If you want to answer the question of "should we let people solely convicted of drug crimes free", then the point is that whether it might be possible to convict them of something else is irrelevant - at present, they're innocent of those crimes.
If you want to discuss plea bargains in general, you're wildly off-topic in a harmful way - there's context in this discussion that you've decided to ignore without saying so, and in doing so, appeared to support the argument that people shouldn't be let free because they might actually be guilty of something else (that they've never been convicted of). I can promise you I'm not the only person who read your comment and thought you were saying that.
Well we're all off topic considering that the headline is about dogs' sense of smell! But I thought the point of such discussions was to exchange information... maybe other smart people stop by here, who know things I don't.
We aren't gathered here to vote on the fate of these people. And I resent the idea that every comment needs an elaborate bow to your preferred policies, elaborate avoidance of "harmful" ways to read things I apparently said "without saying" them.
Actually, believe it or not, public opinion is a huge driver of public policy. As a result, when speaking in public with the opportunity to influence people's opinions, one needs to be careful not to influence people's opinions in a way that may result in support for harmful public policy.
To say otherwise, in my opinion, is to say that speech has little value - in which case why does the US protect it so highly?
I hope that public opinion will be swayed most strongly by facts, not by random internet guys’ opinions. This got started with pugworthy’s request for numbers above, and I think the facts I’m asking for are relevant.
I actually worry that this plea bargain business is a sign that we have implemented a justice system much more scary than what everyone else is discussing. A system which locks people up for having a little weed is bad... and also pretty trivial to work around. A system which locks people up for reasons known only to the DA, who is free to lie and threaten behind closed doors, is fucking terrifying.
Do we even know which of these systems we have? That's what I was hoping people could help me understand.
If you want to discuss plea bargains in general, you're wildly off-topic in a harmful way - there's context in this discussion that you've decided to ignore without saying so, and in doing so, appeared to support the argument that people shouldn't be let free because they might actually be guilty of something else (that they've never been convicted of). I can promise you I'm not the only person who read your comment and thought you were saying that.