Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

mick063

(2,424 posts)
8. I refuse to be part of a process that puts a man in jail for owning marijuana
Thu Jul 25, 2013, 10:28 PM
Jul 2013

Possession of an assault rifle is a much greater danger to our youth.

I will not partake in the hypocrisy.

If a man makes profit from marijuana and does not pay taxes on it, I will convict for evasion of taxes, but only if the infrastructure is in place where he can pay taxes without being charged for possession.

If a man steals marijuana, I will convict him for the monetary value of the theft, but not for the possession.

If a man distributes marijuana to minors, I will convict if the penalty falls into the same parameters as distribution of alcohol to minors.

If a man intoxicates an unknowing person against their will with marijuana, I will convict him for that act, but not for the possession.

I have thought this through.

I would likely declare my stance early in the jury selection process and not be selected to pass judgment. I will not have the incarceration for possession on my conscious.

By the way, I have not used marijuana for a few decades and I passed a job dependent urinalysis this morning, living in a state that has come close to fully legalizing it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Debating between option two and option three. nt ZombieHorde Jul 2013 #1
I suggest we medicate and meditate pintobean Jul 2013 #2
I just finished my pizza, so the timing is perfect. ZombieHorde Jul 2013 #3
When you are an aggressive, bigot with a gun, you shouldn't be able to twist the law and get off. Hoyt Jul 2013 #4
OK, because of the Zimmerman case we have had DUers call for the end of the jury system, Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #6
As long as it's there, use it for murderous bigots with guns. Hoyt Jul 2013 #9
Get me on a jury in a drug trial, then ask me. Comrade Grumpy Jul 2013 #5
Why have laws then? GlashFordan Jul 2013 #7
Um, that is exactly what a jury does, decides guilt. morningfog Jul 2013 #14
Jury judges guilt GlashFordan Jul 2013 #18
Juries decide facts and guilt. morningfog Jul 2013 #20
There are reasons why a jury is given instructions GlashFordan Jul 2013 #21
Wrong question. JackRiddler Jul 2013 #17
I refuse to be part of a process that puts a man in jail for owning marijuana mick063 Jul 2013 #8
Interesting. I thought jury nullification only worked one way - that is, acquittal, not conviction. reformist2 Jul 2013 #10
That's what Wikipedia says. Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #11
nope - "A jury can similarly convict a defendant on the ground of disagreement with an existing law" DrDan Jul 2013 #19
I didn't know it could go both ways as well davidpdx Jul 2013 #12
A jury that convicts without a law isn't really nullifying, it's making up its own law, imo. reformist2 Jul 2013 #13
It's true. Convicting contrary to the state meeting its burden is not jury nullification morningfog Jul 2013 #15
If a jury convicted when the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt Ms. Toad Jul 2013 #16
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What's your view on jury ...»Reply #8