Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You think people that carry an ounce of weed are thugs, or just all people of color?
Either way, NYC knows that white people have half the weed in NYC and arent targeted for arrests, so this is why hes doing it, and hes right. Then the cops can focus on real crimes, and the courts can stop being clogged up prosecuting weed, which is a complete waste of money, and makes the citizen relationship with the city worse.
White people smoke indoors almost always, or at least on their property (ie: on a upper level porch).
Black people are not getting arrested smoking indoors like most white people, unless there is another reason for cops to come. So cut the nonsense.
Black people like to more often roll large stinky blunts and other paper based implements, and smoke outdoors. Not all, but those that do account for most of the arrests. I know. I walk through their sidewalk blunt smoking parties in NYC on a weekly basis. The same guys, in the same places, using the sidewalk like its an outdoor Amsterdam cafe. That has literally never happened to me with White people.
Or they are otherwise giving cops reason to search them, while they possess weed, because they are doing something that they shouldn't. I don't know, like blasting music on a large system in the street to the point where no one on the block can sleep at 2 am.
Meh any reduction in the level of removing people's freedom with force for doing something that does not hurt anyone else is a good thing. Frankly, idc what the law says I'm more interested in overall reduction of harm. If the law is hurting people who are minding their own business and some place decides to start ignoring it i won't shed a tear.
No. You fail to grasp the logic of even the person who is refusing to prosecute. The logic is based on the fact that the black group gets caught at a higher rate for this particular offense, and thus goes to jail more for it.
The OPs rhetorical logic holds. The DA's logic wasn't centered on the relative violent nature of the crime, but its minority impact. Thus, the logic can be both implemented and criticized across hypothetical offense boundaries.
The DA stated that arresting minorities for marijuana possession doesn't contribute to the safety of his jurisdiction. He not only considered the violence of the crime, he addressed it in his speech. What else could be possibly have been referring to with the word "safety?"
The OPs attempt to compare marijuana possession with violent crime is ridiculous.
Come on, read it again. That's not what the OP did.
From the OP:
Quote:
By the same logic, other violent crimes are more common among "people of color, particularly young African Americans." Should we also dial-down arrests for violent felonies such as assault and robbery?
No. The point is that if we're going to stop prosecuting crimes simply because of disparate impact, then we will have to stop prosecuting pretty much all crimes, even those much more serious than marijuana possession. It may be wise to decriminalize marijuana, by disparate impact is not a good reason to do it.
Status:
"A solution in search of a problem"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: New York Area
34,416 posts, read 16,517,194 times
Reputation: 29600
Quote:
Originally Posted by golgi1
White people smoke indoors almost always, or at least on their property (ie: on a upper level porch). **************
Or they are otherwise giving cops reason to search them, while they possess weed, because they are doing something that they shouldn't. I don't know, like blasting music on a large system in the street to the point where no one on the block can sleep at 2 am.
No. The point is that if we're going to stop prosecuting crimes simply because of disparate impact, then we will have to stop prosecuting pretty much all crimes, even those much more serious than marijuana possession. It may be wise to decriminalize marijuana, by disparate impact is not a good reason to do it.
This is the quote from the DA:
Quote:
"The dual mission of the Manhattan DA's office is a safer New York and a more equal justice system," Vance said. "The ongoing arrest and criminal prosecution of predominantly black and brown New Yorkers for smoking marijuana serves neither of these goals."
See where it says "a safer New York" before "a more equal justice system"? Then it says "serves neither of these goals".
The DA is saying that arresting minorities for marijuana possession doesn't make New York safer.
Why are you making me defend New York? I hate New York.
Disparate Impact on Certain Groups: Manhattan to Stop Prosecuting Most Low-Level Marijuana Offenses
South Florida did this some time ago, and it seems to free up the cops to police more serious offenses.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.