USA is number one in something, and it ain't freedom.

[Dan Druff]

If 10 people commit prison-worthy crimes, I want all 10 of them in prison. I don't want just 5 of them in prison because "we are incarcerating too many people" or any left-wing BS like that.

As I said, we may have a crime problem, but we don't really have a wrongful conviction or overly harsh punishment problem.

Privatized prisons are a separate issue. They are bad because the system is corrupt, resulting in both prisoner abuse and misuse of public funds.

While only a small symptom of a greater problem, the jail payphone situation is a good example of problems in the privatized prison system. The collect call system it utilizes costs families (NOT the prisoners) a fortune to communicate with loved ones in prison. The rates of carrying the calls are inflated by thousands of percent just because they can, and everyone in prison is literally a captive audience. This type of shit shouldn't be happening. The government should own these phones and should be setting a fair rate for their use.

Again, that's just a minor abuse compared to everything else, but it's symptomatic of the entire corrupt system.

So while I'm with you on reforming the privatized prison system (and in fact, most conservatives feel the same way), falsely lowering the incarceration rate isn't the answer.

[LarryLaffer]

here's another prime example of how our justice system is corrupt and one sided.


FullTilt



these guys STOLE MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS: never saw a day in jail.



there are people spending life without parole for marijuana possession.

[LarryLaffer]

the least you could do, is admit you're wrong in your previous post about the number of drug offenders in jail.

[gimmick]

Only a tiny percentage of those in prison didn't knowingly break the law.

Most of those complaining about the US incarceration rate are doing so from a societal standpoint, as if somehow society is supposed to stop the individual from deciding to commit crimes.

Furthermore, very few in prison are there because they were committing crimes in order to acquire basic necessities. For every guy in prison who was just trying to feed his starving family, there are 1000 who just wanted to get rich the easy way.

The privatized prison system needs reform (though not for the tinfoil hat reasons that judges are supposedly sentencing people in exchange for bribes), but I don't see what we're supposed to do about the incarceration rate.

Ignore crimes and just let people off? That's already happening too much as it is.

Release nonviolent recreational drug users? Okay, but they only make up a tiny percentage of those in prison.

Shorter sentences? I don't think that's a good idea, given that most criminals serve a short percentage of their sentence these days as it is.

Just legalize all drugs. Problem solved...



...or more precisely repeal the previous retarded laws that already ran the exact same cycle with a different substance between 1920 and 1933. That previous substance, alcohol, was much more popular so things escalated quite fast and it was fairly easy to see what piece of legislation, that was lobbied by idiots with good intentions, led to things like Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.

[LarryLaffer]

and you can also admit you're blanket statement about private prisons never influencing judges was absolutely false.

[Dan Druff]

Only a tiny percentage of those in prison didn't knowingly break the law.

Most of those complaining about the US incarceration rate are doing so from a societal standpoint, as if somehow society is supposed to stop the individual from deciding to commit crimes.

Furthermore, very few in prison are there because they were committing crimes in order to acquire basic necessities. For every guy in prison who was just trying to feed his starving family, there are 1000 who just wanted to get rich the easy way.

The privatized prison system needs reform (though not for the tinfoil hat reasons that judges are supposedly sentencing people in exchange for bribes), but I don't see what we're supposed to do about the incarceration rate.

Ignore crimes and just let people off? That's already happening too much as it is.

Release nonviolent recreational drug users? Okay, but they only make up a tiny percentage of those in prison.

Shorter sentences? I don't think that's a good idea, given that most criminals serve a short percentage of their sentence these days as it is.

Just legalize all drugs. Problem solved...



...or more precisely repeal the previous retarded laws that already ran the exact same cycle with a different substance between 1920 and 1933. That previous substance, alcohol, was much more popular so things escalated quite fast and it was fairly easy to see what piece of legislation, that was lobbied by idiots with good intentions, led to things like Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.

I don't know if that graph is accurate.

But I don't care if it is or not.

Did those people in prison commit at least medium-level crimes?

If the answer is yes, then they deserve to be there.

I don't care about the incarceration rate. I care that the people committing prison-worthy offenses are incarcerated for a fair and just sentence. That should be our goal when it comes to crime and punishment.

I do not believe in complete decriminalization of drugs, but rather an approach similar to that of online gambling, where it's not illegal to do but illegal to offer. Or, simply put, imprison the dealers but not the users.

[LarryLaffer]

Druff serious question:


do you agree with Marijuana being a schedule 1 controlled substance?


and if so, do you actually believe marijuana to be just addictive as heroin?



because that's the root of this problem. I'm not in danger of going to the clink because I snorted some heroin and dropped dirty for that.

I'm in danger because I tested positive for a substance that's medically legal here in Illinois, recreationally legal in 3 states as well as medically legal in about 25 (including Illinois) which by the way is a false positive bc I have passed a years worth of them (including 2 in one month just weeks apart)


I got locked up once last year. I posted bail immediately. you know how long it took to get out? 12 hours. why? because the second and third shifts need something to do, so they shuffle us around the bullpens.


it's a fucking money grab.


if I were a coke head, non issue bc it leaves your body quick enough for you to be clean. same with opiates.

[LarryLaffer]

Just legalize all drugs. Problem solved...



...or more precisely repeal the previous retarded laws that already ran the exact same cycle with a different substance between 1920 and 1933. That previous substance, alcohol, was much more popular so things escalated quite fast and it was fairly easy to see what piece of legislation, that was lobbied by idiots with good intentions, led to things like Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.

I don't know if that graph is accurate.

But I don't care if it is or not.

Did those people in prison commit at least medium-level crimes?

If the answer is yes, then they deserve to be there.

I don't care about the incarceration rate. I care that the people committing prison-worthy offenses are incarcerated for a fair and just sentence. That should be our goal when it comes to crime and punishment.

I do not believe in complete decriminalization of drugs, but rather an approach similar to that of online gambling, where it's not illegal to do but illegal to offer. Or, simply put, imprison the dealers but not the users.

LOL @ the last statement. true white bread thinking.


lock up the dealers. Druff give us a fucking break. that graph is 100% accurate. I posted the data. between 1970 and 2005 there was a 700% increase.

[vegas1369]

Seriously Druff, you would rather see people locked up for drug offenses instead of forced rehabilitation?

I know you are most likely thinking that the vast majority of drug related offenses are for dealers, but that would be somewhat inaccurate. The vast majority of offenses involving dealers are the low level guys, not the guys behind the curtains. Most of those people are in it to support their own habits or combat poverty. Reform the system, give addicts legal options and real help and you will see our prison system population plummet. This would solve so many problems, including locking up people that are actually meant to be in prison and not having to reduce their sentences due to overcrowding.

[Dan Druff]

Seriously Druff, you would rather see people locked up for drug offenses instead of forced rehabilitation?

I know you are most likely thinking that the vast majority of drug related offenses are for dealers, but that would be somewhat inaccurate. The vast majority of offenses involving dealers are the low level guys, not the guys behind the curtains. Most of those people are in it to support their own habits or combat poverty. Reform the system, give addicts legal options and real help and you will see our prison system population plummet. This would solve so many problems, including locking up people that are actually meant to be in prison and not having to reduce their sentences due to overcrowding.

Your solution sounds good until you really think about it.

"Combat poverty" = "Make easy money without having to work hard". Why work a difficult, minimum-wage-type job for 8 hours per day when you can make many times that dealing drugs?

We can't just look the other way when people do that, or otherwise it's unfair to those who choose NOT to do that, and follow the law.

And we can't just dismiss "he's an addict, so that's why he deals drugs" as a non-prison-worthy crime, because then everyone will claim to be "addicts" when caught.

There should be more focus on nailing the bigger players, as well as lightening (or dropping) the sentences for the smaller players if they cooperate against the bigger ones.

So, yes, some reform is necessary, but we can't decriminalize it to the extent you want.

[gimmick]

Just legalize all drugs. Problem solved...



...or more precisely repeal the previous retarded laws that already ran the exact same cycle with a different substance between 1920 and 1933. That previous substance, alcohol, was much more popular so things escalated quite fast and it was fairly easy to see what piece of legislation, that was lobbied by idiots with good intentions, led to things like Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.

I don't know if that graph is accurate.

But I don't care if it is or not.

Did those people in prison commit at least medium-level crimes?

If the answer is yes, then they deserve to be there.

I don't care about the incarceration rate. I care that the people committing prison-worthy offenses are incarcerated for a fair and just sentence. That should be our goal when it comes to crime and punishment.

I do not believe in complete decriminalization of drugs, but rather an approach similar to that of online gambling, where it's not illegal to do but illegal to offer. Or, simply put, imprison the dealers but not the users.

Yea i don't care about legalization of drugs because of random hippy reasons or that their legal status makes it mildly inconvenient to get them. I care about the same reasons that ultimately led to repealing prohibition and on a national level during prohibition drinking alcohol was never illegal. Making drug use legal is almost completely worthless regarding economy, national health and security.

[LarryLaffer]

Druff, I'd love to see you work a minimum wage job for 4 hours.



my guess is, you've never actually had a minimum wage job ever.



how much did you get paid before you switched to poker?


pretty easy to point the blame when you can't relate.


This drug war is a sham. and for someone who prides themselves on seeing through the bullshit, you really are blind to this one.


sorry but this is the biggest scam that's ever happened in the USA. and you're defending it.


oh because you think you're morally obligated to defend what you think is a just and fair system.

[LarryLaffer]

I get it. it sucks to be wrong sometimes (like you were a few times in this thread: RE the tin foil hat comment about judges never accepting bribes, or RE the actual percentage of people locked up for drug offenses)


but you need to accept that your theories regarding decriminalization are so far off and old, they're literally out of the D.A.R.E. pamphlet they gave me in the 6th grade.

[LarryLaffer]

another serious question (even though you haven't answered any)

do you believe homosexual acts should be outlawed?

[JACKDANIELS]

larry owning old man todger hard keep at it and maybe he will ban you rofl

[LarryLaffer]

larry owning old man todger hard keep at it and maybe he will ban you rofl

HackDaniels, he's owning himself with every propagandic DARE program level response he gives in this thread.

[MumblesBadly]

I get it. it sucks to be wrong sometimes (like you were a few times in this thread: RE the tin foil hat comment about judges never accepting bribes, or RE the actual percentage of people locked up for drug offenses)


but you need to accept that your theories regarding decriminalization are so far off and old, they're literally out of the D.A.R.E. pamphlet they gave me in the 6th grade.

SHEEEE-iiiiiitttt! How do you think I got a potentially VERY expensive double traffic ticket back in the day (driving an unregistered vehicle and driving it without i insurance) reduced to a relatively small fine??!! #ItPaysToGetTheRightLawyer

[gimmick]

another serious question (even though you haven't answered any)

do you believe homosexual acts should be outlawed?

I believe this is the part where Druff naps out of this thread, if i've learned anything from history. But don't worry when a similar subject pops up after few months then Druff will give his same exact views on the subject mostly based on reasons.

Regarding sodomy laws in the US. From this thread we can gather that when sodomy was still illegal Druff would have said:

"We can't just look the other way when people do that, or otherwise it's unfair to those who choose NOT to do that, and follow the law.

And we can't just dismiss "he was born that way, so that's why loves the cock" as a non-prison-worthy crime, because then everyone will claim to be "born that way" when caught.

There should be more focus on nailing the bottoms, as well as lightening (or dropping) the sentences for tops if they cooperate against the bottoms.

So, yes, some reform is necessary, but we can't decriminalize it to the extent you want."

And then regarding those unfortunate faggots behind bars:

"Did those people in prison commit at least medium-level faggotry?

If the answer is yes, then they deserve to be there.

I don't care about the incarceration rate. I care that the people committing prison-worthy offenses are incarcerated for a fair and just sentence. That should be our goal when it comes to crime and punishment.

I do not believe in complete decriminalization of sodomy, but rather an approach similar to that of online gambling, where it's not illegal to do but illegal to offer. Or, simply put, imprison the bottoms but not the tops."

[LarryLaffer]

@ mumbles we have a nice history of it in Chicago.



infact, aside from NYC pre Serpico, we were the best.


I present to you: operation Greylord.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Greylord

[LarryLaffer]

ITT: cliffs:

Larry unhappy that he might get in trouble for a probation violation. proves that our system is corrupt and unjust with statistics and video evidence.


Druff chimes in to give us a DARE pamphlet of responses that drug offenders deserve prison.

Druff doesn't respond to any of Larrys questions.

Druff gets leveled by another poaster.

Druff still silent (as of this post).