Osler's Razor

It almost goes without saying that a reform in our drug policy would reduce this number drastically. You've mentioned alternatives tangentially in class, but the bottom line is that we're spending a lot of time, money, and even lives, but the drugs keep on coming. What we're doing now is digging us deeper into the problem without really fixing it. At this point, it may have been cheaper and more productive to occupy Columbia and station National Guardsmen arm and on along the border.

I'm so not concerned with the probation and parole numbers, since it's much less expensive to maintain those programs, and the people who deserve to be released to supervision should be released. And honestly, if there weren't systemic problems with who is in prison and how they got there, I wouldn't be so concerned with the prison numbers. After all, we have prisons for a reason, it's just that the current inmate profile is out of sync with that reason. What function of criminal justice does it serve to have people jailed for such relatively minor crimes? Retributive? Deterrent? Not so far.

Recidivism is another vital weakness in our system, but I'll leave that for someone else to discuss.
 

Decriminalize possession and private, home use of small amounts of recreational drugs.
 

Potential solutions:

1. Ship all criminals to New Zealand.

2. Create Thunderdome. Put Tina Turner in charge. 2 men enter, 1 man leaves. Prison population dwindles.

3. All prisoners must battle Grar the panda for their survival. Grar has flamethrower. Prison population dwindles.

4. Take away California's statehood. State with the largest prison population. No longer a state. Nothing to see here.
 

Legalize and tax marijuana. With tax proceeds, create Bio-dome instead of Thunderdome and put all inmates with drug charges in the Bio-dome with Pauly Shore. If the inmates can survive for a year, they gain their freedom, but have to live in California.
 

Like RRL idea. But to Michael, Giant Maverick Panda say use Carrot-top.
 

RRL...or you could implement the Escape from LA plan with regard to CA... :)
 

I'm pretty much agreeing except for the New Zealand part.

I'm a total libertarian where use of any substance (alcohol, cigarettes, drugs) and at the very least think these should all be seen equally by the law. But in the absence of total legalization, I'm with y'all on doing something about legalizing small amounts for home/recreational/even medicinal use.

I'm writing this hurriedly without reading the article though, I'm just assuming that it's drugs that have put so many people in prison. But I don't know: is it too-harsh sentencing for other crimes as well?
 

Generally, sentencing can be tailored to fit the crime by the judge (or the jury, at least in Texas). The problem comes with the absolute hysteria legislators have over drugs and drug use. The idea of the "war on drugs" has infected our policy to the point where it makes no sense. For instance, pharmacologically-mild drugs with no approved medical uses are treated as more dangerous than things like opiates, amphetamines and cocaine simply because there are approved medical uses to opiates, amphetamines and cocaine.

I don't think people that are drug addicts are good, contributing members of society. I think they're sick, and need treatment, like alcoholics or people with any sort of addiction. I think that driving under the influence of any intoxicant should remain illegal and be punished accordingly. I think employers have a right to demand that their workers show up sober to work. But pretending like there is an actual difference between alcohol and other drugs because one has been socialized into our culture and the others haven't is silly and breeds crime.

Decriminalize or legalize them, tax them, and provide harm reduction services instead of punishing end users. Cut out the need for a black market and you cut out the major motivation for a lot of violent crime.
 

1. Secede.
2. Legalize everything. Thus, no more prisons.

...

4. Profit!

- Coco, Great and Glorious Leader of the Confederate States of the Puffalump

P.S.: In all seriousness, it's time to legalize recreational drugs. Let some folks out of prison. Maybe Obama can party just as hard as W in the Harold and Kumar movie...
 

Kansas, it seems, has a partial answer to the question. Apparently, a state legislator just introduced a bill that would once again abolish the death penalty in Kansas. Why? The financial crisis - the whole "it costs more to put a prisoner to death than it does to keep him in prison for life" argument. It won't lower the prison or probation population, but it could lower the state budget.

Interesting tidbit - as conservative a state as Kansas seems to be, I don't believe a condemned prisoner has been executed here since the Kansas Legislature voted to reinstate the death penalty in 1994. How about that?

Whether you support capital punishment or not (in the interests of full disclosure, I'm on the fence), you gotta admit that it makes sense - if you're not gonna use it, why keep it on the books? Why spend money on the more extensive voir dire, the automatic appeals, etc, when you're not executing death row prisoners?

I also agree with legalization to an extent - I'm not sure PCP should be legalized, but I'm all for legalizing and taxing marijuana. Save the money wasted fighting that and focus on something more important.
 

Yes, Kansas, I think you--and Kansas--are right to notice the expense of the death penalty. It's definitely not the reason I'm against it, but cost is the one argument that conservative-ish states will listen to. I think it might fly in Virginia. No other argument will.
 

Campbell:

Back in high school, I had to do a whole debate case centered around the idea of legalization/decriminalization. At first, I was like you: "why in God's name would I want to make PCP available at the pharmacy for any idiot that wants it?"

Then I thought about it: PCP isn't one of those drugs that is used casually. You generally have to know and seek out PCP if you want to use it (thank you, Prof. Osler, for assigning me PCP for Drug Day!). It is so uncommonly abused that would hypothesize that no one who currently possesses the desire to do PCP says, "well, yeah, I'd love me some PCP, but I think I'm going to pass because it's illegal." I think there are people that say that about marijuana, cocaine, maybe LSD or mushrooms -- but not PCP.

So, let's assume that everyone that wants to do PCP has the guilty state of mind already. At least some of these people will act upon it. A percentage of those will be ripped off by shady drug dealers (who are not answerable to consumer safety commissions) and ingest impure PCP, resulting in complications.

This is all simplified if PCP is regulated, taxed, and sold only at government-approved locations by clerks trained to detect minors and other people to whom it is illegal to serve intoxicating substances.

Anything "bad" about PCP intoxication currently (like going on a rampage) would still be illegal. You don't have to let the crazy man beat up a telephone pole just because he legally purchased the PCP. You still take him to jail, dry him out, and punish him for his crime: but what you don't punish is his decision to legally purchase and consume PCP.

I don't think we'd see a spike in PCP usage. I don't even think we'd see much of a spike in marijuana or cocaine usage, since anyone that currently wants to do these drugs pretty much does. What we would see is a lot less subterfuge or black market business that is associated with these drugs. No one goes into the smuggling business when it is more profitable to do it legally.
 

As a defense attorney, I think the number of arrest/probationers etc could be reduced if Citizens and Police Officers used their discretion more wisely.

Often, my clients are arrested because 1)the cops were called when there was no reason for the cops to be called (i.e. simple family matter, albeit voices raised) and 2) Once the cops arrive because of a call they often times feel forced to arrest someone.

What ends up happening is the person arrested, who was innocent of any crime, has to spend money to hire an attorney. If the attorney is good, the end up getting the case dismissed, but not until months of system red tape which involves the client getting arrested, bailing out, and appearing in court several times.

So in short, the solution is to use your discretion, both in calling the cops and in cops arresting people.

And also I agree that we should decriminalize marijuana.