- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 56,981
- Reaction score
- 27,029
- Location
- Chicago Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
Holder to outline new drug offender sentencing proposal.....
The Justice Department plans to change how it prosecutes some non-violent drug offenders, so they would no longer face mandatory minimum prison sentences, in an overhaul of federal prison policy that Attorney General Eric Holder will unveil on Monday.
Holder will outline the status of a broad, ongoing project intended to improve Justice Department sentencing policies across the country in a speech to the American Bar Association in San Francisco.
"I have mandated a modification of the Justice Department's charging policies so that certain low-level, nonviolent drug offenders who have no ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels, will no longer be charged with offenses that impose draconian mandatory minimum sentences," Holder is expected to say, according to excerpts of his prepared remarks provided by the Justice Department
Holder will also reveal a plan to create a slate of local guidelines to determine if cases should be subject to federal charges.
The attorney general will also announce an updated plan for considering release for "inmates facing extraordinary or compelling circumstances - and who pose no threat to the public.".....snip~
Holder to outline new drug offender sentencing proposal
So what are your thoughts upon this matter. Holder will scale back federal laws for weed. Plus now to release Federal Prisoners like some states are releasing their non violent offenders.
I like that he will take away some minimum time for those charges. Make that part null and void, on the sentencing for weed. What about this bit on those with extenuating circumstances.
If someone "poses no threat to the public" then why were they locked up, on federal charges, in the first place?
I consider Holder to be a domestic enemy of the US Constitution, and a dirtbag.
It would be interesting to know the motivation for this. I doubt very much it is his conscience bothering him, for he has no conscience.
It must be some perceived political advantage.
It happens because of draconian drug laws that are in effect. Most potheads are not a danger to society anymore than someone who drinks is (assuming they aren't on the road high or drunk).
I agree, I don't like the idea of the AG changing things from their office though. It needs to be changed through the proper channels and this just isn't it. If the laws are on the books, they need to enforce them.
I happen to think smoking pot should not be a criminal offense, but right now it is.
I agree, yet do not see the federal gov't actually shrinking, laying off judges, FBI officers or closing prisons. They likely intend to make more room for "illegal" gun possession/sales folks. The whole "war on drugs" is a huge failure, just as alcohol prohibition was.
I agree, yet do not see the federal gov't actually shrinking, laying off judges, FBI officers or closing prisons. They likely intend to make more room for "illegal" gun possession/sales folks. The whole "war on drugs" is a huge failure, just as alcohol prohibition was.
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder will call Monday for major changes in the federal criminal justice system, including doing away with some mandatory minimum sentencing policies that have condemned scores of non-violent offenders to long prison terms and driven up the costs of incarceration.
The attorney general's position echoes a rapidly evolving shift in law enforcement and penal policy that has been sweeping the states in recent years. Increasingly, officials are acknowledging that they can no longer bear the cost of warehousing thousands of non-violent offenders — mostly for drug crimes — who have been targets of especially harsh punishment starting more than two decades ago when crime was surging.
[h=1]Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing[/h]
Personally, I think he's right on the mark with this one. So do people from both ends of the right vs. left political spectrum.
Even a broken clock is right at least twice a day.
Well unless you broke the hands off. Which seems to be the American Justice system.
Limit? There shold be no "mandatory minimum" at all. The punishment in each situation should be soley dependant on the circumstances of the crime in each case. This includes both aggravating and mitigating factors.
Wait, what are you talking about?
I am talking about setting a maximum punishment for each offense and then letting each judge determine how far to apply it to each defendant in each case. How hard is that to understand?
I wasn't talking about that so, yeah. I was more or less saying the entire American justice system is a joke and this won't exactly help.
I oppose mandatory sentencing. The fed's sentencing regime is very draconian. It is something that has been kicked around the legal community since well before Obama was President. A lot in the profession want to do away with the federal guidelines altogether. The problem with drugs is that sometimes you might be a kid who wants to buy a joint and already have a possession conviction for which you got a $25 fine, but just happen to be buying said joint when the fed raid hits the place, and suddenly you are in a federal prison for something that wouldn't even get you jail time in a state court had the locals been the one who caught you with it.
I wasn't talking about that so, yeah. I was more or less saying the entire American justice system is a joke and this won't exactly help.
I absolutely agree with you. I have supported FAMM, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, for years.
It is old news that our MM sentences are grossly unfair and very expensive, very old news. That's why I am suspicious of Holder's motivations.
If he has suddenly discovered justice and the right thing to do, there are many many other actions he could take to clear his conscience.
I suspect this is a political move, but don't know exactly what he is trying to achieve.
Until the root cause of the huge injustices of our system--the drug prohibition--is corrected, this won't do much at all.
We will see how serious Holder and Obama are about this. I'm pretty sure that as AG, and the Prez through EO, alot can be done quickly by DOJ. Pardon my cynicism, but I do not see either of those men as being sincere.
Unfortunately neither the President nor the DOJ determine Federal sentencing guidelines. Mandatory minimums for Federal crimes are set by act of Congress. Mandatory minimums for State offenses are set by act of State Legislatures.
I absolutely agree with you. I have supported FAMM, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, for years.
It is old news that our MM sentences are grossly unfair and very expensive, very old news. That's why I am suspicious of Holder's motivations.
If he has suddenly discovered justice and the right thing to do, there are many many other actions he could take to clear his conscience.
I suspect this is a political move, but don't know exactly what he is trying to achieve.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?