• @[email protected]OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 month ago

    Here you go.

    Despite these actions, the Last Prisoner Project (LPP) notes in a statement that Biden “has yet to release a single person still incarcerated for cannabis through commutation.” Although the pardons granted relief to thousands of people with a conviction on their records, the president’s clemency actions did not address the approximately 3,000 individuals serving time in federal prisons for cannabis related offenses.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajherrington/2024/11/26/nonprofit-group-calls-on-biden-to-pardon-cannabis-prisoners/

    • @Ensign_Crab
      link
      English
      111 month ago

      So all the “he pardoned weed offenses” was just as much of a lie as “he rescheduled cannabis.”

      • @MutilationWave
        link
        -21 month ago

        No, it just means he didn’t pardon all weed offenses.

        • @Ensign_Crab
          link
          English
          71 month ago

          Right. He timidly only pardoned the ones who were already out. Because incrementalism is about doing as little as you think you can get away with and demanding everyone act like you solved the whole problem.

          Cannabis is still schedule I and these people are still in prison.

    • @AbidanYre
      link
      English
      31 month ago

      That sounds like a great place to start; it also wasn’t mentioned in the headline, summary, or original article.

        • @AbidanYre
          link
          English
          -11 month ago

          Yes. And I’m saying that a “case-by-case” analysis of “nonviolent offenses” is impossible in two months and if he wants anything to happen he needs to narrow the scope because non violent is not the same as victimless. The drug offenses you mentioned seem like a fine place to start.

            • @AbidanYre
              link
              English
              -1
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Because 90% of 150,000 is still 135,000 individuals. How thorough do you want each of those “case by case” checks to be?

              https://www.bop.gov/mobile/about/population_statistics.jsp

              If you want a blanket pardon for everyone with just a possession of marijuana charge that’s cool. But it’s not what the letter is asking for.

              • @[email protected]OP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 month ago

                You think the US government can’t do that if they want to? We have the technology. And the man power. And the ability to print money. What is the hold up?

                Do as many as you can. But the US is capable of doing that with the time left. We’re choosing not to.

                • @AbidanYre
                  link
                  English
                  -1
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  You realize the money printing department and the releasing people from prison department aren’t the same, right?

                  Having a lot of people and having a lot of people qualified to individually examine 135k federal cases are two different things.

                  You say it can be done, I disagree. It doesn’t seem like there’s much more to be said.

                  • @[email protected]OP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    3
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    You realize the money printing department and the releasing people from prison department aren’t the same, right?

                    I’m trying to guess what your reason for thinking the US can’t do something is because you wont say.

                    Having a lot of people and having a lot of people qualified to individually examine 135k federal cases are two different things.

                    There are plenty of qualified people.

                    You say it can be done, I disagree. It doesn’t seem like there’s much more to be said.

                    Why do you disagree?

                    Regardless, in case you didn’t know, the US can do this. There is no reason we can’t and your argument doesn’t provide any. edit: typo