DOJ announces clemency overhaul, allows release for some after 10 years

[flowers]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/23/clemency-after-10-years-in-prison-doj-announcing-overhaul/

The Justice Department moved Wednesday to significantly expand the number of people eligible for clemency, issuing new guidelines allowing certain prisoners who already have served at least 10 years behind bars to apply for release.

The initiative is part of a broader Obama administration effort to ease sentences for nonviolent drug offenders.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole outlined the changes, which include six separate criteria inmates must meet to be eligible, on Wednesday morning. Among the requirements is that inmates must have served at least 10 years of their federal sentence and not have a "significant criminal history." They must be "non-violent, low-level offenders" with no significant ties to major gangs, have a record of good conduct in prison, and have no history of violence.

Finally, the process will be open to those who likely would have gotten a lesser sentence if convicted of the same offense today.

"Older, stringent punishments that are out of line with sentences imposed under today's laws erode people's confidence in our criminal justice system. I am confident that this initiative will go far to promote the most fundamental of American ideals -- equal justice under the law," Cole said.

He said the department plans to launch the initiative "quickly and effectively."

Cole suggested attorneys in the Justice Department are on board, though separate efforts to curb mandatory minimum sentencing have drawn complaints from the rank and file.

The National Association of Assistant Untied States Attorneys wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder in January arguing that the current sentencing system is "worth preserving" -- and that mandatory minimums give prosecutors "leverage to secure cooperation from defendants."

[Dexter]

Basically they realize how stupid it will look if we legalize pot and still have non-violent offenders serving life in prison because of marijuana possession. I think this is mostly to let a lot of those guys off the hook, which I agree with. Our prisons are too bloated and overpopulated with people that really shouldn't be there, at least not for as long as they have been. It's expensive and completely unnecessary.

[sinkspur]

Besides, they'll all vote Democrat, just in time for the mid-terms.

[flowers]

Besides, they'll all vote Democrat, just in time for the mid-terms.

Bingo!!!!

[Oceander]

Besides, they'll all vote Democrat, just in time for the mid-terms.

maybe; maybe not.  i came across a study a while back that found that while felons who had been released (and gotten back their right to vote) tended to vote more democrat than the average population, they also tended to vote much less than the average population, meaning that they add very little of significance to the vote totals.  i'd think that the electoral fraud (the ongoing felonies) committed by democrats/progressives tend to have much more of an effect on election results.

[Dexter]

Besides, they'll all vote Democrat, just in time for the mid-terms.

Pot legalization is something Republicans need to get behind, because I promise it will be a mistake if "Republicans will take your weed away" becomes a left wing talking point. Millions of stoners would line up to keep the right from taking away their pot.

[Oceander]

Pot legalization is something Republicans need to get behind, because I promise it will be a mistake if "Republicans will take your weed away" becomes a left wing talking point. Millions of stoners would line up to keep the right from taking away their pot.

depending on how frequently stoners vote, that may or may not be a material issue.  seems to me the bigger reason for republicans to consider this is that smoking pot should be treated as a matter of individual freedom (and concomitant responsibility) - like drinking - that should not be criminalized simply because some people find it distasteful.

[Dexter]

depending on how frequently stoners vote, that may or may not be a material issue.  seems to me the bigger reason for republicans to consider this is that smoking pot should be treated as a matter of individual freedom (and concomitant responsibility) - like drinking - that should not be criminalized simply because some people find it distasteful.

I agree completely with that as well; it's pretty well known now that marijuana does not cause any more harm than alcohol does. That is exactly why Republicans need to get behind it, though, because if they don't it will make the Democrats look more reasonable, and they'll use it to say the right is against personal freedoms. Stoners may not vote a lot right now, but if the crux of their existence is on the line they will most assuredly go out and vote more often.

[sinkspur]

Millions of stoners would line up to keep the right from taking away their pot.

They might, but it wouldn't be a straight line.

[Oceander]

They might, but it wouldn't be a straight line.

it might not even be a line at all; perhaps a circular be-in