Freedom of Information

[blackwidow]

U.S. incarceration rates are unusually high relative to historical figures for the U.S. itself. For the fifty-year period spanning the 1920s through the mid 1970s, the number of state and federal prisoners per 100,000 varied within a 10 to 20 unit band around a rate of approximately 110.
Beginning in the mid 1970s, however, state prison populations grew at an unprecedented rate, nearly quadrupling between the mid 1970s and the present. Concurrently, the rate of incarceration in local jails more than tripled.

What happened in the early 1970’s that caused the prison population to quadruple in such a short time? Did we suddenly become such a corrupt society relative to the rest of the world? Was there and epidemic crime wave? NO.

PrisonPopulationCharts.jpg (22.24 KiB) Viewed 4749 times

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Enfor ... nistration

The government ala Richard M. Nixon created a giant HAMMER always in search of a nail.

Prison Math
What are the costs and benefits of leading the world in locking up human beings?
http://reason.com/archives/2011/06/08/prison-math

PS..I also spent the early part of my childhood in a Detroit Suburb...Roseville. My PAternal relatives are all still there.

[PDad]

The flaw in these studies is they presume people in prison only committed the crimes for which they were convicted. By their criteria, Al Capone was a nonviolent offender.

Some states have been reforming their 3-strikes laws to require a fairly serious 3rd strike. It wouldn't be necessary if DA's always exercised sound prosecutorial discretion, but sometimes mistakes are made or politics interfere.

Some fiscal conservatives are also concerned about the costs and are rethinking some mandatory sentencing laws and becoming more open to alternative approaches that are more cost efficient.

[Sam]

Well there are statistics and there are liars. The war on drugs definitely put more bodies behind bars and many in treatment centers. If you have never dealt with this issue directly, I would argue that you know nothing of what you are talking about. The virtual explosion of drug use in the 60's caused the Government to declare a war on drugs and forced states into crafting laws dealing with drugs. What occurred during the 60's was a consequence free environment leading to people dropping out of society. People were no longer productive.....because they tuned out. Now our country is being run by these same imbeciles.

Sorry, but I'm not smart enough to post a wikipedia reference.

[blackwidow]

Well there are statistics and there are liars. The war on drugs definitely put more bodies behind bars and many in treatment centers. If you have never dealt with this issue directly, I would argue that you know nothing of what you are talking about. The virtual explosion of drug use in the 60's caused the Government to declare a war on drugs and forced states into crafting laws dealing with drugs. What occurred during the 60's was a consequence free environment leading to people dropping out of society. People were no longer productive.....because they tuned out. Now our country is being run by these same imbeciles.

Sorry, but I'm not smart enough to post a wikipedia reference.

Sam,
I really respect all the research you’ve done on over-use injuries and have used many of the links that you have provided for my own education and to pass along to others.
Yet, I’m not exactly sure what the point of your post is? I’ll dissect each statement and maybe you can clarify for me.

Well there are statistics and there are liars.
Are you saying that the statistics shown are wrong? Flawed? Or Fabricated?

The war on drugs definitely put more bodies behind bars and many in treatment centers.
True. Are you saying that it is morally correct for people to be kidnapped and locked in cages because of the choice of substance they consume?

If you have never dealt with this issue directly, I would argue that you know nothing of what you are talking about.
I would argue that this is a logical fallacy. Whether or not I have had direct dealings with the issue has nothing to do with the validity the facts presented. With that being said, if you grew up in this country as I did, you have more than enough experience and knowledge about the drug war by virtue of living in this society. I think I can safely say that most of the people in this country have had some experience with drugs, drug abuse, drug dealers or may have even had friends who have died from drug overdose. It does not change the facts presented.


The virtual explosion of drug use in the 60's caused the Government to declare a war on drugs and forced states into crafting laws dealing with drugs.
That is a perception with no concrete data in reality…according to a Gallup Poll from 2002….In popular imagination, the 1960s were the heyday of illegal drug use -- but historical data indicate they probably weren't.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/6331/decades ... s-70s.aspx
But even if they were so what?



What occurred during the 60's was a consequence free environment leading to people dropping out of society.
Again, so what? As long as these so-called societal drop-outs are not infringing on your rights what is the problem? Are we a free country or not? Who gets to decide? And what does a “consequence free” environment actually mean?

There are plenty of groups living off grid in communal type situations. They would rightly be considered to have dropped out of society.
Now the US Government is cracking down on those people too.
SWAT Team Raids Texas Organic Farm, Holds Residents At Gunpoint
http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/08/swa ... -gunpoint/
Michigan government unleashes armed raids on small pig farmers, forces farmer to shoot all his pigs
Learn more: http://bakersgreenacres.com/


People were no longer productive.....because they tuned out.
Define productive. In a free country do we have the right to be un-productive? Who gets to decide what productive is? Are we to be of the collectivist mindset and force everyone to be part of the collective or do we have the right to be left alone?

Now our country is being run by these same imbeciles.
Our country is being run by the same ruling elite that has been running the country for the last 100 years.

Sorry, but I'm not smart enough to post a Wikipedia reference.
Sam based on all the research you have shown for over- use you are obviously smart enough to do your own research and present any rebuttal to the sources I have provided. You chose not to.

Slave.png (55.83 KiB) Viewed 4684 times

If anyone in a fan of Breaking Bad or The Wire this is a really great doc about the war on drugs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxRVhgbVN9o

[jonriv]

What Sam was trying to point out(I believe) was that the "War on Drugs" did not come out of thin air- it was a reaction to what was happening at the time and was a response to a public outcry. You see BW, in this country, our gvt tends to take action based on what the public wants(however sometime misguided. My recollection of the early 70's NYC supported that need for a War on Drugs- Time Square was unsafe and you would have been safer in Beirut than walking on 8th or 9th Ave. Crime, especially violent crime skyrocketed during this period.

The "three strikes" rules came about- again from public outcry, because people were sick and tired of repeat offenders continuing to commit crimes

The key is "public outcry" I am sorry you think we live in some totalitarian dictatorship- perhaps you should go live in China or Saudi Arabia for a while to appreciate what you do have

[jonriv]

[quoteThere are plenty of groups living off grid in communal type situations. They would rightly be considered to have dropped out of society.
Now the US Government is cracking down on those people too.
SWAT Team Raids Texas Organic Farm, Holds Residents At Gunpoint
http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/08/swa ... -gunpoint/
][/quote]

Arlington, Texas is off the grid????

[Battle]

You see BW, in this country, our gvt tends to take action based on what the public wants(however sometime misguided. My recollection of the early 70's NYC supported that need for a War on Drugs- Time Square was unsafe and you would have been safer in Beirut than walking on 8th or 9th Ave. Crime, especially violent crime skyrocketed during this period.

But this is not the 70s yet you still have the same approach. I love the self rightous people that believe their shit don't stink even though most people have commited a felony at one time in their life but never got caught. If they had then their opinion on this subject would be different because, as someone said, if you've never had to deal with it then you don't know what you're talking about. A simple felony possession charge will affect you for the rest of your life. It affects loans for education, jobs, travel not to mention denying you a way to protect your home. Some states allow for expungement and some don't. Getting a pardon is almost impossible in some states unless you know someone.

If you have commited a crime bad enough for it to follow you for the rest of your life then you should never get out. A 25 year old that caught a felony for drug possession shouldn't have to pay for it from now on. It should be time served especially on a 1st offense.

BW is right. A big hammer has been created searching for a nail. I don't believe she is saying that no one should be locked up just that the crime should fit the punishment. As it stands today (you know...post 60s and 70s), it doesn't in a lot of cases.

[jonriv]

But Battle - it is usually not the first offense that they are being locked up forever(even with a possesion charge) It is usually #3, 4 ..............

I agree that there the three strikes law is way to broad and there are some that have been in prison too long for what they have done, but I also worry about wholesale releases. It also appears that laws and punishments are starting to change. -by public outcry. I am not sure I have sympathy for those who do committ the felony - if you don't want the consequence, don't commit the crime.

For the record- I have neve committed a felony(or even a misdemeanor)

[Battle]

But Battle - it is usually not the first offense that they are being locked up forever(even with a possesion charge) It is usually #3, 4 ..............

In that case, the law is right but it's not always the case yet the law blankets all.

I agree that there the three strikes law is way to broad and there are some that have been in prison too long for what they have done, but I also worry about wholesale releases. It also appears that laws and punishments are starting to change. -by public outcry. I am not sure I have sympathy for those who do committ the felony - if you don't want the consequence, don't commit the crime.

For the record- I have neve committed a felony(or even a misdemeanor)

...not that you know of. Have you ever taken someone else's prescription pain meds from a relative or friend? If so, as soon as that pill hit your hand you have commited a felony and so has your counterpart. There is no diffence in that and getting caught with it in your glove compartment with no proof of a prescription. I don't expect you or anyone else to admit it but C'mon...

The laws are changing not because of public outcry but because the people that are enforcing these laws find that it's affecting their lives. They find that their little Shannons and Toms are having to endure the punishments that they enforce and have created.

[exD1dad]

The University of Michigan has been doing a poll of HS seniors concerning drug use since the late '60's (I believe), I took it in 1978 which from the last time I read an article on said study (3 to 5 yrs?) '78 had the highest % of students who had used or tried drugs in HS. I have seen my share of the addicts, causal users, I've had friends die & lost a career over my business partners drug usage (meth by the way which is the biggest danger of ANY DRUG legal or otherwise).

The drug war has & is a failure & a waste of billions of tax dollars. The sentencing guidelines for powder & rock cocaine were & are a joke & aimed at poor minorities due to the crack epidemic of the early '80's when in states like Texas you could get 10 years for a couple of joints of weed..

Certain European counties acknowledge a percentage of the population will always be junkies, they give them needles, a place to buy & use drugs & stay an arms length away with an always ready hand to help when the users are ready to get clean. Yes many die, but this keeps crime & HIV down.

I say make pot legal(20 million people use or have used it anyway including 2 of our last 3 presidents ), tax the sh_t out of it, set up rehabs like fast food outlets all over the country, when convicted of an offense, make users have some contraption to blow into (made in the USA of course) to safely operate a vehicle.

I also agree with Battle on the felony convictions post

When comparing Pot to alcoholism singer George Michaels quote "No one ever goes out & gets high with their friends & then comes home & beats their wife or children like blokes who come home from the pub & do just that every week "