They didn't legalize anything, they decriminalized a set of issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization

Vs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalization

All you have are semantics?

No, but I do like how you attempt to purely pass off connotation to push your right wing crap.

Starting off strong today.

Wish I could return the complement.

Some laws are stupid and should not be obeyed.

And if the majority support laws that are cruel and stupid? Your entire viewpoint is ridiculous. People are born into society without being asked. Don't assume so much.

So society has broken down? Is your city on fire? Laws are broken on the regular. It's completely normal. You should calm down.

And morally permissible? Heh. It's not complicated, being a decent person. None of it requires laws.

Ok I will answer it directly. It depends.

You really need a law to tell you murder is wrong? Why do you worship government? Why do you worship law? Why can't you find your own path and your own moral code? Why must you seek to control others for the sake of your comfort?

And in the situation where people disagree on acceptable actions? There should be a conversation. If conversation fails, just do like governments do and use violence. Oh wait, legally only governments can use force. How do you feel about that by the way?

Unless you are feeding starving children with stolen food, probably.

You claimed things aren't black and white, and now you bitch that situations can be complex. You would steal to feed your family, why are you changing the subject?

Stop moving the goalposts. You would if you had to. Now reply that you'll never have to. And we can end this stupid conversation.

Google the phrase if you feel confused. Also I hope you have a great day.

It's morally permissible to break the law if you don't agree with it?

Yes, but that doesnt make you free from the consequences of breaking it.

That's more than semantics. Those are two words that have distinct legal definitions.

Marijuana used to be illegal in Colorado. If you were caught possessing it you would be arrested and could be incarcerated.

Colorado decriminalized marijuana in the 70's. During the period of decriminalization if you were caught with a bag of weed that was for personal use, the cops would take the bag and write you a ticket. The ticket was for a civil, not criminal, infraction. You could pay it by mail.

A few years ago Colorado legalized marijuana. If I were to get arrested for some unrelated offense and had a bag of weed in my pocket, the cops would give it back when they released me.

Why are we debating the meaning of words here instead of the crux of the matter. Definitions are important so as not to mislead ourselves but the issue at hand is the reason for the change in the first place. We shouldn't change our laws based on who violates those laws the most. I'm not pro-legalization of cannabis because black people are the majority of those who get in trouble for it. I'm pro-legalization because it's a dumb law.

If any demographic violates a law more than others we shouldn't change a law just because of that. We should change laws based on whether it should be a law at all. If a certain group violates that law and the law is just maybe that group should stop violating the law in disproportionate numbers. We aren't discussing a victimless crime here. The victims of a crime should be taken more into consideration than the perpetrator.

Would you be in favor of lowered penalties for homicide because one demographic disproportionately contributes to our homicide rate? Just take the question at face value without considering which demographic is in question or any of the theories behind WHY that demographic is overrepresented.

Dead on correct. Are they changing laws in order to not appear racist? That’s what it looks like to me.

You're becoming one of my favorite contributors because all the assholes hate you so much. Keep up the good work!

https://youtu.be/GhbfyP578oc

Collectivism is great!!! Special rules for me but, not you lol. Marxist BS

What? Not being arrested for something doesn’t mean it’s legal. It just means you have to show up at court without being held until then or then they come arrest you.

I’m not saying it’s the best decision. But I think it’s pretty easy to defend prioritizing violent or other more serious crimes over petty theft and non-violent drug crimes.

they did this in some parts of California and theft went through the roof. People are getting their amazon packages stolen, theft at grocery stores, gas out of peoples vehicles, break ins, etc.

Also im guessing this was a liberal politician who voted this in?

Do you have a source? How about any information on conviction rates?

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/05/14/shoplifting-california-prop-47-reduced-penalties/

Thanks.

Preliminary FBI crime reports show a 12 percent jump in larceny-theft, which includes shoplifting, but he said it is too early to determine what, if any, increase is due to the ballot measure.

Dang. That is worrying, but like it even says I’d want to see a bit more data and need to be able to control for more variables but that’s a huge spike.

I mean logic dictates that if criminals know cops won't do shit about theft, then theft would go up. The only question is by what %.

They are saying 12% in that example, but as word spreads that they are free to steal in this manner, I would also predict that % will go up rapidly by year 2.

Also my grandfather who is also browses this sub, news, alt sources, etc, said he never saw anything like what's happening now and is afraid that communism is going to come to the U.S. eventually, citing these 2 examples:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/32073/peter-fonda-put-barron-trump-cage-pedophiles-amanda-prestigiacomo

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/donald-trump-jr-s-daughter-4-targeted-twitter-coming-chloe-163417718.html

They're calling for trumps son to be put in a cage filled with pedos and for his granddaughter as well. Did you even read the links? These are famous hollywood liberals

This is what Bolsheviks started doing in Russia, they got violent against the gov in place at that time too, calling for peoples deaths and kidnappings.

Very concerning. Let's just say I'm seriously seeking out some off the grid land at this point and am getting extra guns + ammo this year every other paycheck

Yeah, that's the ticket. Let's worry about muh violent leftist communists. Pay no attention to the current fascist regime behind the curtain.

oh yeah, I'm sure by beating trump and putting another Democrat in office, all our problems will magically disappear, lmfao

Did you read what I said? Allocation of resources. I’d have to research and see what happens if the police focus on preventing certain types of crimes and ignore others. And again, these people aren’t getting off without consequences. They just aren’t being sent to jail prior to trial as frequently. But:

prioritizing violent or other more serious crimes over petty theft and non-violent drug crimes.

How does it lessen sentencing? That happens at trial and isn’t impacted by whether or not you were in jail before except to reduce it for time served.

I think it’s pretty easy to defend prioritizing violent or other more serious crimes over petty theft

Until it is your disabled grandmother's purse containing $200 of hee only $1200 income that month.

Suddenly it will matter then.

Mine are all long dead. But fair point. That’s why I didn’t said it’s the greatest idea ever. Just one that a city council etc. could pretty easily rationalize.

Has criminalizing it de-incentivized it? We spend billions of dollars investigating, prosecuting and punishing drug addicts every year. It's a huge waste of money and we have more addicts per capita than ever. Check out what Portugal did with drugs.

Also, taking away someone's liberty tends to make them more, not less, likely to commit a crime.

Not in the slightest.

Im just talking smack :)

What’s the incentive?

Ive been in jail for 45 days in Austin. They are lying about minorities being most of the prison population.

Aren't local jails more likely to representative of the demographics of their particular area than a picture of a larger area comprised of multiple jails as a whole? If your jail has 100 white prisoners and 1 minority, there might two jails in areas with different demographics that have 100 "minority" prisoners and 1 white prisoner.

So youre saying that Hispanics and blacks are minorities in Austin? Not where I was.

I'm saying being in jail and expecting it to be representative of an entire prison system is like eating the crust and saying you've had a pizza.

Jails aren't prison.

Okay Ill call it prison then.

You can't do a 45 day prison sentence. They'd send you to jail. Which is where you went.

All of the jails are called jails in Austin. There's no prison.

Once again, I am bewildered by these decisions.

Freedom Cities? Sanctuary Cities? What’s next?

Honestly, where are we headed here?

Aren't local jails more likely to representative of the demographics of their particular area than a picture of a larger area comprised of multiple jails as a whole? If your jail has 100 white prisoners and 1 minority, there might two jails in areas with different demographics that have 100 "minority" prisoners and 1 white prisoner.

Honestly, where are we headed here?

The Great American Free-for-All.

Seriously. What’s next? Jail is only a suggestion & if you go we won’t lock the doors just incase you want to leave?

Isn't that the definition of freedom though?

This will facilitate an ethnic cleansing of law abiding people from Austin as white flight drives them into the suburbs and ex-urbs.

I feel very strongly that no such lieniency should by applied to illegal aliens. The very same black citizens imprisoned at rates quite disproportionate to white citizens are having their neighborhood and their quality of life negatively impacted by the very people who entered as felons, dont belong here dont abide by our laws-ie get a license and car insurance, have no way to support themselves, so they deal drugs or commit identity theft. Meanwhile for a black person sent to jail or prison, even if they were innocent, they have to put up w/gang warfare crap by the Latinos. This is a similar problem faced by Native Americans in the system, having to deal with very culturally different Latinos-gang warfare on the inside, and people can die during riots. It's very much a disservice to real Americans of all colors not to differentiate when they are illegals, also including Russians and Indians as they are some of the top offenders as well. People are just people is a naive attitude held by people who don't appreciate that its the illegals who take from citizens, don't assimilate and don't respect the American people, nor the laws protecting society. None of my above comments apply to any people here legally, except for-one. There are legal immigrants who don't assimilate.

No reason why only poor ppl are under any laws.

Some laws are stupid and should not be obeyed.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/05/14/shoplifting-california-prop-47-reduced-penalties/