 U.S. officials warn against mandatory minimum sentences | CTV NewsLaw & Order | 207865 hits | Feb 22 9:59 am | Posted by: Robair  More than two dozen current and former law enforcement officials in the United States - including police officers, prosecutors and judges -- are warning the Canadian government against mandatory minimum sentences for minor marijuana offences.Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
...
"These policies have bankrupted state budgets as limited tax dollars pay to imprison non-violent drug offenders at record rates instead of programs that can actually improve community safety. Marijuana prohibition drives corruption and violence and tougher laws only worsen the problem."
...
"We are individuals who were deeply involved with the war on drugs and have now accepted, due to our own experience and the clear evidence before us, that these policies are a costly failure," the letter goes on. "We changed our minds and we encourage you to do the same."
Listen to the people who tried this 30 years ago. It doesn't work, it only makes things worse.
That said, I think there are plenty of instances where judges should be handing out longer sentences. Wonder if there's a way to do that without forcing these minimums on them?
...
"These policies have bankrupted state budgets as limited tax dollars pay to imprison non-violent drug offenders at record rates instead of programs that can actually improve community safety. Marijuana prohibition drives corruption and violence and tougher laws only worsen the problem."
...
"We are individuals who were deeply involved with the war on drugs and have now accepted, due to our own experience and the clear evidence before us, that these policies are a costly failure," the letter goes on. "We changed our minds and we encourage you to do the same."
Listen to the people who tried this 30 years ago. It doesn't work, it only makes things worse.
It's not our gov't they need to convince Curt, it's their OWN gov't that needs convincing. The Liberals up here have no problem with at least decrimming it, so they wouldn't take much, if any, persuading. The Conservatives OTOH, do what the US does so they really don't need to be convinced either.
I assume these same "officials" believe in the right to bear arms. Is their advice still credible to Canadians?
Is that the choice - guns or jails?
I assume these same "officials" believe in the right to bear arms. Is their advice still credible to Canadians?
Is that the choice - guns or jails?
NO...........it's called selective and convenient endorsement.
I assume these same "officials" believe in the right to bear arms. Is their advice still credible to Canadians?
Is that the choice - guns or jails?
NO...........it's called selective and convenient endorsement.
As the letter states, these are people who have learned from their mistakes. They've seen that prohibition is not a solution to drug addiction, it's a catalyst for it.
That should be applauded, and your sideshow isn't relevant.
As the letter states, these are people who have learned from their mistakes. They've seen that prohibition is not a solution to drug addiction, it's a catalyst for it.
That should be applauded, and your sideshow isn't relevant.
Can't wait to remind you of this post.
That's what I don't get. We have laws and punishment to protect us yet it's not okay to actually punish criminals? Jailing criminals is the cost of a supposedly safe democratic society. How many thread have been made here where the criminal got a slap on the wrist for horrific crimes?...............LOTS!
The difference is, with a drug crime there is no victim. Punishing a drug user makes less sense than punishing an obese person for eating cheeseburgers. The cheeseburgers will kill you. Marijuana will not. There has to be a reason for the laws, and the cure should not be worse than the illness.
That's what I don't get. We have laws and punishment to protect us yet it's not okay to actually punish criminals? Jailing criminals is the cost of a supposedly safe democratic society. How many thread have been made here where the criminal got a slap on the wrist for horrific crimes?...............LOTS!
The difference is, with a drug crime there is no victim. Punishing a drug user makes less sense than punishing an obese person for eating cheeseburgers. The cheeseburgers will kill you. Marijuana will not. There has to be a reason for the laws, and the cure should not be worse than the illness.
This one too.
This one too.
I can't see why you haven't done it in the past then. I've said these things before, and I'll say them again. We've been discussing this here for how many years? I'm still waiting to hear even one reasonable excuse for the prohibition laws that cause so much violence and corruption. There doesn't seem to be any, the closest you can ever find is that the Americans will close the border. Even that seems strange considering these facts (contained in the letter):
"Sixteen U.S. states and the District of Columbia have passed laws allowing some degree of medical use of marijuana, and 14 states have taken steps to decriminalize marijuana possession," the letter said.
The letter also noted that three states - Washington, California and Colorado - are all preparing ballot initiatives in 2012 to overturn marijuana prohibition.