Kentucky Commonwealth attorneys office-weekly cases (drug related cases)

[rstevens62]

This is from the county I live, they put this report out weekly, as an overview of all the cases they have prosecuted for the week. I found it very interesting, there was a total of 45 cases, 32 of which, are drug/ drug related!!!


https://myemail.constantcontact.com/...w97GIYillsqdPw


If anyone was on the fence in regards to the drug war, this should clear it right up for you (as to why they keep the drug war going).

[ocnjgirl]

Originally Posted by rstevens62

This is from the county I live, they put this report out weekly, as an overview of all the cases they have prosecuted for the week. I found it very interesting, there was a total of 45 cases, 32 of which, are drug/ drug related!!!


https://myemail.constantcontact.com/...w97GIYillsqdPw


If anyone was on the fence in regards to the drug war, this should clear it right up for you (as to why they keep the drug war going).

Unfortunately this doesn’t surprise me, drug offenses are an easy cash cow.
There were 663,000 marijuana arrests in this country in 2018, more than in 2017 or 2016. 92% of them were for possession only. Prior to 2016, marijuana arrests were steadily declining.That’s 663,000 people who will not be able to get jobs for at least the next 10 years. And the majority of the arrested tend to be minorities also, despite the fact the numbers of white people smoking pot are far greater.

Meanwhile, more serious crimes such as rape and robbery are going unsolved. They need to quit wasting their time and our money, just to enrich police and municipal coffers, the private prison system and the politicians who invest in them.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.for...ata-shows/amp/

[rstevens62]

Originally Posted by ocnjgirl

Unfortunately this doesn’t surprise me, drug offenses are an easy cash cow.
There were 663,000 marijuana arrests in this country in 2018, more than in 2017 or 2016. 92% of them were for possession only. Prior to 2016, marijuana arrests were steadily declining.That’s 663,000 people who will not be able to get jobs for at least the next 10 years. And the majority of the arrested tend to be minorities also, despite the fact the numbers of white people smoking pot are far greater.

Meanwhile, more serious crimes such as rape and robbery are going unsolved. They need to quit wasting their time and our money, just to enrich police and municipal coffers, the private prison system and the politicians who invest in them.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.for...ata-shows/amp/

Whats interesting, there were NO rapes cases, NO murder cases, NO assault cases, there was a couple sex offenders, but those were for failing to register with the county, (not a new sex offense committed)...


WITHOUT drugs/drug related crime, law enforcement would fade into obscurity and become mostly irrelevant, there just isnt enough 'regular' non-drug related crime to maintain such a large law enforcement, prison industries.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by rstevens62

Whats interesting, there were NO rapes cases, NO murder cases, NO assault cases, there was a couple sex offenders, but those were for failing to register with the county, (not a new sex offense committed)...

WITHOUT drugs/drug related crime, law enforcement would fade into obscurity and become mostly irrelevant, there just isnt enough 'regular' non-drug related crime to maintain such a large law enforcement, prison industries.

Bingo! I've tried to explain that repeatedly in these forums. Drug arrests are the bread and butter of law enforcement and the court system, they are the justification for building new jails, hiring more cops and judges. One of the commonly used criteria for evaluating a Police Officer's performance is the number of felony arrests they have made, and it's so easy to arrest someone for drug possession. Spend a week in a town/neighborhood and you will know who uses drugs and who is on parole. People on parole or probation can be searched without a warrant.

One of the common gripes in these forums is California lowering the status of personal possession of a drug to a misdemeanor. Many people disagree with that and justify their position by telling us that their local Police want to repeal that law.. duh yeah I get that, they lost a huge source of 'business' when prop 47 passed.

[ocnjgirl]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Bingo! I've tried to explain that repeatedly in these forums. Drug arrests are the bread and butter of law enforcement and the court system, they are the justification for building new jails, hiring more cops and judges. One of the commonly used criteria for evaluating a Police Officer's performance is the number of felony arrests they have made, and it's so easy to arrest someone for drug possession. Spend a week in a town/neighborhood and you will know who uses drugs and who is on parole. People on parole or probation can be searched without a warrant.

One of the common gripes in these forums is California lowering the status of personal possession of a drug to a misdemeanor. Many people disagree with that and justify their position by telling us that their local Police want to repeal that law.. duh yeah I get that, they lost a huge source of 'business' when prop 47 passed.

That is still true for the "system", but there are a few who have seen the light. There's a group that used to be called LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) who are actively working to get drugs out of the criminal justice system. They think ALL drug use should be part of the Health system, not the justice system. Now they are called the Law Enforcement Action Partnership. It is made up not only of retired cops, but also ex prosecutors and judges, too.



https://lawenforcementactionpartnership.org/ Here are their main principles, below:


Our Principles

• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that adult drug abuse is a public health problem and not a law enforcement matter.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership does not promote the use of drugs and is deeply concerned about the extent of drug abuse and drug-related violence worldwide. However, both drug abuse and violence flourish under drug prohibition, just as they did during alcohol prohibition.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that drugs can be dangerous and addictive. Reasonable regulation should protect public health and include age restrictions on drug sales and use.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that currently illicit drugs pose different risks, requiring different models of regulation. We believe that U.S. states and other nations must be given the regulatory latitude to try new models that balance personal freedom and responsibility with the public health risks of death, disease, and addiction.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that it will take time to strike a proper balance, blending private, public, and medical models to best control and regulate currently illicit drugs. Our speakers advocate for a range of strategies in line with their own diverse experiences and political philosophies.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that government has a public health obligation to ascertain and clearly communicate to the public the risks associated with the use of each currently illicit drug.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership argues that as the government ends prohibition, it should release drug offenders, expunge their records, and restore their civil rights. However, we believe that people using alcohol or other drugs must be held accountable for the harms caused to others while under the influence.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that individuals suffering from drug addiction who seek help should receive support, including drug treatment. We argue that the cost of expanding such services could be financed with a fraction of the criminal justice savings from ending drug prohibition.

[rstevens62]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Bingo! I've tried to explain that repeatedly in these forums. Drug arrests are the bread and butter of law enforcement and the court system, they are the justification for building new jails, hiring more cops and judges. One of the commonly used criteria for evaluating a Police Officer's performance is the number of felony arrests they have made, and it's so easy to arrest someone for drug possession. Spend a week in a town/neighborhood and you will know who uses drugs and who is on parole. People on parole or probation can be searched without a warrant.

One of the common gripes in these forums is California lowering the status of personal possession of a drug to a misdemeanor. Many people disagree with that and justify their position by telling us that their local Police want to repeal that law.. duh yeah I get that, they lost a huge source of 'business' when prop 47 passed.

Yep, Ive tried to explain to people, that was why the Govt targeted opioid prescription drugs back in 2012, addicts were no longer getting their fix from the corner drug dealer...it was tough for police, because they cannot really arrest someone when they have a 'drug' given to them by their doctor, it was only a matter of time before they went after opioids and criminalized them.


Plus its so easy to see proof of this, right after these opioid laws went into effect, we started seeing lots more heroin ODs, deaths, and general usage. I think this is why the pharma industry didnt try to legally challenge the opioid laws, they knew what they were up against and knew they couldnt compete, by every right, with all the profits pharma companies were making with opioids, they should have challenged the laws before they took effect.

[rstevens62]

Originally Posted by ocnjgirl

That is still true for the "system", but there are a few who have seen the light. There's a group that used to be called LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) who are actively working to get drugs out of the criminal justice system. They think ALL drug use should be part of the Health system, not the justice system. Now they are called the Law Enforcement Action Partnership. It is made up not only of retired cops, but also ex prosecutors and judges, too.



https://lawenforcementactionpartnership.org/ Here are their main principles, below:


Our Principles

• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that adult drug abuse is a public health problem and not a law enforcement matter.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership does not promote the use of drugs and is deeply concerned about the extent of drug abuse and drug-related violence worldwide. However, both drug abuse and violence flourish under drug prohibition, just as they did during alcohol prohibition.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that drugs can be dangerous and addictive. Reasonable regulation should protect public health and include age restrictions on drug sales and use.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that currently illicit drugs pose different risks, requiring different models of regulation. We believe that U.S. states and other nations must be given the regulatory latitude to try new models that balance personal freedom and responsibility with the public health risks of death, disease, and addiction.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership recognizes that it will take time to strike a proper balance, blending private, public, and medical models to best control and regulate currently illicit drugs. Our speakers advocate for a range of strategies in line with their own diverse experiences and political philosophies.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that government has a public health obligation to ascertain and clearly communicate to the public the risks associated with the use of each currently illicit drug.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership argues that as the government ends prohibition, it should release drug offenders, expunge their records, and restore their civil rights. However, we believe that people using alcohol or other drugs must be held accountable for the harms caused to others while under the influence.
• The Law Enforcement Action Partnership believes that individuals suffering from drug addiction who seek help should receive support, including drug treatment. We argue that the cost of expanding such services could be financed with a fraction of the criminal justice savings from ending drug prohibition.

Yes, I have heard of this group before, but only on these forums, their mission will never succeed, law enforcement relies too much on the budget money that the drug war provides them, if ALL drug laws were dissolved, LOTS of people in law enforcement would be out of a job, and the budgets would be drastically lower.More importantly though, law enforcement would loose alot of its power, it would no longer be as relevant.


Other than drug use, there is NO other activity that such a large percentage of the population are willing to chance breaking the law over, again and again. Drug use is the PERFECT crime for law enforcement, its easy to find the criminals/ drugs, and its guaranteed, PLENTY of people will break the law in order to partake, even if they are caught numerous times, the chances they will relapse and re-offend are very high, its like shooting fish in a small barrel!

[JerseyGirl415]

Idk, I live in a very safe town of about 25k people, and we have our own police force like most NJ municipalities. Not much consolidation here. And there are still enough non-drug related calls/issues to keep police employed. I know, because I know multiple POs here and I hear about what goes on. Yeah, maybe they'd have fewer arrests, but police at least here do a lot more than arrest people for drugs.

I think effects would mostly be seen at the jail/prison level and court system. Jails/prisons would empty, there would be fewer corrections officers and other staff needed. Possibly fewer criminal court judges and prosecutors/PDs. Where I am, prosecutor's offices and PD's offices have separate units, so there is homicide, SVU, narcotics, etc. The drug-related units would be decimated, but no other units would be affected much.

My county has over 560k people, compared to this KY county in the article of about 165k. And my county is smaller in size than this KY county. It's a busier county with or without drug-related arrests/prosecutions, because there are simply more people. Making drugs legal would have an effect on part of the criminal justice system and may lead to some counties in some parts of the country having to consolidate certain facilities, like courts/jails/prosecutor's or PD's offices, etc. But honestly, where I am at least, it probably wouldn't lead to cutting LEOs at municipal levels, or much drastic change at all at higher levels. Maybe they'd find they can hire fewer local cops over time, but it would not lead to immediate job loss.

Effects would depend on how governments/police forces are set up, and that does vary a bit around the country depending on population and urbanity, etc. Here, it wouldn't affect much at local levels, you'd see an effect at county law enforcement levels (court and prosecution/PD and jail/corrections) and statewide levels (prisons/corrections mostly).

NJ has bail reform, which has basically eliminated cash bail, and our jail populations have dwindled a lot as a result. Some county jails are in danger of closing, rumor has it. I think jails/prisons, obviously, see the most dramatic effect of any criminal justice reform, and that only affects a certain population of employees within the whole system.

TL;DR - where I live, local LEOs would not be affected much by making drugs legal, if it were to ever happen, corrections officers and court staff/judges in criminal divisions, prosecutors, and PDs are most likely to be most affected.

[ocnjgirl]

Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415

Idk, I live in a very safe town of about 25k people, and we have our own police force like most NJ municipalities. Not much consolidation here. And there are still enough non-drug related calls/issues to keep police employed. I know, because I know multiple POs here and I hear about what goes on. Yeah, maybe they'd have fewer arrests, but police at least here do a lot more than arrest people for drugs.

I think effects would mostly be seen at the jail/prison level and court system. Jails/prisons would empty, there would be fewer corrections officers and other staff needed. Possibly fewer criminal court judges and prosecutors/PDs. Where I am, prosecutor's offices and PD's offices have separate units, so there is homicide, SVU, narcotics, etc. The drug-related units would be decimated, but no other units would be affected much.

My county has over 560k people, compared to this KY county in the article of about 165k. And my county is smaller in size than this KY county. It's a busier county with or without drug-related arrests/prosecutions, because there are simply more people. Making drugs legal would have an effect on part of the criminal justice system and may lead to some counties in some parts of the country having to consolidate certain facilities, like courts/jails/prosecutor's or PD's offices, etc. But honestly, where I am at least, it probably wouldn't lead to cutting LEOs at municipal levels, or much drastic change at all at higher levels. Maybe they'd find they can hire fewer local cops over time, but it would not lead to immediate job loss.

Effects would depend on how governments/police forces are set up, and that does vary a bit around the country depending on population and urbanity, etc. Here, it wouldn't affect much at local levels, you'd see an effect at county law enforcement levels (court and prosecution/PD and jail/corrections) and statewide levels (prisons/corrections mostly).

NJ has bail reform, which has basically eliminated cash bail, and our jail populations have dwindled a lot as a result. Some county jails are in danger of closing, rumor has it. I think jails/prisons, obviously, see the most dramatic effect of any criminal justice reform, and that only affects a certain population of employees within the whole system.

TL;DR - where I live, local LEOs would not be affected much by making drugs legal, if it were to ever happen, corrections officers and court staff/judges in criminal divisions, prosecutors, and PDs are most likely to be most affected.

The problem is, and why it’s so hard to enact change, isn’t because prison employees will be affected, it’s because the profits of the private prison industry will be affected, and they donate huge bucks to pols to make sure things stay just as they are. It’s not just logistics, but corruption throughout the criminal justice system. It is huge money we are talking about and they will not release their grips on it willingly. Remember “Kids for cash” scandal that rocked the PA juvenile justice system ? That’s just the ones who got caught. This kind of thing happens all the time, especially in poor areas where poverty and powerlessness keeps dissenting voices quiet (as well as pols ability to manipulate the masses into believing this keeps them safe).

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by ocnjgirl

The problem is, and why it’s so hard to enact change, isn’t because prison employees will be affected, it’s because the profits of the private prison industry will be affected, and they donate huge bucks to oils to make sure things stay just as they are. It’s not just logistics, but corruption throughout the criminal justice system. It is huge money we are talking about and they not release their grips in it willingly. Remember “Kids for cash” scandal that rocked the PA juvenile justice state? That’s just the ones who got caught. This kind of thing happens all the time, especially in poor areas where poverty and powerlessness keeps dissenting voices quiet (as well as pols ability to manipulate the masses into believing this keeps them safe).

Several years ago in California the State Prison Guard union basically had their own 'shot callers' in the state legislature, bought and paid for congressmen and senators who would make sure that no laws got passed that might result in lowering the prison population. I still get mad when I think about this, there was an initiative to modify the three strikes law and the Prison Guards Union created a fake victims rights group to go on TV and cry about how they would suffer all over again if we dared to let these "monsters" out of prison one day sooner than they were sentenced to. One of the lead spokespersons of the victims right group was the girlfriend of the head of the prison guards union.

SCOTUS sort of ruined their fun when they ruled against California and required the state to release 33,000 prison inmates. The prison supporting legislators began losing re-elections and Jerry Brown passed laws that would reduce the prison population and not giving the prison guards union a say in how it would happen.

At one point California had 30,000-50,000 inmates in state prisons who were there for technical parole violations, such as being late to an appointment with your parole agent. The system in effect at that time punished all rule violations with a 3 month to one year return to prison.

https://www.propublica.org/article/g...fornia-prisons