New NJ Drug Legislation

[rockandrollsouls]

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/breaking-news/index.ssf/2012/07/gov_chris_christie_signs_drug.html

Thoughts?

I'll take "treatment" over "prison time" any day (though, obviously the far lesser of two evils) and though I'm not sure of all the details I'm guessing it might be slightly better than what we have...?

[playboymommy]

Why should tax payers pay for the imprisonment or the treatment of drug users?

It doesn't work. Some wise man once said, "The more you subsidize something, the more of it you get."

[Valli6]

I think this it's a big nothing.

In this video, Christie says this "will allow every person who comes into the criminal justice system in NJ with a drug addiction, to get a year of mandatory drug treatment, in-house."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQul78I_eNg#t=2m06s

If it's 1 year "mandatory" and it's "in-house", doesn't that mean they will still be locked up for a full year? And it's not as if programs like this don't already exist in NJ. Why are they acting like it's a whole new concept?! It's BS.

This won't benefit the typical nonviolent person charged with drug possesion, because those people aren't addicted and can't benefit from a year long progam. Taxpayers just get to pay for a further-expanded drug war.

[Working Poor]

If it's 1 year "mandatory" and it's "in-house", doesn't that mean they will still be locked up for a full year?

prolly so...

[Kelly.]

yet another growth for government under a "conservative" governor

sorry if i dont look to surprised.

[osan]

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/breaking-news/index.ssf/2012/07/gov_chris_christie_signs_drug.html

Thoughts?

I'll take "treatment" over "prison time" any day (though, obviously the far lesser of two evils) and though I'm not sure of all the details I'm guessing it might be slightly better than what we have...?

It may be a lesser evil, but evil nonetheless. There is no authority to which anyone can credibly point that empowers anyone either to imprison or force rehab on someone. Drug possession and use are not crimes and therefore all legislation that deems it such and sets forth punishments and other violations of individual rights are the actual crimes. Ironic, no?

If we are to be so violated by the criminals calling themselves "the state", I suppose this is preferable but it is still criminal. I would nevertheless continue to express my vehement opposition to this and all other issues that criminalize non-criminal behavior.

When one thinks of such things to any depth it becomes alarmingly clear just how profoundly insane this world really is.

[Eisenhower]

It isn't the ideal option, but it is surely better than imprisoning drug using violators.

[rockandrollsouls]

Yea, that's how I thought of it. Obviously I don't like this option, but it's marginally better than tossing more people in prisons.


It isn't the ideal option, but it is surely better than imprisoning drug using violators.

[proudclod229]

I said this in another thread: laws like this label everyone who uses drugs and is caught by police only trying to help(justify their paycheck) as an addict.

Imagine if it was johnny pot seed instead. hahaha

[QuickZ06]

I want to put Christie on mandatory wight control for a year.