Comments on: Fair and Balanced http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/ A site about lugs, tan sidewalls, maybe jazz, classical, punk and bluegrass, local riding, worldly riding and people, cool cats, lame ducks, 110 bcds, wool, and smelling like hell after a long ride. Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:19:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: new computer != remembering username (Sean) http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4623 new computer != remembering username (Sean) Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:17:48 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4623 Get tough on drugs? Why? Do we want people to stop taking drugs? Legalize drugs - all of 'em and tax the shit out of them like they're cigarettes or gasoline...or...legalize them and secretely infuse ipecaq into everything so drugs will make people so sick they'll stop using them...or give them enough drugs to thin out the population a little...or something. Get tough on drugs? Why? Do we want people to stop taking drugs? Legalize drugs – all of ‘em and tax the shit out of them like they’re cigarettes or gasoline…or…legalize them and secretely infuse ipecaq into everything so drugs will make people so sick they’ll stop using them…or give them enough drugs to thin out the population a little…or something.

]]> By: Nichols http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4566 Nichols Fri, 02 Nov 2007 20:22:15 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4566 Update: the DOJ lowered the crack sentencing guidelines. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15885119&ft=1&f=1001 (no hyperlink here). There are, however, good reasons for the disparity. Foremost among them being, lawyers do coke, not crack. We have to be tough on drugs, just not the drugs the lawmakers may partake in now and again. Update: the DOJ lowered the crack sentencing guidelines. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15885119&ft=1&f=1001 (no hyperlink here).

There are, however, good reasons for the disparity. Foremost among them being, lawyers do coke, not crack. We have to be tough on drugs, just not the drugs the lawmakers may partake in now and again.

]]> By: starmer http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4560 starmer Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:52:03 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4560 Sorry, I realize that might be too much computerese for some of you. != means not equal. Sorry, I realize that might be too much computerese for some of you. != means not equal.

]]> By: starmer http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4558 starmer Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:43:00 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4558 Casey, you are killing me. Remember Einstein's theory of englishitivity: <img src='http://ridelugged.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/einstein.jpg' alt='sentance isn’t a word' /> Casey, you are killing me. Remember Einstein’s theory of englishitivity:

sentance isn’t a word

]]> By: johnson http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4551 johnson Fri, 02 Nov 2007 01:09:02 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4551 well i heard they are considering adjusting the sentancing for crack possession, shortening the sentance, but that still disregards the gross imbalance in drug quantity in relation to sentancing. way to comment on the blog, nichols. obv i need to bring more legalese into the conversation here. well i heard they are considering adjusting the sentancing for crack possession, shortening the sentance, but that still disregards the gross imbalance in drug quantity in relation to sentancing.
way to comment on the blog, nichols. obv i need to bring more legalese into the conversation here.

]]> By: Nichols http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/comment-page-1/#comment-4550 Nichols Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:37:39 +0000 http://ridelugged.com/2007/11/01/fair-and-balanced/#comment-4550 SCOTUS just reviewed this issue and, moreover, the DOJ has held a number of hearings recently regarding adjusting the sentencing guidelines. If your interested, read the briefs from Kimbrough v. US (docket # 06-6330). The bigger problem, however, is the "non-binding", yet still binding, sentencing guidelines in Fed. Ct. SCOTUS just reviewed this issue and, moreover, the DOJ has held a number of hearings recently regarding adjusting the sentencing guidelines. If your interested, read the briefs from Kimbrough v. US (docket # 06-6330). The bigger problem, however, is the “non-binding”, yet still binding, sentencing guidelines in Fed. Ct.

]]>