blank'/> Liberally Lean From The Land Of Dairy Queen: War On Drugs ---- I Give Up My AntiWar

3.10.2008

War On Drugs ---- I Give Up My AntiWar


You make the call.

Basic law: If you possess between 1 and 4 grams of dope, the range of punishment is that of a Third Degree Felony (2 to 10 years in the pen.) To wrap your brain around that, a gram is the equivalent of a Sweet N Low packet.

Bonus law: If you commit the above offense but previously had been convicted of any felony and gone to the pen, got out, got convicted of another felony and sent to the pen again (regardless of the type of felonies and regardless of the length of the sentences) then you can be "Enhanced" to a "Habitual Offender." The new range of punishment for what had been a Third Degree is now no less than 25 years and no more than Life. Absent a plea bargain, the jury gets to pick that number.

So . . . a guy in Tyler gets caught with a whopping 1.46 grams of meth (not exactly Pablo Escobar), but he has the unfortunate background of being sent to the pen twice before.

So the jury says ...............Answer.

Yeah, yeah. Sure he's a "loser" and he "broke the law" but, in the end, it was 1.46 grams of dope.

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good, in the end he got what he deserved.

Anonymous said...

I think I'm going to be sick. Aren't we called a civilization?

Anonymous said...

Barry, Why don't you petition to have him released and that you will take him in under your own recognizance?

Anonymous said...

...and so the war against drugs continues.

one sweet-n-low packet at time.

Anonymous said...

Yep...only 1.46 grams...but that's 1.46 grams more than he was supposed to have!

Anonymous said...

Strange thing about this war on drugs: the good guys (cops, justice system, et al) deliver some astonishing victories in battle, and are all so blind with arrogance as to fail to see that they are losing the war.

Anonymous said...

Built them and they will come? 1 in 100 in America incaracerated? Yes, many do need to be there. But can't we hit most of the small frys where it hurts........penalties and fines. Let's make money from them rather than spend money housing them.

Even put them to picking up trash on the roadways rather paying a fatcat contractor who will use migrant workers and entice even more over here.

Anonymous said...

5:23---------------------------

I'll agree that he probably got what he deserved. BUT, ask yourself the bigger question; did you as a taxpayer get what you deserved? You now get to feed and house him for the rest of his life as well as his family, who will now be on the welfare roles, probably for more than a generation. And all because his drug of choice is illegal. How about your own habits? Alcohol, food, TV, sex, etc. etc? Are they really any less destructive, or are you just casting the first stone?

double fake big brother said...

i think half of the readers of this blog want ALL of the 40% of americans with drug problems to be locked up for good. should be an interesting social experiment if nothing else. I know, lets cordon off Texas, and ship everyone there!

wordkyle said...

1.46 g of meth, 2.93 g of marijuana. Previously convicted of delivering marijuana. Previously convicted of possessing a prohibited weapon. He has also has been convicted of theft, possession of a controlled substance, failure to identify/fugitive from justice, criminal mischief and theft by check.

If he had been found guilty only of possessing the meth...or only of possessing the marijuana....or hadn't been convicted of two previoux felonies, or a slew of crimes of various types, then you might have an argument.

But criminy, talk about having been given second chances....Does he have to kill someone before he deserves some real jail time?

Anonymous said...

Ok so 60 years is a bit to much, I even think the 25 would have been alot. You have to remember that we have to pay for him to watch cable TV and highspeed internet service, along with health and dental care, and his food and clothing for the next 15 years 60 if he doesnt behave himself in the pen.

The Bloviator said...

This guy has made many very bad choices over many years. Many uninvolved, innocent people have been at the least unnecessarily, wastefully, very inconvenienced by his actions, and undoubtedly many have been seriously hurt in various ways, directly and indirectly. I doubt if he has any regard for the law or concern for the rest of society. He is a "taker" -- big time. Every person that gets up in the morning and goes to work has to produce extra in order to support him and his, and the population with a similar story is growing in America, and in the rest of the world. In hopes of reducing his sentence, the defense states that he has a wife and child/ren, but he stated he was waiting for his girlfriend. How many are receiving entitlements because he doesn't carry his own weight? There is no help to change his ways being offered by society, I would guess the jury just said "let's remove him from our streets, prevent him from fathering any more offspring, and make it so he can't directly hurt anyone again".
I have consumed alcohol occasionally since I was about 16, now 53 yr. old, most, but not all, of the time responsibly. Intoxicants of any sort produce no good, and meth, coke, heroin, etc., are a huge drain on society worldwide. My son, who recently safely completed a tour in Iraq, tells me that no, they don't have alcohol, but that heroin addiction is rampant over there. I don't agree at all with the idea expressed at 5:23, but to 5:33: What should our "civilization" do with this guy? To Barry, seriously, as an experienced participant in the system, and opponent of the war on drugs as it is, what do we do with this guy? Prison seems harsh and in no way rehabilitative, so what do you suggest? Leave him be? Do you give him a raise so he has more pocket money? Guarantee him food, clothing, and housing for the rest of his miserable life? I'm sure no one reading this blog wants to trade places with this guy for even one day.
The reason these people exist is not because we don't put enough into entitlements, and increasing entitlements won't reduce the number of people in that circumstance. I don't know if it is a true statement, but someone told me yesterday that over 60% of the federal budget goes to some form of entitlement.
"If 10% is enough for Jesus, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam". I don't recall who I'm quoting, but I like the sentiment.

Anonymous said...

York, also known as Mark Burton, was convicted of delivering marijuana in Dallas County in 1996 and possessing a prohibited weapon in Smith County in 2006, for which he was on parole. Beginning in 1987, he has also has been convicted of theft, possession of a controlled substance, failure to identify/fugitive from justice, criminal mischief and theft by check.

He also had Mara"HOOCHIE" on him. Parole in 15 years. Sounds about par for the course on this one.

Anonymous said...

Someone PLEASE tell me why people who HAVE illegal stuff in their car CONSENT to a search. I do not understand.

Over 1% of the U.S. population is in prison. This dumba$$ is only a threat to himself. Darwin's Law will eventually catch up to him.

Anonymous said...

He needs to get the needle. He apparently is too stupid to figure it out so do everyone a favor and remove him from this world. Let's take out the trash. It could give new meaning to:

Don't mess with Texas!!!

And yes I'm serious. I am tired of paying for losers who break the law or those on welfare to lazy to get a job.

Anonymous said...

You play, you pay.

Anonymous said...

So Barry, trade places with one of the jurors, what would you push for? Would you stand up for what you believe in? Would you tell your fellow jurors that punishing people for doing drugs is wrong and that we should apologize for arresting him, pay him some money for his troubles and send him on his way.

Should we legalize all drugs or just the ones that are not addictive? What about the people who stay stoned and can't hold a job? Do we give them money for their drug habit so they don't go out and steal to buy drugs? Or should the government just provide free drugs, kind of like food stamps?

Some time I would like to know what you think on we should handle our drug situation.

lovelit said...

Darwin's Law already caught up with him, along with Murphy's and the good ol' United States/TX drug laws...he didn't stand a chance. But hey, maybe he can earn a degree or two while he's there.

Anonymous said...

I have only one comment- Proportionality!

Anonymous said...

From 523 to 623 trust me I see this all the time. This guy wasn't going to change or he already would have. I dont know this guy but I have seen a lot like him. He was a habitual offender. If he couldnt stay out of trouble while on a PAROLE why does anyone think he will pay fines, etc. to stay out of jail. Wake up!

And just so that everyone understands I would be willing to bet that this guy has plenty of plea bargins in the past which ultimately show up as "not guilty" on his record. The liberals on here want you to believe that he went to jail for a second maybe third offense when in most cases that simply isnt true.

Finally, I or we may have to feed him the rest of his life but I bet I or we wont have to pay his court appointed attorney fees anymore (appeals I know).

What if a person like this sold dope to your kid? What if a person like this invaded your house and stole all your personal items to fund a drug habit. There's no sympathy here, send them all away!

Ps I am a willing taxpayer, build bigger prisons.

Anonymous said...

Law Enforcement will never get an upper hand in the war on drugs. Law Enforcement can only do so much and they do a damn good job considering what they are faced with on a day to day basis. It is always a damned if you do and damned if you don't. If it were not for Law Enforcement, there would be all kinds of illegal activity going on and everyone would be complaining about were are the cops when you need them. Point is 1 more dumbass off the street and on to the next. It is amazing that people complain about the police, but they are the first to call them when they need them. Stirke another one up for the good guys.

RPM said...

US drug laws need some serious overhauling.

Anonymous said...

Obviously he is a "habitual offender". A non-violent habitual offender. 60 years is preposterous. The cost to society of housing him for the next 60 years will far outweigh the cost of any damage he is likely to do on the streets. If there were ANY hint of violence in his past, it might be different. But his history is essentially of hurting himself.

Anonymous said...

I'm tired of my tax dollars being wasted on this stupid "war on drugs". Prohibition never has worked, and it never will.

Anonymous said...

Yes, this ridiculous war on drugs continues. We are a part of it because we do not DEMAND our elected officials to end it.

What is really "honorable" about our judicial system?

Very little, but I'll put my money on the guys and gals who on a daily basis risk their lives to protect us from drug addicts.

Thanks!

bigfan said...

5:23

Maybe he will Get it in the End....

Anonymous said...

Stirke?

Anonymous said...

6:08 PM - Blind arrogance keeps us committed to a losing war on drugs? Ok, genius, who do we surrender to? In the larger cities, the street gangs are killing eachother for drug-dealing turf. Let's repeal the drug laws and turn your neighborhood over to the dealers.

When we lock up assholes like this guy, the fight is justified and must continue to so that it is unprofitable for everyone involved. EVERYONE! The alternative is not acceptable.

Yes, we lock criminals up in this country and the numbers do not matter. Yes, it costs money to build prisons and fill them up. The alternative?

Maybe we should do as China did when it became the most drug-ridden society on earth with opium supplied by England and the USA. China's ban on drugs invoked decapitation for anyone caught using. A few heads rolled in the public streets and, ultimately, China became a drug free country.

Our liberal whiners here would be ranting to hell and back, protesting about death sentencing and screaming for imprisonment instead. We are more "civilized" than that but it worked for China.

Give up because we are losing? Not on your life! Maybe the USERS will someday give up and our drug lords will be in prisons where they belong. Free room and board? Sure, but at least they aren't dealing to your kids or the over-the-hill hippies in your neighborhood. It's worth it.

Anonymous said...

We are so quick to get and punish those who deal and do street drugs.

Hey, what about some of these folks who are hooked on prescription meds?

By golly, they are just as dangerous to me.

Anonymous said...

DUH! Prescription drugs are LEGAL! So what?

Anonymous said...

STOP the whining about the costs of locking up criminals! If we can afford a space program, interstate highways, seaports and power dams, we can sure as hell afford the money to keep criminals behind bars. Saving expense for jailbirds is about the dumbest anarchist lament of all.

Anonymous said...

6:09
"Decaptitation for anyone caught using"?

That's your solution? Really?

"Sure, but at least they aren't dealing to your kids or the over-the-hill hippies in your neighborhood. It's worth it."

Well, if they are dealing to your kids, aren't your kids then using? Wouldn't your kids then need to be decapitated? Just trying to follow your logic here.

Any other customs or laws you want to import from China?

Anonymous said...

Yes 8:10 prescription drugs ARE legal, but check out the number of abusers.

the undomiciled sophisticate said...

6:09 - "Blind arrogance keeps us committed to a losing war on drugs? Ok, genius, who do we surrender to? In the larger cities, the street gangs are killing eachother for drug-dealing turf. Let's repeal the drug laws and turn your neighborhood over to the dealers."

Um, repealing prohibition would eliminate profit for drugs sales, hence eliminating "turf".

8:10 - "DUH! Prescription drugs are LEGAL! So what?"

Yes they are, just ask Rush Limbaugh, after you string him up, of course, by which point it may be tough for him to answer.

Anonymous said...

The reason we are losing this war is because we are not killing the enemy. In a normal war you get out your guns and bombs and you go out and kill the enemy. We just slap them on the wrist or lock them up for a while and hope that they will give up one by one. I like the China idea.

Let the heads roll - I bet you will see a change real quick. Don't want to lose your head don't do drugs.

The Bloviator said...

rpm @ 10:07:
I've seen similar comments by you before on this blog. What would you do with this guy?

anonymous461 said...

rpm - Still waiting for you to come up with one-half an accomplishment of Obama in any elected office.

Sincerely,
anonymous113

Anonymous said...

Is it possible that those who whine the most about drug laws and cops are users? Oh yes. We have to consider prescription drug addicts too. What a LAME excuse! Is there some kind of criminal enterprise that brings those drugs to the phamacy huh? If you are afraid of our drug laws and being locked up, why not give up the street drugs crime? Dopers make me sick!

Anonymous said...

That's crazy,well we're crazy I guess for tolerating the way offenders are treated.That guy should be in a hospital,a treatment program or if he won't give the drugs up and hasn't commited any other crimes leave him alone! We'll figure this out some day and be ashamed of how we've treated other human beings.