simple question about the Biden weed pardon

Thank you for the source of your factual citation. You only, however, told half of the story, when it comes to the pardons (which is not as big a deal as the re-examination of federal drug policy, regarding pot, which Biden concurrently ordered). From your source's opening paragraphs:

<Snip>
Officials estimate about 6,500 people with federal convictions for simple possession of marijuana will benefit.

No-one is currently in federal prison solely for possession of marijuana. Most convictions occur at state level.

But the federal pardons will make it easier for people to get employment, housing, and education, Mr Biden said.
<End>


EDIT: I now notice that your selective mentioning of the facts, has already been brought to your attention. It was very misleading of you but, unfortunately, that's the way debates work, right? It is the opponent's job, to sniff out the bullshit.

 

The person I was replying to, but whose quoted message inexplicably was not included in my reply, said that 6500 people were to be released from federal prison when their simple possession pardon comes through. That was the original post I was refuting. If you, too, believe 6500 people are going to be released from federal prison, then I welcome your citation.

 

The number has been estimated that approximately 6,500 people will be impacted.

 

That's awesome!

 

What one believes vs what is reality, is up to each person.
No matter if said person even posts a link showing exactly the opposite of one's said belief.

Somehow, about 6500 fed inmates will be released from prison for simple possession of MJ, according to both mine and your links.

 

My source made no mention of anyone being released from federal prison. In fact, it specifically stated that no one was currently IN federal prison for simple MJ possession.

Your NYPOST link agrees with me:
"All 6,500 people expected to be pardoned federally are not currently in prison, an official said, and “there is no individual currently in federal prisons solely for simple possession of marijuana.”

 

Yes, there's 2 different statement made on this issue which I missed.
There's 6500 convicted under federal drug laws, however, none are in fed prison for simple possession.

Are they in other(state) prisions? Or are they free and just going to have their records purged of the charge.
Either way, it's a benefit to those 6500 who were convicted of simple possession.

 

I doubt they would be in state prisons on federal charges. But, no doubt having this expunged from their record will be a benefit to some of them, in particular those who are not career criminals with long lists of more serious crimes.

Would it be safe to speculate that many (most?) of those who have somehow managed to score a federal simple possession charge would also be likely have a long history of other more serious criminal charges? It seems like simple possession would most often be an add-on charge for people who had committed other federal crimes, while smoking a doobie.

 

It was not misleading, it was in response to someone who said 6500 inmates were to be released from federal prison. That was the only point I was refuting. No one is to be released from federal prison, because no one is IN federal prison solely for simple possession.

 

****. I’ve been smoking weed for about 40 years. My worst crime has been speeding tickets. I’ve held a good paying job for most of my career. You couldn’t be more wrong.

 

I dunno.
All the articles wrote about is the number of those convicted for simple possession charges under federal law.
Could many be in the military or some other fed gov't employ?

 

I've got you beat by almost 10 years, and ditto on the crimes. I'm not sure what you are refuting here.

 

Important point is that this only applies to federally charged people- and the vast number of those under MJ charges are state charged violations.
Bottom line, the number of people actually affected is quite tiny by comparison. That however does not prevent it being touted as some sort of magnanimous act of compassion by a president without a clue... but in desperate need of some kind of redeeming acts to claim.

 

Your claim that those arrested for possession likely have a long criminal record.

 

Nor do I. I fail to grok how anyone would catch a federal "simple possession" charge that would, by itself, land them in the federal pokie. It would stand to reason that the possession charge would be an add-on to a list of other charges.

I would therefore dispute how much a pardon of the 'simple possession' charge would really benefit someone who was convicted of, for instance, tax-evasion, money-laundering, embezzlement, and simple possession. That would be like saying someone who drove their car through a crowd, tossing out hand grenades has benefited significantly from their 'expired inspection' charge being dropped.

 

My supposition is that those federally charged for simple possession are likely to have a bunch of other federal crimes that go along with it. The feds aren't generally going to charge people and throw them in jail for simple possession as an only charge.

 

That is correct, at the moment. However, that 6500 figure, is the number who will have convictions (whether or not they served time, for them), expunged from their records. For those who this is their only criminal conviction, which is probably most of them, this will still be a real boon, in removing an obstacle to their gaining employment, housing, and education.

I had not realized the context of your post because, as you'd mentioned, the quote you were answering, had not been included.

 

It is fully legal in some places, partially legal in others, medical only in more. This has nothing to do with STATE law only federal, the President cannot pardon someone for a state crime. This only applies to a past crime, there is no such thing as a "pre-pardon" and person charged with a federal possession crime tomorrow can be tried an put in prison. It just never happens on the federal level anymore. This in prison are people who pled down felony charges to a simple possession to get a shorter sentence.

 

I am interested to know your thinking behind the bolded above, because based on what I know of federal charges, my thinking is exactly opposite. I find it really unlikely that anyone would receive a federal simple possession charge as an only offense.

 

If Biden or rather his handlers had a brain cell between them they would be trying to de-schedule marajuana.

They collect to much from private prison contracts to do anything meaningful. That would be biting the hand that greases you.

 

Unless you are a federal prosecutor, or a criminal defense lawyer, specializing in federal cases, I don't believe that what you "know of federal charges," suffices as any kind of basis, to draw such a generalization. As I am not in either of those two professions, I have no basis from which to doubt the article, or the administration's claims.

 

That's no more true than it is for any of the crimes that presidents have pardoned people for over the years.

Donald Trump pardoned someone who was convicted of bank fraud. Is bank fraud de facto legal now?

Check out this link of people Trump pardoned, and tell me how many of the crimes these folks were in jail for are now de facto legal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency_by_Donald_Trump

 

It’s completely illegal everywhere. A state cannot override federal law.

The states are flat out saying, “come get us, if you want.” The fed has opted out. There’s no going back, now. The money it would cost for the fed to shut down every marijuana dispensary in the country would be astronomical.

We are all but legal, at this point. The fed has opted out for the past several administrations. Even Trump, who says he doesn’t drink, smoke or partake in drug use, didn’t want to get into it.

 

Possession in an airport, military base, or any federal land is a federal crime.

 

So, draft dodging is legal since Carter pardoned the Vietnam draft dodgers?

Your ASSumption is laughably absurd.