The Justice Policy Institute released a report [PDF] today on the racial disparities in drug law enforcement, and their findings are some of the most comprehensive I’ve seen on this subject. Here’s the report introduction:
Over the course of the last 35 years, the rate at which the U.S. places its citizens in jails and prisons has risen dramatically. For the first 70 years of the twentieth century, U.S. incarceration rates remained relatively stable at a rate of about 100 per 100,000 citizens. Since 1970, the U.S. has experienced a large and rapid increase in the rate at which people are housed in federal and state correctional facilities. Currently, the U.S. incarceration rate is 491 per 100,000.1
The exceptional growth in the prison population has been driven in large part by the rate at which individuals are incarcerated for drug offenses.2 Between 1995 and 2003, the number of people in state and federal prisons incarcerated for drug offenses increased by 21 percent, from 280,182 to 337,872.3 From 1996 to 2002, the number of those in jail for drug offenses increased by approximately 47 percent, from 111,545 to 164,372.4 This does not include people imprisoned for other offenses where drugs, the drug trade, or other drug activities were a feature of the offense.
The increase in incarceration of drug offenders translates directly to an increase in prison expenditures. The American Correctional Association estimates that, in 2005, the average cost of incarcerating one person for one day was approximately $67.55. The cost of incarcerating drug offenders in state or federal prisons amounts to a staggering eight billion dollars per year.5
There is little evidence to suggest that high rates of incarceration affect drug use rates or deter drug users. Researchers have previously found that decreases in crime in the 1990s were not attributable to an increase in the number of prisons or the increase in the incarceration rate.6 A Justice Policy Institute (JPI) study further substantiated these findings by investigating the relationship of incarceration to the rate of drug use in states. In fact, when observed over a three-year period, states with high incarceration rates tended to have higher rates of drug use.7
The growing rate of incarceration for drug offenses is not borne equally by all members of society. African Americans are disproportionately incarcerated for drug offenses in the U.S., though they use and sell drugs at similar rates to whites.8 As of 2003, twice as many African Americans as whites were incarcerated for drug offenses in state prisons in the U.S.9 African Americans made up 13 percent of the total U.S. population, but accounted for 53 percent of sentenced drug offenders in state prisons in 2003.10
The report uses data from 2002 from across the entire United States and discovers that a staggering 97% of large-population counties in this country have racial disparities in drug law enforcement, despite the fact that the evidence collected shows no disparity between the races when it comes to involvement with drugs. The report specifically discusses the work done by UW Professor Katherine Beckett:
A recent in-depth analysis of drug enforcement patterns in Seattle57 indicates that African Americans are disproportionately arrested for drug delivery offenses, and that these disproportions are not due to any extraordinary characteristics of those African American arrestees, the behaviors they engaged in, or the communities in which they were arrested. In other words, although African Americans in Seattle were not selling drugs at a higher rate than whites, they were targeted more frequently for drug arrests. Given the racial disparities in drug enforcement practice highlighted in this in-depth Seattle study, it is not surprising that the drug imprisonment rate in King County, WA, was 23 times higher for African Americans (465 per 100,000) than it was for whites (20 per 100,000) in 2002.
What’s even more alarming than the fact that an African American in this county is 23 times more likely to go to jail for a drug crime than a white person (despite similar numbers of people violating these laws) is that King County is only the 49th worst large county in the United States. The grim statistics are in this Excel spreadsheet.
If by this post I’m supposed to come away thinking racism is the cause of blacks being overrepresented in prisons, I’m not buying it. You could post an encyclopedia’s worth of stats from the Justice Policy Institute, but I have to do is open up the newspaper to see what’s going on. Blacks make up 13% percent of the U.S. population. They make up 65% of the U.S. prison population.
Now I’ll give you people the truth. I work in the inner city, and here is all you need to know. Many blacks are angry. Many blacks are unemployed by choice. And many blacks use crime and violence to get things they want.
@1
If you work in the inner city, then how come you have to open up a newspaper to see what’s going on?
Yes, many blacks are angry. They’re angry about what I’ve posted here. White people would be angry too if we were being sent to jail at higher rates for crimes that people of different races commit equally.
This report details the massive disparity in our prison population, and demonstrates that it isn’t because black people are morally inferior (which is very clearly what you’re implying in your comment). It’s because of how our drug laws have been enforced since the war on drugs was launched in the early 70s. The evidence is overwhelming to support this.
I don’t want more meth labs or armed marijuana growers in our national forests! After all, my relatives live in those places, too.
What we need is an intelligent policy for controlling (and, if possible, eradicting) the drug scourge in our communities. For years, the King County Bar Association has advocated treatment instead of incarceration for users. Violent drug criminals, though, need to be locked up. They’re dangerous and I don’t want them on the streets! Policing and sentencing should be based on the crime, not race or economic status.
@3
This state’s treatment-over-incarceration efforts (spurred on by the KCBA) have already saved the taxpayers of this state millions of dollars, even though we still have way more we can do. Violent people, regardless of whether they’re involved with drugs, need to be locked up. Treating someone who likes to get high the same as someone who’s an actual threat the community is what’s gotten us into this mess.
I think certain people are going to look for certain facts that will support their belief that blacks are no more likely to commit crimes than whites. I agree that the facts may be true, but I also think there are some things that aren’t being said.
Most whites are deathly afraid of sounding the slightest bit racist. I’m not. I believe in speaking the truth. I’ll be the little boy in the Emperor’s New Clothes story… Blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than whites. That’s why there are more of them in prison.
Blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than whites. That’s why there are more of them in prison.
This report shows that for drug crimes, there are more black people in prison despite the fact that equal numbers of whites and blacks commit that particular crime. For other crimes, that’s not the case, and blacks actually do commit certain crimes at a higher rate. But the fact that you seem completely disinterested in understanding all of this makes me very skeptical that you’re just some guy trying to “tell the truth”.
I actually think our drug laws are too severe. Prisons have to release dangerous criminals early to make room for non-violent druggies. That’s wrong.
And I think drug laws should be equal. There shouldn’t be a difference between sentences for powder cocaine and crack cocaine. You’ve actually made me want to research this a little. Good post.
@7
Thanks. I have to catch my bus right now, but there’s a lot being written about this topic from both the left and right. Feel free to email me.
Our prisons need to reserve room for the imminent influx of Bush Administration employees.
BS:
“Many blacks are angry. Many blacks are unemployed by choice. And many blacks use crime and violence to get things they want.”
If you’ll forgive me, I must doubt the accuracy of the word ‘many’.
headless lucy we forgive you
Legalize marijuanna, for starters. Why should we send people to the slammer for pot? “Reefer Madness” is viewed as a funny, archaic film in the modern world, but its intent was to lie and force propaganda down the populace’s throats back to make marijuanna illegal. With assholes like Wm. Randolph Hearst behind criminalization of marijuanna, a lot of lies got told. He was a cocksucker and a hypocrite.
Do Homosexuals do Drugs?
13 –
Yes, and lots and lots of other ordinary people like to indulge in recreational drug use, and it’s nobody’s business but their own.
Time to end Prohibition.
Maybe we should lock them up to.
Gosh, don’t oversimplify or anything. Let’s not forget the whole picture here.
Blacks sell drugs on the streets disproportionately to whites. Ironically, this is where cops are. If you need to see this in action go to Pioneer Square.
Secondly, there’s a whole due process thing here going on too. If they didn’t do anything, there won’t be any evidence against them and the judicial system should do it’s job. It’s no secret the political makeup of King County’s courts and population, they’re largely Liberals. So, this means that racist Liberals are convicting Blacks be it through Judge or Jury, at a disproportional rate.
Way to go you loons…
re 11: I wasn’t asking you.
re 16: But who’s buying the drugs? Openly. On the street. Where, ironically, the cops are.
Even if it is true, all the more reason to not be a criminal.
re 16: Ronald Reagan (at least he was pimping for those really responsible) filled the black ghetto with drugs so that he could fund South American death squads.
#10 headless lucy says:
What, “many” isn’t enough for you?
> Black people can be stressful to be around 24/7. Believe me , I know.”
> http://www.horsesass.org /?p=1009#comment-73256
Still waiting for you to explain this.
“Ronald Reagan must be the nicest president who ever destroyed a union, tried to cut school lunch milk rations from six to four ounces, and compelled families in need of public help to first dispose of household goods in excess of $1,000…1f there is an authoritarian regime in the American future, Ronald Reagan is tailored to the image of a friendly fascist.” – Robert Lekachman
Isn’t it racist for Steve Sharansky to compare Ron Sims to a murderous African dictator like Robert Mugabe? Why won’t you answer my question?
Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!
08/25/2007 at 11:22 pm
3. Marvin Stamn says:
#49 headless lucy says:
Marv: Isn’t it racist for Rush Limbaugh to say that the only reason Democrats want to stop the killing in Darfur is so that black American voters will vote Democratic?
Why can’t the Republican Party elect even one single black Congressman or Senator?
Is there some sort of problem with the Republican base that prevents that? Why won’t you answer?
I’m not rush limbaugh, I can only speak for myself. Just like I’m not asking you why robert byrd enjoyed his time in the KKK.
I’m asking YOU why you are a racist, why you feel so stressed around blacks.
4. headless lucy says:
“Black people can be stressful to be around 24/7.”
It is clearly idiotic of you, Marvin, to say that this is an unfair or inaccurate statement.
“Why can’t the Republican Party elect even one single black Congressman or Senator?” You avoided answering this one, so I’ll answer it for you: It’s because the white n’ rite voting base of the Republican Party is racist.
“Isn’t it racist for Steve Sharansky to compare Ron Sims to a murderous African dictator like Robert Mugabe? Why won’t you answer my question?”
Your reply:”Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!” Yes. It is racist.
Your answer to this question completely overlooked the fact that Robert Mugabe is a murderous dictator and focused only on the fact that Mugabe and Sims are both Black. THIS IS SO BLATANTLY RACIST ON YOUR PART THAT I WILL BRING IT UP EVERY TIME YOU CALL SOMEONE ELSE A RACIST.
You are clearly the racist. If Steve Sharansky said that Sims was exactly like Slappy White because they are both Black, well then, to quote you: “Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!”
Asshole…
Reagan: Was He Really that Dumb?
“Poor dear, there’s nothing between his ears.”
–British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
“…like reinventing the wheel.”
–Larry Speakes (Reagan’s former press secretary) describing what it was like preparing the President for a press conference, Speaking Out: The Reagan Presidency from Inside the White House
“The task of watering the arid desert between Reagan’s ears is a challenging one for his aides.”
–Columnist David Broder
“He has the ability to make statements that are so far outside the parameters of logic that they leave you speechless”
–Patti Davis (formerly Patricia Ann Reagan) talking about her father, The Way I See It
“This loathing for government, this eagerness to prove that any program to aid the disadvantaged is nothing but a boondoggle and a money gobbler, leads him to contrive statistics and stories with unmatched vigor.”
–Mark Green, Reagan’s Reign of Error
“President Reagan doesn’t always check the facts before he makes statements, and the press accepts this as kind of amusing.”
–former president Jimmy Carter, March 6, 1984
“Ronald Reagan is the first modern President whose contempt for the facts is treated as a charming idiosyncrasy.”
–James David Barber, presidential scholar, On Bended Knee: The Press and the Reagan Presidency, Mark Hertsgaard
“His errors glide past unchallenged. At one point…he alleged that almost half the population gets a free meal from the government each day. No one told him he was crazy. The general message of the American press is that, yes, while it is perfectly true that the emperor has no clothes, nudity is actually very acceptable this year.”
–Simon Hoggart, in The Observer (London), 1986
Bush is no smarter than Reagan. He’s not even an ‘amiable dunce’.
Make no mistake about it: If the President is a blockhead (as Reagan was and W is, then he’s just a figurehead of a cabal.
Did you elect a cabal? Seems you did. Do you really think whether undocumented aliens receive driver’s licenses is anything other than a distraction for idiots?
Lee, didn’t we already have a thread on this just a couple of months ago? U R running out of ideas?
“I agree that the facts may be true, but … ”
That kind of explains our entire drugs policy right there.
Re 27: Yes, PudWax™, the problem has been mentioned before. But the people are still in jail, so it’s still a problem.
“Did you hear what he said? He said, ‘Minky!'” Inspector Clousoe’s boss.
Leadless Loocie (TM) The object of Marvin’s question is you, not Stefan Sharkansky. When will that Cheesecake Factory calorie laden single celled mind comprehend that?
Marvin Stamn is commenting on your words. You deflect to Stefan? What an idiot. And it’s a 24/7 idiot too. Good gene pool there Leadless!
Now regarding blacks and crime… I will watch this thread before commenting as a black man from the inner city!
Correction: “Clouseau”
Leadless Loocie (TM) they are still locked up because they received sentences more than two months. Maybe they broke the law?
re 30: …and I’m asking about Marvin’s words. Turnabout is fair play.
So, how ’bout it , Pud? Is it fair to compare you to Rue Paul?
“Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!” Marvin Stamn
There goes PudWax™, the Rue Paul of King County.
Do you agree with Marvin,PudWax™? Is it fair to compare you to any other Black person because:
“Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!” Marvin Stamn
Would you object if I compared you to Godfrey Cambridge?
Nah! Rue Paul is more accurate.
Loocie. Stop this. Comment on your comments or STFU!
Why don’t you let Marvin comment on his comments? We’re all waiting.
@24 Wasn’t Reagan the president who said trees cause air pollution?
Pelletizer (TM) I guess you never read this guy:
http://www.metla.fi/archive/fo.....00177.html
Oh course being the idiot bunny you are you don’t understand the apple ripening process produces large amounts of ethylene gas either. That’s why apples are stored in Nitrogen coolers to inhibit the ethylene formation.
That’s why one bad apple (your worthless stupid comments) spoils it on HorsesASS. Well in the case of HorsesASS, there are many bad apples on the left releasing gaseous excretions and they call them blog entries!
This is why Pelletizer (TM) is an idiot.
He doesn’t understand the ripening process because he likes his problems (carrots) rotten.
Ethylene gas turns:
bananas yellow
tomatoes red
avocados soft
Your brain to mush — Oops previous postings already proved this happened earlier.
Yeah, treatment worked out great for the habitual drug offender who murdered Lito Barber
http://archives.seattletimes.n.....query=Lito
Pelletizer (TM) Wasn’t Reagan from California. I guess he got his tree pollution info from UC Cooperative Extension, UCLA and UC Riverside.
http://ucanr.org/delivers/impa.....actnum=129
“Some trees and shrubs emit high rates of certain volatile organic compounds (VOC), which react with nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sunlight to form ozone, a ground-level pollutant.
A team of researchers representing UC Cooperative Extension, UCLA and UC Riverside measured isoprene emission rates for more than 60 California trees and shrubs. Although isoprene is not the only compound released by trees, it is often dominant and therefore was selected for the project. Of the species studied, the researchers found that the highest isoprene emitters were certain oak, poplar and eucalyptus species. Plants that emitted very low levels of isoprene included those in the rose family such as almonds and apricots, ash trees, cotton, lilac and euryops daisy.
Emissions from trees might be compared to vapors from gasoline spilled at the pump. For example, a medium-sized liquidambar tree on a warm summer day emits about one gram of isoprene per hour. For a very large planting of 10,000 trees, the isoprene emission would be about 10 kilograms per hour, an amount comparable to the evaporative emissions caused by spilling about 12 gallons of gasoline per hour.”
Fair use claws invoked to de-program the malleable leftists on HorsesASS!
Really, trees can aid in the pollution of OZONE, the primary gas of Pelletizer’s (TM) cranial orifice?
Pelletizer (TM) you were trumpeting the victory of Kevin Rudd, as the new Australian Prime Minister. Well how come the Aussies figgered out some trees cause air pollution?
Maybe God in his infinite wisdom recognized these trees have a benefit?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....223032.htm
Typical thal Lee spews about drugs and prison. I’m shocked! Have another toke there Lee; someday you’ll have to grow up.
The same could be said to you, Mark1.
Amazing the way some of these threads devolve so quickly into name calling. Too bad you people don’t have any actual, y’know, points to make.
Lee, you’ve studied this…is the meth problem changing anything? Seems (based on no particular statistical data) like most meth cookers and for that matter from what I’ve seen users are rural and primarily white. Are the incarceration trends changing at all because of that?
If not, that would be pretty damning evidence in support of “use is the same between black and white but arrest & incarceration is higher for blacks.”
And BS: note that the study isn’t counting dealing:
So as usual you don’t have a leg to stand on.
@1 BS Maybe if minorities weren’t denied the same benefits and opportunities for all those decades they wouldn’t be so angry. Wadda ya think?
Black farmers couldn’t get loans that white farmers could. Go figure…..
@46
Thanks PI, Mark is still very sore about the fact that I don’t conform to his stereotypes.
@47
Lee, you’ve studied this…is the meth problem changing anything? Seems (based on no particular statistical data) like most meth cookers and for that matter from what I’ve seen users are rural and primarily white. Are the incarceration trends changing at all because of that?
I’m sure that the crackdown on it has had some effect (which may have been reflected more in the data here if the study covered all counties, not just the most populous ones), but meth is not as commonly used in this country as cocaine, heroin, or especially marijuana. Also, even with all the talk of a “meth epidemic”, the number of actual users of meth hasn’t gone up in decades. What’s been going up is the purity level of the meth being produced. The “epidemic” is being entirely driven by its increased addictiveness, which is primarily because it’s illegal and being produced by criminals. It’s very similar to what happened with moonshine during prohibition.
The trees “form ozone”. Get it?
“Some trees and shrubs emit high rates of certain volatile organic compounds (VOC), which react with nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sunlight to form ozone, a ground-level pollutant.”
@49:
Except moonshine didn’t rot your teeth out and turn you into a scabby skeleton.
The facts shown in this study have to be seen in a contest of legal discrimination against Blacks for centuries, followed by voter discrimination, followed by the fact that the greater incarceration of blacks results in …..taking away voting rights of blacks.
Meanwhile white politicians sometimes freely admit to their youthful drug use, and Americans see that as no problem in electing them.
In other words, in their hearts, Americans know that use of drugs really is no moral bar to future exercise of political rights….if you are white.
The loss of voting rights is very high is some jurisdictions, it is just another 1 or 2% overall to favor the right, which is all they need in some important states like Ohio or Florida.
Habitual drunks of course keep their right to vote.
@51
Although sometimes it rotted your intestines and made you blind. :)
Marcel, the current laws disenfranchising felons in certain states date back to the era of Plessey v. Ferguson and were passed in conjunction with “vagrancy” laws which basically made it a felony to be a black man in public. The whole point of these laws from the beginning was to disenfranchise black males (note that women did not have the right to vote back then so ways to disenfranchise black women were not needed). The “vagrancy” laws were overturned by the Supremes, but then President Tricky Dick figured out a new type of “vagrancy” law to use to disenfranchise blacks, and started this whole “War on Drugs” deal. Which, as noted, is primarily enforced against blacks (else Rush Limpd**k would be in jail for his hillbilly heroin use). It’s all part of the Republican Party’s “Southern Strategy”, in the end. White drug dealers are, well, white. Black drug dealers are these scary black beasts who want to creep into every whitey’s bedroom and KILL US ALL (GASP!). So of course the law is primarily enforced against blacks. No racism involved, nosirree!
– Badtux the Snarky Penguin
Stats only tell part of the story.
Whats misssing:
% that have already been through treatment
% of violent vs non violent offenses
% or number of repeat offenses
% that have graduated high school
Who can afford a lawyer & how bad public defenders are at their trade.
Funding by drug seizures of law enforcement.
It’s far too easy to make this a racial issue.
re 55: And……yet, there it is. The elephant in the living room:
“Whats misssing:
% that have already been through treatment
% of violent vs non violent offenses
% or number of repeat offenses
% that have graduated high school”
If you have a point to prove, why don’t you present the statistics?
Too lazy?
From BS @ 5:
“the facts may be true”
That one should be enshrined as a tin-hat, neocon classic.
Right up there with “tax cuts pay for themselves”.
Well, let me see. Approx. two years ago a right-wing radio talkshow blowhard (Rush Limbaugh) finally plead guilty to some offense having to do with Oxycontin, which he blamed on his doctors not warning him was addictive. This is the same guy who argued against people using an addiction as an excuse for criminal behavior, saying that they should put them in jail and throw away the key. I forget now what crime he ultimately plead guilty to, but the details included him using multiple doctors to issue prescriptions being filled in different drug stores, and forcing his maid to get prescriptions in her name, fill them, and deliver the drugs to him. He tried to blame the maid. He gets probation, no time in jail.
Then a year later he get’s caught coming BACK INTO the country from a foreign vacation, with prescription drugs in his possession in the name of someone other than himself. He says he had the doctor make out the prescription in the doctor’s name and then supply it to him, in order to save him embarrasment. The prescription drug was apparantly Viagra.
Now remember that the casual nature in which he is treating the prescription drug laws was what got him into trouble in the first place, yet again he is caught, apparantly thinking that the laws don’t apply to him, as long as he has some rational reason for believing that the laws don’t apply to him, and he is a bigshot, and the President, the Justice Dept., and the Florida governor all think he is a great guy, because he delivers votes among those who are dim enough to really listen to him. So he gets a pass – no charges, no probation referral.
But that’s the rub – he is on probation, yet he gets to leave the country, and come back into the country carrying illegal drugs (controlled drugs for which he has no valid prescription). If any one of us had been stopped for the same offense, particularly any averge black man or woman, we would have been immediately arrested, and then jailed until our probation officer could get around to deciding how many additional months we should serve for a probation violation in addition to our original offense for which the probation was revoked.
And if the person involved were your average black man or woman, they would probably be serving at least six months on the initial offense, followed by more or less permanant inability to get a job anywhere where they might be able to rise above the blue-collar leve. But a white man or woman would get probation pending successful completion of a drug rehab program, after which our records would be expunged.
#38 headless lucy says:
What do you want me to say. I do not believe that comparing two individuals is racist. Hell, even MLK said to judge people by their character and not the color of their skin.
Is comparing you to roadkill racist? I don’t believe so. Although comparing you to roadkill would be insulting to the roadkill.
So don’t be afraid, why do you feel it can be so stressful to be around black people 24/7? For your information, I travelled with the Temptations, Mary wells, Martha Reeves and wasn’t stressed at all. Just the opposite, I had a great time. Why are you so uncomfortable around black people?
And don’t forget that there was no “War on Drugs” until young middle-class white people started using drugs in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. Before then, in many states it was a crime simply to be an “addict”, as well as to possess or use drugs. But once the middle-aged white kids started to get involved, then the focus of law enforcement shifted away from incarcerating the “user”, and instead became focused on the “pusher”. In other words, the white suburban teenager who was caught with pot or acid would get a pass, as long as they turned in the black guy in the ghetto who sold it to them.
This policy continued until the 1980’s, when suddenly cocaine became the big issue. But you never heard about cocain raids on beverly hills mansions where it was being left out in party trays like M&Ms, or in any of the affluant white neighborhoods where it became the recreational drug of choice. Instead, you had a seperate set of laws which MUCH stricter punishment for the use of “crack cocaine”, which tended to be used more by blacks than whites, and undercover activities were mounted against the drug trade in the black neighborhoods.
But any white suburban teenager found with cocaine would be given a pass from prosecution if they completed a drug program, but a black teenager caught with a bit of crack would be thrown under the penal system bus.
Of course, to the wingnuts here, it’s all the black kid’s fault – if they don’t want to get put in jail, they shouldn’t expect to live like their white counterparts.
Re 59:
Isn’t it racist for Steve Sharansky to compare Ron Sims to a murderous African dictator like Robert Mugabe? Why won’t you answer my question?
Marvin Stamn says:
“Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!”
08/25/2007 at 11:22 pm
Would you compare Martha Reeves to Idi Amin?
Marvin, if you can not see that the flippant comparison of Ron Sims to Robert Mugabe is wrong, then I see no hope for you. And you go further in defending Sharansky’s mendacity by claiming that:
“Comparing a black person to another black person is racist? Ouch!” Marvin Stamn
08/25/2007 at 11:22 pm
Asswipe (That’s Marvin’s African name. It’s pronounced Ahs-wee-peh.)
Loocie just can’t comment on his comments. Why? Because many people on his side of the aisle thought they were very offensive.
Well Leadlice Loocie (TM) you too are offensive.
You know what liberals? I thought the Great Society Programs were created to lift those in inner city poverty out of it. The funny thing is, they never applied the money to the people who really needed it.
Hence the inner city people became mired in the beaurocratic muck, spiraling downward while others went up. Since the cities are controlled by your side, it IS your fault liberals.
#42 – Union Fireman – Don’t blame the Drug, like you wouldn’t blame the gun. Responsible gun owners aren’t the problem, similarly responsible drug users aren’t the problem. People that don’t use drugs also kill people. If your going to blame the drugs as the problem then you should blame guns as the problem too.
#61 headless lucy says:
Not sure the point, but if it makes you happy.
Martha is a much much better singer. Idi the more experienced & proficient at hand to hand combat and weapons.
Martha brought joy and happiness to others. The same can’t be said of Idi.
Martha fills out a dress!! Idi married women, Martha never married a woman.
I will gladly compare further if you still can’t tell the difference between the two.
> Black people can be stressful to be around 24/7. Believe me , I know.”
> http://www.horsesass.org /?p=1009#comment-73256
I believe that you know why it’s stressful to be around “Black people” 24/7. Just tell us.
“Don’t blame the Drug, like you wouldn’t blame the gun.”
Tommy,
Read my post. I don’t blame the drug. I posted about how the treatment in this case worked out.
From the article;
“Just 10 days before the accident, she had been released from prison after serving less than half the standard sentence under an alternative-sentencing program that required her to receive drug-abuse treatment.”
@67
Are you suggesting that drug treatment doesn’t have a 100% success ratio? You don’t say!
Drug treatment is very far from perfect, but the reality is that putting our money towards drug treatment is cheaper and more effective than putting it towards more jails.
Hi all,
Nobody should ever be put in prison for doing something that simply harms their own health or mental well-being.
That assumes their isn’t alcohol–the worst drug from the standpoint of auto fatalities–and driving involved.
Everything else should be put into the category of people making bad choices. We should tell em at least to try and hold their dose.
The war on drugs is about feeding the bureaucracy–especially the new prison-labor industry which is a bipartisan conspiracy to bring slavery back to America.
Thanks all,
New Left Conservative #1
Hi all,
Let me add a thanks to HA for a really great post.
Best,
New Left Conservative #1
#67 Union Fireman – And do you think things would have changed if the full sentence was served? And that by serving the full sentence, the accused would have been more responsible? Let’s go even further and say the accussed was sentenced with serving twice as long as what was given, do you think the accussed would have be more responsible once released and the death averted?
@ 71,
Is she had served the entire time, she wouldn’t have been driving the car that killed Lito.
@ 68,
You libs are against the death penalty, but that is exactly what this habitual drung offender did to Barber. Tell me Lee, where is your outcry for those criminals that use irresponsibily? Why not admit that in this case, a person using drugs contributed to loss of a life? Is it because he is a cop? I never said that treatment is %100. But in this case, treatment cost the life of a very promising young man who had his entire life ahead of him. Way to pick your side.
@72
You libs are against the death penalty, but that is exactly what this habitual drung offender did to Barber.
First of all, you have no idea what my view on the death penalty is, so before you make more of an ass of yourself, you might want to ask me first.
Tell me Lee, where is your outcry for those criminals that use irresponsibily?
It’s overshadowed by my outcry over a system that doesn’t work, wastes taxpayer money, and still does nothing to prevent incidents like the one you’re referencing.
Why not admit that in this case, a person using drugs contributed to loss of a life?
Of course a person using drugs contributed to a loss of life. The question here is whether you blame the drugs or you blame the person. The point was made to you that this is the same as with guns. Was what happened in Omaha yesterday the young man’s fault or the gun’s fault?
I never said that treatment is %100. But in this case, treatment cost the life of a very promising young man who had his entire life ahead of him.
Absolutely bullshit. Treatment has nothing to do with it. By your logic, the way we prevent people from shooting each other is to put all the gun owners in jail. Are you really arguing that? Because if you’re not, you’re being massively hypocritical. Some people are going to be irresponsible and harm others regardless of what we do. But if you try to just lock all of them away in jail based upon whether they use drugs or whether they like to shoot guns is a counterproductive solution that flies in the face of the ideals that this country was founded upon.
@72 – Union Fireman – yeah maybe on that day it would not have happened, but what’s to say that it wouldn’t have happened even if the accussed was locked up for years and then released. Doesn’t sound to me like the penalty, whatever it was, would have prevented this (in other words the early release pretty much has no bearing on the issue). In your original posting you try to make a statement, but I’m not sure what your statement is?
@74
All of this ignores the fact that by focusing on the drugs rather than the person, truly dangerous people who happen to use drugs are seen as being no more of a threat than harmless people who happen to use drugs. IAFF Fireman is promoting the faulty logic that allows for this to happen. Barber’s death was not caused by drugs. It was caused by a recklessly negligent individual. The reason these people aren’t being kept in jail is because the jails are already filled with too many non-violent people who don’t belong there.
@74
Maybe the appropriate penalty that would have prevented this incident would have been to amputate the arms of the accused, so that she wouldn’t have been driving that day – unless she was using her feet.
“It’s overshadowed by my outcry over a system that doesn’t work, wastes taxpayer money, and still does nothing to prevent incidents like the one you’re referencing.”
You are right, the alternative sentencing and treatment program is a waste of money.
“the question here is whether you blame the drugs or you blame the person.”
I never blamed the drugs. The person in this case made a conscious choice to use a substance that subsequently contributed to her making a decision that led to the death of a fine young man. It was her choice to begin with. But the Drugs did contribute to the death.
“Treatment has nothing to do with it.”
She was in a court ordered treatment program and from what I gather, she was also in a treatment program while serving only half her sentence. IT FAILED!
“It was caused by a recklessly negligent individual.”
Let the smoke clear out of your head a little there Lee. If you believe for 1 second that the drugs played no part whatsoever in the death of this person then you are as ignorant as you are wrong. Tell me, have you ever seen a person on crack that is peaceful? How about those on Meth? What about PCP? Ever been spit on by a heroin junkie, because they shot up a hot load in a mall elevator and OD’d? After a nice dose of Narcan, they come up swinging, in spite of the fact that they were breathing less than 2 times per min.
The individual makes the choice, but those under the influence of either drugs or alcohol don’t have the same mental faculties to make a choice based on reason. Listen, I know a number of people who like to smoke dope. They make the choice to Watch the Family guy and eat Chili Cheese Fritos all day. But even they will tell you, that the decision making process is hampered when under the influence. And when somebody, under the influence, make a poor decision that costs the life of an innocent person, then to say that drug (or Alcohol) wasn’t a contributing factor, is just plain Stupid.
@77
You are right, the alternative sentencing and treatment program is a waste of money.
Incorrect:
http://www.justicepolicy.org/c.....8;ssmID=52
I never blamed the drugs. The person in this case made a conscious choice to use a substance that subsequently contributed to her making a decision that led to the death of a fine young man. It was her choice to begin with. But the Drugs did contribute to the death.
What the hell? You say you never blamed the drugs but you also say “the Drugs did contribute to the death”. Which is it? Are you completely unaware of how you’re contradicting yourself here?
She was in a court ordered treatment program and from what I gather, she was also in a treatment program while serving only half her sentence. IT FAILED!
And that’s exactly what I was saying! Drug treatment often fails!! That doesn’t mean that it’s the wrong thing to do. In fact, study after study has shown that treatment is far more effective than prison when it comes to rehabilitating drug users and decreasing the likelihood that someone will do what happened in this case.
Let the smoke clear out of your head a little there Lee. If you believe for 1 second that the drugs played no part whatsoever in the death of this person then you are as ignorant as you are wrong.
Then what are you saying? Should we make alcohol illegal because drunk drivers have killed people? Should we ban guns because people use guns to kill people?
Tell me, have you ever seen a person on crack that is peaceful?
Yes.
How about those on Meth? What about PCP? Ever been spit on by a heroin junkie, because they shot up a hot load in a mall elevator and OD’d? After a nice dose of Narcan, they come up swinging, in spite of the fact that they were breathing less than 2 times per min.
And I’ve seen people do things much, much worse while on drugs called “whiskey” and “tequila”. Again, you’re blaming the drugs and not the people. If you don’t like heroin junkie’s OD’ing, then why don’t you support prescription heroin programs like the ones they have throughout Europe which have massively reduced the number of overdoses? If your main concern about drugs is that it makes people violent, you should be screaming about alcohol, which is far worse than heroin, cocaine, meth, or pot when it comes to that.
The individual makes the choice, but those under the influence of either drugs or alcohol don’t have the same mental faculties to make a choice based on reason.
What does this have to do with anything? How is this an argument against drug treatment? Are you saying that we’d have less problems with alcohol if we shut down Alcoholics Anonymous and put them in jail instead?
Listen, I know a number of people who like to smoke dope. They make the choice to Watch the Family guy and eat Chili Cheese Fritos all day. But even they will tell you, that the decision making process is hampered when under the influence. And when somebody, under the influence, make a poor decision that costs the life of an innocent person, then to say that drug (or Alcohol) wasn’t a contributing factor, is just plain Stupid.
Sometimes it might be, but smart people who smoke pot (or drink alcohol) don’t make those poor decisions. I’ve been smoking pot for 14 years now. I’ve never once been even close to making a decision under the influence that would’ve affected someone’s life like that. This idea that pot is something that makes you make poor decisions is just an excuse. People who make poor decisions often blame their drug use when their own poor decision-making is exposed.
Not to mention that incidents like what happened with Joselito Barber (sp?) are relatively rare, and the drug that leads to the most deaths, by far, is alcohol. The average pothead is much further from being a risk to greater society than a chronic drunk, yet pot is still treated as a more dangerous drug than alcohol.
#77 – As would a gun (contribute towards death).
“What the hell? You say you never blamed the drugs but you also say “the Drugs did contribute to the death”. Which is it? Are you completely unaware of how you’re contradicting yourself here?”
I said that I place blame on the individual. However, the drugs did in fact play a role. They clouded her judgment. Why are you so damn blind?
“What the hell? You say you never blamed the drugs but you also say “the Drugs did contribute to the death”. Which is it? Are you completely unaware of how you’re contradicting yourself here?”
And if the offender doesn’t participate in said rehab, then what? I NEVER SAID TREATMENT WAS BAD. I said it failed in this case. As a result of that failure, a promising young man died. In this case, it was a waste of time. In order to be rehabilitated, you must want to be. If you would rather be high and driving a car, then guess what? The likelihood of causing harm or death to yourself or someone else drastically increases. Same with Alcohol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kegLdHfUsoY
“And I’ve seen people do things much, much worse while on drugs called “whiskey” and “tequila”.
Honestly, how stupid are you? I said
“The individual makes the choice, but those under the influence of either drugs or alcohol don’t have the same mental faculties to make a choice based on reason.”
See, right there EITHER DRUGS OR ALCOHOL. Learn reading comprehension.
“Again, you’re blaming the drugs and not the people. If you don’t like heroin junkie’s OD’ing, then why don’t you support prescription heroin programs like the ones they have throughout Europe which have massively reduced the number of overdoses?”
Have you ever even been to Europe? I lived there, and yes I have been to Amsterdam. You talk about all of these Maintenance doses, but fail to recognize, that the drugs are still being sold on the street. Downtown Frankfurt is littered with needles. Same with Amsterdam. They still go on overdoses and there is still drug related crime.
“If your main concern about drugs is that it makes people violent, you should be screaming about alcohol, which is far worse than heroin, cocaine, meth, or pot when it comes to that.”
See the above post about reading comprehension. I talked about alcohol. And studies also show a direct link between violence and certain illegal drugs.
In your grand world, who pays for all of these legal drugs? Who pays for the dental care for Meth Mouth? How about for the treatment of the transmission of HIV, Hep C and TB among the IV drug users? Or does all of this magically go away?
“Not to mention that incidents like what happened with Joselito Barber (sp?) are relatively rare”
So how many deaths does it take? 100? 1000? 1000000? What number, by your scale does it take before you agree that illegal drugs (And ALCOHOL (See there is that word again)) are contributing to the downward spiral of society?
I said that I place blame on the individual. However, the drugs did in fact play a role. They clouded her judgment. Why are you so damn blind?
But most people who use drugs don’t do the kinds of idiotic and reckless things that she did. The drugs didn’t make her irresponsible. Because she’s irresponsible, she ended up in a dangerous situation involving drugs.
And if the offender doesn’t participate in said rehab, then what? I NEVER SAID TREATMENT WAS BAD. I said it failed in this case. As a result of that failure, a promising young man died. In this case, it was a waste of time. In order to be rehabilitated, you must want to be. If you would rather be high and driving a car, then guess what? The likelihood of causing harm or death to yourself or someone else drastically increases. Same with Alcohol.
Again, just because treatment fails a certain percentage of the time does not mean that it’s a waste of time. There are many activities in life that have potential for failure. That does not mean that you refuse to do them because you’re not guaranteed success.
Have you ever even been to Europe? I lived there, and yes I have been to Amsterdam. You talk about all of these Maintenance doses, but fail to recognize, that the drugs are still being sold on the street. Downtown Frankfurt is littered with needles. Same with Amsterdam. They still go on overdoses and there is still drug related crime.
I’ve lived in Europe as well. I’ve been to Amsterdam before and it is not “littered with needles”. You can look up the numbers for any of these countries and do the comparisons, or you can look at the results from when Frankfurt, Sydney, Zurich, and other cities have tried out heroin maintenance. Overdoses went way down, as did drug-related crime. Zurich has cut the number of new heroin users by over 80% in the 10+ years since giving addicts heroin in clinics.
See the above post about reading comprehension. I talked about alcohol. And studies also show a direct link between violence and certain illegal drugs.
No they haven’t. What they’ve shown is a link between violence and the black market that exists when a drug is illegal. What the studies show is that if you want to eliminate the violence, youlegalize the use and regulate the market. For example, at the height of the crack “epidemic” in the 80s, researchers looked at the crime statistics for Manhattan in 1988. Out of 414 homicides studied, 106 were related to competition between drug dealers (mostly selling crack), while only 1 was the result of a person being under the influence of the drug. Instances of a person killing someone under the influence of these drugs is much rarer than we’re led to believe.
In your grand world, who pays for all of these legal drugs?
The people who are using them.
Who pays for the dental care for Meth Mouth?
No one has to, because if meth were legal and regulated, it wouldn’t be sold at 90% purity instead of the 10% stuff that we used to give to our Air Force pilots to keep them awake longer. Prohibition is what makes drugs so dangerous and addictive.
How about for the treatment of the transmission of HIV, Hep C and TB among the IV drug users?
Again, in a sensible system, you can more easily implement needle programs, as they’ve successfully done in a number of places.
Or does all of this magically go away?
Much of it actually does go away. Many of the problems we have with drugs in this country come from the fact that drug use is considered a criminal act, which inherently makes it more dangerous and leads to a greater health care burden for everyone.
So how many deaths does it take? 100? 1000? 1000000? What number, by your scale does it take before you agree that illegal drugs (And ALCOHOL (See there is that word again)) are contributing to the downward spiral of society?
Are you suggesting we bring back alcohol prohibition? If not, there’s absolutely no coherence to anything you’re arguing. You’ve bought into a system that’s fundamentally flawed. You obviously recognize that there’s little difference between the potential for harm that comes from alcohol when compared to other drugs. You can’t demonstrate that treatment is a worse option than incarceration. Yet you’re still arguing for something. What are you arguing for?
#80 – Not that I support legalization of all drugs (if you read my comments you will see that I never advocated for the legalization of all drugs), but I still don’t understand your reasoning that drugs are detrimental yet guns are not a problem. You’ve never answered this question, and you have skirted the issue.