Marijuana and college students - please call your Congressman

soulsinging

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

you're school system?????

hahahahahahahahahaha..................................

looks like yours wasnt all that fucking great either.....

hehehehehehehehehe.....................

considering he lives in europe and english is his second language and 90% of the americans that post here can't get that right either, id say his is doing alright. i'd like to see the americans here try to type in french or spanish or whatever they learned in high school.

jlew24asu

soulsinging wrote:

the law currently denies anyone with a drug offense the possibility of financial aid. paroled murderers can get aid. rapists can too. drunk drivers can also. a kid busted with a joint in high school cannot.

ok well all the others you mentioned should be denied too. and people with drug offences as small as the one you mentioned should be allowed on a case by case basis.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

soulsinging wrote:

considering he lives in europe and english is his second language and 90% of the americans that post here can't get that right either, id say his is doing alright. i'd like to see the americans here try to type in french or spanish or whatever they learned in high school.

cmon conor....you know me ....

i was just giving him a little shit.....

all in fun.....

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

then that smart guy can get a lawyer and a drug test to prove he didnt take any drugs. people dont get drug convictions for being at a party where drugs are present. the persons holding them do

you don't know much about how the justice system works do you? it's quite simple. people with money for a good lawyer don't get drug convictions. those without that money do. period.

that's the only reason i'm in law school instead of prison. i'm dead serious. i could afford attorneys and got a few lucky breaks.

QuarterToTen

why should students with drug convictions get preferential treatment?

that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
what kind of a lesson is that teaching kids?

wow.

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

ok well all the others you mentioned should be denied too. and people with drug offences as small as the one you mentioned should be allowed on a case by case basis.

so then, why did you oppose the initial post? that is exactly what the change in the law mentioned by the OP is for.

jlew24asu

soulsinging wrote:

you don't know much about how the justice system works do you? it's quite simple. people with money for a good lawyer don't get drug convictions. those without that money do. period.

that's the only reason i'm in law school instead of prison. i'm dead serious. i could afford attorneys and got a few lucky breaks.

thats too bad. I'm glad I dont know you. people who admit they should be in prison, have no business walking the streets.

jlew24asu

QuarterToTen wrote:

why should students with drug convictions get preferential treatment?

that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
what kind of a lesson is that teaching kids?

wow.

exactly.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

jlew24asu wrote:

thats too bad. I'm glad I dont know you. people who admit they should be in prison, have no business walking the streets.

soulsinging is someone everyone on this board should look up to....

he has battled his demons and come a long way.....

you misunderstood where he was coming from my friend...........

jlew24asu

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

soulsinging is someone everyone on this board should look up to....

he has battled his demons and come a long way.....

you misunderstood where he was coming from my friend...........

ok fair enough. I think I remember now. I apologize soul.

Uncle Leo

soulsinging wrote:

the law currently denies anyone with a drug offense the possibility of financial aid. paroled murderers can get aid. rapists can too. drunk drivers can also. a kid busted with a joint in high school cannot.

I don't know the law and I am too lazy to look too deeply into it (imagine how lazy I'd be if I was smokin weed). But if this is true, it's almost funny. Most of us acknowledge the ridiculous cost of education. If you are not fortunate enough to be one of those kids who actually has the ellusive "college fund" can you even pay for it without aid? (I had the college fund). Would you need to save up for several years--cost yourself years worth up upward mobility and earning power while driving forklift and taking 10 years to graduate? All because you got caught with a dime bag in high school? And drug offenses are the only crime that has this prohibition? That's not about morality (or the rapists would not get loans). It's about the US's OCD-like villification of drugs. The thought must be that this is a deterrant either to young people doing drugs or to people bring drugs to campus. In the meantime, the jackass who beat the shit out of you in the high school bathroom and has an assault conviction just obtained financial aid. The kid who took a few hits a party that was busted just had his future jeopardized. Common sense is lacking.

Collin

jlew24asu wrote:

um thats not true. and if it was, then its ok since everyone is doing it?

College students are stealing music and movies constantly, there are people driving recklessly, cross walking ...

Some crimes are just less serious. So, I don't think commiting a crime is a good excuse for denying someone financial aid without any other reason. If you're just getting high all day watching Family Guy DVDs, which you downloaded from the internet, I agree, the money is better spent on someone who actually wants an education.
But if you smoked a joint once and got caught and there aren't any other problems (good grades, stayed out of trouble...) I think you should still get a chance.

we are talking about colleges here. which we have some of the best in the world.

but its crap regarding cost? meaning its too expensive? yea I agree.

Yes, colleges and yes, I think they're too expensive.

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

thats too bad. I'm glad I dont know you. people who admit they should be in prison, have no business walking the streets.

yeah well, supermax dui laws are a bitch. luckily, i got a few plea deals thanks to an attorney. and now i don't drink at all and havent in years. i also get large federal loans from the government to help me turn my life around and pay for school. becos... people can CHANGE.

Uncle Leo

jlew24asu wrote:

thats too bad. I'm glad I dont know you. people who admit they should be in prison, have no business walking the streets.

Actually he never said he SHOULD be in prison, but that he WOULD be in prison. Assuming its drugs (from what I know), someone who has his life on track should NOT be in prison (but some are, unfortunately).

dontloseyourheat

QuarterToTen wrote:

why should students with drug convictions get preferential treatment?

that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
what kind of a lesson is that teaching kids?

wow.

It's not preferential treatment, it's equal treatment.

While marijuana is illegal, it is not that serious of an offense. I'd imagine the percentage of this board that has at smoked at least once is >95%.

Now just imagine that you a good student. Honor roll and Vice President of your class. One day you are with your buddies and smoking for the first time. You get busted and booked. You can't afford to pay for college so you are forced to get a job. But you don't have a college education so you can't get a good job. You end up cleaning dishes at Olive Garden, working 40 hours a week for $7.50 while trying to raise a family. You do a good job and after 15 years you end up as assistant manager, now you are making $14.50 hurray! Little Junior is all grown up and now he wants to go to school but he can't because you still trying to pay off your mortgage with a $14.50 salary. All because you smoked a joint when you were 18.

You broke the law but the consequences are disproportionate to the crime.

jlew24asu

Uncle Leo wrote:

Actually he never said he SHOULD be in prison, but that he WOULD be in prison. Assuming its drugs (from what I know), someone who has his life on track should NOT be in prison (but some are, unfortunately).

I apologized.

soulsinging

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

soulsinging is someone everyone on this board should look up to....

he has battled his demons and come a long way.....

you misunderstood where he was coming from my friend...........

now i feel like a dick for undercutting your joke

jlew24asu

soulsinging wrote:

now i feel like a dick for undercutting your joke

but I do apologize. if you battled back and are doing good for yourself. thats awesome

Uncle Leo

jlew24asu wrote:

I apologized.

I know. I almost did not post it. I kind of wanted to (not for you, but in general) point out the difference between WOULD and SHOULD be in prison...I was making a loose connection to all the non-violent drug offenders in prisons.

soulsinging

Uncle Leo wrote:

I don't know the law and I am too lazy to look too deeply into it (imagine how lazy I'd be if I was smokin weed). But if this is true, it's almost funny. Most of us acknowledge the ridiculous cost of education. If you are not fortunate enough to be one of those kids who actually has the ellusive "college fund" can you even pay for it without aid? (I had the college fund). Would you need to save up for several years--cost yourself years worth up upward mobility and earning power while driving forklift and taking 10 years to graduate? All because you got caught with a dime bag in high school? And drug offenses are the only crime that has this prohibition? That's not about morality (or the rapists would not get loans). It's about the US's OCD-like villification of drugs. The thought must be that this is a deterrant either to young people doing drugs or to people bring drugs to campus. In the meantime, the jackass who beat the shit out of you in the high school bathroom and has an assault conviction just obtained financial aid. The kid who took a few hits a party that was busted just had his future jeopardized. Common sense is lacking.

it's true. i've been arrested for drunk driving three times. i didn't have to say a word about any of them on my grad school loan applications. there were TWO questions about drug convictions. the first was do you have any, the second was whether or not you were aware that not answering or lying on that question could get you arrested. and one of my arrests was as a minor, so i broke TWO laws... drinking, and then driving on top of it. the pot smoker broke one.