4 ms·

The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. I can't support that. Repealing mandatory mini

The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. I can't support that. Repealing mandatory minimums and revising sentences is something I could get behind. Not because marijuana law has changed, but because they were given unjust sentences in the first place.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. The principle "if one in jail for an offense which is later legalized, one should be released" would only lead to freeing Capone with the end of prohibition if tax evasion were legalized at that time, which it was not. If, instead, the principle "if one in jail because one was prosecuted for an offense other than the one primarily motivating the government to seek to jail you because they had insufficient evidence for the offense that is the prime motive, and the offense that is the prime motive for the government seeking to jail you -- even if it is not the one you were convicted of -- is legalized, then you should be released for jail", well, then Capone would only be released with the end of prohibition if murder were legalized at that time. I don't think any principal which would lead to Al Capone being released when prohibition ended was either proposed or implied upthread.
- slavik81 11y ago
  That seems more like a technicality of the example I chose than some deep-seated principal of justice. Besides, do most modern day drug dealers accurately report their earnings to the IRS? Would you actually support prosecutors who aimed to convict drug dealers on on tax fraud because they knew you were about to pardon all drug offenses?
yolesaber 11y ago
Al Capone did plenty of illegal things beyond distributing alcohol: murder, racketeering, etc. If he had merely sold booze like so many others I would argue there is no wrong in letting him walk free post prohibition. And yes I agree with you wholeheartedly that the sentences were unjust in the first place. It is my hope that legalization will steer people to reconsider the excessive harshness and implicit racial bias of drug laws e.g. crack cocaine users receiving larger sentences than those caught with powder.
bmm6o 11y ago
> The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. I can't support that. Al Capone was famously only convicted of tax evasion, so I'm not sure this is relevant. And bootlegging wasn't what made him "Public Enemy #1", it was the violence he used to run his gang. Those actions would still be crimes without prohibition. The US is fairly unique among Western countries in that the repeal of a law doesn't automatically end the sentences of people convicted of breaking it (AFAIK - this came up here on HN in the last few months).

dragonwriter 11y ago

> The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. The principle "if one in jail for an offense which is later legalized, one should be released" would only lead to freeing Capone with the end of prohibition if tax evasion were legalized at that time, which it was not. If, instead, the principle "if one in jail because one was prosecuted for an offense other than the one primarily motivating the government to seek to jail you because they had insufficient evidence for the offense that is the prime motive, and the offense that is the prime motive for the government seeking to jail you -- even if it is not the one you were convicted of -- is legalized, then you should be released for jail", well, then Capone would only be released with the end of prohibition if murder were legalized at that time. I don't think any principal which would lead to Al Capone being released when prohibition ended was either proposed or implied upthread.

slavik81 11y ago
That seems more like a technicality of the example I chose than some deep-seated principal of justice. Besides, do most modern day drug dealers accurately report their earnings to the IRS? Would you actually support prosecutors who aimed to convict drug dealers on on tax fraud because they knew you were about to pardon all drug offenses?

yolesaber 11y ago

Al Capone did plenty of illegal things beyond distributing alcohol: murder, racketeering, etc. If he had merely sold booze like so many others I would argue there is no wrong in letting him walk free post prohibition. And yes I agree with you wholeheartedly that the sentences were unjust in the first place. It is my hope that legalization will steer people to reconsider the excessive harshness and implicit racial bias of drug laws e.g. crack cocaine users receiving larger sentences than those caught with powder.

bmm6o 11y ago

> The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that Al Capone should have walked free when prohibition ended. I can't support that. Al Capone was famously only convicted of tax evasion, so I'm not sure this is relevant. And bootlegging wasn't what made him "Public Enemy #1", it was the violence he used to run his gang. Those actions would still be crimes without prohibition. The US is fairly unique among Western countries in that the repeal of a law doesn't automatically end the sentences of people convicted of breaking it (AFAIK - this came up here on HN in the last few months).