The Supreme Court on Monday said judges may impose shorter prison terms for crack cocaine crimes...?

Question

Enhancing judicial discretion to reduce the disparity between sentences for crack and cocaine powder.

What do you think about this decision by a conservative Supreme Court?

Answer 1

it's overdue.

Cocaine is cocaine.
No good reason to have unbalanced sentences, if you believe drugs should be illegal.

Answer 2

It's a conservative decision. The War Against Drugs in the manner it's being waged should have been branded unconstitutional ages ago. It's amazing how the US Government can circumvent the guarantees of the Constitution merely by saying it's the "law" as written by US Title or US Code and they somehow get away with because people do not complain. People are drawn to being given the illusion of security in exchange for some of their freedom bit by bit every day.

That would make the Founders cringe and forment revolt, but here the mainstream of society feel it's OK to seize property without due process, to jail people where the search is illegal merely because drugs were involved, to be permitted to break down your doors and subject you to full-on police assault simply because they think you have drugs in your house?

It's a fascist attitude that allows this, and I think that if you want to live in a fascist nation, I hear Iran is looking good these days.

Answer 3

I'd be real interested in reading the court transcripts to read the arguments from both sides.... I think in its most heinous form - everybody wants to see a kid rapist die. BUT rape is one of those terms that you cant simply apply a blanket punishment for...thats why different states have different punishments for the various crimes under the umbrella of "rape". I dont think the Supreme court is turning a blind eye to the crime - i simply think they are preventing the death sentence from being "abused" . We as a society are supporters of death when a life is taken - when its not- then the lines are blurred. If rapists can get the death penalty - why not domestic abusers, why not armed robbers? These criminals leave behind victims too dont they? Plus pedophiles are often caught BEFORE actual "rape" takes place. Molesting or inappropriate touching is just as bad - but considered "indecent" or assault instead of rape. So those internet predators who are possibly most likely to hurt kids arent in danger of being put to death for their crimes. And i think THEY should be. Any rapist - of a child or adult needs to be under the jail - I think they should amend their decision to include only serial rapists & repeat pedophiles.

Answer 4

It's a good decision. The demonization of crack use vs. cocaine use was ridiculous in the first place. The penalties for the use of one should be the same as for the other.

Answer 5

The Supreme Court is not conservative, it's still about half and half.

Drug crimes are not violent crimes, they're more like underaged drinking. They don't need to be harsh until they involve other felonies such as dealing, weapons or children.

Drug criminals are the primary candidates for treatment if they're addicted, not child predators.

Answer 6

A very good decision.

The differences in the sentencing guidelines for basically the same drug were unfair.

However, I think all drugs should be legalized anyway and treated as an addiction/medical issue and not a crime.

Answer 7

I think it's long overdue. These people are sick. They are addicted to a substance. That's it...nothing more. Lets see the mandated sentences here focus on TREATMENT...not throwing them in a prison at taxpayer expense.

Answer 8

this is nothing more than liberal crap because of the "victimization" of people who make the choice to deal drugs. people aren't given harsher drug sentences because of their race they get them because they get caught dealing amounts OVER the amount that gets you the five year minimum. this is going to do nothing but INCREASE drug and drug related crime once it gets out you get shorter time for dealing. the perfect thing would be to offer NO jail time but to cut the arms off dealers and uses and give them lifetime monitoring through ankle bracelets, and cut off federal funding of areas that refuse to cooperate with the police and turn in the dealers and users that ruin their neighborhoods.

Answer 9

Because crackheads are people too!

Answer 10

sounds fine to me