Washington state's marijuana laws keep getting more sane

[AkSaber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Imagine how much more efficient our courts and prisons would be if one day we realized, the only people who deserve prison (and who we actually need to be protected from) are the violent offenders.

There are only four crimes in the violent category: murder, rape, robbery, and assault

[Lief 🗽]

There are many more crimes than murder, rape, robbery and assault that deserve prison.

[Blue3]

There are many more crimes than murder, rape, robbery and assault that deserve prison.

Such as?

[memphis]

There are many more crimes than murder, rape, robbery and assault that deserve prison.

Such as?

Burglary. Fraud. Money laundering. Conspiracy. DUI....there are hundreds.

[angus]

DUI

prison for drunk driving?  seriously?  ouch.

[memphis]

DUI

prison for drunk driving?  seriously?  ouch.

FYI
http://dui.drivinglaws.org/pa-dui.php

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

The reason we put people in jail for drunk driving is because jesus tapdancing christ did a lot of people drive drunk before those laws came along.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

DUI

prison for drunk driving?  seriously?  ouch.

Seriously.  It's essentially the same thing as attempted murder except a drunk driver doesn't usually have an intended victim.  If we were to more broadly apply the death penalty than we do now, I could easily see applying it to drunk drivers who kill someone.

[angus]

I agree with the OP that for murder, rape, robbery, and assault the perpetrator has shown that he is a menace to society.  But for some of those others mentioned by memphis--burglary, fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, DUI--I'm not so sure that this is the case.

Let's take burglary.  Let's imagine a nineteen-year-old down on his luck, driving a hooptie with a broken fuel gauge, because that's all he can afford.  He runs out of fuel and his car is stuck on the street in a suburban neighborhood far from the nearest services.  He doesn't have a mobile phone.  He walks around and notice a car parked on the street and he siphons enough gas from the tank to make it to the gas station.  He gets into the car and suddenly a police car comes in behind him, arrests him for Burglary of a Motor Vehicle, so now he has to pay a 2500 dollar fine and spend six months in a penetentiary.  Does the sentence seem to fit the crime?

Or what about conspiracy?  There's a holiday song that says, "Later on we'll conspire, as we dream by the fire, to face unafraid the plans that we made, walking in a winter wonderland..."  Prison for this?  Seems again that the sentence doesn't really fit the crime, if indeed there was a crime.

As for drunk driving, it's currently a misdemeanor.  At least for the first few offenses.  You get a heavy fine as it is, and your insurance premium increases, but does it merit imprisonment?

I'm not excusing any of these crimes.  The lad in the first example should have probably walked, however far, to the nearest fuel station and purchased a gas can and a gallon of gas, or if he didn't have any money, he should have found a telephone and phoned someone who does.  Still, our prisons are already overcrowded and we're imprisoning a far greater fraction of our population than most other societies.  At great expense to the taxpayers, I might add.

The Navajo had a cure ceremony for those afflicted with maladies.  If you got drunk and shot up a store and stole something, it meant that something inside you wasn't right, and a wise man would be called to have a sing for you.  I'm not sure that stuff works, but I'm quite sure that putting young men in prison only makes them jaded, tough, and wiser in the ways of crime.  You don't turn criminals into citizens by treating them the way we do. 

[minionofmidas]

There are many more crimes than murder, rape, robbery and assault that deserve prison.

Such as?

Burglary. Fraud. Money laundering. Conspiracy. DUI....there are hundreds.

Tax evasion (beyond a certain point).

[emailking]

Let's take burglary.  Let's imagine a nineteen-year-old down on his luck, driving a hooptie with a broken fuel gauge, because that's all he can afford.  He runs out of fuel and his car is stuck on the street in a suburban neighborhood far from the nearest services.  He doesn't have a mobile phone.  He walks around and notice a car parked on the street and he siphons enough gas from the tank to make it to the gas station.  He gets into the car and suddenly a police car comes in behind him, arrests him for Burglary of a Motor Vehicle, so now he has to pay a 2500 dollar fine and spend six months in a penetentiary.  Does the sentence seem to fit the crime?

No. But that's a red herring. If someone burglarized your residence, clean wiped you out of your possessions...really no prison for that? Or are you arguing that burglary should not automatically mean  prison?

Or what about conspiracy?  There's a holiday song that says, "Later on we'll conspire, as we dream by the fire, to face unafraid the plans that we made, walking in a winter wonderland..."  Prison for this? 

No.

As for drunk driving, it's currently a misdemeanor.  At least for the first few offenses.  You get a heavy fine as it is, and your insurance premium increases, but does it merit imprisonment?

Yes. A strong deterrent effect is needed. People's lives are at risk when someone drives drunk.

The Navajo had a cure ceremony for those afflicted with maladies.  If you got drunk and shot up a store and stole something, it meant that something inside you wasn't right, and a wise man would be called to have a sing for you.  I'm not sure that stuff works, but I'm quite sure that putting young men in prison only makes them jaded, tough, and wiser in the ways of crime.  You don't turn criminals into citizens by treating them the way we do. 

It's an interesting point but I think largely irrelevant to whether or not we should put people in prison for serious crimes. If they offend again, put them in prison again, and for longer. Perhaps the prisons need to become a LOT better, but even if they don't we still need to make use of them.

[angus]

If someone burglarized your residence, clean wiped you out of your possessions...really no prison for that? Or are you arguing that burglary should not automatically mean  prison?

Yes, I'm arguing that burglary should not automatically mean prison.  I tried to come up with a plausible example to illustrate that.  If someone burglarized my residence and cleaned it out, that's different.  That would not have been the example I chose to make my point.

It seems that this thread has taken a dreadful turn, but maybe it's fair since all these crimes were delineated specifically in the original post.  I think you have to ask what the point is.  Do we incarcerate to rehabilitate?  To protect ourselves?  For revenge?  I suspect that different people would answer differently. 

If it's for revenge, then we hang murderers.  We put rapists in prisons, where they will undoubtedly be raped.  We put assaulters in prisons, where they will undoubtedly be assaulted.  Do we put a man in a prison, to be raped and assaulted, just because he took a gallon of gas, or just because he had one too many martinis, or, for that matter, because he has a few lids of weed in his car?  And that gets us back to the original thread:  I presume the point is that this bill is a bit weak because it only protects those who possess marijuana by prescription.  I'd agree with the tacit proposition made in the OP that no one should be arrested solely for its possession, with or without a medical provider's prescription. 

If it's for rehab, then we're doing a demonstrably lousy job of that.  Yes, the Navajo example was far fetched, but I bet they have a much, much better record in this regard.

If it's for our protection, that some are genuinely dangerous to society, then I'd agree that jokers and tokers really aren't menacing.  Nor are some burglars.  Nor are some conspirers.  You could argue that the money launderers, frauds, and drunk drivers are menaces to society, but the latter category will only become more menacing once they graduate from the horrible sorts of prisons most states operate.

[opebo]

The enthusiasm for prison shown here by the subjects of a penal society is hardly surprising.

Surely you people realize there are other solutions, no?

[Badger]

I agree with the OP that for murder, rape, robbery, and assault the perpetrator has shown that he is a menace to society.  But for some of those others mentioned by memphis--burglary, fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, DUI--I'm not so sure that this is the case.

Let's take burglary.  Let's imagine a nineteen-year-old down on his luck, driving a hooptie with a broken fuel gauge, because that's all he can afford.  He runs out of fuel and his car is stuck on the street in a suburban neighborhood far from the nearest services.  He doesn't have a mobile phone.  He walks around and notice a car parked on the street and he siphons enough gas from the tank to make it to the gas station.  He gets into the car and suddenly a police car comes in behind him, arrests him for Burglary of a Motor Vehicle, so now he has to pay a 2500 dollar fine and spend six months in a penetentiary.  Does the sentence seem to fit the crime?

Or what about conspiracy?  There's a holiday song that says, "Later on we'll conspire, as we dream by the fire, to face unafraid the plans that we made, walking in a winter wonderland..."  Prison for this?  Seems again that the sentence doesn't really fit the crime, if indeed there was a crime.

As for drunk driving, it's currently a misdemeanor.  At least for the first few offenses.  You get a heavy fine as it is, and your insurance premium increases, but does it merit imprisonment?

I'm not excusing any of these crimes.  The lad in the first example should have probably walked, however far, to the nearest fuel station and purchased a gas can and a gallon of gas, or if he didn't have any money, he should have found a telephone and phoned someone who does.  Still, our prisons are already overcrowded and we're imprisoning a far greater fraction of our population than most other societies.  At great expense to the taxpayers, I might add.

The Navajo had a cure ceremony for those afflicted with maladies.  If you got drunk and shot up a store and stole something, it meant that something inside you wasn't right, and a wise man would be called to have a sing for you.  I'm not sure that stuff works, but I'm quite sure that putting young men in prison only makes them jaded, tough, and wiser in the ways of crime.  You don't turn criminals into citizens by treating them the way we do. 

You really have no distinction between 'maximum penalty allowed by law' and 'actual penaly usually imposed by the courts, do you?

The maximum penalty allowed by law for a first offense OVI in OH is 6 monhs in jail, 3yrs license suspension, and almost $1100 in fines. "Oh Noes! The prison indusxtrial complex is making a fortune freedomz!!1111..." stop

In reality, the typical first offense ovi, ASSUMING. The case isn't reduced or acquitted--my old office regularly reduced any first offense ovi without aggravating circumstances to a lesser charge)--the typical first offense ovi faced the minimum penalties allowed by law: 6 months suspension from date of arrest, $375 fine plus court costs (total being about $500; higher ins premiums? Sux 2 b u in the free market, huh?) and 3 days in a driver's intervention program (held usually at a motel; no you can't leave, but would you rather spend three days in the county as is the option?).

The other scenarios drawn out indicate even a hanging judge isn't about to impose anywhere near the maximum penalty allowed, or even more than a suspended sentence. Yes, one can always say 'i heard of this mean ol judge somewhere in my state.....' but anecdotal evidence like this is what's needed over actual emperical experience to hold libertard views on sentencing in most cases.

There, I said it.

[angus]

You really have no distinction between 'maximum penalty allowed by law' and 'actual penaly usually imposed by the courts, do you?

None whatsoever.  I often speak metaphorically, and I've been accused of being somewhat Joycean in my posts.  Sometimes I even post pure bullshit.  I'll just run something up the flagpole to see if it flies.  In this area, however, I'm totally serious and totally pedestrian.  See my previous posts on prisons, punishment, and crime in general.  I've been very consistent in my analysis that we are a very vindictive society, and if there is a cause-and-effect relationship, that vendetta has not paid off very well in terms of making us any safer, and crime statistics bear that out.

[Sbane]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

[© tweed]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

[Sbane]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

People addicted to Heroin, Meth and Nicotine don't need help?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

We really do place too much emphasis on imprisoning people in this country.  The Navajo example  angus mentioned was interesting.  While some societies place emphasis on restitution to a victim, or reconciliation within the community, our American criminal justice system isn't generally built for that. We say a person in prison is "paying their debt to society,"  but how?  They're not contributing anything to society being locked up like that.  There's a point at which locking more and more people up causes more social disruption and insecurity than it prevents.

[angus]

They're not contributing anything to society being locked up like that. 

To be fair, in some places they do.  In west Texas the state pens put them out in the hot sun with sledgehammers to break up rocks to build highways.  When they're not fighting off rattlesnakes and heat stroke they actually do accomplish some road construction.

I guess my own preference would be restitution and reconciliation/rehabilitation, and I agree that we're not really set up very well for that.

I certainly don't think restitution or punishment is required if all you have done is purchased some chemical substances for your own recreation, but rehabilitation may be in order, especially if someone is addicted to a drug.  I don't know if there's a good study on the costs and benefits of rehab for meth, coke, and heroin addicts in comparison to imprisonment of these addicts.  My gut feeling is that rehab is more cost effective and generally produces better results than prison.  Same goes for drunk drivers.  As for small-time burglars, that's probably a function of poverty more than anything else.  I don't have an easy solution to that problem.  It could be that Ron Paul is right.  We have created a nation of dependents and the only cure is to make people more self-sufficient.  Or it could be that Mother Theresa is right.  We just need to learn to love each other, care for the afflicted, and pool our resources. 

[© tweed]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

People addicted to Heroin, Meth and Nicotine don't need help?

not necessarily, and regardless of what they 'need', forcing help on them is going to be counterproductive.  but the key point here is that possession is not equal to addiction.  you wouldn't call someone carrying a six-pack an alcoholic.

[Sbane]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

People addicted to Heroin, Meth and Nicotine don't need help?

not necessarily, and regardless of what they 'need', forcing help on them is going to be counterproductive.  but the key point here is that possession is not equal to addiction.  you wouldn't call someone carrying a six-pack an alcoholic.

So do you think meth should be sold in stores?

[© tweed]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

People addicted to Heroin, Meth and Nicotine don't need help?

not necessarily, and regardless of what they 'need', forcing help on them is going to be counterproductive.  but the key point here is that possession is not equal to addiction.  you wouldn't call someone carrying a six-pack an alcoholic.

So do you think meth should be sold in stores?

in an ideal world of my creation, it would be sold via state monopoly, yes, though this has little relevance to current public policy debates.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Given how a lot of the problems associated with meth come from the witches' brew of toxic chemicals used to make it illicitly, our current policy there is not helpful.  That said, I would not make meth legal just yet. What I would do is make marijuana, cocaine, opioids, and other drugs that can be grown or easily obtained from grown products legal.  That would cut the legs out from under the international narcotrafficers. If there were legally available cocaine of known purity, I would expect that would cut severely into the demand for meth of unknown quality.

[opebo]

We need to stop imprisoning people for drug violations. I am not just talking about Marijuana, but any simple drug possession. Those people need help, not prison. Of course the prison industry won't like that.

why do people in possession of drugs "need help"?

People addicted to Heroin, Meth and Nicotine don't need help?

They need help getting the police off their backs.