this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
979 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2953 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I hate the emphasis of "simple possession charges", like there aren't situations where someone gets charged with multiple misdemeanors or other petty crimes while carrying an 8th. When Minnesota legalized this year they went the route of "simple possession" for pardons and exoneration, only about 3 people had their sentences ended. To me that indicates they're afraid of being labeled "weak on crime" instead of doing the right thing.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

People need to learn "tough on crime" and "law and order" are dog whistles for "oppress minorities"

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A lot of people already know, and that's exactly why they support it.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Word. It's a way for people who aren't outwardly "flag on a truck" racists to indulge their racism safely and quietly without confronting its existence directly.

[–] LufyCZ@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

If you commit another crime while possessing, you'll be charged with said crime and possession.

You should still be cleared of the possesion charge, while staying locked up for whatever else you might have done.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What if you get nailed for possession then they find a bunch of other shit to charge you with. I assume that happens anyway. If weed was the basis of probable cause, throw out the conviction for the other stuff.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah. Fruit of the poison... uh... tree.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Hell even that would be an improvement. I just don't think prisons fit anywhere in the rehabilitation of prisoners and would rather see all nonviolent offenders released.

[–] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Ok I can agree on principle but in practice you unfortunately need to have alternative systems in place first to deal with the realities of the problem.

Take the guy I used to work with who went to prison for scamming old ladies out of money, if we don't have mechanisms to deal with people like him then it won't take long before everyone is demanding we bring back prisons

[–] grue@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I could be wrong, but I think it's possible for situations to exist where the other thing only becomes a crime because of the possession. Maybe something like being charged for carrying a gun during the commission of a crime, where the crime being committed was having marijuana.