Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SucksToYourAssmar3 t1_iz0johr wrote

But if we pardon them we have to 1 admit that it was a racist cash grab from the beginning 2 take money away from our partners in the law enforcement and private prison industry.

56

CityOfChamps09 t1_iz0kr4b wrote

Not really. We can just do it.

But, the board that rejected the 90% is part of the corrupt ass prison system so of course they are going to rule against letting these people free or out from under their bullshit charges.

We should have created an independent board or council to review these cases, not some board that's already a cog in the state prison system.

40

hedgerow_hank t1_iz0m9dz wrote

Exactly. Screw this noise. Legalize marijuana nationally NOW. Put an end to 60 years of bullshit.

If it's OKAY for big pharma to sell pot ("medical marijuana") then it's okay for regular shopkeepers to sell THE SAME FUCKING PRODUCT.

38

discogeek t1_iz0ogc1 wrote

First, not sure why we need an application process for this. State government knows who exactly is convicted of marijuana possession, yet they're making people be proactive in a situation where there's no solid reason to do so. I mean, unless there's someone out there who would rather *not* have this removed from their record.

Second, the article is click-bait. the headline states 90% are rejected precisely to piss you off, but if you read the article they state "Although the reasons for so many being denied remain largely unknown..." As in (and I'd suspect) a ton of applications "I murdered my neighbor while smoking pot so I should be pardoned" which doesn't fly.

231

EngelSterben t1_iz0oz2x wrote

>Although the reasons for so many being denied remain largely unknown, speculation suggests that technical issues with submissions and criminal records omitted from the application may be to blame for why a majority of applicants were denied

So, instead we're going to put out an article completely based on speculation

34

Worth-Cantaloupe-958 t1_iz0pisd wrote

We can see that the control party care nothing about the people and everything about the corporations. Smh

−1

ExPatWharfRat t1_iz0q7nc wrote

90% seems like a lot. What was the reason given? Or do they even need to offer one?

−1

AgentInCommand t1_iz0qx1q wrote

I'm all for legalization, but that's a bad argument for it. There are plenty of products that are regulated and sold by one industry or another (yes, including pharma) that shouldn't be sold by any random storefront.

14

downonthesecond t1_iz0s8lz wrote

I would have expected better laws from liberal politicians.

−17

djarvis77 t1_iz0vb97 wrote

> As in (and I'd suspect) a ton of applications "I murdered my neighbor while smoking pot so I should be pardoned" which doesn't fly.

Lol, murder. Come on. More like as in (and this was from another article on it) the weed conviction was paired with "Paraphernalia" or a host of any other, lesser, but not pardonable charges.

The thing is, many of the weed busts get pleaded down to the lesser charges in the first place. So people could be sending those in as well. The paraphernalia charge is a big one though, since weed smoking is often paired with some device or another.

You make a great point about the application process, for sure.

28

SmokeChaser426 t1_iz0vnff wrote

Mostly because of the Super Right Republicons in the PA legislatior which will be replaced by the Democrats who are much more reasonable and realistic in their governing. Good riddance to the Goose stepping Brown shirts. Maybe PA will finally listen to the voters instead of the Power brokers Just a thought

4

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz0vrdi wrote

90% are rejected because it must only be a charge indicating a small amount of pot. If at all the individual was charged with small pot charge coupled with a paraphernalia charge, they are automatically denied. Which inevitably happens 9/10 times because a plastic bag containing pot is considered paraphernalia. We need to get with the times. It's not a scheduled one narcotic. It is NOT worse than coke or meth.

122

LowNo5584 t1_iz0wxbc wrote

It's a bit piece based on biased speculation. The only facts given are the numbers. Find out why so many were denied, then report again.

7

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz10hd3 wrote

I'll believe it when I see it. A lot of politicians have said a lot of things about reducing restrictions to pot. Also, the federal government takes FOREVER to get anything done. So, even if this happens, it will take years and years. Hopefully not though.

42

rcher87 t1_iz10nke wrote

To your final point - there could also be really dumb procedural reasons that are easily rectified that got someone rejected.

eg - you filed it without signing the third-to-last page, so once your lawyer sees that, sign it and resubmit and you’re fine.

I’m hoping for that one - like ballots/fixing ballots.

8

pwnedkiller t1_iz10u5o wrote

This state is run by people out overly outdated ideals

14

DirtyHippyBastard t1_iz176d2 wrote

The industrial prison operation will not be threatened by the desire to treat the people fairly. Lock up these dangerous people so the children can be safe from communism.

1

DylanBob1991 t1_iz1dzef wrote

The last leader of the Republicans just said we should throw out the constitution and the year before he stoked a violent insurrection to illegally stay in power. And the vast majority of his party encouraged and protected him.

Let me know which democrat leaders are on that level because I'm unaware of them.

6

Steelplate7 t1_iz250j8 wrote

Keep voting Republican…

−6

victorix58 t1_iz27wek wrote

As as a criminal defense attorney, I have NEVER seen a small amount of marijuana that wasn't charged with drug paraphernalia.

If they rejected pardons because it has to be separate from this, I'm surprised the pardons were granted in 10% of cases.

Wolf sucks.

39

Extra-Permission-431 t1_iz2cved wrote

I agree. Who would carrying it in their pocket without a bag or without a smoking tool? They would probably charge your pocket as paraphernalia for that matter haha. Thank you for your professional advice and comment. Wolf certainly does suck. He makes it seem like he wants to help people out, but does the opposite.

17

victorix58 t1_iz2e3ee wrote

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Governor has pardon power. The pardon program was entirely within the governor's control. It was his project and not passed by the legislator.

−5

commanderfish t1_iz2ekaa wrote

If you want this fixed you need to pass laws legalizing and creating a legitimate program for clearing the crimes in bulk. For decades Republicans have blocked any real progress. In NJ the legalization laws includes this process as has many other states. The governor can't make money appear to do this correctly, the legislature has to do that. Republicans have controlled the house and Senate since 2011

0

irishgambin0 t1_iz2m265 wrote

same. they did a temporary rescheduling of cannabis a few years back, and that expired recently. so they renewed it again, while putting out statements of permanent rescheduling since the first temporary reschedule. so i'll believe it when i see it.

3

Latter-Pollution-474 t1_iz30ygi wrote

poor pot heads, howd did earth ever survive the last 9 billion years while it was illegal

−5

FHatzor t1_iz33u33 wrote

Yea, and another charge if they used a cell phone to call their dealer, and another charge if they drove with friends to the pickup, and another charge if they were near a park, school or church, and another charge if, and if, and if... ad fucking nauseam.

7

OutrageForSale t1_iz3487o wrote

I imagine many were rejected due to incomplete paperwork. I drove to the courthouse in the county where I was arrested (2.5 hours away) twice to get all the necessary copies of documents. In the end, I never sent the pardon request to the board.

2

irishgambin0 t1_iz4gm5m wrote

my mistake, i think it's fentanyl that got temporarily rescheduled. i'm always "weighing" drug scheduling vs. marijuana and fentanyl. and let's just say i smoked a little marijuana yesterday and got them mixed up.

2

Besthookerintown t1_iz4zxia wrote

It was almost impossible for me to get all the documents they required. I’m out of state and had to mail them 5 times and probably spent multiple days tracking down documents. I almost gave up multiple times.

2

Besthookerintown t1_iz6n938 wrote

How shitty of you. I was charged with two felonies for having an ounce of weed in college. The second charge was that I purchased it somewhere else and delivered it back to my house. It was $60 of brick weed. Never read my rights, threatened with ten years in jail if I didn’t plead guilty. You think an 18 year old with $60 of weed should be a double felon?

1

hedgerow_hank t1_iz9db3l wrote

> but that's a bad argument for it

Really? Do you think marijuana will be "randomly" sold in storefronts?

Please, tell tell me more of your marketing and licensing expertise. You can use the alcohol industry if you so desire. That would be a good one.

−1