Props 47 & 57 and Gov Brown

[Lou]

1 hour ago, gotbeer said:

There wasn't for the ahole that shot up the Whittier officer.

yes, there was. 

[Lou]

6 hours ago, fan_since79 said:

. By the way, he's 22 years old with seven convictions already. That's unacceptable!

where are you getting this number? 

[Lhalo]

1 hour ago, gotbeer said:

Channel 7 did a segment tonight on the drug use, and early release.  They were interviewing a family and saying their son was early released based on prop 57.  He's been a revolving door of drug use.  His family said he should still be in jail.  They say he refuses to go to any sort of drug program, and continues to use drugs and steals to get the money. 

Sounds like he should be in jail for theft. 

[Lou]

17 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

Sounds like he should be in jail for theft. 

people don't go to jail if they aren't arrested 

however, if the family truly wanted him incarcerated, why didn't they report his criminal activity to the police? 

[Tank]

non violent offenders can include those arrested for DUI, right? i have no interest in anyone pulled over for DUi being sent on their way home - they deserve jail time before they kill/hurt someone. 

as for drug users, i suppose there's an argument to be made for not incarcerating them. not sure what a good alternative would be. for multiple repeat offenders, maybe jail time becomes an issue to consider as they likely turn to illegal things to support/finance their usage.

[Lhalo]

34 minutes ago, Tank said:

as for drug users, i suppose there's an argument to be made for not incarcerating them. not sure what a good alternative would be. 

How about just let them use drugs? What they do to their body is their choice.

34 minutes ago, Tank said:

for multiple repeat offenders, maybe jail time becomes an issue to consider as they likely turn to illegal things to support/finance their usage.

If they turn to illegal ways to support drug use then by all means, put them in jail. 

[Tank]

16 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

How about just let them use drugs? What they do to their body is their choice.

intellectually, i don't disagree with you, but can serious drug users just do their thing in a vacuum? it sure doesn't seem like it from my experience, and what they do often affects others. when their work affects others, as it often does, time for the law to step in.

[red321]

4 hours ago, gotbeer said:

Channel 7 did a segment tonight on the drug use, and early release.  They were interviewing a family and saying their son was early released based on prop 57.  He's been a revolving door of drug use.  His family said he should still be in jail.  They say he refuses to go to any sort of drug program, and continues to use drugs and steals to get the money. 

So, he was in jail due to his drug use, didn't get treatment while in jail, was released from jail, and went back to using drugs. 

No shit. Next on Channel 7, sky is blue.

Longer time in jail will have no impact on that. They want him in jail, so they don't have to deal with him. I get that. I live that. At least you don't have to worry, is tonight the night you get the call?

but none of that actually helps address the addiction issue

Oregon has a program, takes drug users out of prison and puts them in addiction rehab. You have to qualify. Financially they determined it made better sense with less recidivism, or maybe that's what they are thinking will be end result.

The current strategy of just locking up drug users has failed. 

 

[Lou]

6 hours ago, calscuf said:

Hey, Lou's doing the Mexican mother thing: "He a good boy, he no ina a gang!"

yeah, that was dumb.

i've only stated facts and asked legitimate questions. not once have I defended this piece of shit 

Edited February 22, 2017 by Lou

[Jason]

9 hours ago, Lou said:

so, this killing had nothing to do with Props 47 or 57 then? 

good thread 

You can blame AB 109 as prop 57 hasn't gone into affect yet. . He had at least 5 probation violations since his release in 2016 and only served a couple of days for each one. AB 109 isn't on the voters.

[Glen]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

You can blame AB 109 as prop 57 hasn't gone into affect yet. . He had at least 5 probation violations since his release in 2016 and only served a couple of days for each one. AB 109 isn't on the voters.

So the OP was hysterically reacting to something without having the full facts at hand, as were those who supported his premise?

[Stradling]

20 hours ago, loofah faced shit gibbon said:

lol.

Welcome back to the fray, nutjob.

 

@Blarg would like to have a word with you about being a meanie to Brian since he doesn't post much anymore. 

[Blarg]

I think you've got a case of mistaken identity. 

[fan_since79]

11 hours ago, Lou said:

where are you getting this number? 

That was a different parolee who led Torrance police on a high speed chase in a stolen car and smashed into another car, killing the innocent driver.

That man is a gang member from San Pedro, 22 years old with seven convictions already. I was making a point that there are numerous people like him roaming the streets when they should be locked up for life. 

[Stradling]

15 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I think you've got a case of mistaken identity. 

Oh sorry I thought it was you who called me out for giving Brian a hard time for the affect Scioscia has on his enjoyment of baseball.  Must have been some other dude. 

[Blarg]

Are you saying I'm being mean to Brian in some way for... What? 

[Jason]

5 hours ago, Glen said:

So the OP was hysterically reacting to something without having the full facts at hand, as were those who supported his premise?

If Prop 57 had been in affect then he would have been released prior to 2016

[Glen]

So you're using time travel to justify your point?

[mtangelsfan]

[Lou]

17 hours ago, Glen said:

So the OP was hysterically reacting to something without having the full facts at hand, as were those who supported his premise?

yes 

[Lou]

11 hours ago, Glen said:

So you're using time travel to justify your point?

fortunately for him he isn't black or we may have had us a good ol' fashun lynchin' 

[Lou]

18 hours ago, Jason said:

You can blame AB 109 as prop 57 hasn't gone into affect yet. . He had at least 5 probation violations since his release in 2016 and only served a couple of days for each one. AB 109 isn't on the voters.

I hate to break it to you, but that usually is the case for probation violations (depending on the severity of the violation, of course)

Most violations are for things like not reporting when you're supposed to, not attending court-ordered classes, being somewhere you're not supposed to be, not paying your fine, not securing employment, not living where you listed on your court release papers ( or not reporting that you changed address), etc. 

What usually happens is when a person gets in front of the judge, he makes some bs excuse and the judge tells him not to do that anymore and releases him. 

It's important to remember there's a big difference between a probation violation and violating parole. 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Lou

[Rico]

His 2014 conviction for GTA was for two years.  It's now 2017.  

[Spirit]

On 2/21/2017 at 0:20 PM, Brian Ilten said:

If you voted for any of the above... how does it feel to have blood on your hands?

 

RIP Officer Keith Boyer.  Somehow, someway, the liberals in this state will either change or pay.

 

It so good to see you back online, @Brian Ilten!  I was very worried you hadn't survived the Bowling Green Massacre or the terrorist attacks in Sweden.  

Glad you're safe! 

 

 

[Lhalo]

Hey @ten ocho recon scout or @LBHalos17 how formidable is the Winter Gardens gang?