What point are you trying to make? She DEALT fucking CRACK. This isn't granny smoking a little weed, this is granny fucking up peoples lives and profiting off of it. Sorry if I think she got what she deserved. Because she is old makes her less responsible for her crimes? I don't think so.

8/17/2007 2:51:34 PM

yeah.

i'm not a big fan of the so-called "war on drugs"...

but this woman was the matriarch of a crime family who took food stamps from the poorest of the poor and traded them for crack cocaine.

sorry if i dont have any sympathy.

8/17/2007 3:08:08 PM

I am pretty sure 13 years taught her a lesson about dealing crack.

8/17/2007 3:12:11 PM

hmm.... you've got a point.

disparities in sentencing, epecially WRT socio-economic status....

yeah, that is a serious problem with our justice system.



dammit.... just when you think you can settle your mind on something, someone comes along and fucks it up.

8/17/2007 3:16:56 PM

Quote :

"Federal Bureau of Prisons estimated that the annual cost in 2001 to house a prisoner was $22,632"

$22,632*13=$294,216

That figure has most likely gone up over time, it also is a rough estimate that does not include the cost of health care. She spent a great deal of time in a prison hospital so that figure is probably nothing near the actual cost of keeping her locked up.

I think fiver or six months in county jail would have taught this 74 year old lady not to take part in or allow her kids to deal crack out of her trailer. That also would have saved the rest of us at least $300,000.

That sentence was not just horribly unjust, but plain stupid and a waste of taxpayer resources.

8/17/2007 3:36:12 PM

Quote :

"this is granny fucking up peoples lives and profiting off of it."

(assuming she's guilty, which it really doesn't sound like she is,)
How is she fucking up peoples lives?

8/17/2007 6:55:42 PM

oh, i dont know. selling crack to low-income people and taking their food stamps.

yeah, that's pretty cool.

i dont know why people have a problem with that.

8/18/2007 3:31:55 AM

I can't help but think nutsmackr is just trolling this topic.

How could unregulated dangerous drugs be any safer than regulated dangerous drugs?

I know that implementing new public policy can be a headache, but we should feasibly be able to control the amount of highly addictive substances that a consumer can purchase at one time, not to mention the frequency at which those purchases are made. With regulated drugs, quality control would be a nonissue. As it is, quality control is a huge issue.

8/18/2007 2:15:11 PM

here's two good reasons for legalizing pot...




seen earlier today at Hempfest 2007, in downtown Seattle
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/328218_hempfest19.html



[Edited on August 19, 2007 at 1:51 AM. Reason : ]

8/19/2007 1:49:06 AM

damn i need to move to seattle...that bitch is smoking in public

8/19/2007 2:09:32 AM

^
yeah, her and a few thousand others.

Quote :

"About 150,000 people were expected at the two-day event [Seattle Hempfest 2007], which calls for greater tolerance of marijuana and hemp use. ... crowds were so large Saturday that people were shoulder to shoulder in many areas. Many people showed up to enjoy the day, one in which the Seattle police didn't crack down excessively on users inside the festival's gated area. ... Teenage boys sported Mohawk-style haircuts. Mothers pushed babies in strollers past older supporters with flecks of silver in their hair. Kyle Thayer, 17, arrived from Federal Way and quickly realized that many attendees were enjoying the leafy substance. He even smoked marijuana out of a small glass pipe while police officers watched. "They didn't care," he said. "There are good people here. There are some crazies, but it's Seattle. Everyone is chilling."

[Edited on August 19, 2007 at 2:49 AM. Reason : ]

8/19/2007 2:38:39 AM