I don’t care for putting someone in a cage for possession of a little 966. Violation of article 67 though is serious at any level. Property crimes lead to more serious crimes down the road. That is just one reason felony theft should start at $100 or more.
But that's not what's going on in most of the cases. They are arrested for a lot of 966 and/or pwid 966 and/or 966 and 95g. They are pleading to a possession charge. Then people come behind them and use the charge they pled to as the reason they were arrested in the first place and say it's not fair. So let's compromise. No jail time for an actual possession charge but a distribution charge or a gun charge can't be pled to simply a possession charge.
I don’t care for putting someone in a cage for possession of a little 966. Violation of article 67 though is serious at any level. Property crimes lead to more serious crimes down the road. That is just one reason felony theft should start at $100 or more.
But that's not what's going on in most of the cases. They are arrested for a lot of 966 and/or pwid 966 and/or 966 and 95g. They are pleading to a possession charge. Then people come behind them and use the charge they pled to as the reason they were arrested in the first place and say it's not fair. So let's compromise. No jail time for an actual possession charge but a distribution charge or a gun charge can't be pled to simply a possession charge.
^^^This has so much truth in it. I very rarely see people come through court with just a simple possession charge. For context I am a bail bondsmen in MS. Heck the interview in that article the woman was charged with having meth.
How about we give some people penalties right from the start, no first time breaks, no diversion, teach them up front to live within the laws. If the first time they steal or get caught with pot, they get a summons, then the next time they get arrested but diverted, then the next time fined and put on probation, they just learn to adjust and adapt to the workings of the system and keep going further down the rabbit hole. I think that if someone had to spend a week in jail for their first shoplift or simple possession, no matter how minor, they would in most cases learn not to steal again, and they'd at least be more careful about their smoking if they didn't quit. If they actually do steal or get caught with weed again, at least a month. If they lose their job in that week or month, get evicted, their car towed away/repo'd, and see lots of consequence for their actions from the start, maybe they'll think better of it in the future. If these consequences happen when they are young and can still move on with their lives, I bet they'd become a lot more productive with their lives.
One sure way to take the ride for a shoplift when I was working a shift was to ask me "Don't I just get a ticket for this?" Not today, you don't! If you knew to ask that, it was because you had already gotten one before, and I sure as hell wasn't going to turn around and give you the same break you already didn't take advantage of. I'm not the good fairy from the "Little Rabbit Foo-Foo" song, giving ONE MORE CHANCE every time you're caught in the wrong. As for 966, I never go knocking on doors looking for that, police catch the idiots that go driving around smoking, or walking the streets and standing on the corners smoking, or bringing it to school and smoking. If you're gonna insist, then go buy it, go straight back home, and smoke in your house to your heart's content! Or a friend's house if you live in an apartment with close neighbors. And not in hotels. Certainly not at school!
Jesus, just don't be so stupid about it! If you are gonna be stupid about it, then shut the hell up and be a man when you're caught breaking the law.
I always used to ask shoplifters if it was their first time stealing, and they'd usually reply "I've never been arrested before, officer." That's not what I asked. It was very rare for someone to actually ever admit "Yeah, I steal all the time, and just haven't been caught before." They always claimed to be first-timers, usually even when they had long records for previous thefts, and they knew you were gonna find that out. Boggles my mind why they can't just be up front when the game is over.
I make no apologies for my position on the war on drugs, so it’s no surprise I don’t like the idea of caging non violent drug users and distributors. Prisons only make those guys violent so when they get out and have a chance to go back to their old lives they do so, but smarter, meaner, and more willing to spill blood. The only reason I could see caging a nonviolent dealer is if he was misrepresenting what he was selling and was putting something out on the streets that was toxic or vastly more dangerous than implied.
Property crime should involve mandatory restitution with the a fall back of jail time, because there is a victim and they don’t usually get compensated appropriately for their losses. Restitution should be earned through strenuous labor for less than minimum wage, even when all property is restored at no cost the the owner or state. And there should be no option for a cash reimbursement directly from the offender or on the offender’s behalf.
Just to clarify my personal position, drug manufacturing and/or distribution should be a criminal offense. Drug use should be a health and hospitals issue.