San Francisco Uses Computer Algorithm to Dismiss 9,362 Marijuana Convictions

bugleyman

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Messages
1,227
Never have I read a comment so devoid of thought. Your entire premise is based on the assumption the "War on Drugs" failed. Simply put if you had spent any time at all thinking you would have realized there never was a war on drugs. Yes, there was a federal and state policy stating that we were fighting a war on drugs but there never was an actual attempt to curtail illegal drugs.

Let me lay it out for you. The war on drugs was nothing more than an increase in spending to federal and state law enforcement to prevent drugs from entering this country and to intercede at the point of sale. In very simple terms we spent money to bolster our defenses. It is axiomatic that in both sports and war you cannot defend your way to victory. Since all we did was bolster our defenses it should be no surprise that it has failed. If we were actually to wage a war on drugs, the drugs would be stopped. First, we would recognize the majority of the drugs originate in foreign countries. Then we would employ our armed forces to do things like use air power to fire bomb the fields where the drugs are being grown and deploy ground forces to kill the people who are growing the crops. And many other things. Simply put, we would carry the fight to the enemy which would cut the supply of drugs off at its source.

So based on your solution, if you or your wife are getting raped and you can't stop the rapist, you should just charge him for the ride and then create some social program to help him understand that he is bad. Brilliant thinking on your part. You must be from French Canada.
You don't appear to understand economics. Attacking the supply is futile.

Don't even get me started on the crazy rape analogy.
 

Rizen

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2000
Messages
9,258
Maybe when you are paying their medical bills through your taxes... You might rethink that stance.
Okay so then are we going to regulate alcohol, smoking, and being fat as well? Because all of those things cause significant health problems, worse than pot for that matter. If you are going to let people have the freedom to make their own decisions then you need to at least be consistent.

Kids are the victims of stuff dealers
Make drugs illegal for adults <18 then, problem solved. When I was a teenager it was trivially easy to get alcohol, cigarettes, and weed, so it hardly works anyway. Keeping it illegal and locking otherwise nonviolent users and dealers up for selling drugs is a massive waste of time and tax dollars.

you dont really think this do you? i know you wouldn't tell that to a 13 year old coming to you for advice and being pressured into trying drugs. a pregnant woman? a homeless person? its hard to believe you would not tell them to avoid drugs. its possible you would i guess but i don't think people are generally bad, they just say silly things sometimes.
What is your point? That some people shouldn't do drugs? Yeah, that's obvious. Some people shouldn't eat McDonalds twice a day but who are we to tell them that?

This has got to be in the top five idiotic statements I have read on the internet so ...bravo? You are one of those brainless children who feel that if I have not shot up heroin that I cannot comment on it? Jesus Christ man. I have done my fair share as a young impressionable fool, but it did not lead to any sort of enlightenment. Sorry man, but it just turns you into white trash.
Heroin isn't a hallucinogen, so you're basically cementing his point that a lot of people here are commenting on something they don't understand. A hallucinogen would be something like LSD or shrooms.
 
Last edited:

Nunu

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
257
I think all illegal drugs of any kind are bad. Don't care if it's weed or anything else, and giving someone who knowingly sold and profited illegally a free pass sends a terrible message . Check out recidivism rates for drug offenders. These people didn't just give a joint to a friend at a party. They were drug dealers.

They had no chance at a bank loan or apartment application to begin with, that's why they were selling drugs lol. They talk about attending school trips for his kids like that was ever going to happen. Rehabbing by releasing them as if nothing occurred is the weakest position to take and the absolute worst solution for criminal justice reform. Fitting it came from Cuckoldfornia.
 

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
This is one instance where I think we should adopt the Chinese mode. Death penalty for all drug offenses. They learned a hard lesson long ago. China was once a first world country and drugs were legal. Then the excessive drug use in the country effectively destroyed the country.
As long as the big government types think they can make money off taxing something it will be legal.
Just like they legalized gambling (lottery), and now pot. It's not about caring for people, it's about bringing in more tax revenue.


i don't care what people ingest so long as they are responsible for the results. that includes long term health care and near term things like broken bones from falls or whatever impairment leads to. once anyone becomes my burden i become the boss. at least i strongly feel that it should work that way

i mean this to apply to those who can legally be responsible for themselves - ie: 18+
And this is the problem. Responsibility.

If you occasionally use drugs, but can still function and hold down a job to support yourself, then it's your business.
If you can't function and support yourself, then you are burden on others and they have the right to try and make you stop.

When you are drunk or drugged out, and cause an accident that injures or kills someone, then others have the right to punish you.
When you try and support your habit by selling the others, especially others under 18, then you should be put away for a long, long time, maybe removed permanently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: c3k
like this

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
Never have I read a comment so devoid of thought. Your entire premise is based on the assumption the "War on Drugs" failed. Simply put if you had spent any time at all thinking you would have realized there never was a war on drugs. Yes, there was a federal and state policy stating that we were fighting a war on drugs but there never was an actual attempt to curtail illegal drugs.

Let me lay it out for you. The war on drugs was nothing more than an increase in spending to federal and state law enforcement to prevent drugs from entering this country and to intercede at the point of sale. In very simple terms we spent money to bolster our defenses. It is axiomatic that in both sports and war you cannot defend your way to victory. Since all we did was bolster our defenses it should be no surprise that it has failed. If we were actually to wage a war on drugs, the drugs would be stopped. First, we would recognize the majority of the drugs originate in foreign countries. Then we would employ our armed forces to do things like use air power to fire bomb the fields where the drugs are being grown and deploy ground forces to kill the people who are growing the crops. And many other things. Simply put, we would carry the fight to the enemy which would cut the supply of drugs off at its source.
As long as there is a market for drugs, and a profit to be made selling them, they will never be completely eliminated.
As long as we support the users with welfare programs, and treat them every time they OD, we will continue to have a growing drug problem.

If we had the political will, we could eliminate most drugs. You just need harsh enough punishment that is carried out quickly.
If anyone caught with more than a few ounces was given a quick trial and then then death penalty, you would scare most people away from selling.
For the people who continued to sell, once they are caught, they wouldn't be selling any more.
Eventually you would run out of sellers, and with no sellers, you have no customers.
 

Laowai

Gawd
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
534
This is one instance where I think we should adopt the Chinese mode. Death penalty for all drug offenses. They learned a hard lesson long ago. China was once a first world country and drugs were legal. Then the excessive drug use in the country effectively destroyed the country.

http://www.historywiz.com/downfall.htm
It does not work like that in practice.
While you can be stopped at any time for no reason whatsoever and be forced to pee in a cup, few are actually executed. Even a number of the big guys get the death penalty but sit in jail for a few years until people forget about it and enough bribes/fines are paid.....or a proxy does the jail time. People get popped for drugs all the time here in China. Drugs are significantly harder to find here but far from impossible.
Very, very few cases of any criminal activity actually make it to the court system. If it can't be remedied by the police through payoffs to any victim and/or to the police and it goes to court, there is a 98-99% conviction rate. Let that sink in. Nobody wants to go to court.

Also, an earlier poster was 100% correct. Communism/socialism destroyed China. Communism/socialism + Mao's disastrous and murderous policies and the subsequent collapse of Chinese culture and morality are still felt today.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,785
Damn. Let me tell you its not addictive like pain killers and shit. I wouldn't touch that shit with a 10-foot pole. My back was hurting and my doctor wanted to happily give me all kinds of pills and shit. I was like no thanks, walked in to a weed shop got me a few gummies. Took one at night and woke up with no fuckin back pain. Take that to the bank lol.

No I don't do this shit every day and I haven't done it for 8 months but I would take marijuana thc shit anyday over pain killers. They can shuv those up their ass. Would I substitute it for pain killers anyday? Hell yea. Most of the people that i know do this is in a recreational way. Some of the most responsible people I have met. Alcohol is worst than weed, atleast weed has some positives.

Just cuz uncle sam has brainwashed you into thinking it is a drug while having you pump all the pain killers down legally is not anyone's fault but yours. I don't see people complaining about people dying with prescription drugs and shit but they have time to bitch about weed lol.

Lets stop comparing weed to shit like cocaine and crap.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,785
This is one instance where I think we should adopt the Chinese mode. Death penalty for all drug offenses. They learned a hard lesson long ago. China was once a first world country and drugs were legal. Then the excessive drug use in the country effectively destroyed the country.

http://www.historywiz.com/downfall.htm
Iol you bitch about drugs but you then you go on killing people for weed? Get real. Shit actually has its benefits unlike pain killers and crap.
 

WBurchnall

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
2,620
Really, they actually care about people? That's a nice surprise.
Honestly, it's probably more about spending less on incarceration costs than helping out individuals in my opinion out they wound have long long since freed these people.

Okay so then are we going to regulate alcohol, smoking, and being fat as well? Because all of those things cause significant health problems, worse than pot for that matter. If you are going to let people have the freedom to make their own decisions then you need to at least be consistent.

Make drugs illegal for adults <18 then, problem solved. When I was a teenager it was trivially easy to get alcohol, cigarettes, and weed, so it hardly works anyway.
I think this is an issue with the age being too young still. It's very easy for a fifteen year old to have an eighteen year old boyfriend whose going to the same school. Ex grade 10 and 12 student dating. Maybe you'd see grade 12 with a first year college student or second year but getting into the third and fourth years it is less likely they run in the same social circles. So really like 21 to 24 would be ideal age to set to keep it out of high schoolers hands more.

You'll still gave to deal with an the irresponsible parent that gives out weed to their 13 year old but that would be the exception at that point.
 

GotNoRice

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 11, 2001
Messages
9,353
These people didn't just give a joint to a friend at a party. They were drug dealers.
Well yes, Marijuana is a drug, and if someone sells it, then they are a "drug dealer". I don't think anyone would dispute that or that it was ever in question. It's also true that your stereotypical "drug dealer" is someone who sells much more than just marijuana, and that is what that particular label is generally associated with. It's why people love to use that label on people who only sell marijuana. Calling some a "drug dealer" and having that phrase conjure up images of a typical gangster-pride crack or heroin dealer when actually talking about someone who is just selling marijuana is a great way to demonize them and make them seem like a much worse person than they actually are, especially to those who don't know them.

They had no chance at a bank loan or apartment application to begin with, that's why they were selling drugs lol. They talk about attending school trips for his kids like that was ever going to happen.
You have no idea what context they got their criminal record. The vast majority of people I know who sell marijuana are selling stuff that they grew themselves, and most not even as their primary source of money. Not sure where you are getting all these assumptions from but you seem to be buying into your own label and believing that these are hardcore drug dealers we are talking about.
 

gamerk2

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
1,694
If anyone caught with more than a few ounces was given a quick trial and then then death penalty, you would scare most people away from selling.
No you wouldn't, for one very simple reason: Profit. And at the end of the day, that's the main driver for most illegal activities. As long as there is profit in dealing, people will do so; after all, *they* personally will never get caught.

As has been tested over and over again through human history, the idea of "being tough on crime eliminates crime" has not once worked. All you do is drive it farther underground, but you never see an instance where simply being tough solves the problem.
 

Verado

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
251
No you wouldn't, for one very simple reason: Profit. And at the end of the day, that's the main driver for most illegal activities. As long as there is profit in dealing, people will do so; after all, *they* personally will never get caught.

As has been tested over and over again through human history, the idea of "being tough on crime eliminates crime" has not once worked. All you do is drive it farther underground, but you never see an instance where simply being tough solves the problem.
As documented in a book called "Chasing the scream".

Its a book everyone whos actually interested in this topic should consider reading.
 

Laowai

Gawd
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
534
Your take on world history is lacking.
3. Also, China was never "destroyed" - at various points the government changed significantly but the people / culture have been from the same lineage for about 2000 years under different names.

/rant
Nope. The culture that existed for thousands of years in China pre-Mao was systematically destroyed by Mao's regime and his sucessors. For somebody who thinks others should learn more about history, your own knowledge seems questionable at best. If you care to educate yourself, you can start with "The Four Olds". The CPC began attacking old ideas, culture, customs, and habits and hasn't really stopped. Temples were destroyed, intellectuals were murdered, books were destroyed, art was destroyed, folk music was replaced with gov't propaganda put to martial music, etc. Today, honest Mainlanders will flat out tell foreigners that if they want to learn or see Chinese culture then they should visit Taiwan. There have been numerous books and articles on this very topic and few to none take the position that traditional Chinese culture is intact on the Mainland. Any remnants of said culture have been subverted to serve the CPC.
 

Dekoth-E-

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
7,599
I'd prefer my kids to stay away from people who used to sell drugs. At the time they did it it was still illegal.
While I want to agree, the problem is this system was over punishing people decades after they had served their time. The system should be about rehabilitation of those that can be and not destroying the rest of their lives. The people being dealt with here weren't drug lords. Most of them were dumb ass teenagers who sold a bag of weed trying to make a quick buck.
 
Last edited:

The Cobra

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
2,700
"But but, what about the children?" I am so tired of that argument. If you have kids take responsibility for them. Teach them about drug use, it is not our job to educate your children about drugs "dangers"

If it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg...I don't care.
 

The Cobra

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
2,700
And we don't have a "Drug Problem" in Murica...we have a "Use Problem" Cutting off the supply will not solve anything. Banning ANYTHING never works...look at prohibition. Treat it as a medical condition and not a crime...you'll get a lot further. Look at Portugal and what happened when they decriminalized drug use. Drug use actually went down and it was a net positive. But no, we can never try anything like that here...
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
"THE ALGORITHM" aka OCR with Ctrl+F
Yep, they performed a search, wow!! /S
The only thing worthy of news was that they decided to do away with the application process altogether... Well shit, how is that not going to be more efficient? Jeez.
 

Nunu

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
257
Well yes, Marijuana is a drug, and if someone sells it, then they are a "drug dealer". I don't think anyone would dispute that or that it was ever in question. It's also true that your stereotypical "drug dealer" is someone who sells much more than just marijuana, and that is what that particular label is generally associated with. It's why people love to use that label on people who only sell marijuana. Calling some a "drug dealer" and having that phrase conjure up images of a typical gangster-pride crack or heroin dealer when actually talking about someone who is just selling marijuana is a great way to demonize them and make them seem like a much worse person than they actually are, especially to those who don't know them.



You have no idea what context they got their criminal record. The vast majority of people I know who sell marijuana are selling stuff that they grew themselves, and most not even as their primary source of money. Not sure where you are getting all these assumptions from but you seem to be buying into your own label and believing that these are hardcore drug dealers we are talking about.
You are trying to rationalize away breaking the law to make a quick buck . How am I demonizing someone who has repeatedly sold illegal drugs as a "stereotypical drug dealer"? It is what they are. They chose to do that, no one forced them and that's as much as you need to know about their context. At the time they did that, it was against the law. My assumption is that the vast majority of these convicted felons were not regular surfer dudes lighting up on the beach, or your friendly neighborhood college weed dealer .
 

Xpl1c1t

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Messages
471
I'm pretty sure communism destroyed the country.
More like western opium, western religion, and then the western-technology-fueled Japanese empire... destroyed China.


The average Chinese citizen now has greater domestic purchasing power than the average Joe. But, maybe you are right?
 

Aireoth

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
3,258
Never have I read a comment so devoid of thought. Your entire premise is based on the assumption the "War on Drugs" failed. Simply put if you had spent any time at all thinking you would have realized there never was a war on drugs. Yes, there was a federal and state policy stating that we were fighting a war on drugs but there never was an actual attempt to curtail illegal drugs.

Let me lay it out for you. The war on drugs was nothing more than an increase in spending to federal and state law enforcement to prevent drugs from entering this country and to intercede at the point of sale. In very simple terms we spent money to bolster our defenses. It is axiomatic that in both sports and war you cannot defend your way to victory. Since all we did was bolster our defenses it should be no surprise that it has failed. If we were actually to wage a war on drugs, the drugs would be stopped. First, we would recognize the majority of the drugs originate in foreign countries. Then we would employ our armed forces to do things like use air power to fire bomb the fields where the drugs are being grown and deploy ground forces to kill the people who are growing the crops. And many other things. Simply put, we would carry the fight to the enemy which would cut the supply of drugs off at its source.

So based on your solution, if you or your wife are getting raped and you can't stop the rapist, you should just charge him for the ride and then create some social program to help him understand that he is bad. Brilliant thinking on your part. You must be from French Canada.
Your analogy is again so terrible you must be devoid of all intelligence, it's like a deformed straw man.

Physical violence is not the same, does not equal, and isn't a substitute for marijuana consumption, clearly someone has been brainwashed by the anti drug commercials of the 80's and 90's.

If someone attempts to rape my family, I would shoot them without a second thought. If someone is smoking the Marijuanas, I wouldn't even think of shooting them, or getting violent with them, in fact I think their habit should be taxed and those taxes used to treat and prevent the addiction. Do you legitimately not see the difference???

You seem to also be devoid of the factual history around the war on drugs too and the attempts to curtail it. May I suggest you start with reading more and speaking/typing less.

Your manifestos read like you just want more excuses to kill people.
 
Last edited:

{NG}Fidel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
6,287
In this life the only thing a person really has are their thoughts and their ability to think... Taking drugs impairs and destroys that one thing that is truly yours... I don't understand the attraction of drugs.

The other thing is that I have heard it said that marijuana and alcohol are the same. In effect this may be true but in reality, if you want to make marijuana illegal then all you have to do is ban any plant that produces THC. On the other hand since almost any food can be made into alcohol the only way to make it illegal is to ban all foods... Not very practical. So with alcohol the best you can do is legalize it and manage it. Simply put, even though alcohol is a narcotic it is not the same as any other drug.
And alcohol?
You sound so sure of yourself for someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.
You even covered alcohol but you still got it wrong.
 
Last edited:

Burticus

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,163
WARNING! CONTAINS OPINONS! I AM NOT A LAWYER!

I think the criteria was possession, not dealing, and under a certain amount (what that amount is I don't know offhand).

And of course like anything else, there is a catch:

"Under Prop. 64, people with prior violent felonies, registered sex offenders and those with certain other convictions are not eligible to have their felonies reclassified."

So these people might have been busted for weed but other or prior offenses make them ineligible. While I personally think that sex offenders should be strapped to rockets and launched into the Sun, it is an interesting complication. 2 people get busted for the same amount of weed. Person A could be eligible for release, but person B was found to have committed other crimes, unrelated to the weed. I think the lawyers are going to be lining up around the block to get in on this action. I am not a lawyer, but it seems reasonable (I know, stop laughing) that if you "de-criminalize" the exact thing that got people arrested, then how do the other things stand up?

Like this hypothetical. Lets say knives are illegal. 3 guys are arrested separately for possesing knives. During arrest, cars are searched. Guy A had a big knife but none in the carr. Guy B has a big box of knives in his car. Guy C has a knife and a dead body in the trunk. Person A is eligible for release if the amount discovered didn't fall into the "dealing knives" amount. Person B had way more than the limit for that and is considered a dealer, he stays in prison. Person C only had a small amount of knife on him, and claims he doesn't know who the dead person is in the trunk and had nothing to do with it. Could it be argued that without the small amount of knives the original arrest was based on, then the search wouldn't count? This is where I get confused and I don't know how retro-actively these cases are going to be worked. Or perhaps the wording of Prop 64 doesn't allow for the retroactive re-examining of crimes/evidence. Again.. not a lawyer. But it sounds like a slippery slope to me.

All that being said, marijuana should be legalized everywhere. How that affects previous convictions is a whole other ball of fun.

edit - I screwed up my own analogy. tried to fix.
 

NKD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,785
You are trying to rationalize away breaking the law to make a quick buck . How am I demonizing someone who has repeatedly sold illegal drugs as a "stereotypical drug dealer"? It is what they are. They chose to do that, no one forced them and that's as much as you need to know about their context. At the time they did that, it was against the law. My assumption is that the vast majority of these convicted felons were not regular surfer dudes lighting up on the beach, or your friendly neighborhood college weed dealer .
LoL. You are unreal. It's clear you refuse to think logically and for you it's drug dealer or not. You seem to be one of those guys who believes anything your uncle sam tells you. Marijuana is evil ruuuuun. Anyone with a half brain knows marijuana is not even in the same league as other drugs. It's just that you chose to believe what you were told. These are minor convictions and since weed is legal in California why the fuck would you want to waste tax payer money keeping these people in jail. When doctor provides you pain killers say no, they are worst than weed lol .
 

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
No you wouldn't, for one very simple reason: Profit. And at the end of the day, that's the main driver for most illegal activities. As long as there is profit in dealing, people will do so; after all, *they* personally will never get caught.

As has been tested over and over again through human history, the idea of "being tough on crime eliminates crime" has not once worked. All you do is drive it farther underground, but you never see an instance where simply being tough solves the problem.
It may not eliminate it completely, but the level could be reduced to such a small number that most people would never see it.
It also depends on how tough you are on the specific crime. However, as a civilized people, we would never be willing to go that far.
 

Aireoth

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
3,258
It may not eliminate it completely, but the level could be reduced to such a small number that most people would never see it.
It also depends on how tough you are on the specific crime. However, as a civilized people, we would never be willing to go that far.
You should do some research into the history of crime and punishment (not the book), severity of punishment has very little impact on rates of crime, it does escalate crimes though. When someone was facing death for a crime, they tend to commit more sever crimes (typically kill the witnesses, since your dead if your caught anyway).

The best way to combat crime is to reinforce the family unit as most criminals come from broken homes. Planned parenthood, family social services, and access to abortion for those that don't want a family for xyz reasons.

Crime rates started to drop quite rapidly with the deployment of contraceptives and have mostly continued that trend.
 
Top