Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (846657)	3/31/2015 10:24:19 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By POKERSAM Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575596

>> What do you think about that? They weren't pot-related offenses, nor were these offenses merely possession-related. While I'm not a believer in long sentences for nonviolent drug offenders, and NEVER life sentences for nonviolent offenders, ever, neither do I believe that drugs like Cocaine, Crack, or Meth should be legal (I do believe Mescaline should be legal because it is pretty harmless and it would supplant the use of other, more dangerous substances). I don't know the circumstances in these cases but no one should ever, under any circumstances, receive a life sentence for marijuana possession, regardless of quantity of quality. So, that guy should have been pardoned long ago. I wouldn't argue with any of those things provided they were all nonviolent and there weren't some circumstances beyond possession. I'm just not a believer that harsh prison sentences are a good way to deal with substances, period. The bigger question to me is why were these 22 cut slack yet others are left in jail? There is precedent for Democrats to sell pardons to the highest bidder and I would want to know that is not what is happening here. Because I don't trust that bastard as far as I could throw him.