Article

2013-08-12 Government

Eric 'my people' Holder seeks to end mandetory minimums, empty prisons.

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2013-08-12 05:42|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 Seems fair to me, don't enforce the laws, just execute the perps.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2013-08-12 10:36|| 2013-08-12 10:36|| Front Page Top

#2 1. Anything Holder touches is almost by definition bad for the US

2. US Federal criminal law is completely out of control, and mandatory minimums are definately part of the problem.

3. Anyone who dislikes large, unaccountable government should oppose current drug laws.

4. Rather than address any of these real problems, looks like Holder is using them as a fig leaf excuse to release bad guys from prison just because they are black.

Posted by Iblis 2013-08-12 10:55|| 2013-08-12 10:55|| Front Page Top

#3 He has mandated against the mandatory.

In the bad old days, otherwise law abiding kids who smoked pot were criticized for deciding which laws they would obey and which laws they would not obey. After all, this is a democracy so if you don't like the law you should change it instead of breaking it. Now we have Holder and his boss who decide which laws they will enforce and which laws they will not enforce. As far as I'm concerned they're far worse than the old dope smoking hippies who were too stoned to get off their asses and change anything. They've just thrown democracy right out of the window.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2013-08-12 11:33|| 2013-08-12 11:33|| Front Page Top

#4 Let my People go!

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2013-08-12 12:12|| 2013-08-12 12:12|| Front Page Top

#5 Concurrent with this is the move to block employers from refusing to hire convicts. Of course the same people pushing this are NOT going to relieve employers of liability when said employee engage in destructive/anti-social behaviors. Welcome to the Oligarchy.

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-08-12 13:31|| 2013-08-12 13:31|| Front Page Top

#6 I have a few conflicting thoughts on this.

First, I don't like this use of executive authority. Not disclosing the amount of drug seized is tantamount to lying to a court. I suppose that doesn't bother Mr. Holder, but if I were a federal prosecutor I'd refuse to comply.

Second, if you don't like the law, change it. Seems like there is enough sentiment in Congress to do so with bipartisan support. Who knows, perhaps working together on something would be contagious.

Third, marijuana laws for adults indeed are too severe. I'd remove prison time all together and make marijuana use and possession a misdemeanor punished with a modest fine. Serial abusers might get a little community service. Traffickers would face forfeiture and confiscation but no prison time. Marijuana might be a gateway drug for some but we've lost this part of the drug war pure and simple.

Fourth, Mr. Holder is correct in that low-level, nonviolent offenders without ties to gangs and drug lords should not be in prison. Prison is simply graduate school for hoodlums.

But the Attorney General should not be modifying the law, he should be following it, and advising Congress how to make it better. Don't look for Mr. Holder to do any of that.

Posted by Steve White 2013-08-12 13:48|| 2013-08-12 13:48|| Front Page Top

#7 Eric 'my people' Holder seeks to end mandetory minimums, empty prisons.

In time for 2014 elections?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-08-12 15:26|| 2013-08-12 15:26|| Front Page Top

#8 This move won't empty prisons.

1. it only applies to Federal drug crime.

2. only for those with no violent crime history

3. doesn't affect existing inmates

The action by Holder is well within the general administrative authority of the prosecutorial discretion of the DOJ.

Notwithstanding the above I agree that, assuming a general consensus that the change is needed, it would be desirable to have Congress actually change the mandatory minimums rather than do this via administrative discretion.

Posted by lord garth 2013-08-12 17:36|| 2013-08-12 17:36|| Front Page Top

#9 Many times the appearance of a severe sentence for "non-violent" drug crimes is because there wasn't enough evidence to get a conviction on a much more serious crime. Remember Al Capone was responsible for many deaths but he went "Up the River" for tax evasion. Think O.J.

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2013-08-12 18:05|| 2013-08-12 18:05|| Front Page Top

#10 fwiw, the mandatory minimums for federal drug crime is here

the most famous issue here is that the minimum sentence begins at 28 grams for crack and 500 grams for powder cocaine

Congress should have fixed this years ago (about 200/500 would be more realistic) but perhaps no one wants to sponsor the 'leniency for crack possessors' act

Posted by lord garth 2013-08-12 20:57|| 2013-08-12 20:57|| Front Page Top

23:03 JosephMendiola
23:01 JosephMendiola
23:00 JosephMendiola
22:55 JosephMendiola
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:43 USN, Ret.
22:40 USN, Ret.
22:36 RJ45ACP
22:21 Glomosing Brown8795
22:09 Rex Mundi
20:57 lord garth
20:50 SteveS
20:24 Redneck Jim
20:04 Procopius2k
19:41 gorb
19:36 JosephMendiola
19:19 Thing From Snowy Mountain
19:18 Besoeker
19:18 JosephMendiola
19:15 Raj
18:25 DarthVader
18:24 Shipman
18:23 Shipman
18:21 airandee