would solve the problem a lot faster but hey i'm too extreme. Boo hoo.

I sure hope you never drink alcohol, because that would make you a hypocrite to the highest degree.

a reply to: Tardacus

'profits from illegal drugs is probably equal too or more than the profits of the pharmaceutical companies'


Oh you sweet summer child.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: muzzleflash

drug dealers should be pooling their money and hiring high priced lobbyists to get the laws changed, profits from illegal drugs is probably equal too or more than the profits of the pharmaceutical companies.if the pharmaceutical companies can afford high priced lobbyists why can`t the drug dealers?

Drug dealers want to keep it illegal. It's more profitable for them that way. Did you know that drug cartels lobby the Mexican government to keep pot illegal on the regular?

a reply to: Tardacus

They do,..have you read the fbi police corruption reports? Whole depts laundering drug money, Chicago, st louis, detroit, Baltimore high level corruption and colaboration. Rival gangs go to jail crime stays on the street win win for everyone.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

While a law is framed for bringing justice to the society, a policy is framed for achieving certain goals.

Read more: Difference Between Law and Policy | Difference Between www.differencebetween.net...

There is not justice when every one in the society is treated differently based on skin color, financial status, sexual orientation etc. That is where policy comes into play...the policy is to achieve a goal. The goal is to lock up as many folks at it can for free labor...


That is why our
POLICE cars say it right on the side of the car...POLICY

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oops sorry. I don't drink alcohol. Your hypocrite argument is invalid sorry better luck next time. I don't smoke either.

a reply to: Tardacus
That is exactly what happened with Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, and the change he implemented. They bribed him to change the laws and buy guns is exactly how it reads to me.
a reply to: luthier

America's Faulty Perception of Crime Rates
Government statistics show that, except for some small blips, serious crime has decreased almost every year from 1994 through 2013. For over a decade Gallup has found that the majority of Americans polled believe crime is up, contrary to the fact that crime rates have plummeted in almost every small and large city since the 1990s. This is not to say that all cities and areas are experiencing decreases in violent crime year after year, but the overall rate of violent crime is significantly lower than historic levels.

What Caused the Crime Decline?
The report is 142 pages, and although they try to downplay the role of mandatory minimums, they like to highlight the benefit of reduced crack use that came with it. Crack was the biggest driver of violent crime during the eighties and nineties. They try to cite an aging population and reduced alcohol consumption as primary factors. But statistics from 2015 show people are still drinking as much as ever.
Legalized abortion was also a factor they tried to cite, but that had been legal for decades already, so it is a weak argument to use.

Neither of these attempts to downplay mandatory minimums actually physically removed violent criminals, or the ones who were dealing the drugs that turned many people violent during this period. The mandatory sentencing policies did do that. I chose a left leaning institution as the source for a reason. It became obvious to see the bias by doing so.

Do I think a weed dealer needs 15 years for a couple ounces? Not at all, and this rarely happens in 2017. Obviously we had that clear blasphemy of justice from Alabama recently, I did not support that. Hell neither did one of the state's Supreme Court justices.

It worked in my city and state though It worked in New York. It worked in MANY jurisdictions. Crime continues to be rampant though in jurisdictions that take a more liberal policy towards drug related crime, and it typically reflects as such with higher violent crime rates within said jurisdictions.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I`m not trying to defend anyone, I`m just trying to defend the constitution and the rule of law.

the constitution and the rule of law has served this country well for over 200 years and has allowed it to grow and prosper.

just because the latest generation doesn`t have what it takes to work within the bounds of the constitution to make the changes that they want to see is not a good enough reason to trash the constitution and usher in anarchy where everyone just obeys the laws that they agree with.

It`s hard work and time consuming to get laws changed but nothing worth having comes easy and nothing that comes easy is worth having.
if changing the drug laws isn`t something that they are willing to work for and make sacrifices for then obviously it isn`t something that they really care about changing.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

As a Kid in my 20's I had a run in with the overseers because I worked at a telemarketing company and let me tell you those mandatory minimum sentences are scary as hell I almost went away for 10 years not knowing the company was crooked. It's actually a book that they just go through and add up a score and what ever the # is that's what you get.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Perfectenemy

You sound like the kind of person that neither drinks nor smokes. You also avoid fast food, exerciser regularly, go to your yearly health checkups. Also you have no hobbies to distract you from your true human purpose - Avante!

Jumping to conclusions are we. First sentence is correct the following not so much. I like Fast Food and the best thing is i can eat as much as i want because i can't get fat even if i tried. I guess ATS counts as an hobby don't you think. There is no true human purpose as far i can tell.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: luthier

America's Faulty Perception of Crime Rates
Government statistics show that, except for some small blips, serious crime has decreased almost every year from 1994 through 2013. For over a decade Gallup has found that the majority of Americans polled believe crime is up, contrary to the fact that crime rates have plummeted in almost every small and large city since the 1990s. This is not to say that all cities and areas are experiencing decreases in violent crime year after year, but the overall rate of violent crime is significantly lower than historic levels.

What Caused the Crime Decline?
The report is 142 pages, and although they try to downplay the role of mandatory minimums, they like to highlight the benefit of reduced crack use that came with it. Crack was the biggest driver of violent crime during the eighties and nineties. They try to cite an aging population and reduced alcohol consumption as primary factors. But statistics from 2015 show people are still drinking as much as ever.
Legalized abortion was also a factor they tried to cite, but that had been legal for decades already, so it is a weak argument to use.

Neither of these attempts to downplay mandatory minimums actually physically removed violent criminals, or the ones who were dealing the drugs that turned many people violent during this period. The mandatory sentencing policies did do that. I chose a left leaning institution as the source for a reason. It became obvious to see the bias by doing so.

Do I think a weed dealer needs 15 years for a couple ounces? Not at all, and this rarely happens in 2017. Obviously we had that clear blasphemy of justice from Alabama recently, I did not support that. Hell neither did one of the state's Supreme Court justices.

It worked in my city and state though

It worked in New York. It worked in MANY jurisdictions. Crime continues to be rampant though in jurisdictions that take a more liberal policy towards drug related crime, and it typically reflects as such with higher violent crime rates within said jurisdictions.

What worked?

Your truly ignorant if you think because something had an effect it is the most efficient or best mean to get the result.

Before I waste a lot of time do you believe I can show you better results with different drug and policing polices that are more based on treatment and community policing inniciatives?

Sessions wants to go backwards.

You also don't approach his union support and why that is such a major issue in policing.

Do you actually work in courts?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If this true I about darn time we get justice department to cater to lawful abiding citizens and stop pandering to criminals.

Hallelujah.