When anti-drug laws go awry... (1 Viewer)

[BullDawg]

http://www.tribstar.com/local/local_story_246225916.html

Let me preface this by saying crystal methamphetamine is the most hideous substance created thus far by man. It makes crack cocaine look like pop-a-rock candy. It's effect are devastating to the user, to the user's family and friends, and to the user's community. The manufacturing process is absurdly dangerous for anyone in the vicinity, not just the cook. I support any effort to eradicate this drug from the face of the earth, however difficult that may be.

That being said, here is an example of how "any effort" can actually go awry. While Granny did indeed violate the law as it is written in her area, she in no way violated the spirit of the law. This is where a District Attorney can, and should IMHO, drop all charges. This doesn't seem to be the case at this time though.

So should the aggressive application of the law, in the interest of public safety in face of such a deadly substance proven to negatively affect entire communities, be given precedence over the common sense application of the same law?

 

[V Chip]

Agreed.

But to many folks, allowing a DA to weight the benefits of a case, or allowing a judge to rule differently in different circumstances reeks of "activism" and "liberalism," or "preferential treatment" and "profiling." DAs get afraid to not charge for fear of being seen as soft on crime, or for letting off old white people and not the young off-white people; legislators pass laws that have mandatory minimums and write into laws the inability for a judge to decide what is best for the situation and forcing a judge to just become a person who presides over a predetermined outcome.

People are becoming afraid to use common sense (or just don't have any), and worse many legislators are writing laws that don't allow it.