Lets pretend that we run the country. Let's say that whatever decisions WE make, would be the law.
So, what would you do with drug offenders? Now, when I say drug offenders, I mean ALL types of drug offenders. People who get caught with weed, coke, heroin, etc. People that get caught dropping dirty at parole or probation. People that get busted selling, and people that are making millions on the drug "business" by flying it in, etc. (u know what I mean)
Should people that get in trouble by dropping dirty at parole get more time then people who get caught growing pot plants? Should they get any time at all?
Should a person be looked at as a PAROLEE with a drug problem? Or as a person with a drug problem who happens to be on parole?
What do we do with the people who just don't want to quit, and you know are not going to benefit from treatment at this time? (Assuming of course that we KNOW that particular person doesn't want to get clean)
Anyone have any ideas? Obviously this "drug war" isn't working. So, if you had your way, what should happen, and to whom?
This is hard cuz my opinions are based on my own boyfriends addiction. I know that he wanted to get clean, tried to get clean, and didn't have the ability at that time because of his fear of going back to prison. (didn't want to admit the addiction for fear of being incarcerated again)
So, when I think of him, I think that ALL drug offenders are in the same boat, which I know isn't true. Not everyone wants to get clean, or live a clean life.
How many times should we send someone to treatment instead of prison for drug charges. Once? Twice?
I think that if a person is on parole, and drops dirty, they should automatically get sent to an inpatient rehab center. Sending someone to prison without trying to get them help just isn't right.
Now, people that get busted selling drugs-no violence against other people. What do we do with them? If they want to be clean, then send them to rehab. But, how do we know?
Wow, I am rambling here.
So, my question to you all. What would you do?
Violent drug offenders?
Parolees who violate by testing positive?
Major drug dealers?
Small time dealers?
Pot growers?
I have been thinking about this alot lately, wondering what I would do if given the opportunity to make the rules.
(yea, like that's gonna happen! LOL)
So, any ideas?

Jeni, I wish you WERE running things!
You, at least, have the insight into why a parolee relapses.
You, at least, have the intelligence to know there is not just one punishment for every offender.
Personally, I would not send parolees back to prison for dropping dirty. They would be shipped right into treatment.
It would be voluntary, with them signing to the effect that they are there of their own free will and entering a contract of sorts with an addictions counselor or someone of that nature. The contract would state that they would always have room for this person if they had the genuine need for this sort of intensive treatment. No prison, no cops, just the properly educated people helping the addict with his addiction.
I am more inclined to hit the traffickers with the prison sentences. They have no addictions as a rule....usually the "top dog" is the guy who never touches the product and uses others to make his $$$.
If he is ever incarcerated, he does easy time due to his infamy, & his connections; he has the best lawyer $$ can buy and his family is surely not suffering from the poverty that the addict's family is suffering from when their loved one is incarcerated.
I am afraid I would just give up on the whole pot thing too.
At my age, I have not seen anything do the damage to a person's soul that heroin and cocaine have done.
Lots of burn-outs from pot, but not a whole lot of wrecked lives and violence involved with pot until you go further up the food chain to the "top dog" again.
Street-level dealers, I have no idea. There has to be some deterrent to what they are doing, but I don't think lengthy prison terms help anyone out in the long run. Educate people so that they can survive without dealing drugs for a living, i guess.
Ok, there is my two cents or twenty dollars..lol
I'm a rambler, too, you see :p

;) I agree with everything you have said. (well, all except me running things! LOL) But I do believe that unless you really really KNOW an addict, you can't make decisions on what is the best course for them.
Actually, ONLY an addict can make those decisions.
So, since I have been sucked into this drug war, I have had alot of time to think about what is happening to these people. I don't have any answers. I mean, there are things that I think should be done differently, many things, but there are certain drug offenses that I am on the fence on.
I think that if a parolee drops dirty, they should be sent to rehab. And like you said, I think they should sign a piece of paper that basically says that this is your chance to make a sincere effort to get and stay clean. If they get out and drop dirty again, well, I don't know. Should they be locked up then?
If they stay clean, wonderful.
I believe that parole officers need to remember that methadone IS legal when prescribed by a doctor. I don't think that they have the right to decide if the parolee can be on it or not. If the state says its legal, then it's legal. I am not a huge fan of methadone, but I did alot of reading on it when my boyfriend was on it. If it saves just ONE addict, then it is worth it.
Drugs are one of the MAIN reasons people go to prison to begin with. I mean, the majority of people locked up are locked up because of drugs. Why can't we focus on THAT instead of seeing all prisoners as bad, horrible people?
Money needs to be put into rehabs rather then prison.
From my own experiences, an addict doesn't want to be an addict. If they could take it all back, they would. If we focused on the root of the problem, maybe we could nip it in the bud before worse things happen. But we don't do that. Sure were making steps in that direction, but what is it going to take to make our lawmakers see that addiction IS a disease?
I know that my boyfriend regrets using that one last time. Just like a cigarette, he thought he could use one more time without getting addicted. WEll, he couldn't. Why should he be locked up for something like that?
Thank God they haven't made cigarettes illegal. (they probably should, but I don't want to go to jail!)
So, I dunno. I guess there really isn't a cut and dry answer. But, I do know that the answer is not prison.
I was just recruited to this lovely "prison team" about a year and a half ago, and I have already figured out that sending addicts to prison isn't the answer. Why can't they?

Very interesting Jeni! :)

Here's some of what I'd do:

1. Do away with mandatory minimums, 3 strikes laws, habitual laws, etc. - especially for non-violent crimes.

2. First offense - 6 months treatment and 1 year in either a half-way house, house arrest, or intensive supervised parole/probation. If they don't screw up in that 18 months, then the felony is dropped from their record. It's sort of a gift from the state.

3. If parolees drop dirty - they go straight to rehab. There's outpatient and inpatient programs. Let the PO and the parolee decide what's best. Also, let the parolee pay for it - if the choice is prison or rehab, they'll find the money. Also, this doesn't cost the state anything.

4. All non-violent offenders who do land in prison should get good time or at least yearly parole hearings.

5. NA or AA should be available in ALL facilities as well as their reading materials.

I've got other ideas that I'll post. I've been sucked into this drug war as well - I'm a recovering addict and married to to one who is in prison related to drugs. There's just GOT to be a better way!

Monica- I agree with everything you have said.
#1-The three strikes thing in these cases is wasting tax payers money. Especially for Non Violent offenders like u said. What a waste of life!
#2-I definitely agree that if they stay clean after 18 months, then the felony SHOULD be dropped from their record.
#3-I agree with sending parolees to rehab. My question is where do you cross the line with that? What happens when you send that parolee to rehab, and they come out and use again?
#4-I absolutely agree with the yearly parole hearings.
#5-And, once again, I agree with you . I think it's ridiculous that people can't get into these programs because a) they don't have room for them cuz they don't offer enough of these classes or B) they don't offer them at all.
This is exactly what I was looking for!!! Thank you Monica!
In Robert's prison, they don't give random drug tests. I think that all prisons should do that. What do you think?
Thank you for your responses! :)

Jeni,
In Canada here(at least in my man's prison) they give random drug testing every couple of months and they also have access to the 12 Step Programs. My guy has insisted on them testing him even more often because he wants the proof when he goes up for parole.
The sad thing about the prisons here is that once they admit they have a drug problem, they are jacked up constantly for searches of their cells and their visitors go through untold horrors trying to get in to visit. So, this has caused alot of prisoners to keep it to themselves about their addictions in order to prevent their families being treated badly.
The stigma is definitely there. I asked quite innocently one time if he didn't have access to bleach for his laundry( they do their own laundry). He told me he would rather have his whites gray than to ask a CO for a dixie cup of bleach, because they keep track of who asks for bleach, making the assumption they are bleaching their rigs.
So, instead of promoting bleaching for IV drug users, they would rather let them all share needles so they can up the HepC and HIV rates higher.
Makes no sense at all to me.

I agree with all of the above!!!! My son is a drug addict and it is a constant battle, but should he go to prison for giving a dirty drug test? I don't think so. I think rehab should be the first step. Bravo Jeni...I wish you were running things too!!!!!

"DITTO" I agree with all the above!

I totally agree with this and in addition to this I think the drug programs should be as much longer. None of this 2 week or 1 month or even 3 months but should be a min. of 6 months long. Preferably a year long that includes programs on responsibility skills and money management skills, holding down a job while they are there and all that is included in being a positive part of society. To many drug addicts have absolutely no real living skills. The money spent on prisons and the rates of drug relapsers going back to prisons comes to a crazy amount of money. It would take much less than that to do a program like this instead.

My son is in prison for doing something stupid while he was drinking and doing drugs. I agree with all of you. I don't think warehousing people solves anything. And I don't even think that they offer AA or NA at most of the prisons in Texas. Programs like this were cut out due to "budget cuts." Go figure.

Addiction is a disease. An addict can get the disease into remission but the disease is NEVER!!! cured. We can never give up hope that our loved ones will get clean. If AA or NA is not offered in the prison, go to a meeting and ask how you can change that. As far as making the patient pay for rehab, some can't afford it. Salvation Army offers a one year rehab for free. The one month rehabs CAN work if the addict is ready and has the support he or she needs afterwards. I have seen miracles happen, bones recover their flesh, parents return to their children, and abusers grow meek. Addicts DO recover!

Can I make an observation?
I had no idea what to expect when I saw this thread, and the kind of answers I'd see. But I know one thing, and please don't think I'm disrespecting anyone in the joint, but, If they were as intelligent as their wifes/girlfriends, etc. seem to be (given the commentary in his thread) I doubt that they would have found themselves in trouble, at all. I hope they stay close to you, as sometime this stuff can rub off on them. I hope they realize how smart and special you all are.

Well you are probably right, we are probably the smarter half considering we are free and they are not. Not sure we should tell them though ??!!!! lol