Jump to content

New Suffolk county DA

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

17 mins ago, JTR said:

Mind blowing, isn’t it?

 

Crimes should have punishments. What a crazy concept :banghd:

I look at it like this, You breaka my stuff, I breaka you face...…………….it a wash  and more or less there will be no charges filed...………...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JTR said:

 It won’t be long until we’re paying for these people’s housing, groceries, cell phones, booze, and drugs...............

JTR in most cases are we not already paying some cost for those who steal and cheat now ? One Judge is not going to change the laws that govern the police departments , good bad or indifferent .

I wish that was the case when it comes to poaching of fish , The epo does his job and the judge look the other way when it comes to sentencing . It is a rare case when justice prevails . Any judge who may put forth a list that inhibits the laws also increases the work load of the police to do the job we pay them to do. Its bad enough we have those who on alcohol looking for money to feed a habit.

Those on hard Drugs as well, now we have added weed to the mix . It will be interesting to see if this will have an burden on the police and fire departments as well, at some point, in this journey to make every thing legal.

Life member M.B.B.A #509

Life member Izaak Walton Fishing Association

Life member Cape Cod Canal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 mins ago, Angler #1 said:

JTR in most cases are we not already paying some cost for those who steal and cheat now ? One Judge is not going to change the laws that govern the police departments , good bad or indifferent .

I wish that was the case when it comes to poaching of fish , The epo does his job and the judge look the other way when it comes to sentencing . It is a rare case when justice prevails . Any judge who may put forth a list that inhibits the laws also increases the work load of the police to do the job we pay them to do. Its bad enough we have those who on alcohol looking for money to feed a habit.

Those on hard Drugs as well, now we have added weed to the mix . It will be interesting to see if this will have an burden on the police and fire departments as well, at some point, in this journey to make every thing legal.

I was being facetious. We're absolutely paying for all of those things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JTR said:

 It won’t be long until we’re paying for these people’s housing, groceries, cell phones, booze, and drugs...............

I have agreed with most of your posts in this thread. Too bad you fall back on that ole saw.

 

Prison is the place the tax payers have to pay for their housing and groceries.

It is also the place they are ruined forever for civilization and trained and educated on success in Life of Crime.

 

Not to say make it easier to get away with crime. I'm not onboard with the judge, if the press is telling the whole story. 

 

I am saying it is good to take a hard look at who goes to prison and why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mins ago, mikez2 said:

I have agreed with most of your posts in this thread. Too bad you fall back on that ole saw.

 

Prison is the place the tax payers have to pay for their housing and groceries.

It is also the place they are ruined forever for civilization and trained and educated on success in Life of Crime.

 

Not to say make it easier to get away with crime. I'm not onboard with the judge, if the press is telling the whole story. 

 

I am saying it is good to take a hard look at who goes to prison and why.

To be honest, I said it half seriously and half out of jest. That whole system is messed up, but it does help people as well.... that’s a discussion for another thread.

 

I agree that it’s good to take a hard look  at who goes to prison. That said, most of these crimes would already be plea bargained long before prison was on the table. Habitual offenders would be the exception to that.

 

What I think is dangerous is announcing to the public that these crimes will not be prosecuted. I’d equate that to the person coming over the loud speaker at the grocery store saying “99 cent rib eye in aisle 4.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am wondering, as a taxpayer, is it cheaper to throw scum bags into jail or support them on the street?????????

 

Personally, I don't think that drug addiction or drug use should be treated as a crime, however treatment sentances should be handed out for users...……..

 

Drug dealers and elicit manufacturors (meth, fenatil ect.) should be charged with attemted murder at least and then put away for a long time (prison not a country club)………..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mins ago, b-ware said:

Drug dealers and elicit manufacturors (meth, fenatil ect.) should be charged with attemted murder at least and then put away for a long time (prison not a country club)………..

Those dealing synthetic opiates are literally killing people every day. Their product isn't regulated and is made in some drug house's basement. If they mix the wrong ratios, they'll kill dozens.... oops.

 

And yet, in Boston, come January, possession with intent is basically no longer a crime...... it is WILD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 mins ago, JTR said:

To be honest, I said it half seriously and half out of jest. That whole system is messed up, but it does help people as well.... that’s a discussion for another thread.

 

I agree that it’s good to take a hard look  at who goes to prison. That said, most of these crimes would already be plea bargained long before prison was on the table. Habitual offenders would be the exception to that.

 

What I think is dangerous is announcing to the public that these crimes will not be prosecuted. I’d equate that to the person coming over the loud speaker at the grocery store saying “99 cent rib eye in aisle 4.”

I thought you might not be serious but probably some agreed anyway.

 

Plea bargins and all that lawyer's evil.

THAT'S what needs a close look.

 

It's good to look at who goes to jail and why, it is also good to look at who gets away and why.

 

I agree with the part about bad advertising, including what you said earlier about leaving that list posted on her site.

I have a sneaky sense there is more yet to play out on this.

I mistrust the stories at this point. Seems like part of the story. 

I'm all researched out so I'm not on top of it at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 mins ago, JTR said:

Those dealing synthetic opiates are literally killing people every day. Their product isn't regulated and is made in some drug house's basement. If they mix the wrong ratios, they'll kill dozens.... oops.

 

And yet, in Boston, come January, possession with intent is basically no longer a crime...... it is WILD.

Yah that's what I mean.

There has got to be more to the story. 

As you phrase it here, it makes no sense.

 

I think you inserted some hyperbole to leap from the addict selling a few extra to support his habit to the illegal chemist.

 

I have faith a fentanyl or meth or any other manufacturers would be fully prosecuted.

I'm sure federal law would be available if nothing else. (Without research, maybe wrong)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to be interesting to watch what this does with crime in Boston. I tried to delve into some research before sticking with my initial reaction of "you've got to be kidding me."

 

Her plan of action comes right from her website, and it does seem like other "progressive" reform may be coming. Eliminating cash bail, more pre-trial diversion and alternatives to jail.

 

I wish instead of looking at the problem of clogged courthouses and choosing to not prosecute, we would look to make our courts more efficient... but what do I know. 

 

Im most definitely shocked this would be announced to the general public. What would stop  someone from shoplifting and resisting arrest or worse if they know there is zero repercussions? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 mins ago, mikez2 said:

Yah that's what I mean.

There has got to be more to the story. 

As you phrase it here, it makes no sense.

 

I think you inserted some hyperbole to leap from the addict selling a few extra to support his habit to the illegal chemist.

 

I have faith a fentanyl or meth or any other manufacturers would be fully prosecuted.

I'm sure federal law would be available if nothing else. (Without research, maybe wrong)

 

Wait, I'm rushing, sorry.

I missed your point I now realize. 

 

No amount of intent to distribute opiates should be ok because anyone could sell a hot bag.

I'm with you on that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 mins ago, mikez2 said:

I have a sneaky sense there is more yet to play out on this.

She has apparently (rumor, I have no source) told BPD that she is open to changing policies after some discussion, so there probably is more to come. But, that said, if she never planned on sticking to her campaign promises (not that anyone does), that's an incredibly low level to stoop to.

Edited by JTR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 mins ago, mikez2 said:

Wait, I'm rushing, sorry.

I missed your point I now realize. 

 

No amount of intent to distribute opiates should be ok because anyone could sell a hot bag.

I'm with you on that.

 

Totally agree on this. RI passed "Kristen's Law," which is intended to allow for life sentences for dealers who end up dealing drugs that kill someone. It is a step in the right direction.

 

Personally, I think that if you deal drugs that kill someone, that's it - do not pass go, do not collect $200. Life should be automatic. Build new prisons if need be. But as we stand now, there's very little deterrence for dealing optiates, especially under the trafficking minimum (14 grams).

 

At a very minimum, it should be involuntary manslaughter. Dealing fentanyl in my opinion absolutely satisfies the elements of Involuntary manslaughter. Up to 20 years. I'm baffled as to why we don't see that ever.

Edited by JTR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 mins ago, JTR said:

Totally agree on this. RI passed "Kristen's Law," which is intended to allow for life sentences for dealers who end up dealing drugs that kill someone. It is a step in the right direction.

 

Personally, I think that if you deal drugs that kill someone, that's it - do not pass go, do not collect $200. Life should be automatic. Build new prisons if need be. But as we stand now, there's very little deterrence for dealing optiates, especially under the trafficking minimum (14 grams).

 

At a very minimum, it should be involuntary manslaughter. Dealing fentanyl in my opinion absolutely satisfies the elements of Involuntary manslaughter. Up to 20 years. I'm baffled as to why we don't see that ever.

isnt it cheaper to just give the dealer a lethal dose of the own poison so us tax payers do not also have to suffer....just sayn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...