COMMENTS: 49
Drug War Traps Increasing Numbers of Women
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email.
In many respects, she fits the common profile of a woman doing time for a drug-related offense. Her crimes have ranged from possession to check forgery and theft, including an arrest for trying to steal a $64 comforter from Wal-Mart. Eventually sentenced to a two-year state prison term, Thomas admits that she committed her crimes to feed the “800-pound gorilla on my back that I just hadn’t been able to shake.â€
Thomas is part of an alarming statistical trend and a modern-day American phenomenon. For starters, she is one of half a million people (roughly one-fourth of the total prison population) locked up on drug-related charges. Thomas is also an inmate in a state that locks up women at one of the highest per capita rates -- 129 per 100,000 residents, a figure that is right behind Texas, the federal system and California. Oklahoma’s imprisonment of women rose a stunning 1,237 percent from 1997 to 2004.
Drug addiction is what led Thomas down the river to prison, she admits freely. What’s a bit more unusual about her is that she holds a medical doctorate from the University of Illinois, and was a practicing neurologist and professor at a teaching hospital. She stood out in her field to such a degree that her colleagues felt uncomfortable around here, particularly after she disclosed she was a lesbian. What Thomas didn’t disclose, however, was an early childhood marred by incest, the lingering pain from which she used cocaine as an escape. Unfortunately, her cocaine use took a painful turn into a full-blown crack addiction.
Thomas and other women have had the misfortune of being sucked into what the federal government calls the “war on drugs.†We have our own “drug czar,†who sits atop the massive Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). President Nixon started this war in 1969, and President Reagan kicked it into high gear. It’s been a full-throttle battle since, even through the Clinton years.
By 1980, the number of drug-related arrests stood at 581,000. Just 10 years later, that number had nearly doubled to 1,090,000.
In 2005, the FBI reported that law enforcement officers made more arrests for drug-abuse violations (1.8 million) than for any other offense.
One of the most surprising facts about these figures, as far as police are concerned, is the drug of choice: marijuana. Cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that it is one of the most dangerous drugs imaginable.
Cocaine, on the other hand, a leading cause of overdose deaths, is classified as a Schedule II. So is PCP. Go figure.
In 2005, nearly 43 percent of all drug arrests were for cannabis possession (37.7 percent) or “sales and manufacture†(4.3 percent). That’s millions of arrests and billions of dollars -- and amounts to a lot of misery and money down the drain.
In 2008, the ONDCP drug-war budget will reach a record $12.9 billion, with $8 billion of this funding being funneled into law enforcement. Bear in mind that these are only the official numbers. Many criminal justice experts point out that the figure doesn’t incorporate the costs of incarcerating people sentenced for drug offenses. The real expenditure, including the costs of imprisonment, comes close to $22 billion, according to an analysis by the drug policy newsletter, Drug War Chronicle.
We’re not getting much of a bang for these big bucks. Unintentional drug overdoses have become the second-most common form of accidental death after car crashes. While the government increases funding for antidrug missions in Colombia and Afghanistan by tens of millions every year, federal allocations to the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention and the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment are being cut by $32 million in 2008.
A 2006 Government Accountability Office report revealed that our $1.4 billion antidrug media blitz wasn’t working, either. And it wasn’t the first organization to note this. In 2003, the White House Office of Management and Budget disclosed that it found these ads lacking in any demonstrable success.
What’s worse, the people who need help aren’t getting it. In the rest of the Western world, assistance with drug and alcohol problems is widely accessible. They predominantly view heavy drug use or full-blown addiction as public health issues, not behavioral issues subject to prosecution (except in cases involving other criminal activity).
In the United States, however, rehabilitation and counseling are difficult to access without money. The waiting lists for free or subsidized rehabilitation programs can run from a few months to a couple of years -- even in progressive cities like San Francisco or Seattle.
Most American women, as well as men, have used some form of intoxicant (legal or illegal) during their lives, and half of all women ages 15 to 54 admit to having used illegal drugs specifically.
An estimated 22 million Americans are currently dependent on alcohol, drugs or both, although the real number is likely to be much higher, particularly as the figure does not take into account the 71.5 million people age 12 and up who use tobacco -- many of whom are likely addicted to nicotine.
Anyone who has ever smoked cigarettes habitually can relate to what even heroin and other hard-drug users have told me on several occasions -- that nicotine is the most addictive drug they have ever taken, and the hardest substance to quit. (Small wonder that the tobacco ban in many prisons has started a fierce black market, where a single cigarette can cost between $5 and $10.)
Regardless of whether they are caught, more than 9 million women each year use illicit drugs, and another 3.7 million use prescription drugs without medical authorization.
One such woman, Danielle Pascu, 29, got hooked on prescription drugs after the birth of her daughter. At first she was grateful for the prescribed Vicodin that got her though the lingering pain from a caesarean section and untreated postpartum depression.
But it didn’t take Pascu long to develop a full-blown habit, where she was eventually falsifying her prescriptions in order to get more. Pascu had no criminal record, had never used drugs before and was generally unaware of the risks involved. These days, Pascu is serving nearly three years in the sun-baked and dilapidated Arizona State Prison Complex in Perryville.
At this point, drug violations and property offenses account for a majority (59 percent) of females in state prison. By comparison, men in both of these offense categories add up to just 39.5 percent. Meanwhile, in federal prison, women and men convicted of drug offenses constitute nearly 60 percent of inmates.
Tina Thomas knows that she has a quadruple strike to overcome. She’s a black female with a former cocaine addiction, in a state that prefers to lock people up for substance abuse and that will deprive her of public assistance when she gets out. She now faces a lifetime ban on federal benefits, including contracts, licenses and grants.
As a drug offender, Thomas won’t be able to get Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) if she should ever need it. Food assistance, higher-education funding and even income tax deductions for pursuing a college degree are all yanked away from most felony drug offenders.
Yet nearly every other category of ex-offender -- including sex offenders, murderers, arsonists and perpetrators of domestic violence -- is eligible for these benefits. And, as if all this isn’t bad enough, Thomas will find that even getting a job will be difficult, because she must report herself as an ex-felon.
I’m often asked whether African Americans might just be using drugs more than any other group of people. My response is always met with disbelief until I prove it with the government’s own health statistics: African Americans constitute only 15 percent of drug users nationwide.
FBI data, at first glance, appears to show Euro-Americans bearing the brunt of drug-related arrests. Numerically speaking, they do, in that they are still the majority of the U.S. population. But a closer look reveals something else: African Americans are arrested at three times the rate of their demographic representation.
Marc Mauer, executive director of the Washington D.C.-based Sentencing Project, asks the very pertinent question of whether police are arresting crack and cocaine users in general, or specifically going into communities of color and lower-income neighborhoods, where some people are using drugs and engaging in the street trade.
“Conducting drug arrests in minority neighborhoods does have advantages for law enforcement,†writes Mauer in his 2006 book, Race to Incarcerate. “First, it is far easier to make arrests in such areas, since drug dealing is more likely to take place in open-air drug markets. In contrast, drug dealing is suburban neighborhoods almost invariably takes place behind closed doors and is therefore not readily identifiable to passing police.â€
This is a crucial point. Many substance users are men and women with professional careers. People with middle- to upper-class incomes tend to use their drugs behind doors in nice houses, in well-to-do neighborhoods. They slip under the drug war radar, just as college students do.
A quarter of full-time undergraduate students meet the criteria for substance abuse or dependence, something the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse calls “wasting the best and brightest.â€
Yet none of this is anything that the Office of National Drug Control Policy cares to have mentioned, much less examine. It’s just another one of those inconvenient truths.
Stay up to date with the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Axiom69 on Feb 13, 2008 7:38 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As this article gets read I'm sure there will be alot of comments calling for the legalization of drugs. I'm sorry to inform you that it won't happen. Why? Because instead of people taking reponsibility for their actions we have become a nation of victims. There is always someone else to blame for our own poor choices.
BurgerKing made me fat. I stole cause I'm an addict. I robbed cause I'm poor. I molested cause I was molested. I beat my wife cause my mother didn't love me enough. I shot up my school cause I was bullied. I raped cause I was drunk.
How the hell are we going to legalize drugs if people can't even take responsibility for their own weight? Are we supposed to assume that if drugs are legal everyone will be reponsible enough not to drive stoned out of their gorde? Are drunk drivers not exciting enough?
When judges start hearing statements like: I was drunk and killed two people on their honeymoon cause I'm a friggin moron. I molested a kid and should be locked up for life cause I'm sick in the head. I robbed an old lady and accept any punishment the court feels is just. Maybe then drugs will get legalized. Until then drugs will be illegal because people will try to use them to explain away their lousy chioces.
You don't need to preach to me about pot. It should be legal and will be as soon as the government figures out a way to cash in and tax it without everyone growing it at home. My comment is for those of you that think every drug should be legal including heroin, meth, crack and the like.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: marchpet
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: marchpet
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: jmooney
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: ot
» You sir or madam, are a troll
Posted by: jackl2400
» RE: You sir or madam, are a troll
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: El Hombre Malo
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit
» Personal responsibility has nothing to do with drug prohibition
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: ookah
» Sadly, though, he's correct
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» RE: Sadly, though, he's correct
Posted by: aussidawg
» Well written and
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on Feb 18, 2008 4:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Throw another War up into the air and see where it falls.
How many Wars can we juggle at the same time?
Do we have anything better to do with our time and money?
They are great at starting Wars and really bad at finishing them!
Why?
Who benefits from having more Police, Lawyers, Judges and Prisons?
It is a giant waste of money!
Throwing more good money, after bad.
Is Drug abuse a medical problem?
Where's the Compassion?
Where's the health care?
Where’s the support?
There is no reason to put drug abusers in jail.
They are hurting themselves.
They need help!
Keep the Lawyers and Judges out of it.
Are they Doctors now?
It is a tremendous waste of money and resources, that should be spent more wisely, somewhere else!
Half of the people in jail are parole violators and victimless crime violators.
Release them and set them free.
Victimless Crimes: A Victimless Crime, also known as Consensual Crime, is any activity which does not physically harm a person or property, or to which was in fact consented, and is currently illegal if based on statutory laws!
Do we really want or need our Police, Lawyers and Judges peering into our personal lives?
Looking into our Bedroom windows?
It sounds real bad (Violator) for just missing an appointment.
Is that what you are called, when you miss an appointment?
How can people of very limited means spend all their time and resources keeping appointments?
How can they keep a job, get treatment and still keep dozens of these other appointments with their parole officer?
Could you do it?
How can they afford it when gas is over three dollars a gallon?
How much does a Parole Officer get paid?
Where’s the payoff?
Who benefits from a Prison Industrial Complex?
Is this The New Compassionate Conservatism?
Sending all our money building Prisons?
Is spending $60,000 to a $100,000 DOLLARS a year of Taxpayer money to incarcerate someone, instead of a fraction of that to educate and rehabilitate them wise?
The sentences are too long.
Most criminals are young and dumb.
Once they mellow out there is no reason to keep them in Jail.
Violent criminals belong in jail.
Putting some young drug abuser in there with them is crazy!
What about the Social cost to their Communities and
Families?
We can do better than this.
There are many Countries in the world that have a better system.
We should take the best of what the World has to offer and fix the problem.
Sticking your head in the sand like an Ostrag and repeating we are the best country in the World is silly and futile!
It is naïve at best!
What we have is serious problems that our smartest people must solve.
Bureaucracy is a Dead End.
Is that what you want?
Some Corporate Bureaucrats running your life.
They are too busy lining their pockets.
We are a Society!
A Society rests on a foundation.
The Foundation is the Citizens that form it.
They must benefit first individually as a whole before anyone else.
This is the true test of any Democracy.
Who benefits the Citizens or the Institutions?
Now it is a one way street.
All the money and power is running up hill.
The People are suffering while the super Rich get getting even Richer.
If it is a Crime, let them do the time?
Put that in your Pipe and smoke it!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Another WAR they've Lost!
Posted by: Romantic Violence
Comments are closed-
Posted by: heide on Feb 18, 2008 4:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
our leaders claim to be such bible believing people
GENESIS 1VRS 11&12 ,,29&30
GENESIS 3 VRS 18
GENESIS 6 VRS VRS 21
GENESIS 9 VRS 3
CANNABIS/HEMP is /are SEED YIELDING GREEN HERBS
to put people in PRISON for using an HERB BLESSED BY GOD IS BLASPHEMY
OR THE BIBLE IS A LIE
LEGALIZE ALL THINGS HEMP NOW!!!!!!!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: a seed yielding green herb/Kaneh bosm!
Posted by: garry minor
» RE: a seed yielding green herb/Kaneh bosm!
Posted by: heide
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on Feb 18, 2008 4:48 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure, our drug laws are a redneck horror show, and our lack of a sensible national policy on caring for the mentally ill is a disgrace. But it's really tiresome to read reports that imply that because a woman was abused in some way as a child, she gets a free pass for the bad choices she makes later in life. Men are widely abused early in life too, but nobody is boo-hooing about that.
Of course, the reason for this women-centric journalism is largely advertising-based: Advertisers want articles that appeal to young women, who supposedly are the be-all and end-all of advertising demographics. But it's not fair -- and it's increasingly boring. Let's focus on solving our serious social and political problems for all the people, not just one interest group.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Implication: Women are more important than men
Posted by: boydranchitos
» Thank feminism!
Posted by: messedup
» RE: women just being women
Posted by: Dboy
» Second-class citizens? Now that's funny . . .
Posted by: Moonray
» RE: Second-class citizens? Now that's funny . . .
Posted by: aussidawg
» This crap is why alternet and the left suck
Posted by: timemachinist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on Feb 18, 2008 5:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: picket on Feb 18, 2008 7:42 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Children and young adults must have responsible adults make them aware that there is a double standard for punishment in the USA.
The Police crawl in the sewer on National TV to round up a piece of white substance the size of a pea. The "criminal" then gets a sermon AND a long sentence. Punishment is different for the "heiress", the son of the ex VP of the USA, and the US Congressman.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ken_sailor on Feb 18, 2008 9:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What do you want to bet? Will the U.S. still be habitable when prohibition is repealed? Or will we die in some massive catastrophe able to console ourselves that at least we protected the kids from drugs?
Of course there is simply no evidence that prohibition has reduced drug use or protected anyone's children, but that doesn't matter.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Divide and conquer (and distract)
Posted by: Romantic Violence
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 18, 2008 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean, think--why now of all times, this push to lock as many women up as possible? Nobody really cared about enforcing the anti-cannabis laws this strictly before. But right now, remember that FELONS CANNOT VOTE--either in prison OR WHEN THEY GET OUT. The fact that the story details how a young neurosurgeon with a brilliant career behind and ahead of her--and presumably either a Hillary OR Obama voter--got sucked into a jail cell NOW--indicates how far the Old White Men are willing to work to derail the Democratic clean-up candidacy of either Obama or Clinton. Let's face it--if the core Dem votership--women--are in jail on Nov 8--then hello, McCain.
The way to derail this is for emergency votes to be passed in each state NOW, to allow convicted felons to vote. After all, they're Americans too--there was never any reason to disenfranchise free BUT PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED FELONS--who presumably have served their sentences and been reinstated into society--from VOTING AS AMERICAN CITIZENS!
If this disgusting status-quo is maintained, and the marijuana sweeps--a victimless crime if there ever was one--continue, well, look to say President McCain, the day after Election Day. The Old White Men will win again.
Nice going, Karl...you're still not missing any tricks, are you?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: C the B on Feb 18, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Haha
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VickyinSD on Feb 18, 2008 12:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article was meant to inform the uninformed about the increasing numbers of women being imprisoned for NON VIOLENT crimes, something that MSM doesn't exactly talk about on the evening news.
This is a problem that is affecting more than just the "offender", but our communities as a whole! Many of these women are young and naive, many more are single mothers who have children that need their love and attention — children that usually wind up in foster care because of the imprisonment of their mothers... another cost to tax payers.
Many lack a good education, many don't have any kind of family support, they didn't have school counselors who took the time to help head off the problems in a compassionate way. There is so little help in our system for people who need it, but there's millions of our taxpayer dollars spent incarcerating non-violent offenders... people who, for the most part, are only harming themselves... and crying out for help that doesn't exist!
Our government has de-funded the mental health system regularly for decades, leaving no assistance for those who cannot afford a $150 an hour shrink! We need to fund programs that help our citizens... men and women alike, instead of spending so much money imprisoning those who harm nobody but themselves!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The "Feminist" attackers...
Posted by: GEM-592
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: VickyinSD
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: Andrew_S
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: GEM-592
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: Andrew_S
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: VickyinSD
» Feminists suck
Posted by: timemachinist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jmooney on Feb 18, 2008 1:14 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suggest using other words such as initiative in place of war. And, in this case, maybe it should be an "Initiative against Drugs," but a "Pro-recovery or pro drug-free initiative" or something like that.
We've gone war crazy, and when everything is about war everything is about aggression. We can't "aggress" ourselves out of our drug problem. Addiction is a cunning and baffling thing. It perhaps can be avoided early in life by appropriate initiatives with young folkis and can perhaps be arrested later in life with solid, science-based recovery programs,but we aren't going to arrest our way out of it.
War against terror, war against drugs, blah, blah. War schmar. War spelled backwards is "raw", and that's all our bleeding country is going to be as long as we continue the use of bellicosity and aggression to attempt to solve our problems.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Initiative Against War
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Initiative Against War
Posted by: liberalibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timemachinist on Feb 18, 2008 2:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ridiculous.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timemachinist on Feb 18, 2008 2:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Drug war hurts PEOPLE, not just women. I guess this author thinks drugs should be legal only for women? Only women shouldn't be thrown in jail and have their careers ruined? When it was overwhelmingly men targetted by the drug fascists, that was ok?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VickyinSD on Feb 18, 2008 3:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what's the problem with an article highlighting the increasing population of non-violent women drug offenders?
It's not a feminist thing, nor is the author trying to gain pitty from the public regarding women in prison... it's just an informative article!
WTF is the problem?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» WTF is the problem? The majority of "drug offenders" in jail are men.
Posted by: timemachinist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Axiom69 on Feb 13, 2008 7:38 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As this article gets read I'm sure there will be alot of comments calling for the legalization of drugs. I'm sorry to inform you that it won't happen. Why? Because instead of people taking reponsibility for their actions we have become a nation of victims. There is always someone else to blame for our own poor choices.
BurgerKing made me fat. I stole cause I'm an addict. I robbed cause I'm poor. I molested cause I was molested. I beat my wife cause my mother didn't love me enough. I shot up my school cause I was bullied. I raped cause I was drunk.
How the hell are we going to legalize drugs if people can't even take responsibility for their own weight? Are we supposed to assume that if drugs are legal everyone will be reponsible enough not to drive stoned out of their gorde? Are drunk drivers not exciting enough?
When judges start hearing statements like: I was drunk and killed two people on their honeymoon cause I'm a friggin moron. I molested a kid and should be locked up for life cause I'm sick in the head. I robbed an old lady and accept any punishment the court feels is just. Maybe then drugs will get legalized. Until then drugs will be illegal because people will try to use them to explain away their lousy chioces.
You don't need to preach to me about pot. It should be legal and will be as soon as the government figures out a way to cash in and tax it without everyone growing it at home. My comment is for those of you that think every drug should be legal including heroin, meth, crack and the like.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: marchpet
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: marchpet
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: jmooney
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: ot
» You sir or madam, are a troll
Posted by: jackl2400
» RE: You sir or madam, are a troll
Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: El Hombre Malo
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit
» Personal responsibility has nothing to do with drug prohibition
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Personal responsibility
Posted by: ookah
» Sadly, though, he's correct
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
» RE: Sadly, though, he's correct
Posted by: aussidawg
» Well written and
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on Feb 18, 2008 4:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Throw another War up into the air and see where it falls.
How many Wars can we juggle at the same time?
Do we have anything better to do with our time and money?
They are great at starting Wars and really bad at finishing them!
Why?
Who benefits from having more Police, Lawyers, Judges and Prisons?
It is a giant waste of money!
Throwing more good money, after bad.
Is Drug abuse a medical problem?
Where's the Compassion?
Where's the health care?
Where’s the support?
There is no reason to put drug abusers in jail.
They are hurting themselves.
They need help!
Keep the Lawyers and Judges out of it.
Are they Doctors now?
It is a tremendous waste of money and resources, that should be spent more wisely, somewhere else!
Half of the people in jail are parole violators and victimless crime violators.
Release them and set them free.
Victimless Crimes: A Victimless Crime, also known as Consensual Crime, is any activity which does not physically harm a person or property, or to which was in fact consented, and is currently illegal if based on statutory laws!
Do we really want or need our Police, Lawyers and Judges peering into our personal lives?
Looking into our Bedroom windows?
It sounds real bad (Violator) for just missing an appointment.
Is that what you are called, when you miss an appointment?
How can people of very limited means spend all their time and resources keeping appointments?
How can they keep a job, get treatment and still keep dozens of these other appointments with their parole officer?
Could you do it?
How can they afford it when gas is over three dollars a gallon?
How much does a Parole Officer get paid?
Where’s the payoff?
Who benefits from a Prison Industrial Complex?
Is this The New Compassionate Conservatism?
Sending all our money building Prisons?
Is spending $60,000 to a $100,000 DOLLARS a year of Taxpayer money to incarcerate someone, instead of a fraction of that to educate and rehabilitate them wise?
The sentences are too long.
Most criminals are young and dumb.
Once they mellow out there is no reason to keep them in Jail.
Violent criminals belong in jail.
Putting some young drug abuser in there with them is crazy!
What about the Social cost to their Communities and
Families?
We can do better than this.
There are many Countries in the world that have a better system.
We should take the best of what the World has to offer and fix the problem.
Sticking your head in the sand like an Ostrag and repeating we are the best country in the World is silly and futile!
It is naïve at best!
What we have is serious problems that our smartest people must solve.
Bureaucracy is a Dead End.
Is that what you want?
Some Corporate Bureaucrats running your life.
They are too busy lining their pockets.
We are a Society!
A Society rests on a foundation.
The Foundation is the Citizens that form it.
They must benefit first individually as a whole before anyone else.
This is the true test of any Democracy.
Who benefits the Citizens or the Institutions?
Now it is a one way street.
All the money and power is running up hill.
The People are suffering while the super Rich get getting even Richer.
If it is a Crime, let them do the time?
Put that in your Pipe and smoke it!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Another WAR they've Lost!
Posted by: Romantic Violence
Comments are closed-
Posted by: heide on Feb 18, 2008 4:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
our leaders claim to be such bible believing people
GENESIS 1VRS 11&12 ,,29&30
GENESIS 3 VRS 18
GENESIS 6 VRS VRS 21
GENESIS 9 VRS 3
CANNABIS/HEMP is /are SEED YIELDING GREEN HERBS
to put people in PRISON for using an HERB BLESSED BY GOD IS BLASPHEMY
OR THE BIBLE IS A LIE
LEGALIZE ALL THINGS HEMP NOW!!!!!!!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: a seed yielding green herb/Kaneh bosm!
Posted by: garry minor
» RE: a seed yielding green herb/Kaneh bosm!
Posted by: heide
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on Feb 18, 2008 4:48 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure, our drug laws are a redneck horror show, and our lack of a sensible national policy on caring for the mentally ill is a disgrace. But it's really tiresome to read reports that imply that because a woman was abused in some way as a child, she gets a free pass for the bad choices she makes later in life. Men are widely abused early in life too, but nobody is boo-hooing about that.
Of course, the reason for this women-centric journalism is largely advertising-based: Advertisers want articles that appeal to young women, who supposedly are the be-all and end-all of advertising demographics. But it's not fair -- and it's increasingly boring. Let's focus on solving our serious social and political problems for all the people, not just one interest group.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Implication: Women are more important than men
Posted by: boydranchitos
» Thank feminism!
Posted by: messedup
» RE: women just being women
Posted by: Dboy
» Second-class citizens? Now that's funny . . .
Posted by: Moonray
» RE: Second-class citizens? Now that's funny . . .
Posted by: aussidawg
» This crap is why alternet and the left suck
Posted by: timemachinist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on Feb 18, 2008 5:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: picket on Feb 18, 2008 7:42 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Children and young adults must have responsible adults make them aware that there is a double standard for punishment in the USA.
The Police crawl in the sewer on National TV to round up a piece of white substance the size of a pea. The "criminal" then gets a sermon AND a long sentence. Punishment is different for the "heiress", the son of the ex VP of the USA, and the US Congressman.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ken_sailor on Feb 18, 2008 9:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What do you want to bet? Will the U.S. still be habitable when prohibition is repealed? Or will we die in some massive catastrophe able to console ourselves that at least we protected the kids from drugs?
Of course there is simply no evidence that prohibition has reduced drug use or protected anyone's children, but that doesn't matter.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Divide and conquer (and distract)
Posted by: Romantic Violence
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 18, 2008 9:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean, think--why now of all times, this push to lock as many women up as possible? Nobody really cared about enforcing the anti-cannabis laws this strictly before. But right now, remember that FELONS CANNOT VOTE--either in prison OR WHEN THEY GET OUT. The fact that the story details how a young neurosurgeon with a brilliant career behind and ahead of her--and presumably either a Hillary OR Obama voter--got sucked into a jail cell NOW--indicates how far the Old White Men are willing to work to derail the Democratic clean-up candidacy of either Obama or Clinton. Let's face it--if the core Dem votership--women--are in jail on Nov 8--then hello, McCain.
The way to derail this is for emergency votes to be passed in each state NOW, to allow convicted felons to vote. After all, they're Americans too--there was never any reason to disenfranchise free BUT PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED FELONS--who presumably have served their sentences and been reinstated into society--from VOTING AS AMERICAN CITIZENS!
If this disgusting status-quo is maintained, and the marijuana sweeps--a victimless crime if there ever was one--continue, well, look to say President McCain, the day after Election Day. The Old White Men will win again.
Nice going, Karl...you're still not missing any tricks, are you?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: C the B on Feb 18, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Haha
Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VickyinSD on Feb 18, 2008 12:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article was meant to inform the uninformed about the increasing numbers of women being imprisoned for NON VIOLENT crimes, something that MSM doesn't exactly talk about on the evening news.
This is a problem that is affecting more than just the "offender", but our communities as a whole! Many of these women are young and naive, many more are single mothers who have children that need their love and attention — children that usually wind up in foster care because of the imprisonment of their mothers... another cost to tax payers.
Many lack a good education, many don't have any kind of family support, they didn't have school counselors who took the time to help head off the problems in a compassionate way. There is so little help in our system for people who need it, but there's millions of our taxpayer dollars spent incarcerating non-violent offenders... people who, for the most part, are only harming themselves... and crying out for help that doesn't exist!
Our government has de-funded the mental health system regularly for decades, leaving no assistance for those who cannot afford a $150 an hour shrink! We need to fund programs that help our citizens... men and women alike, instead of spending so much money imprisoning those who harm nobody but themselves!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The "Feminist" attackers...
Posted by: GEM-592
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: VickyinSD
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: Andrew_S
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: GEM-592
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: Andrew_S
» RE: The point is...
Posted by: VickyinSD
» Feminists suck
Posted by: timemachinist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jmooney on Feb 18, 2008 1:14 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suggest using other words such as initiative in place of war. And, in this case, maybe it should be an "Initiative against Drugs," but a "Pro-recovery or pro drug-free initiative" or something like that.
We've gone war crazy, and when everything is about war everything is about aggression. We can't "aggress" ourselves out of our drug problem. Addiction is a cunning and baffling thing. It perhaps can be avoided early in life by appropriate initiatives with young folkis and can perhaps be arrested later in life with solid, science-based recovery programs,but we aren't going to arrest our way out of it.
War against terror, war against drugs, blah, blah. War schmar. War spelled backwards is "raw", and that's all our bleeding country is going to be as long as we continue the use of bellicosity and aggression to attempt to solve our problems.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Initiative Against War
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Initiative Against War
Posted by: liberalibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timemachinist on Feb 18, 2008 2:17 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ridiculous.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timemachinist on Feb 18, 2008 2:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Drug war hurts PEOPLE, not just women. I guess this author thinks drugs should be legal only for women? Only women shouldn't be thrown in jail and have their careers ruined? When it was overwhelmingly men targetted by the drug fascists, that was ok?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VickyinSD on Feb 18, 2008 3:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what's the problem with an article highlighting the increasing population of non-violent women drug offenders?
It's not a feminist thing, nor is the author trying to gain pitty from the public regarding women in prison... it's just an informative article!
WTF is the problem?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» WTF is the problem? The majority of "drug offenders" in jail are men.
Posted by: timemachinist
Updated: Catholic Bishops Embrace Anti-Abortion Terrorizers Missy Smith and Randall Terry
10 Defining Feminist Moments of 2009
Going Undercover in the Crazy, Tragic World of Christian Gay-Conversion Therapy




