NFL players respond to President Trump's request for names of people he should pardon

[Shake n Blake]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-players-respond-to-president-trumps-request-for-names-of-people-he-should-pardon/

Quote:Earlier this month President Donald Trump, who has long been insistent that NFL players stand for the national anthem, said that he wants to meet with players who have knelt during the anthem to protest social injustice because they've "seen a lot of abuse, they've seen a lot of unfairness" in their lives. He wants to hear from these players so they can recommend to him people deserving of pardons.

On Thursday, four of those players -- Doug Baldwin, Anquan Boldin, Malcolm Jenkins and Benjamin Watson -- responded in a New York Times Op-Ed.

"To be sure, the president's clemency power can be a valuable tool for redressing injustice," the letter stated. "Just look at Alice Johnson, age 63, who was serving a life sentence for a nonviolent drug conviction until her sentence was commuted by President Trump. He should be commended for using his clemency power in that case."

"But a handful of pardons will not address the sort of systemic injustice that NFL players have been protesting. These are problems that our government has created, many of which occur at the local level. If President Trump thinks he can end these injustices if we deliver him a few names, he hasn't been listening to us."

The letter offered ways Trump could help beyond "a handful of pardons."

"Of the roughly 185,000 people locked up in federal prisons, about 79,000 are there for drug offenses of some kind — and 13.5 percent of them have sentences of 20 years or more. Imagine how many more Alice Johnsons the president could pardon if he treated the issue like the systemic problem it is, rather than asking professional football players for a few cases. ...

"There is also a systemic problem in federal prison involving the elderly, who by next year will make up 28 percent of the federal prison population. Releasing these prisoners would pose little to no risk to society. ..."

"Apart from using the pardon power, there are policies the president and the attorney general could implement to help. For instance, they could eliminate life without parole for nonviolent offenses."

The letter goes on to say that these changes "would positively affect the lives of thousands of people and have a lasting beneficial effect on many more people in the future," and the authors note that "being professional athletes has nothing to do with our commitment to fighting injustice."

"We are citizens who embrace the values of empathy, integrity and justice, and we will fight for what we believe is right. We weren't elected to do this. We do it because we love this country, our communities and the people in them. This is our America, our right."

So much to digest here.

1. Where are they getting their numbers, and why do they use the qualifiers "roughly" and "about"? What year are they referencing? Why only use Federal prison numbers, which make up a small fraction of overall prison numbers?

2. If this supposed problem is at the local level, why have the players wasted so much time beefing with President Trump? Shouldn't they be protesting in local communities and taking their fight to local politicians? Instead, they've let the kneeling become fully associated with Trump, and have exacerbated this by making a big stink about not showing up to the White House.

3. Are they really suggesting drug dealers should be free to roam the streets? Most of the folks in prison for 20+ years over a drug offense aren't in there for having a dime bag. We're usually talking about mass distribution of hardcore drugs. Is this how you support the black community? By putting more drug dealers back on the streets?

4. Is this their idea of "systemic injustice"? Arresting folks for mass distribution of hardcore drugs? The only way this makes sense (I guess) is if they think the government is shipping in drugs to poor communities, just so they can lock up black folks, which seems ludicrous...especially when the players suggest it's a local problem.

I'm really not sure how holding folks accountable for their own actions = oppression or systemic injustice. It makes no sense. Laws are color-blind. Mass distribution of drugs is a bad thing. It didn't become a bad thing just so cops can nab black people.

5. They say releasing elderly prisoners would pose "little to no risk" to society. That's debatable, and when did this protest become related to the elderly? They didn't specify black elderly.

6. "They could eliminate life without parole for non-violent offenses" - I'm fine with this, that said, many of the prisoners the players are referring to got those sentences due to multiple crimes committed over a span. Drugs and violence go hand and hand.

-----------

It seems many of these players are thinking too much with their hearts and not enough with their heads. I'm betting if you locked up Richard Sherman, Anquan Boldin, Malcolm Jenkins, Ben Watson, etc with some of these "harmless" drug dealers for a week, they may change their stance that the prisoners should all blindly be released en masse back to the streets.

[*michaelsean*]

He can only pardon people for federal offenses so I'm guessing that's why they listed the federal prison pop.

I don't see how you argue that elderly people should be released. Life without parole is just that.

[Millhouse]

(06-21-2018, 04:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: He can only pardon people for federal offenses so I'm guessing that's why they listed the federal prison pop.

I don't see how you argue that elderly people should be released.  Life without parole is just that.

Not long ago there were 70 some people locked up with a life without parole sentence for marijuana related offense, which I am assuming was a large quantity. Even though the 'War on Drugs' has been a failure, the 'War on Marijuana' which was part of that was just ridiculous. Locking someone away for weed, even lets say 6 pounds of it, is just mind-blowing wrong.


If its a non violent crime, then a lwp sentence doesnt seem justified, let alone right.

[BFritz21]

(06-21-2018, 02:44 PM)Shake  n Blake Wrote: https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-players-respond-to-president-trumps-request-for-names-of-people-he-should-pardon/


So much to digest here.

2. If this supposed problem is at the local level, why have the players wasted so much time beefing with President Trump? Shouldn't they be protesting in local communities and taking their fight to local politicians? Instead, they've let the kneeling become fully associated with Trump, and have exacerbated this by making a big stink about not showing up to the White House.

3. Are they really suggesting drug dealers should be free to roam the streets? Most of the folks in prison for 20+ years over a drug offense aren't in there for having a dime bag. We're usually talking about mass distribution of hardcore drugs. Is this how you support the black community? By putting more drug dealers back on the streets?

4. Is this their idea of "systemic injustice"? Arresting folks for mass distribution of hardcore drugs? The only way this makes sense (I guess) is if they think the government is shipping in drugs to poor communities, just so they can lock up black folks, which seems ludicrous...especially when the players suggest it's a local problem.

I'm really not sure how holding folks accountable for their own actions = oppression or systemic injustice. It makes no sense. Laws are color-blind. Mass distribution of drugs is a bad thing. It didn't become a bad thing just so cops can nab black people.

I agree with all of what you said and was going to reply to it all but poker game is starting.

  

(06-21-2018, 04:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: He can only pardon people for federal offenses so I'm guessing that's why they listed the federal prison pop.

I don't see how you argue that elderly people should be released.  Life without parole is just that.

But then why aren't they petitioning their local jails?  Why haven't they been doing that all along?  Why wait until Trump is in office?  So you can bash him if he disagrees with anything?

(06-21-2018, 05:28 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Not long ago there were 70 some people locked up with a life without parole sentence for marijuana related offense, which I am assuming was a large quantity. Even though the 'War on Drugs' has been a failure, the 'War on Marijuana' which was part of that was just ridiculous. Locking someone away for weed, even lets say 6 pounds of it, is just mind-blowing wrong.


If its a non violent crime, then a lwp sentence doesnt seem justified, let alone right.

I agree that people in jail for weed should be released, unless they used violence in selling/collecting/distributing or also sold other drugs.

[Shake n Blake]

(06-21-2018, 05:28 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Not long ago there were 70 some people locked up with a life without parole sentence for marijuana related offense, which I am assuming was a large quantity. Even though the 'War on Drugs' has been a failure, the 'War on Marijuana' which was part of that was just ridiculous. Locking someone away for weed, even lets say 6 pounds of it, is just mind-blowing wrong.


If its a non violent crime, then a lwp sentence doesnt seem justified, let alone right.

I agree for the most part...when it comes to weed. I don't view it as a harmless miracle drug that many smokers claim it to be, but it's clearly not as damaging as heroin, which is a huge chunk of the 60,000 overdose deaths recorded in 2016. That said, the players didn't specify marijuana here. They just said "drug offenses". Many - if not most - of these drug offenses aren't for weed.

[Millhouse]

(06-21-2018, 06:40 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I agree for the most part...when it comes to weed. I don't view it as a harmless miracle drug that many smokers claim it to be, but it's clearly not as damaging as heroin, which is a huge chunk of the 60,000 overdose deaths recorded in 2016. That said, the players didn't specify marijuana here. They just said "drug offenses". Many - if not most - of these drug offenses aren't for weed.

It wasnt long ago, like a couple or few years ago, roughly half of those in jail/prison for drugs was for weed. The other half was heroin, meth, etc.

And then on top of that, there was a disproportionate number of blacks arrested for weed than whites, when it's pretty even on both races using it percentage wise.

Maybe these numbers have changed, but I do know that even though the laws may have been color-blind, those making arrests and sentencing may not have always been.

*To comment on weed, it is definitely not a harmless drug. But in the grand scheme of drugs, it should have never been vilified the way it was which effected the ensuing failure of policies and wasteful amount of tax dollars spent fighting it. Here are is my quick list of harmful drugs, least to most: weed > alcohol > cocaine > meth > heroine . The bold > is where the line should be drawn on illegal and not.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-21-2018, 05:28 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Not long ago there were 70 some people locked up with a life without parole sentence for marijuana related offense, which I am assuming was a large quantity. Even though the 'War on Drugs' has been a failure, the 'War on Marijuana' which was part of that was just ridiculous. Locking someone away for weed, even lets say 6 pounds of it, is just mind-blowing wrong.


If its a non violent crime, then a lwp sentence doesnt seem justified, let alone right.

I’m not arguing for life without parole for non-violent offenders. Im saying in general, that life without parole doesn’t mean life until someone decides you are too old to harm anyone.

[Shake n Blake]

(06-21-2018, 06:54 PM)Millhouse Wrote: It wasnt long ago, like a couple or few years ago, roughly half of those in jail/prison for drugs was for weed. The other half was heroin, meth, etc.

And then on top of that, there was a disproportionate number of blacks arrested for weed than whites, when it's pretty even on both races using it percentage wise.

Maybe these numbers have changed, but I do know that even though the laws may have been color-blind, those making arrests and sentencing may not have always been.

*To comment on weed, it is definitely not a harmless drug. But in the grand scheme of drugs, it should have never been vilified the way it was which effected the ensuing failure of policies and wasteful amount of tax dollars spent fighting it. Here are is my quick list of harmful drugs, least to most: weed > alcohol > cocaine > meth > heroine . The bold > is where the line should be drawn on illegal and not.

I'm assuming they have. Heroin and meth users (and overdoses) have steadily skyrocketed over the last 5 years. Either way, the players should specify marijuana arrests if that's what they were referring to. Pretty big difference between your local pot dealer and a guy running a few hundred pounds of heroin - that is killing tens of thousands every year.

I pretty much completely agree with you on weed. Personally though, I'd leave it illegal, but drastically reduce the sentences.

[fredtoast]

(06-22-2018, 02:21 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'm assuming they have. Heroin and meth users (and overdoses) have steadily skyrocketed over the last 5 years. Either way, the players should specify marijuana arrests if that's what they were referring to. Pretty big difference between your local pot dealer and a guy running a few hundred pounds of heroin - that is killing tens of thousands every year.

You are completely missing the point.  Putting all of these people in prison does not effect the use of illegal drugs in any way.  It is just a massive waste of taxpayer dollars.

There are PLENTY of violent people to lock up.  Life sentences for just dealing drugs don't make sense.