Via: U.S. News.Com
I never thought I would see the day come to America where marijuana would finally be legalized anywhere inside the country. It appears that the Reagan "War On Drugs" has run its course because it feels to me like the whole country is moving toward reinstating its somewhat defunct (and now completely underground) drug culture.
Now I am reading where the City of San Francisco, California (Every new fad seems to start in California, doesn't it?) --- is thinking about allowing people who were convicted for marijuana can petition the court to dismiss their cases.
Yes, I remember when kids in their teens were being thrown into adult jails and given stiff sentences for possessing as little as an ounce of the shit. I don't know if that ever happened in California or not but it did happen and I read about it a number of times. --- Little kids going to jail for years and having their lives ruined just for possessing a little "Pot!"
O.K., my dearly-beloved blog audience ... Let me ask you this: "If some of these people who were considered to be offenders under the old laws can get their convictions overturned, then do you think whoever put them in jail in the first place ought to do something to pay them back for the years they lost or the damage done to their lives? Is this a time for people to start thinking about a few large cash settlements for those convictions?
I would like to know why if the law can be used to destroy somebody's life then why the person whose life was destroyed can't somehow get something for their inconvenience? It seems fair that people who were once considered guilty of something and now, because of a change in the laws aren't considered guilty of having done something illegal ought to be paid for the time they lost, the opportunities they lost and the freedom they lost.
I never thought I would see the day come to America where marijuana would finally be legalized anywhere inside the country. It appears that the Reagan "War On Drugs" has run its course because it feels to me like the whole country is moving toward reinstating its somewhat defunct (and now completely underground) drug culture.
Now I am reading where the City of San Francisco, California (Every new fad seems to start in California, doesn't it?) --- is thinking about allowing people who were convicted for marijuana can petition the court to dismiss their cases.
Yes, I remember when kids in their teens were being thrown into adult jails and given stiff sentences for possessing as little as an ounce of the shit. I don't know if that ever happened in California or not but it did happen and I read about it a number of times. --- Little kids going to jail for years and having their lives ruined just for possessing a little "Pot!"
O.K., my dearly-beloved blog audience ... Let me ask you this: "If some of these people who were considered to be offenders under the old laws can get their convictions overturned, then do you think whoever put them in jail in the first place ought to do something to pay them back for the years they lost or the damage done to their lives? Is this a time for people to start thinking about a few large cash settlements for those convictions?
I would like to know why if the law can be used to destroy somebody's life then why the person whose life was destroyed can't somehow get something for their inconvenience? It seems fair that people who were once considered guilty of something and now, because of a change in the laws aren't considered guilty of having done something illegal ought to be paid for the time they lost, the opportunities they lost and the freedom they lost.
