Baldwin/Goodell Write Letter to Senate

[kidhawk]

[urltargetblank]http://www.seahawks.com/news/2017/10/17/doug-baldwin-and-roger-goodell-write-letter-senate-judiciary-committee-supporting[/urltargetblank]

The letter, which is addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin and Senators Mike Lee and Sheldon Whitehouse, begins by offering “the National Football League's full support for the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2017 (S. 1917). We want to add our voice to the broad and bipartisan coalition of business leaders, law enforcement officials, veterans groups, civil rights organizations, conservative thought leaders, and faith-based organizations that have been working for five years to enact the changes called for in this comprehensive legislation.

PDF File of the Letter:

[urltargetblank]https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/Goodell-Baldwin%20Letter%20to%20Senate%20Judiciary%20Committee.pdf[/urltargetblank]

 

[Mindsink]

Here's a link to the bill they are supporting:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... -bill/1917

 

[kidhawk]

Here's a link to the bill they are supporting:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... -bill/1917

Here's a pdf of the actual bill (just a bit more direct for those who want to read that. It can be found at the above link as well.

[urltargetblank]https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/s1917/BILLS-115s1917is.pdf[/urltargetblank]

 

[StoneCold]

That is several evenings of reading and a pre-law degree to digest. I'll be proud to wear Doug's jersey to the next Hawk's home game. I hope, as I learn what's in this bill that I still feel that way, I have a feeling, if Doug is in favor of it, I will and that the bill has it's heart in the right place.

 

[replicant]

I wonder if this bill amounts to just The soft bigotry of low expectations. In other words, the bill writers are saying that a certain group has no choice but to commit certain crimes and thus should not suffer the consequences as severely as they have been.

 

[Mindsink]

I wonder if this bill amounts to just The soft bigotry of low expectations. In other words, the bill writers are saying that a certain group has no choice but to commit certain crimes and thus should not suffer the consequences as severely as they have been.

I know what you mean by that, but I don't think it applies here.

I read over a lot of it actually and it seems like most of it is in an effort to revise some laws that provisions extremely lengthy jail time for non-violent criminals.

One of the items that caught my eye was to revise a law where a first time offense gets you 3 months, and a second time offense gets you 30 years (or something extreme like that). Pretty crazy.

 

[hawk45]

I don't have any issue with Baldwin, neither his method of protest (he still stands) or his commitment to the cause. Baldwin is one of the (very) few in this who are interested in concrete steps and not mere virtue signaling to "raise awareness" of something no one on the planet is unaware of.

Criminal justice reform has been in the pipeline for quite some time - before any offensive anthem protests - and has been gaining bipartisan support. I do think the anthem protests made it more likely for Goodell to co-sign, but...so what. Goodell's brand is trash. The letter from Baldwin on his own would be high-profile enough.

So I'll applaud Baldwin's efforts, but then again I never took issue with players taking respectful and concrete measures to address things they feel are important. Funny how that works; Baldwin has demonstrated respect for the nation and its defenders, and opposing viewpoints, and therefore is able to gain support even from those who weren't already in his camp.

 

[StoneCold]

I don't have any issue with Baldwin, neither his method of protest (he still stands) or his commitment to the cause. Baldwin is one of the (very) few in this who are interested in concrete steps and not mere virtue signaling to "raise awareness" of something no one on the planet is unaware of.

Criminal justice reform has been in the pipeline for quite some time - before any offensive anthem protests - and has been gaining bipartisan support. I do think the anthem protests made it more likely for Goodell to co-sign, but...so what. Goodell's brand is trash. The letter from Baldwin on his own would be high-profile enough.

So I'll applaud Baldwin's efforts, but then again I never took issue with players taking respectful and concrete measures to address things they feel are important. Funny how that works; Baldwin has demonstrated respect for the nation and its defenders, and opposing viewpoints, and therefore is able to gain support even from those who weren't already in his camp.

Good cop bad cop? Or should that be good Kaep bad Kaep? Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Osprey]

I wonder if this bill amounts to just The soft bigotry of low expectations. In other words, the bill writers are saying that a certain group has no choice but to commit certain crimes and thus should not suffer the consequences as severely as they have been.

I know what you mean by that, but I don't think it applies here.

I read over a lot of it actually and it seems like most of it is in an effort to revise some laws that provisions extremely lengthy jail time for non-violent criminals.

One of the items that caught my eye was to revise a law where a first time offense gets you 3 months, and a second time offense gets you 30 years (or something extreme like that). Pretty crazy.

The cognitive dissonance on this one is pronounced. I see report after report on the opioid epidemic being the scourge of our time and the next report is supporting reducing penalties for those pushing those same opioids.

Obviously no easy answers and the root causes are difficult to define, however, is it really a non-violent crime to peddle drugs that kill?

 

[Mindsink]

The cognitive dissonance on this one is pronounced. I see report after report on the opioid epidemic being the scourge of our time and the next report is supporting reducing penalties for those pushing those same opioids.

"Supporting reduced penalties" for a drug crime does not mean you condone that drug crime. That's a logical fallacy.

Obviously no easy answers and the root causes are difficult to define, however, is it really a non-violent crime to peddle drugs that kill?

Again, flawed logic. Does that mean car salesmen should be charged with violent crimes as well? In fact, more people are killed by cars each year than by drugs. Or what about gun store owners?

 

[hawk45]

The cognitive dissonance on this one is pronounced. I see report after report on the opioid epidemic being the scourge of our time and the next report is supporting reducing penalties for those pushing those same opioids.

"Supporting reduced penalties" for a drug crime does not mean you condone that drug crime. That's a logical fallacy.

I don't see where he suggested that a reduction in penalties equated to condoning the crime. The more logical interpretation of his comment is that he feels that the lower penalties are likely to result in more of the crime being committed. We can debate effectiveness of deterrence or diminishing returns with respect to strength of penalties, but the notion that penalties may impact the likelihood of a crime being committed is as far from a logical fallacy as it gets.

Obviously no easy answers and the root causes are difficult to define, however, is it really a non-violent crime to peddle drugs that kill?

Again, flawed logic. Does that mean car salesmen should be charged with violent crimes as well? In fact, more people are killed by cars each year than by drugs. Or what about gun store owners?

Here I agree that attempting to squeeze the drug peddling itself into a violent category is less effective. A better argument in my opinion would be that there is strong, strong correlation between violent crime activity and drug activity as you have high-dollar illegal dealing going on, often between gangs and cartels, and so a rise in one nearly inevitably leads to a rise in the other.

 

[SmokinHawk]

I wonder if this bill amounts to just The soft bigotry of low expectations. In other words, the bill writers are saying that a certain group has no choice but to commit certain crimes and thus should not suffer the consequences as severely as they have been.

I know what you mean by that, but I don't think it applies here.

I read over a lot of it actually and it seems like most of it is in an effort to revise some laws that provisions extremely lengthy jail time for non-violent criminals.

One of the items that caught my eye was to revise a law where a first time offense gets you 3 months, and a second time offense gets you 30 years (or something extreme like that). Pretty crazy.

There is a lot that needs to be done to reform the justice system and how it treats nonviolent offenders, for sure. Particularly with regard to simple drug possession. That crime alone has been used to institutionalize entire generations of inner-city America.

 

[ivotuk]

I'm extremely proud of Doug Baldwin for writing this letter. And of Goodell for putting his name to it. Things have changed with the NFL, albeit slightly. And I'm glad it was Doug because he is sincere, and offers concrete steps.

The bill is to lessen excessive penalties brought about by the "Reefer Madness" campaign. I've seen people get decades long sentences for Marijuana/non-violent related crimes. There literally are men doing longer sentences for Marijuana related "crimes" than for rape and murder.

Now that Pot is becoming more acceptable, (it already was mainstream), it's my opinion that some are looking for the next "tool" that they can use against people as leverage, welcome to the world of "Opioid Epidemic."

The "Opioid Epidemic" is a manufactured cause. The steps they are taking are mostly for 'face-timing' the news outlets. "Look at what I did to combat this horrible epidemic!" "I've made it more difficult for those that use it legally to have access to it!"

I'm a lifer in that I have to have them for all the metal and fused disks in my back, but now things are becoming more difficult for me and for my doctors who prescribe pain meds. After 4 back surgeries, I'm still in pain from all of the scar tissue. I've had countless injections, radio frequency ablation (nerves grew back), and the Spinal Cord Stimulator trial failed.

I know people who've abused Methadone, and died, this is nothing new. Anna Nicole Smith. But now it's "an epidimic!" B.S. What about Heath Ledger? I believe he O.D'd on Xanax, illegally supplied by the Olson Twins. And Lyrica "can be abused" Bullshit. My doctor shook her head when she read that one to me. The DEA is desperate for budget money, so they invent issues that make them appear important.

So I hope that this bill addresses Non-Violent Felonies in a real way, not just some fluff. Because they are ruining lives by putting people in jail for reasons that effect no one but the person related to them.