And obama spoke…..and the gates of Hell opened….obama to release 6,000 felons today...

[paulitician]

A drop in a bucket. We need to release many many more Citizens who don't belong in cages. Let's start with all non-violent drug offenders being released immediately.

The only purpose that prisons serve is to separate the inmates from the public. The average convicted felon will spend less than 5 years in prison. If they aren't harden criminal when they enter prison, they most likely will be when they leave. Prisons should be a place for rehabilitation, not schools for criminals.

You're about 40 years out of step with the rehabilitation experiment.

Psst...it was an abject failure for which we continue to pay the price.

Wrong. Rehabilitation is the wisest route.

 

[Mustang]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

 

[paulitician]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

If you're in prison for a non-violent 'Dope' offense, you should be released immediately. You don't belong in a cage with brutal murderers and rapists.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

If you're in prison for a non-violent 'Dope' offense, you should be released immediately. You don't belong in a cage with brutal murderers and rapists.

Why not?

 

[paulitician]

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

If you're in prison for a non-violent 'Dope' offense, you should be released immediately. You don't belong in a cage with brutal murderers and rapists.

Why not?

Do you really believe they do?

 

[thanatos144]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

If you're in prison for a non-violent 'Dope' offense, you should be released immediately. You don't belong in a cage with brutal murderers and rapists.

Then let the junkies live in your fucking house and away form my fucking family!

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Flopper]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

I know it's popular to blame Obama with whatever you don't like about the government or most anything else, however the reason for these prisoners being released has very little to do with Obama. The US sentencing commission has established new guideline for sentencing. These changes reduce the terms of many non-violent felons convicted of drug crimes.

So you're saying if we had a conservative Republican President, this still would have happened?

Don't you believe it for a minute.

Yes, it certainly could. We have known for years that federal sentencing guidelines has put a lot of people in federal prisons that shouldn't be there. This resulted in overcrowding, court mandated releases, and dangerous criminals being put in low security facilities because there was no room for them elsewhere.

What the public often ignores is that we have only so much room in prisons. If we fill our prisons with non-violent criminals then there will be no room for those that are truly a danger to society.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

I know it's popular to blame Obama with whatever you don't like about the government or most anything else, however the reason for these prisoners being released has very little to do with Obama. The US sentencing commission has established new guideline for sentencing. These changes reduce the terms of many non-violent felons convicted of drug crimes.

So you're saying if we had a conservative Republican President, this still would have happened?

Don't you believe it for a minute.

Yes, it certainly could. We have known for years that federal sentencing guidelines has put a lot of people in federal prisons that shouldn't be there. This resulted in overcrowding, court mandated releases, and dangerous criminals being put in low security facilities because there was no room for them elsewhere.

What the public often ignores is that we have only so much room in prisons. If we fill our prisons with non-violent criminals then there will be no room for those that are truly a danger to society.

No, all the bureaucracies are under the order of politicians. It's one of the reasons I hate bureaucrats; because they are nothing but fall guys for politicians that do devious things and don't want to take the blame. So no, if we had a Republican President, there is no way in hell he would let somebody from his administration open the doors and let these criminals out. This is Obama's call whether you want to blame others or not. If a President really doesn't have control over his own bureaucracies, then he is a failed leader and needs to be removed.

As these people get out of jail, we will see more crime. They will have a hard time getting a job, they will continue to fight their addiction and probably lose, they will bring harm to law biding citizens.

It may take a year or so, but somebody will be following this. And when they report the outcome to the public, MSM will ignore the story entirely and it may only be seen on Fox. DumBama will be long out of office by then and reside at the golf course.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

I know it's popular to blame Obama with whatever you don't like about the government or most anything else, however the reason for these prisoners being released has very little to do with Obama. The US sentencing commission has established new guideline for sentencing. These changes reduce the terms of many non-violent felons convicted of drug crimes.

So you're saying if we had a conservative Republican President, this still would have happened?

Don't you believe it for a minute.

Yes, it certainly could. We have known for years that federal sentencing guidelines has put a lot of people in federal prisons that shouldn't be there. This resulted in overcrowding, court mandated releases, and dangerous criminals being put in low security facilities because there was no room for them elsewhere.

What the public often ignores is that we have only so much room in prisons. If we fill our prisons with non-violent criminals then there will be no room for those that are truly a danger to society.

No, all the bureaucracies are under the order of politicians. It's one of the reasons I hate bureaucrats; because they are nothing but fall guys for politicians that do devious things and don't want to take the blame. So no, if we had a Republican President, there is no way in hell he would let somebody from his administration open the doors and let these criminals out. This is Obama's call whether you want to blame others or not. If a President really doesn't have control over his own bureaucracies, then he is a failed leader and needs to be removed.

As these people get out of jail, we will see more crime. They will have a hard time getting a job, they will continue to fight their addiction and probably lose, they will bring harm to law biding citizens.

It may take a year or so, but somebody will be following this. And when they report the outcome to the public, MSM will ignore the story entirely and it may only be seen on Fox. DumBama will be long out of office by then and reside at the golf course.

Yes, even more Persons with criminal records who may have a harder time getting a job that is not available.

 

[CowboyTed]

With 2.5 million Americans incarcerated, it is time to start releasing alot more than that

We had 500 million in prison 30 years ago, we now have five times that number

And our crime rate went down……amazing thing….lock up criminals and the crime rate goes down…….Please leave your address, I will forward it to the Federal Dept. of Corrections to make sure that any relocation efforts send these released felons to your neighborhood…..

Since they were all just teenagers smoking pot…right?

Actually crime rates are going down worldwide and other countries are locking up less...

Theory is a load of crap

 

[paulitician]

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

Are they rapists?

By the way, releasing 6,000 nonviolent offenders would conservatively probably save the taxpayers around $200,000,000 a year. It would even be more than that if they get out, get a job, and start supporting their families instead of being dependent on some kind of public assistance.

So, here's the bottom line. Figure out what the hell you want. If you want them to stay in prison, then don't bellyache about the cost. If you want to cut the cost of incarcerating nonviolent offenders, then you have to embrace solutions other than simply locking people up for nonviolent drug offenses.

Pick one!

I've never complained about the cost to keep criminals in prison. I don't think there is anybody on the right that lodged such a complaint either.

What I want is the rule of law. We have laws, and if you break them, you must pay the penalty. If you disagree with our laws, then change them, but don't complain when your daughter comes home and falls on the floor because she ran into a pusher that got her hooked on dope.

And this "nonviolent" thing is such a misnomer. Many of these convicts are in prison for other things besides using dope. They've had a violent past--maybe not for the charge they were sent to prison for, but still violent. Drug trade is violent by nature. A user could get gunned down buying dope from somebody that just wants to rip him or her off, and if you're selling dope, violence is part of the game. And remember, many of these prisoners plead down to a lesser charge of using because the prosecutor found it more constructive to drop a dope dealing charge to give the accused some time in prison.

But if you want to maintain your stance that these prisoners are non-violent, then let me ask: would you accept it if Obama released all 6,000 of these offenders in your neighborhood?

If you're in prison for a non-violent 'Dope' offense, you should be released immediately. You don't belong in a cage with brutal murderers and rapists.

Then let the junkies live in your fucking house and away form my fucking family!

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Such compassion. Nice job.

 

[daws101]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

 

[daws101]

A drop in a bucket. We need to release many many more Citizens who don't belong in cages. Let's start with all non-violent drug offenders being released immediately.

The only purpose that prisons serve is to separate the inmates from the public. The average convicted felon will spend less than 5 years in prison. If they aren't harden criminal when they enter prison, they most likely will be when they leave. Prisons should be a place for rehabilitation, not schools for criminals.

You're about 40 years out of step with the rehabilitation experiment.

Psst...it was an abject failure for which we continue to pay the price.

Wrong. Rehabilitation is the wisest route.

easy there paulie kosher hag's delicate mental state dives her to say stupid shit.

 

[Flopper]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

I know it's popular to blame Obama with whatever you don't like about the government or most anything else, however the reason for these prisoners being released has very little to do with Obama. The US sentencing commission has established new guideline for sentencing. These changes reduce the terms of many non-violent felons convicted of drug crimes.

So you're saying if we had a conservative Republican President, this still would have happened?

Don't you believe it for a minute.

Yes, it certainly could. We have known for years that federal sentencing guidelines has put a lot of people in federal prisons that shouldn't be there. This resulted in overcrowding, court mandated releases, and dangerous criminals being put in low security facilities because there was no room for them elsewhere.

What the public often ignores is that we have only so much room in prisons. If we fill our prisons with non-violent criminals then there will be no room for those that are truly a danger to society.

No, all the bureaucracies are under the order of politicians. It's one of the reasons I hate bureaucrats; because they are nothing but fall guys for politicians that do devious things and don't want to take the blame. So no, if we had a Republican President, there is no way in hell he would let somebody from his administration open the doors and let these criminals out. This is Obama's call whether you want to blame others or not. If a President really doesn't have control over his own bureaucracies, then he is a failed leader and needs to be removed.

As these people get out of jail, we will see more crime. They will have a hard time getting a job, they will continue to fight their addiction and probably lose, they will bring harm to law biding citizens.

It may take a year or so, but somebody will be following this. And when they report the outcome to the public, MSM will ignore the story entirely and it may only be seen on Fox. DumBama will be long out of office by then and reside at the golf course.

Have you read past the headlines? Apparently not. Over 1700 of 6,100 being released are illegal immigrants which are being transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation. 80% of the remainder are not actually in prison but in halfway houses that are filled to capacity. This means approximately 880 inmates in prison will be released, not 6100.

The new commission guidelines reduced non-violent drug sentences retroactively by an average of two years. Yes, a president could certainly block the release. In which case, the courts would do it.

What You Should Know About The Federal Inmate Release

 

[Flopper]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

The only ones being released are those serving time for non-violent drug related crimes. 80% of those being released are near the end of their sentence and are in halfway houses or under home arrest.

 

[Flopper]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

The only ones being released are those serving time for non-violent drug related crimes. 80% of those being released are near the end of their sentence and are in halfway houses or under house arrest.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

Just making a comparison and a point.

 

[daws101]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

Just making a comparison and a point.

making shit up to bolster your paranoia is what you did.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes….in order to push more gun control you have to have an increase in the violent crime rate…currently our violent crime rate is going down, not up….mainly due to locking up criminals for a long time, and also because good people can now carry guns…..

That is going to change….obama and congress have decided that they need to increase the crime rate just before the election and to help push gun control…so today is the day they are releasing 6,000 felons back into our cities…..

Thanks obama…..

Conservatives say that they want to cut spending. So be it. What does it cost the taxpayers every year to keep 6,000 nonviolent offenders in prison?

Don't know. What does it cost for 6,000 rapists?

you have proof that all 6000 are rapists or are you talking out your ass?

Just making a comparison and a point.

making shit up to bolster your paranoia is what you did.

And just what did I make up?