H.R.261 Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act

[Larry_77084]

Well what do you think?

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h261/show

Personnally I think it is a slap in the face for all law abiding people.

I quit!

[Chirpy]

Usuallly I'd say that if Shelia Jackson Lee sponsors it, it has to be bad legislation.

[Tim Kreitz]

Well, the way I see it, here's not really a choice at this point. The federal prison-industrial complex is a failing powder keg. Sooner or later, America is going to have to accept the fact that a fair number of people will always do things like use drugs, hire prostitutes, and otherwise live by their hindbrains. So long as they don't violate the rights of others in the process, there's no reason for many of them to be in jail.

They're trying to build a prison, for you and me to live in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAIRsLPDFdA

[Sleepy Weasel]

I wonder if there's any Enron money behind it?

[tone loc]

Really for non violent offenses, I believe a fine is sufficient. Why go to the extra taxpayer expense of houseing/feeding the people like Martha Stewart.

[Tim Kreitz]

Originally Posted by tone loc

Really for non violent offenses, I believe a fine is sufficient. Why go to the extra taxpayer expense of houseing/feeding the people like Martha Stewart.

Nah. If they owe restitution, that's one thing, but the state generally shouldn't capitalize on the commission of crime. If it's not something jailable, it's probably not a real crime at all.

Martha Stewart went to jail rightly, in my opinion. She wasn't violent, but she did violate the property rights of her fellow shareholders.

[Tourmeister]

Originally Posted by Tim Kreitz

They're trying to build a prison, for you and me to live in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAIRsLPDFdA

Shades of the Dead Kennedys

Originally Posted by Tim Kreitz

Martha Stewart went to jail rightly, in my opinion. She wasn't violent, but she did violate the property rights of her fellow shareholders.

Actually, I don't think she was ever convicted on anything related to insider trading. In the end she was convicted for supposedly lying to the Feds. Ashcroft Gets His Pound of Flesh. This author was spot on during the whole Durham Rugby Team non Rape case, the prosecutor of which went down in flames when the Truth came out... One of the things this author and many others point out about the Federal "justice" system is how so many of the laws are incredibly vague, making it almost impossible to defend against once a charge is leveled. Kind of reminds me of the witch hunts... How do you prove you are not a witch?

If Martha had truly injured the other stockholders, they had recourse via the civil courts, as has been the case since the founding of this country. There is no need for the government to be prosecuting her as a criminal. If those other stockholders were injured, how does fining Martha and giving the money to the government help them? How does putting her in jail help them? Jail should be used for people that are violent. The purpose of the law should be to seek restitution for the victim to the best degree possible. If anyone should get the proceeds of fines, it should be the victims

The more government grows, the more the prison system has to grow. Government equals control. People naturally resist control at some point. As government control expands, the number of people that will become criminals expands. Imagine if everyone that was dishonest about their taxes were actually caught and imprisoned...

[John Bennett]

Originally Posted by Tourmeister

The more government grows, the more the prison system has to grow. Government equals control. People naturally resist control at some point.

You anarchist.

[leekellerking]

Originally Posted by Tourmeister

Shades of the Dead Kennedys



Actually, I don't think she was ever convicted on anything related to insider trading. In the end she was convicted for supposedly lying to the Feds. Ashcroft Gets His Pound of Flesh.

You are correct sir. What Martha did with her stock was no crime. The "crime" she was convicted of was lying to FBI. Not perjury, as it was not sworn testimony, but just telling them something a prosecutor was later able to convince a jury was a lie.

But we have Order!


Lee

[Chirpy]

I smell a rat, or more accurately a crooked Congresscritter.

One of SJL's long time quests is to restore voting rights to felons, for the simple reason that many of her potential constituents can no longer vote. This bill doesn't fit her pattern, as there is no mention of restoration of voting rights.

Which leads me to believe there is a companion bill somewhere, perhaps even in the future, that will restore voting rights to those who meet early release under this program.

[KenH]

Criminal prosecution for non-violent crime seems to be mostly about building revenue. Exactly how much money does a municipality take in for traffic tickets and other mideameanors? I expect the figures are staggering.

[DANNYROTH]

Does the use, possession, sale, distribution, importation, of illicit narcotic substances constitue a violent crime? If not, that's the money behind a bill of this type.

I'm afraid I have to agree with Chirpy regarding legislation sponsored by SJL. I'm sure glad she doesn't "represent" me.

[Buba Gump]

I say do away with the present system Take a state (like louisana) give everyone a fair chance of getting out. Start telling everyone you have two years to vacate with gov $$ help. Put a tall electrified fence (or some other barrier) around it and have one entry/exit point. Out the folks in and dont let them out until their time is up. let the fend for themselves while there. Problem solved,