Editorial: DA Kathleen Rice's 'drug d...

Editorial: DA Kathleen Rice's 'drug deal' worth a try

There are 104 comments on the Newsday story from Jan 11, 2008, titled Editorial: DA Kathleen Rice's 'drug deal' worth a try. In it, Newsday reports that:

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a rather famous New Yorker, once said, "It is common sense to take a method and try it.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
THE FRITO BANDITO

Brooklyn, NY

#1 Jan 11, 2008
Why don't we just do away with the judicial system and give everyone chances. Boy that sounds good. Do what they did in China: execute the drug dealers and suppliers. OOPS that might be another answer.
Rudy Guiliani

Cold Spring Harbor, NY

#3 Jan 11, 2008
Amazing that NYC is having significant decreases in crime over the past decade due to strong policing and enforcement, yet the democraps in nassau decide to just let drug dealers off the hook, and the liberal papers like newsday just jump on the bandwagon. Maybe next they will propose amnesty for murderers and rapists as well. This is a good example of our tax dollars at work.
CDJ

Wantagh, NY

#4 Jan 11, 2008
Rudy Guiliani wrote:
Amazing that NYC is having significant decreases in crime over the past decade due to strong policing and enforcement, yet the democraps in nassau decide to just let drug dealers off the hook, and the liberal papers like newsday just jump on the bandwagon. Maybe next they will propose amnesty for murderers and rapists as well. This is a good example of our tax dollars at work.
The War on Drugs is a failure, okay? A FAILURE. We lost. No, better yet: We got absolutely destroyed. So why not try something new. You need a long-term solution. Arresting a few guys and throwing them in jail for a few weeks isn't going to solve anything. Nothing's worked, so why not try something new?
Karen

United States

#5 Jan 11, 2008
Next up: Rental cars for bank robbers.
Southbound

Kansas City, MO

#6 Jan 11, 2008
Liberals are fools, and Newsday is leading the parade.
When New York City was cleaned up by Rudy Giuliani it was done by aggressive enforcement, not by giving squeegee men apartments and new squeegees! What is wrong with you people?!? Condoning crime and coddling criminals encourages more crime. There isn't even one first-time offender here. These are career criminals. We voted for three-strike rules. We voted for the death penalty. Does it even matter anymore what the majority of citizens want?
Gimme a Break

Bronx, NY

#7 Jan 11, 2008
When all else has failed, why not try something new? However! It is difficult when you have the likes of Mr. Fred "RACE CARD" Brewington claiming the D.A. is singling out blacks in this new program. The second floor at 50 Clinton St. does not see what goes on at Terrace Ave. As a resident of Hempstead and one who is around the "Hood" Kathleen could not have picked a better place. The old story of crying wolf too often is hurting many black people who think Brewington is their champion, while all he's really thinking of is the Green stuff the people like the Town of Hempstead usually settle rhe frivolous lawsuits can pay him. Wake up Black people Brewington is losing more and more these days because he cries wolf too often.
Joe Fraudee

New York, NY

#8 Jan 11, 2008
Southbound wrote:
Liberals are fools, and Newsday is leading the parade.
When New York City was cleaned up by Rudy Giuliani it was done by aggressive enforcement, not by giving squeegee men apartments and new squeegees! What is wrong with you people?!? Condoning crime and coddling criminals encourages more crime. There isn't even one first-time offender here. These are career criminals. We voted for three-strike rules. We voted for the death penalty. Does it even matter anymore what the majority of citizens want?
I was going to write something until I read what you wrote. It is perfect and I couldn't have said it better myself. What I can't figure out is if this woman is the District Attorney or if she is a Social Worker. Her political career (it is an elected position) will not last long with ridiculous nonsense such as this.
tech

New York, NY

#9 Jan 11, 2008
I really wish that whoever the Newsday editor was that wrote that ridiculous editorial would sign their name.

I would then lead a convoy of vehicles and drive over their lawn.
What a total dumba$$
Get rid of her

Bronx, NY

#10 Jan 11, 2008
Some editor you are. These are not suspected drug dealers they are convicted drug dealers. They all have prior arrests. This is not a second chance, this is a third or fourth chance. I don't think they care about going to jail. If they did they would have stopped after the first arrest. It worked in North Carolina in a much smaller area with a much more limted problem. All facts Ms. Rice fails to tell the people. Typical of Newday to pander to Suozzi and his lackeys. Never a bad word. If I lived in the area I would be pissed off that criminals are getting benefits that law abiding citizens cannot instead of being prosecuted. Nassau County you wanted change and you got it. Sell drugs and get social services. Works for me.
Concerned Citizen

Troy, NY

#11 Jan 11, 2008
Kathleen Rice: How do you explain to the mother of a child charged with first time drug possession, that her son has to go to jail, while criminals who have been caught SELLING drugs a SECOND time can get off without even being charged under your plan?

How about putting a cop on every corner around Terrace and Bedell? How about stepped up enforcement with a visible presence? Why not try programs that make sense, before resorting to this type of inconsistant, ill- concieved, illogical nonsense?
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#12 Jan 11, 2008
Rudy Guiliani wrote:
Amazing that NYC is having significant decreases in crime over the past decade due to strong policing and enforcement, yet the democraps in nassau decide to just let drug dealers off the hook, and the liberal papers like newsday just jump on the bandwagon. Maybe next they will propose amnesty for murderers and rapists as well. This is a good example of our tax dollars at work.
this isn't remotely about liberal vs. conservative. it's about what has not worked in the past, and finding a possible solution to the problem. change cannot happen without controversy. the effectiveness of this measure cannot be evaluated yet, so no one anywhere can declare success or failure at this point.

FYI this is probably saving tax dollars that would be spent housing 17 additional inmates in county lockup...
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#13 Jan 11, 2008
Get rid of her wrote:
Some editor you are. These are not suspected drug dealers they are convicted drug dealers. They all have prior arrests. This is not a second chance, this is a third or fourth chance. I don't think they care about going to jail. If they did they would have stopped after the first arrest. It worked in North Carolina in a much smaller area with a much more limted problem. All facts Ms. Rice fails to tell the people. Typical of Newday to pander to Suozzi and his lackeys. Never a bad word. If I lived in the area I would be pissed off that criminals are getting benefits that law abiding citizens cannot instead of being prosecuted. Nassau County you wanted change and you got it. Sell drugs and get social services. Works for me.
WRONG!!! no one is convicted. none of the 17 in question are even charged with anything.. there is evidence against them, however possibly not sufficient evidence. the DA may realize certain cases are weak and this whole thing could be a bluff... if so, it would be a very clever method of scaring these guys straight without using the traditional (unsuccessful) tactics.
Get rid of her

Bronx, NY

#14 Jan 11, 2008
Islez77 wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG!!! no one is convicted. none of the 17 in question are even charged with anything.. there is evidence against them, however possibly not sufficient evidence. the DA may realize certain cases are weak and this whole thing could be a bluff... if so, it would be a very clever method of scaring these guys straight without using the traditional (unsuccessful) tactics.
No you are wrong!!! Read the article again. All of the 17 have prior arrest records and convictions. They have not been charged with the current offense is all. If they get caught again they will be charged with the current offense plus what ever new charges there may be. And yes there is sufficient evidence. READ THE ARTICLE. They were all shown tapes of them selling drugs to undercover officers or informants. They are all criminals. There is not a first time offender in the bunch. she is letting criminals go and giving them services law abiding citizens cannot get. Sounds fair right????
Get rid of her

Bronx, NY

#15 Jan 11, 2008
Islez77 wrote:
<quoted text>
this isn't remotely about liberal vs. conservative. it's about what has not worked in the past, and finding a possible solution to the problem. change cannot happen without controversy. the effectiveness of this measure cannot be evaluated yet, so no one anywhere can declare success or failure at this point.
FYI this is probably saving tax dollars that would be spent housing 17 additional inmates in county lockup...
Furthermore, there is no tax savings here. She is giving them social services. Who do you think pays for those social services? TAXPAYERS.
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#16 Jan 11, 2008
Get rid of her wrote:
<quoted text>
Furthermore, there is no tax savings here. She is giving them social services. Who do you think pays for those social services? TAXPAYERS.
i'm pretty sure jail is more expensive.
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#17 Jan 11, 2008
Get rid of her wrote:
<quoted text>
No you are wrong!!! Read the article again. All of the 17 have prior arrest records and convictions. They have not been charged with the current offense is all. If they get caught again they will be charged with the current offense plus what ever new charges there may be. And yes there is sufficient evidence. READ THE ARTICLE. They were all shown tapes of them selling drugs to undercover officers or informants. They are all criminals. There is not a first time offender in the bunch. she is letting criminals go and giving them services law abiding citizens cannot get. Sounds fair right????
i read the article. YOU read it:

"And it's why the bold, second-chance initiative for suspected drug dealers that Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice recently launched in Hempstead Village is worth a try."

"suspected," that's copied verbatim... you were saying?
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#18 Jan 11, 2008
Get rid of her wrote:
<quoted text>
No you are wrong!!! Read the article again. All of the 17 have prior arrest records and convictions. They have not been charged with the current offense is all. If they get caught again they will be charged with the current offense plus what ever new charges there may be. And yes there is sufficient evidence. READ THE ARTICLE. They were all shown tapes of them selling drugs to undercover officers or informants. They are all criminals. There is not a first time offender in the bunch. she is letting criminals go and giving them services law abiding citizens cannot get. Sounds fair right????
Q: how do you know the evidence is sufficient?
A: you don't.

remember that not all of the suspects are being offered this leniency.

the social services are very much available to everyone. plus, while costing less than housing an inmate, they provide assistance for people who WANT to improve themselves to the point that they don't need any further assistance. like job training, for example, which is short-term.

your vision is clouded by your political views. try to separate the two issues, as they have nothing to do w/ each other.
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#19 Jan 11, 2008
Get rid of her wrote:
<quoted text>
No you are wrong!!! BLAHBLAH BLAH BLAH [nothing] blahblahahahah
you are evidently anti-Rice to begin with and are using this opportunity to attack her.

..and i'm not defending her, just her idea (and courage)..
Islez77

Richmond Hill, NY

#20 Jan 11, 2008
....tick, tock, tick, tock....
[waiting for response].....
Jimmy Crack Corn

East Hampton, NY

#21 Jan 11, 2008
Why am I not surprised this is the angle Snoozeday took? If I ever have a problem trying to decide what I think about something, I know I can count on the Editorial page to help me make my mind up - I just read Newsday's position and then think the opposite!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News On This Day: McCollum Memo Delivered (Feb '15) Jul '16 Cynthia 3
News Like Lincoln and FDR, Obama faces nation in cri... (Nov '08) Oct '14 yon 52
News Veteran projectionist still threading film at m... (Mar '13) Mar '13 Films 1
News Memos show U.S. hushed up Soviet crime (Sep '12) Sep '12 Pesky army 6
News Hmm. The 2012 Election Reminds Me Of Something (May '12) Jun '12 Le Jimbo 71
News Paul Broun on FDR (Sep '11) Sep '11 Brotha of the Unb... 1
News The Constitution and compassion, too (May '11) May '11 JERRY DEMING 6
More from around the web