If we ever decriminalize Marijuana at the Federal level, that seems to me like it would mean millions of prisoners held for offenses involving only that drug would need to be set free. In my mind it is a horrible injustice to jail people for a relatively harmless substance like THC.
I think in 100 years, more evolved humans will look back on the THC incarcerations the same way we now look upon the Salem Witch trials, or prohibition, etc. You know, one of those times where mankind just massively screwed up 'en mass' on sort of a societal level, and was unable to correct itself because the majority of people are brainwashed into believing whatever their parents told them about things. Sort of as a feed-back loop also, parents were unwilling to teach their children things that conflicted with societal norms. So society as a whole can fall into this kind of a 'rut' where getting out of it takes a long process of evolution of thought.
There's about 95,000 people in federal prison with a drug offense as their most serious charge. About 11,500 of those charges involved primarily marijuana. (The overwhelming majority of that is for trafficking, not possession.)
That is of course not to say that justice, for a few tens of thousands of people isn't an important thing! Though I hesitate a little bit to put trafficking in the same "justice" category as using. It's generally accepted that the government has much more leeway to control what is sold in the market than to control what people do with their bodies.
It's pretty misleading to look only at federal inmates as they're a relatively small percentage of the overall prison population. There are currently 189,520 total federal inmates (https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/population_statistics.j...) out of the total 2,173,800 incarcerated individuals (as per original article) in the US. Probably better to look for a figure that includes state prisons and local jails as well.
My post mentions both federal (about 11,500) and federal + state (about 20,000-40,000). The reason for mentioning federal is because BJS has data for marijuana versus other drug offenses for the federal system.
Note that while only a small proportion of the overall prison population is in federal prison, a much larger proportion of drug convicts are in federal prison.
"There's about 95,000 people in federal prison with a drug offense as their most serious charge. About 11,500 of those charges involved primarily marijuana. (The overwhelming majority of that is for trafficking, not possession.)"
So no, your statement is not correct. If we take 'overwhelming majority' of 11,500 as 60%, that would leave ~5000 prisoners whose 'most serious charge' is possession of marijuana. Or about 2.5% of the federal inmate population (all this assuming that the figures quoted are correct, I didn't source them myself).
It would be interesting to see the re-incarceration rate of those set free from charges like that.
I wonder if jail time has the opposite effect of rehabilitation for many, especially considering how much harder life can be with jail time on your record, or even just the black hole in your resume that you have to explain.
Not to mention that you spent the last however many years being told and treated like criminal scum, I imagine that would have a fairly significant impact on your mental health and self image, as well as your relationships with friends and family.
I found this article on how jail in the Netherlands is focused on giving prisoners whatever they need to go back into society and not reoffend interesting. They claim that under 10% of prisoners reoffend, compared to about 50% in England and the US:
> If we ever decriminalize Marijuana at the Federal level, that seems to me like it would mean millions of prisoners held for offenses involving only that drug would need to be set free.
Decriminalisation isn't necessarily retroactive, that it's now legal or less illegal doesn't mean it was at the time of conviction.
For instance despite the Labouchere Amendment ("gross indencency") having been mostly repealed in 1967, Turing legally remained a criminal until his pardon in 2013.
Not just Turing, people still alive are still under great injustice, because it was only Turing who received a pardon. Pardons should have been provided to everyone convicted under those laws.
> Gay and bisexual men convicted of now-abolished sexual offences in England and Wales are to receive posthumous pardons, the government has announced.
> Thousands of living men convicted over consensual same-sex relationships will also be eligible for the pardon.
I predict that when (not if, but when) the Federal Gov finally does make Marijuana fully legal, they will do whatever is required to make it retroactive. Even if it takes an amendment to the constitution specifically for this purpose it will need to be done, and will be considered minor paperwork. There will be no debate about whether it needs to be done. Who would argue against it? Perhaps only those Judges who handed down harsh sentences, because THEY are the individuals who morally deserve to be punished, and THEY are the ones who would go to jail if this were a just world.
"If we ever decriminalize Marijuana at the Federal level, that seems to me like it would mean millions of prisoners held for offenses involving only that drug would need to be set free."
Millions? Millions??
Where on Earth are you getting "millions" from? And why is this completely absurd and unsubstantiated claim the top voted comment?
The idea that millions, or even hundreds of thousands of people are in jail for simply smoking a joint is a myth:
"Less than 1 percent of sentenced drug offenders in federal court in 2014 were convicted for simple drug possession, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and most of those convictions were plea-bargained down from trafficking charges. Even on the state level, drug-possession convicts are relatively rare. In 2013, only 3.6 percent of state prisoners were serving time for drug possession, often the result of a plea bargain, compared with 12 percent of prisoners convicted for trafficking. Virtually all the possession offenders had long prior arrest and conviction records. The meth users that Tustin, California, police officer Mark Turner encountered in his undercover narcotics days were sentenced to drug classes. “Then they would skip out of the classes and always re-offend,” he says." (Source: http://www.city-journal.org/html/decriminalization-delusion-... )
Trafficking can be a small amount of pot and a box of ziplock bags, but you're generally talking about 28-40g before you'll get charged (and usually more like 100g+), and the fed sentencing guidelines all involve the prefix "kilo" on the weights, so that tends to be the scale they're concerned with.
I would dare say that there have been millions of people whose lives have been affected very badly by the Marijuana laws, however I didn't look up the incarceration statistics, so if you feel the need to correct that number, no problem. Doesn't affect my point at all.
Hmmm. The Salem episode lasted seven months from the first accusations (March 1692) to the last hangings (September 1692) and the dissolution of the court appointed to try those people (October 1692).
The war on drugs is now about a century old, and going strong.
Hopefully, future people will look on both as some kind of collective self-delusion. But the comparison is otherwise unfair to Cotton Mather, Samuel Sewall, and the rest of those Puritan ghouls responsible for that episode. And I can't believe I'm defending them.
I think where you lack is in the common sense to realize I wasn't comparing magnitudes or duration of the episodes but was merely pointing out how mass-delusions and brainwashing makes people basically irrational.
I would expand that and decriminalize almost all forms of drug use (not selling/distribution). The number of people incarcerated for drug use is much higher than just those there on drug charges. A fair amount of property and public order laws are broken by drug users as well.
Getting them into a real treatment plan, with real job placement, housing assistance, etc, would stem more of that crime than throwing them in jail/prison.
I think in 100 years, more evolved humans will look back on the THC incarcerations the same way we now look upon the Salem Witch trials, or prohibition, etc. You know, one of those times where mankind just massively screwed up 'en mass' on sort of a societal level, and was unable to correct itself because the majority of people are brainwashed into believing whatever their parents told them about things. Sort of as a feed-back loop also, parents were unwilling to teach their children things that conflicted with societal norms. So society as a whole can fall into this kind of a 'rut' where getting out of it takes a long process of evolution of thought.