Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by cageymaru, Feb 26, 2019.
They said marijuana offenses, they didn't specify if they were trafficking or not.
If they are on death row, then they are usually in isolation, so they don't commit crimes, even against other prisoners.
However, if you get rid of the death penalty, and switch them to life, then they are mixed in with the regular prison population.
Considering the number of violent attacks in prison, they do commit more crimes.
Sorry, but we'll have to disagree on this. In most cases reform doesn't work, it just leads to smarter criminals that are harder to catch.
The worse the crime, the more likely they will commit similar crimes once they are released.
That's not what he's saying.
But the drunks don't sneak into the walk-in freezers and munch the deserts
Eating up the profits .... literally.
Yeah they do... Drunks eat too. They're just way sloppier
What about the degenerates who drink and smoke?
I mean what about me?
Also interesting about this thread: The number of people assuming that a conviction means the defendant was guilty. Innocent people often have very strong financial incentives to plead guilty to a lesser charge, and going to trial is risky.
If you support drinking and don't support marijuana use, something is a bit off here.
Blinded by me you can't see a thing.
Twisting your mind and smashing your dreams.
Just call my name I'll hear you scream.
The problem with minor pot convictions is to my understanding they preclude you from federally backed student loans and I know they preclude you from military service and many government jobs.
I’ve seen a 10 sack keep people from doing stuff they want to do.
I don’t smoke weed. I drink tequila every night.
Weed should be legal and alcohol should be illegal.
Even after my two mj related felonies, I was able to get fed backed student loans, worked a gov job (true I had to get an exception from each shipyard commander when a new job opened up) but it’s not automatically the end of all good opportunities.
Lol whoda guessed this forum is full of Nancy Reagans
Possessing and consuming alcohol is legal in all 50 states. Marijuana is not. I am not going to tell my kids to not possess and use illegal drugs based on some moral high ground. I am going to tell them to avoid it because the juice isn't worth the squeeze.
Nothing good comes from a criminal record.
Also, being a parent is pretty much being a hypocrite. I am going to tell them not to do things that I did... full stop.
Hehe , yep.. Just keep thinking cop, nightstick and raybans or something.
So when it's legal, you'll flip the switch then.
Not at all. I wouldn't even support marijuana use in Colorado where rec use is legal...... because it's still illegal federally. Telling someone it's OK in your state is a great way to fuck up people job opportunities in the future.
I vote against it exactly because of this reason. I will not support pot in my State until after the Feds back off and legalize it for the country. It's just a huge false flag/mixed message for young people to fuck themselves up with.
And BTW, we just received renewed emphasis from the Army's Command that pot is still illegal federally and that we even have to watch out with investments as investing in pot farming or farming pot yourself remains illegal from a government employee angle. Yes, they are even saying pot stocks are out of bounds for government employees.
Reading some of the documents on it, it would seem that the Feds are still coming to grips with all the angles of these issues. For instance, I'm pretty sure they would have a problem with me loaning Uncle Fester $10K for his pot farm, legal or otherwise in his state. The also might not like me investing in a company who's company profile included cultivation of recreational and medical weed. But medical weed only might be different. The word "knowingly" came up with a suggestion that investing in a mutual fund without realizing that the fund has a pot stock in it would probably be overlooked. What about investing in Anheuser-Busch?
Can I invest in BUD or not because they have branched out in their product line-up?
I'm hoping that the federal government will eventually come around and relent on this issue and leave it to the States to determine it on their own. Either that or they have to "bring the states to heal", and I'm not really for that approach. Flies in the face of my views on States rights and just what our Government should and shouldn't be getting into.
It has to start somewhere and the way things are this is it's best chance until certain elders are not in office
I don't agree. Your statement assumes that it's something that must happen and I'm not sold on that.
That being said, I do think it should be up to the States, so I believe the Federal Government should give in.
But until they do, I am not a proponent of going it alone because I think it puts a State's citizens in a catch-22.
If you think I have an odd perspective on it try and understand, I see this as a perfect example of why the Federal Government needs to stay out of things as much as they can while they pursue their true responsibilities as charged by the Constitution.
To this end, I also believe that our people need to stop looking to big brother to solve all their problems for them.
10k for a pot farm doesn’t even turn on the lights.
Minimum $10m for a startup in California at this point.
The USFG has already had to back off. Medical marijuana for VA patients has changed tremendously in the last 6 years. It’s actually crazy to watch.
It’s weed ... big deal. Recreational marijuana was made legal for the entire country, where I live, and guess what happened. Nothing.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Except studies have shown the opposite. You see this effect better outside the US, where the rest of the industrialized world has much lower rates of people released from prison committing crimes (yet another on the list of "things the rest of the world does better then us").
I'm all for it.
All you have to do is figure out how to challenge the constitution itself, or Congresses interpretation of it which is going to be hard.
Give this one a quick read and see it's references to your issue. I think you will have a hard time applying the Tenth to this.
What a dumb stance. Do you need to be a murderer to be objective on murder? A rapist for rape?
How did this get 20 likes
You categorize drug use as 'illegal" alongside rape and muder...
Yet, drug use does not necessitate the involvement of a 2nd party.
What I do to myself, by myself, staying away from you - no one has a fucking right to interfere with.