Finally,Someone gets it right!

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Emperor

    Seriously Misunderstood!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 7, 2011
    8,376
    113
    Nether region
    That story lacks details, but I understand what they are trying to do; particularly if any of these folks are first-time offenders. That said, if any of these people are semi-habitual offenders, especially those grouped as the low-level property criminals, how low level is acceptable for each person that has had property stolen or damaged?
     

    hoggin357

    *Banned*
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 23, 2019
    43
    6
    Iowa,La.
    See that's the thing.They can go steal up to 1k in goods and only be charged for
    a misdemeanor.So at this point,may as well lettem roam the streets.Its that or
    house them for $300 a day.Maybe if we keep going ,we can start taking care of
    crime the old fashioned way again.whaaaaa.
     

    323MAR

    Well-Known Member
    Silver Member
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jan 15, 2014
    2,484
    83
    New Oeleans LA
    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.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    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.
     

    lefty

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 7, 2008
    168
    16
    Hattiesburg, MS
    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.
     

    Kraut

    LEO
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Oct 3, 2007
    1,799
    83
    Slidell, LA
    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.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    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.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    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.

    Tons of good points here.

    I would like to add in my wilder days no one I knew ever got busted for possession except for being wrapped up in some other dumbs### circumstances, usually of their own creation.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,712
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    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.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    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.

    This is an area that really pushes my boundaries. I clearly have no issue with Marijuana among other recreational drugs being produced and distributed, but admittedly my resolve for the freedom of each American to have a right to chose does waiver a little when we start talking phentinal (spelling?), meth, opioid pill-mills, among others. I don’t have the perfect answer, but I am definitely bothered by the poorly planned out and executed war on drugs.

    It’s clear some of these drugs are very harmful to the individuals health and overall well being. Conversely Bin Franklin was known for his affection towards working girls and opium dins.
     
    Last edited:

    gwpercle

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 20, 2013
    453
    28
    Baton Rouge, LA.
    Swift and harsh punishment gives you a reason to change your stealing drug using criminal ways.
    A slap on the wrist does nothing but encourage you to steal from the honest and hard working folks so you can buy more drugs .
    I had one of these guys shoot me in the face for the $3.00 that was in my wallet .
    I was lucky a shot in the face usually results in death....the guy was out on parole for drug possession . April 21, 2004 inside an office on Perkins Road .
    Be easy on them...it could be you who gets shot in the face next time .
    Gary
     
    Top Bottom