Eric Holder: Many "Low-Level, Nonviolent Drug Offenders" Will No Longer Face Mandatory Minimums

After 3 drug using presidents...it is about time.

Originally posted by Sharingan
reply to post by WaterBottle

 

...
First thing this tool has done right since he was appointed AG

edit on 12-8-2013 by Sharingan because: (no reason given)

Thing is, he has not done it yet. Admin knows they are losing the people. They said they would not go after dispensaries in legal states but stll do.

He is a liar. No cause to think jack will change.

Originally posted by jam321
Why now? Why not when they first took over and had a chance to change the laws to reflect justice? Thousands of ruined lives. Lives that affect other lives when people have to turn to the government for handouts because their bread winner sits in jail over political BS.

Why now?


Peace

Because every time a scandal errupts with this administration they try to find ways to change the channel, and they do it in such a way that people forget about the origional scandal.

While ending manditory minimums may tick some people off, its a lot easier dealing with that crticism than it is trying to explain why our Ambassador and aides in Libya were murdered, Fast and Furious, Birth Certificate, IRS scandal, FEC scandal etc etc etc etc...

reply to post by hadriana


They work with opposites, so while he claims this in the background they will be persecuting these cases to the fullest extent of the law.

This world is seriously evil.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


It is a positive step towards a right direction, at the least.
Could any news be good news to you, Wrabbit?

I'm glad to see something like this, amidst all the things to get upset about.

I'm not being very eloquent, but at least it is sensible.
Of course there are those who dont believe anything can improve, and are suspicious of everything, and will use this comment, perhaps, to jump off to listing reasons why this is not a positive development.

I get tired of the cynicism, even in myself. It's no way to live!

So now it's not enough for politicians to work on changing ineffective & harmful policies, but they also must do it for the right reason? I say any improvement is, well, improvement.


reply to post by onequestion


Explain, how this thread deserves the post from you "the world is evil".
Or how that adds substance to the thread.
Please explain "opposites" & how that'll work out to prosecute to "fullest extent of law" when the fullest extent has been reined in.

Holder is just trying to get some good press in light of all these scandals he's been part of.

OH and because of Rhode Island.

They are starting to see what kind of economic incentive is created by these policies.

~Tenth

reply to post by russ1969


That's a good point. I'm glad if the administration is trying to hide right hand with left hand pronouncements, that at keast it's about dumb drug policy and ineffective jailing methods

reply to post by kkrattiger


Good news is meaningful change to the laws that govern. This isn't good news. This is more bad news with a sexier cover on the book.

When Holder disregarded existing law and got particular about what parts he deemed worthy of enforcement on other areas, we screamed and rightly so. He's doing the very same thing here .....and it just happens to be on a topic many of us like. See what this does?? The principle which was wrong then and is STILL wrong now hasn't changed. It's just been made attractive so we shut up and don't complain half as much the next time it's used to hurt...not help us.

Change laws? Good news. Play with them for politics? More of the same bad. Same crap, different day.

reply to post by Mikeyy
My opinion on that if I may.....If they were to legalize weed in the U.S. There would be no need for cartel shipping,because the U.S. would have it's own products and shops as they do now in Denver,California,and Michigan.So In truth it would be quite the opposite affect,it would cause cartel business to go belly up.

reply to post by Onewhoknowsjesus


The same was hoped and believed when Prohibition was repealed and common sense restored to the concept of liberty with personal responsibility.

Unfortunately then, as is true now I believe, the crime organizations have matured well beyond their roots and diversified past needing any one thing to sustain themselves. The damage is done for making that beast, I'm afraid.

I have to agree with Mr. Wrabbitt on this...He is not king, he cannot just declare this and make it happen.
I would guess that mandatory sentences vary from state to state. But maybe he is just talking about the illegals coming across the border with drugs.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole medical marijuana thing. Seems like its turning into a big business. But getting caught with some pot is way less deadly than a young man getting caught carrying a gun.

I'd like to hear him say that any young man caught carrying a gun that is not registered to him will face 20 years mandatory. I know that would be a hard law to write because legitimate gun owners share weapons. But never after borrowing a friends handgun have I forgot it was under the seat of the car...or had a friend forget his weapon in my truck...
There is far too much gun violence in our inner cities! that needs to be addressed!

reply to post by kkrattiger

Explain, how this thread deserves the post from you "the world is evil". Or how that adds substance to the thread. Please explain "opposites" & how that'll work out to prosecute to "fullest extent of law" when the fullest extent has been reined in.

*Satanist* work with opposites. Its apart of their whole belief system. If you ever get deeply involved with any people into the *esoteric* or hidden or whatever crap they want to sell they will tell you this to. I'm not saying Holder is a satanist, persay. He may be ignorant to this fact but still playing by the same rules if you catch my drift.

May statement the world is evil is just a statement of fact as i perceive them to be.

one step forward.

17 steps back...

reply to post by tinner07


the 2 are not comparable.

the constitution does not garuntee you the right to a plant. (although it should)

I do not find it surprising that he wants to give people who break laws, a pass, and not send them to jail. Maybe he's trying to send people a message on how to treat him?

While this is a great step in the right direction ( even if he doesn't follow through with it, him saying it is a milestone ) , I would like to know what he intends to do about legal, voted on medical cannabis in different states. This "free loving, hands off " administration has persecuted medical cannabis businesses and their users at an alarming pace, more so than any other administration. If the people voted on it, and allow it in their state/town, why is the federal government not heeding their wishes and staying out of it? ( I know it's still illegal federally, just musing ).

So now they're shamelessly pandering to their base again? Why am I not surprised?

reply to post by luciddream

There are serious criminals to catch and use the budget instead of kids wanting to get high.

Or indeed adults seeking the same thing.

Kids using drugs, unless it's for genuine medical purposes, ought to be discouraged. Their adult counterparts however are adults and able to make informed choices about their own usage, provided that is done responsibly and without harm to other, independent parties.

I agree this is a tentative step in the right direction, but i would have like to see it go much further...i would have liked to have heard him announce that all such 'low risk inmates, especially those incarcerated for soft drug 'crimes', will be released over a staggered period lasting no longer than 6 months.

That would have been real positive news, especially for the families for those inmates.

Who says the government isn't on top of things? It only took them 44yrs to figure this out. That must be some kind of record.