Submitted by LindaFulkerson on Tue, 04/28/2009 at 1:28 am.
What will the bill consider non voilent crimes. do they consider child support non voilent. or is that in a class by it self. because the jail in stafford va has a lot of those in there including my husband. he could not find work and they said that we did not pay enogh of it so they put him in jail. now i know that there is alot of people should be in there get out alot early then him. he is in there for a year. so if they consider child support non voilent please i wish they would send him home to me and our 3 childeren.
Submitted by harasubam on Tue, 03/31/2009 at 9:50 am.
we are incarserating too many people in va and giving out far more time than some crimes warrent. we changed to truth in sentancing and did away with parole in va but what we forgot is to readjust the amount of time a judge is able to give for those non violent offences or even for technacle violations from missing probation apointment or other things like failling a drug test when we expect a addict to not do any drugs with little or no treatment shouldnt we try to give them help if they fail the test rather than put them away for a long time. we wshould be looking at addiction as the illness it is . and help those who want the help.
Submitted by chadp26753 on Fri, 03/27/2009 at 12:35 pm.
But the simple solution - obeying the law - is seldom included in a discussion about our poor unfortunate incarcerated. How soon we forget that it's the actions of the incarcerated that got them there.
Let me fix that for you.
But the simple solution - obeying the law - is seldom included in a discussion about our poor unfortunate incarcerated. How soon we forget that it is the actions of an uneducated, cowardly minority that creates laws to incarcerate people for daring to refuse to acknowledge an authority that is antithetical to life, liberty, and property.
Submitted by George K on Fri, 03/27/2009 at 11:18 am.
However, the Taliban did ban opium production, "officially". The tribal leaders from the Northwest Territories insisted on continuing opium production and that issue helped secure their support against the Taliban This is well documented by other "boots on the ground".
Since the invasion the Taliban has become desperate for cash and has changed their tune on opium production. Unofficially.
One of the challenges in Afghanistan has been to redirect opium production to other sustainable agricultural products. It's a wide spread problem far more complicated than naming just one group.
Effective strategies require accurate intelligence.
Submitted by Craig Paskewic on Thu, 03/26/2009 at 11:13 pm.
Government and media exploit differences.
That’s how they operate–divide us. Keep us fighting each other.
Pit the poor against the middle class or rich.
A simple thing that happens to work. Instigate race, religion, jobs, social status, radio personalities…anything to keep us from realizing the real problems-“them”. It's power.
My mind doesn’t work that way. I got this real moronic thing I do-form my own opinion. My first rule is "don’t believe what my government or the media tells me".
You're wrong about the Taliban and the money they obtain made off opium in Afghanistan. Intel and boots on the ground prove otherwise…like those on my two feet.
Mexico? That's one convoluted situation.
George - I'm not opposed to medical marijuana, but I don't believe in breaking the law simply becuase you disagree with it. My opinion. Drunk drivers kill engaging in illegal activity - it's a personal responsibility issue.
Evan - First, the 'rare' comment was sarcasm. Second, I stand by my comment about unfair laws (see my comments to George re marijuana). I don't think 65 mph speed limits are fair, but when I disobey them I accept the potential consequences of my actions. If we were talking about racist laws then that comment would be relevant.
Keep in mind - my comments have nothing to do with whether I think a particular law (or punishment) is fair. I quite simply believe that if you break the law you should accept the consequences.
That's not a logical position as it's an appeal to authority. Just because something is a law doesn't mean it's right or should be enforced. Just look at the history of racist law in the US.
I realize that violence associated with the manufacture and distribution of illegal drugs is rare, and you hardly ever hear about someone getting hurt or killed in the drug trade
What do you mean by rare? Most violent crime is over money. Gangs run off drug money and violently protect their market share. The cost of these drugs is pushed way up because they're illegal which just adds more fuel to the fire. If it wasn't for the underground drug trade, these people would have to get off the street and find a job instead.
What will the bill consider
What will the bill consider non voilent crimes. do they consider child support non voilent. or is that in a class by it self. because the jail in stafford va has a lot of those in there including my husband. he could not find work and they said that we did not pay enogh of it so they put him in jail. now i know that there is alot of people should be in there get out alot early then him. he is in there for a year. so if they consider child support non voilent please i wish they would send him home to me and our 3 childeren.
we are incarserating too
we are incarserating too many people in va and giving out far more time than some crimes warrent. we changed to truth in sentancing and did away with parole in va but what we forgot is to readjust the amount of time a judge is able to give for those non violent offences or even for technacle violations from missing probation apointment or other things like failling a drug test when we expect a addict to not do any drugs with little or no treatment shouldnt we try to give them help if they fail the test rather than put them away for a long time. we wshould be looking at addiction as the illness it is . and help those who want the help.
Correction
But the simple solution - obeying the law - is seldom included in a discussion about our poor unfortunate incarcerated. How soon we forget that it's the actions of the incarcerated that got them there.
Let me fix that for you.
But the simple solution - obeying the law - is seldom included in a discussion about our poor unfortunate incarcerated. How soon we forget that it is the actions of an uneducated, cowardly minority that creates laws to incarcerate people for daring to refuse to acknowledge an authority that is antithetical to life, liberty, and property.
I agree with you on somethings.
However, the Taliban did ban opium production, "officially". The tribal leaders from the Northwest Territories insisted on continuing opium production and that issue helped secure their support against the Taliban This is well documented by other "boots on the ground".
Since the invasion the Taliban has become desperate for cash and has changed their tune on opium production. Unofficially.
One of the challenges in Afghanistan has been to redirect opium production to other sustainable agricultural products. It's a wide spread problem far more complicated than naming just one group.
Effective strategies require accurate intelligence.
Dont
Dont do the crime if you cant do the crime
GEORGE K
Government and media exploit differences.
That’s how they operate–divide us. Keep us fighting each other.
Pit the poor against the middle class or rich.
A simple thing that happens to work. Instigate race, religion, jobs, social status, radio personalities…anything to keep us from realizing the real problems-“them”. It's power.
My mind doesn’t work that way. I got this real moronic thing I do-form my own opinion. My first rule is "don’t believe what my government or the media tells me".
You're wrong about the Taliban and the money they obtain made off opium in Afghanistan. Intel and boots on the ground prove otherwise…like those on my two feet.
Mexico? That's one convoluted situation.
george, evan
George - I'm not opposed to medical marijuana, but I don't believe in breaking the law simply becuase you disagree with it. My opinion. Drunk drivers kill engaging in illegal activity - it's a personal responsibility issue.
Evan - First, the 'rare' comment was sarcasm. Second, I stand by my comment about unfair laws (see my comments to George re marijuana). I don't think 65 mph speed limits are fair, but when I disobey them I accept the potential consequences of my actions. If we were talking about racist laws then that comment would be relevant.
That's not logical
Keep in mind - my comments have nothing to do with whether I think a particular law (or punishment) is fair. I quite simply believe that if you break the law you should accept the consequences.
That's not a logical position as it's an appeal to authority. Just because something is a law doesn't mean it's right or should be enforced. Just look at the history of racist law in the US.
Rare?
I realize that violence associated with the manufacture and distribution of illegal drugs is rare, and you hardly ever hear about someone getting hurt or killed in the drug trade
What do you mean by rare? Most violent crime is over money. Gangs run off drug money and violently protect their market share. The cost of these drugs is pushed way up because they're illegal which just adds more fuel to the fire. If it wasn't for the underground drug trade, these people would have to get off the street and find a job instead.
frankr27401
You comment is dead on, and I hope everyone reads it.