Baltimore will no longer prosecute for drug possession, prostitution, or other low-level crimes....

To pass laws... Police arrest people for breaking said law.. The Judicial system rules on those charges.. Pretty simple.

You cant tell police hey enforce these laws but dont.

 

Then track it. I am sure you can find the numbers in every locale and make a nifty spread sheet and sent it to Washington. I am sure you can find someone who wants to learn more about guys who piss on a tree or in a field or on a wall.

 

If its no longer prosecuted it wont be tracked.. You will have laws on the book that are not being charged... So change the law.

 

I don't think they got the memo...

Politicians tell police to do that all the time.

Welcome to Fundamentally Transformed Amerika. The rule of law in the old America died a long time ago...

 

Or keep it illegal for cases you really want to prosecute and don't track the numbers because its not worth anyone's time. I dont care.

 

Selecting enforcement? Would that not lead to claims of racism or favortism something they claim they are against?

 

Lol, or prosecutorial discretion .

 

They couldn't pay me to live in Bmore. I was forced to have to reside there for work, once. Horrible, crime-ridden Dem city. Anyone who disagrees never lived in the city. The statistics don't lie.

 

And the elected officials say this. Democracy at work.
You can post a cop behind every tree and get people arrested for jaywalking all day.
It's good that politicians demand their cops to get real crooks instead of being petty.
Them cops had their go, and on purpose targeted the black population for decades.
So there is a need for that institute to get told what to do and what not.

 

While that theoretically makes sense, one thing New York is trying to deal with is that making things legal does not mean that you are not going to still have an illegal market that evades the regulatory requirements that come with legalization---like collecting taxes on your weed sales.

 

I’m in favor of fewer reasons to put people in jail, so I don’t see a problem here.

 

Well Golly Gee that has been used to claim racism by posters like notme on this very forum

 

Agree with you here. Allowing for selective enforcement would absolutely lead to racist outcomes. Better to drop the laws from the books if the aim is to not enforce them.

 

Sound like they threw in the towel. I think that the whole thing, the digression and the choice to ignore it, is a direct result of the Democrat welfare state.

 

Strange enough these policies of non enforcement are backed by the suggested that to many of ( fill in the blank) are charged with said crime... Since the push behind this is race based then you should be against this entirely.

Again
"The policies enacted over the past year have resulted in a decrease in arrests, no adverse impact on the crime rate, and address the systemic inequity of mass incarceration," the statement said.

As a result, the policies will be adopted permanently.

"Today, America's war on drug users is over in the city of Baltimore. We leave behind the era of tough-on-crime prosecution and zero-tolerance policing and no longer default to the status quo to criminalize mostly people of color for addiction," Mosby said. "We will develop sustainable solutions and allow our public health partners to do their part to address mental health and substance use disorder."

Aka to many POC are charged so it has to go.. No one asks why it is that way.. Claiming racism is just an easy out.

 

I see it as advancing freedoms. I, being a patriotic American, love freedom. So I don’t see a problem with this.

 

If you think I should be against this then I must not have made my position clear. Sorry about that.
I’m in favor of fewer reasons to put people in jail.
I’m in favor of policies that don’t lead to racist outcomes. (The war on drugs has absolutely exacerbated that issue)
I’m in favor of treating medical issues as such.
I like things that expand our freedoms.

Your “AKA” seems like a misrepresentation of the statement.

 

MO’s is good, and we are very fortunate to have many excellent choices. My personal favorite is Jimmy’s Seafood.

As for the inner harbor, drastic change from what you experienced in 2007. Both pavilions are pretty much boarded up. We used to love strolling the promenade around the harbor, watching children on the carousel, visiting all the shops, sampling all the food and enjoying pleasant evenings listening to music from Pier 6. It was wonderful! Now, there’s a freaking Ripley‘s Believe it or Not on the Promenade . WTH! Our inner harbor is a shadow of its former self, is it any wonder why.

 

I dont like the idea of people in jail but they are there for a reason... if you dont want people in jail perhaps they should not break the law.
How is being charged for a crime racist but not charging people based on race not racist?
Dealing drugs has nothing to do with mental nor medical issues. Addicts are another story but they does not excuse breaking the law.
How is NOT enforcing laws on the books expanding "freedom"?

That idiot that got off for murder because of "affluenza" did that expand anyones "freedoms"?

How so its clear as day.. Read it... If you see anything other then the obvious words in front of you that is your bias trying to spin what is clear.

 

Yeah, the reason is that they broke a law. The question is does that law yield positive outcomes for society. In the case of the drug war it’s clear that they don’t. Falling on the wrong side of bad laws is not an indictment of those affected.

Charging a person with a crime is not racist, but the results can be racist. Are you familiar with sentencing disparities between crack vs powdered cocaine? Do you know the difference between the two? What about usage demographics?

You acknowledge that addicts warrant a different look than dealers, yes? That’s good. Do you see laws that penalize mental illness/medical issues as being okay? I don’t.

All laws limit our freedoms. What we have to do is determine if the limitations result in good. Doing away with bad laws increases freedom without increasing suffering.

I don’t quite recall the details of the affluenza case. Believe it was vehicular manslaughter, right? No of course not. We have laws against vehicular manslaughter because it results in harm to members of society.

It was a reference to bad laws that data shows disproportionately impacts people of color. If it was so clearly what your “AKA” attempted to make it out to be your “AKA” wouldn’t have been necessary in the first place.

 

Oh I am fully aware who implemented those policies /laws and it was not Republicans.. Go going /facepalm

So you admit its race based.. Then you claim i am saying Mosby said something she did not when i did no such thing and you focus on AKA instead of what she said.

Your Rules for Radicals is weak.. Go back and re-read it and try again.

 

I can see you’re not putting much effort into your bad faith argument here. Catch you in another one.

 

Because i have you in a deep hole you run...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bb4c98-9dcf-11e9-85d6-5211733f92c7_story.html

Enjoy....

So the issue you brought up that is racist Joe Biden was behind.. Mosby's own words ( and yours) admit its based on race ( issue in OP article.) so yes please run... My guess is you are spam reporting my posts trying to make this go away.

 

Not running from anything. I offered you a fair an honest discussion and all you can do is attempt to blame one side or another. Perfect example in this post. You’re not looking for an honest discussion, just looking to score political points against a rival. Not interested.

 

"Agree with you here. Allowing for selective enforcement would absolutely lead to racist outcomes. Better to drop the laws from the books if the aim is to not enforce them."

I guess you forgot this already ^^^^

How can we agree on the majority of the issue if i am not here for honest dialogue? I know damn well you are trying to convince mods to delete my post..

I will simplify my opinion on this topic.

I AM AGAINST RACE BASED POLICIES.

I thought you were at the start but watching you spin and complain about me typing "AKA" instead of discussing Mosby's own words shows you are doing what you accuse me of.