Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | School Lunch Menus | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Holder is right on prison sentences

August 14, 2013

Attorney General Eric Holder is taking on prison overpopulation and spiraling costs by taking aim at mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug crime....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(6)

Avoice

Aug-15-13 9:38 AM

95% of these sentences are state mandated or imposed. 5% is adjudicated by Federal Courts. So much ado about nothing but just another attempted takeover by the Obama Administration.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Zorromcgee

Aug-15-13 3:42 PM

Avoice-how are reasoned, money saving solutions that are based on providing more freedoma nd spending less tax dollars a "takeover"?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Avoice

Aug-15-13 9:55 PM

Zorromcgee - currently prisoners are being provided with food, shelter, and healthcare by the taxpayer. When released,as Holder suggests, they will need jobs(which are hard to come by but getting better) in order for them to have food, shelter, and healthcare. They either buy it or they need to get subsidized by someone. That someone is probably a program provided by the government, be it local, state, or federal funded by taxpayers. When releasing prisoners, you no longer need staff to watch over those prisoners, so they will need help also. Dependency is a way for making sure those you are subsidizing will keep you in power. Zorro, there will never be "savings" in what is being presented.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Zorromcgee

Aug-16-13 12:00 PM

Avoice-So to you we can save money by keeping non-violent drug offenders locked up, rather than have them in the community working and paying taxes? Do you have any facts or studies to back it up? Because there is a wealth of info supporting the economic feasability of programs like the Drug Court.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Avoice

Aug-18-13 3:48 PM

ZCMGEE - I never advocated saving money by keeping them locked up. Iam questioning if law relaxation is in the best interests now? When most of the sentencing guidelines were set in years past, ****** useage and trade among the minority population was rising at a fast pace. ****** was found to be a nasty drug due to it's effects (including increased application of mandatory sentencing guidelines) so many of the total population reverted to marijuana. Along with that was the common attitude marijuana was a recreational drug along with claims of medicinal benefits. Drug Courts are good but we still high levels of recidivism despite the benefits. What is also coming back is the increasing useage of ****** among our younger generations. That does cause concern of being premature in relaxing our laws. What will happen if we relax our laws now and then find out we have a much larger problem at a later date? contd.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Avoice

Aug-18-13 3:52 PM

contd: There are several bills being heard in Congress for some time now but, IMHO, this was an opportunity for Holder to get out front inf a political stance. I see the useage of the hard drug name was astericked but one can tell what I was stating.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 6 of 6 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web