No jail time for possessing any drug ever

[_DoubtingThomas]

I personally like the idea of decriminalizing drug use if we could get rid of welfare.

That would make crime go up.

[_DoubtingThomas]

if we could get rid of welfare.

Abortion would be the solution.

[_honorentheos]

I'd like to put a stop to people collecting a disability check for alcoholism now as well.

You wrote your post anticipating that if drugs were legalized, then a huge, crippling % of the population would then spend their time unemployed, destitute, and living off of government benefits perpetually drunk or high. That alcohol is already legal and this isn't happening seemed to escape your attention. This is bizarre, because alcohol has been legal longer than you've been alive. While alcoholism does harm a % of the population, the legal sale and use of alcohol does not grind the economy to a halt with drunks living off of welfare. That's a very unpleasant lifestyle - difficult to maintain in its own way - and the vast majority of people avoid it.

There isn't even evidence that legalized drugs leads to more drug addiction, and even if it did, it doesn't follow that this leads to a greater % of people collecting government benefits, and even if it did, it doesn't follow that this would exceed the direct and indirect costs of of prosecuting prohibition of drugs. It's actually extremely implausible that legalization of drugs, like alcohol, hurts taxpayers more than keeping it illegal.

You're just off in a land of stereotypes. As previous posting indicates, you don't care that you live in an alternate reality devoid of facts. And because you dismiss out of hand what you believe for other reasons, there's not much to do but occasionally poke at it.

The Breitbart article that focused on an interview earlier this week did Ajax the disservice of not reporting on Buttigieg's platform position on this issue. By focusing on the idea he would push to remove federal laws criminalizing possession of drugs without contextualizing it has no other purpose than to incite folks like ajax. So mission accomplished.

The question I have for ajax here is why he didn't go look for more information about Buttigieg's position himself? It's been his policy position for months now, and is relatively clearly explained on his campaign website:
https://peteforamerica.com/policies/securing-justice/

Here's a longer white paper .pdf from his website as well:
https://storage.googleapis.com/pfa-weba ... _Paper.pdf

We must recognize that our criminal system is unfair and racist in many ways. This must change. So we will free those who are unjustly detained. As President, Pete will work to cut the size of the incarcerated population by 50%. And for those who are incarcerated, we will ensure that while they are incarcerated they are prepared not only to regain their freedom, but also to rejoin their communities in productive and fulfilling ways. Justice must include a real second chance, and incarceration should be not only about detention, but also about redemption.

Rebalancing our criminal system and refocusing resources on areas like public health, economic opportunity, and alternatives to incarceration will dramatically reduce mass incarceration and racial disparities in the system. At the same time, it will keep communities safer and save money.

It is past time to transform the criminal legal system into one that truly promotes justice, and benefits all of us.

Pete is committed to reducing the number of people incarcerated in the United States at both the federal and state levels by 50%. Experts agree that far too many people are locked up unnecessarily.3 As a result, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.4 In some cases, incarceration actually leads to an increase in crime.5 It’s not just a matter of closing down prisons; we also need to invest in social services to allow people to rehabilitate and expand access to diversion programs to keep people out of prison in the first place. We need better ways to address crime and poverty, both in the criminal justice system and in society. To remedy this, Pete will:

● Double funding for federal grants for states that commit to meaningful reform and prioritize funding for programs aimed at pretrial reforms, decarceration, and expansion of alternative to incarceration (ATI) programs. These grants will allow states to reduce their incarcerated populations while investing in programs that make communities safer, including drug rehabilitation, affordable housing, behavioral health treatment, and subsidized transportation. Pete will also triple funding for technical assistance and training efforts. Such incentives will help states reform their systems, while grant requirements will hold states accountable to follow through.

● On the federal level, eliminate incarceration for drug possession, reduce sentences for other drug offenses, and apply these reductions retroactively. Drug crimes have huge racial discrepancies. For example, despite equal rates of use, Black people are nearly four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than whites.6 Latinx people are 53% more likely to be convicted of a drug crime than whites.7 Research shows that incarceration for drug offenses has no effect on drug misuse, drug arrests, or overdose deaths.8 In fact, some studies show that incarceration actually increases the rate of overdose deaths.9 We cannot incarcerate ourselves out of this public health problem.

● Legalize marijuana and automatically expunge past convictions. Pete will push Congress to pass legislation requiring that a significant percentage of tax revenue flowing from legalization is directed back to the communities and people most devastated by the war on drugs.

[_ajax18]

I'd like to put a stop to people collecting a disability check for alcoholism now as well.

You wrote your post anticipating that if drugs were legalized, then a huge, crippling % of the population would then spend their time unemployed, destitute, and living off of government benefits perpetually drunk or high. That alcohol is already legal and this isn't happening seemed to escape your attention. This is bizarre, because alcohol has been legal longer than you've been alive. While alcoholism does harm a % of the population, the legal sale and use of alcohol does not grind the economy to a halt with drunks living off of welfare. That's a very unpleasant lifestyle - difficult to maintain in its own way - and the vast majority of people avoid it.

There isn't even evidence that legalized drugs leads to more drug addiction, and even if it did, it doesn't follow that this leads to a greater % of people collecting government benefits, and even if it did, it doesn't follow that this would exceed the direct and indirect costs of of prosecuting prohibition of drugs. It's actually extremely implausible that legalization of drugs, like alcohol, hurts taxpayers more than keeping it illegal.

You're just off in a land of stereotypes. As previous posting indicates, you don't care that you live in an alternate reality devoid of facts. And because you dismiss out of hand what you believe for other reasons, there's not much to do but occasionally poke at it.

Are you in favor of decriminalizing drug use then? If not why, since you believe it doesn't hurt you in any way?

[_huckelberry]

Incidentally it should be noted that by current law (now and at least past 20 years) alcoholism or addiction cannot be the basis of disability qualifying for social security disability.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Are you serious, or are you being cheeky?

- Doc

Either that, or you're quoting him in fear of him going back and editing the original comment later, perhaps?

Neither. It's mockery for an absolute brainlet post. The subtlety of simply quoting him without further commentary should've been enough for the sophisticated connoisseur of message board banter to ascertain the 'wrongness' of his statement.

I wonder, sometimes, if you've ever attended a set at a comedy club and just held a frozen smile for 45 minutes straight. I really do.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

Alcohol is legal already Rip Van Winkle.

not if you're under the age of 21

[_subgenius]

if we could get rid of welfare.

Abortion would be the solution.

That was the founding principle of Planned Parenthood.