3 ms·

There may be 2 seperate issues, so I think the question is: Do the inmates in federal prison qualify as low level drug offenders? Moreover, the term being dis

There may be 2 seperate issues, so I think the question is: Do the inmates in federal prison qualify as low level drug offenders? Moreover, the term being discussed isn't a legal term with a definition, so as a result everyone kind of has their own opinion as to what qualifies. So for example, when I think of low level drug offenders forget people in federal prison and I would also think the vast majority of inmates in state prison fall outside my definition. Basically, when I think low level drug offender I am thinking about people who are in county jails. Edit: Your citation explains the vast majority of those first time offenders in federal prison are there for drug trafficking, that is why I discard federal prison as low level.

arcticbull 10y ago
My perspective on smuggling is that it can be non-violent (concealing a substance to get it through the a port of entry) and is a natural response to criminalization of a substance that people want but is being artificially constrained. Further, this question maybe entirely immaterial as I'd imagine the bulk of this would go away completely with legalization and safe access. I think we'd be left with the same levels of smuggling as we see with cigarettes.
- rayiner 10y ago
  It might be a natural response, but that doesn't mean it should be legal. There is a big difference between making it illegal to consume a product that hurts you, and making it illegal to produce and sell a product that hurts the people who buy it.
  - arcticbull 10y ago
    Agreed 100%, I'm saying that if we're deciding to treat this as a public health problem, provide safe/monitored/controlled access officially (like cigarettes) then the illegal network dries up as a side-effect. I'm not saying we should legalize to get rid of traffickers, I'm saying that legalizing for public health reasons will by consequence get rid of the traffickers.

arcticbull 10y ago

My perspective on smuggling is that it can be non-violent (concealing a substance to get it through the a port of entry) and is a natural response to criminalization of a substance that people want but is being artificially constrained. Further, this question maybe entirely immaterial as I'd imagine the bulk of this would go away completely with legalization and safe access. I think we'd be left with the same levels of smuggling as we see with cigarettes.

rayiner 10y ago
It might be a natural response, but that doesn't mean it should be legal. There is a big difference between making it illegal to consume a product that hurts you, and making it illegal to produce and sell a product that hurts the people who buy it.
- arcticbull 10y ago
  Agreed 100%, I'm saying that if we're deciding to treat this as a public health problem, provide safe/monitored/controlled access officially (like cigarettes) then the illegal network dries up as a side-effect. I'm not saying we should legalize to get rid of traffickers, I'm saying that legalizing for public health reasons will by consequence get rid of the traffickers.