Icarium Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Many Contra Costa crooks won't be prosecuted That's madness. I'm guessing this is a publicity stunt to try and get more funding... but still a nutty move... Anarchy here we come? In the comments in the article someone mentions that this is already happening in SF but is kept "hush hush"?
grawk Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 eh, so he's not proscecuting "crimes" that only impact the criminal. Good for him.
swt61 Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Contra Costa County also includes the upscale town of Walnut Creek, and somehow I don't see the nipped and tucked well to dos that live there settling for this. I can promise you that the first store owner that shoots and kills his assailant will turn things around immediately. And why wouldn't he or she do so, if they know that the D.A. will turn a blind eye to the theft.
Dusty Chalk Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 eh, so he's not proscecuting "crimes" that only impact the criminal. Good for him.What? How does shoplifting only impact the criminal? (For example.)
grawk Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Ok, I missed the shoplifting, I thought it was just the drug crimes they're not prosecuting
Icarium Posted April 22, 2009 Author Report Posted April 22, 2009 Nope... (04-21) 16:41 PDT MARTINEZ -- Misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts and burglaries will no longer be prosecuted in Contra Costa County because of budget cuts, the county's top prosecutor said Tuesday. People who are suspected of misdemeanor drug crimes, break minor traffic laws, shoplift, trespass or commit misdemeanor vandalism will also be in the clear. Those crimes won't be prosecuted, either. Seems to be crimes that impact non-criminals as well.
Hopstretch Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Ok, I missed the shoplifting, I thought it was just the drug crimes they're not prosecuting Many years ago, I managed a liquor store in an undistinguished part of a run-down town in a benighted corner of the Third World. The owner employed private security guards who, as a matter of informal policy, dealt with shoplifting by taking offenders around the back of the premises and beating them unconscious. I thought this was a bit uncivilized and -- the next time someone was collared at the till with a bottle of brandy shoved down his trousers -- asked that the police be called instead. They responded commendably quickly, thanked us for our public-spiritedness and promptly resolved the complaint by taking the poor bastard around the back and beating him unconscious.
gauche Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 Police: Misdemeanor arrests will continue despite Contra Costa DA cuts By Malaika Fraley and Robert Salonga CONTRA COSTA TIMES Posted: 04/22/2009 01:05:21 PM PDT Updated: 04/22/2009 01:17:42 PM PDT MARTINEZ
Voltron Posted April 22, 2009 Report Posted April 22, 2009 I was born in then not as upscale Walnut Creek and grew in the next town over. I got so many tickets for driving my Who-mobile (VW Bug with The Who spray-painted on the front and 20 bumper stickers on the back) that my parents' insurance was canceled. I coulda used this policy back then!
manaox2 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Posted April 24, 2009 I was born in then not as upscale Walnut Creek and grew in the next town over. I got so many tickets for driving my Who-mobile (VW Bug with The Who spray-painted on the front and 20 bumper stickers on the back) that my parents' insurance was canceled. I coulda used this policy back then! Were the tickets for enjoying The Who too loudly?
AlanY Posted April 24, 2009 Report Posted April 24, 2009 There's only so long a state can operate with more than 10% of its population either in prison or working for the prison system before the whole house of cards starts to collapse. It's a huge waste of money. Not sure what the solution is.
inukage Posted April 26, 2009 Report Posted April 26, 2009 It really is kind of scary. Especially in a state like California, where the police and attorney offices are the only thing keeping all society from crumbling. Living in the North Bay, i know that crime is high enough already... telling everyone they will not be prosecuted for their actions..... wow
aerius Posted April 26, 2009 Report Posted April 26, 2009 I can't say I'm surprised. Cratering tax receipts thanks to the recession along with a reliance on auction rate bonds to bridge prior funding shortfalls is a recipe for getting raped. There's a half dozen states including California & Florida which are going to get killed by massive budget shortfalls within the next year or so. Cali & Kansas already had to suspend tax returns this year when they ran out of money, next year's going to be even more fun.
gauche Posted April 27, 2009 Report Posted April 27, 2009 now's the time to start selling pot. Taxing pot could become a political toking point By Eric Bailey February 24, 2009 Reporting from Sacramento -- Could Cannabis sativa be a salvation for California's fiscal misfortunes? Can the state get a better budget grip by taxing what some folks toke? An assemblyman from San Francisco announced legislation Monday to do just that: make California the first state in the nation to tax and regulate recreational marijuana in the same manner as alcohol. Buoyed by the widely held belief that cannabis is California's biggest cash crop, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano contends it is time to reap some state revenue from that harvest while putting a damper on drug use by teens, cutting police costs and even helping Mother Nature. "I know the jokes are going to be coming, but this is not a frivolous issue," said Ammiano, a Democrat elected in November after more than a dozen years as a San Francisco supervisor. "California always takes the lead -- on gay marriage, the sanctuary movement, medical marijuana." Anti-drug groups are anything but amused by the idea of California collecting a windfall from the leafy herb that remains illegal under federal law. Your Vote Should the state tax and regulate marijuana? Yes No "This would open another door in Pandora's box," said Calvina Fay, executive director of Save Our Society From Drugs. "Legalizing drugs like this would create a whole new set of costs for society." Ammiano's measure, AB 390, would essentially replicate the regulatory structure used for beer, wine and hard liquor, with taxed sales barred to anyone under 21. He said it would actually boost public safety, keeping law enforcement focused on more serious crimes while keeping marijuana away from teenagers who can readily purchase black-market pot from peers. The natural world would benefit, too, from the uprooting of environmentally destructive backcountry pot plantations that denude fragile ecosystems, Ammiano said. But the biggest boon might be to the bottom line. By some estimates, California's pot crop is a $14-billion industry, putting it above vegetables ($5.7 billion) and grapes ($2.6 billion). If so, that could mean upward of $1 billion in tax revenue for the state each year. "Having just closed a $42-billion budget deficit, generating new revenue is crucial to the state's long-term fiscal health," said Betty Yee, the state Board of Equalization chairwoman who appeared with Ammiano at a San Francisco news conference. Also in support of opening debate on the issue are San Francisco Sheriff Mike Hennessey and retired Orange County Superior Court Judge James Gray, a longtime legalization proponent. "I'm a martini guy myself," Ammiano said. "But I think it's time for California to . . . look at this in a truly deliberative fashion." He sees the possibility of an eventual truce in the marijuana wars with Barack Obama now in the White House. A White House spokesman declined to discuss Ammiano's legislation, instead pointing to a transition website that says the president "is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana." Several cities in California and around the nation have adopted laws making marijuana the lowest law enforcement priority, including Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, Denver and Seattle. Oakland went even further in 2004, requiring pot to be taxed if it is legalized. But where Ammiano sees taxes, pot foes see trouble. They say easier access means more problems with drug dependency among adults, heavier teen use and an increase in driving while high. "If we think the drug cartels are going to tuck their tails between their legs and go home, I think we're badly mistaken," Fay said. "They're going to heavily target our children." [email protected]
Hopstretch Posted April 27, 2009 Report Posted April 27, 2009 "This would open another door in Pandora's box," said Calvina Fay, executive director of Save Our Society From Drugs. She sports a superb aptonym!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now