Student got arrested in a major drug bust at Gallaudet University

WHAT? Did I say Nixon ended war on drug era? Nope! I didn't say that, he is the ONE that started the war on drug ERA during 70's, made heavy campaign to convince Americans into thinking since we are bringing Vietnam war veterans back with bunch of dangerous dope which is mostly heroin, he actually made congress fall for it and passed law, Nixon had no problem with signing, The beginning budget was passed with small amount, I can't remember and it was not that a lot but enough to start DEA business. It was all because of Heroin that vets brought back here and Nixon was referring Marijuana as equilvent or gateway to Heroin. What A BIG FAT LIE!

During 80's the prison population mushroomed, the demand for new prisons skyrocket during 80's to the point where state government realize they can't afford expand more so that was during early 90's causing some state deciding to relax the drug laws and ignored Federal drug laws. Now two states have passed to repeal the Cannabis prohibition, more to follow soon.

War on Drugs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My biggest concern is Meth, if we don't legalize Cannabis we will see more of Meth coming up and it is killing us. Meth is far worse than Heroin.

This is part reason why I realize that having bigger government is not working and it is hurting us more than good. We had great years and that was before JFK ERA.

Nope, you didn't say Nixon ended the war on drug era. I'm saying you go back a lot in past history and give those examples but I don't think you can apply that to policies today.

You are a history buff, you have good examples on history like prohibition and Nixon, Reagan administration blunders or past that was overhyped. Lead to drug bans and incriminating of drugs. It's not incorrect, you have a point.

Nixon's reasons were pretty simplistic, he did it for too simple opinion (as you have stated):
- Drugs are bad, addiction is bad, Hippies are bad.

Very generic and pretty simpleton reason, not enough to convince someone today about banning drugs. Of course, I agree with that it is not a good reason and very basic without proof, like saying "Deaf do more illegal activity than hearing, therefore we arrest deaf" - bad stereotype.

What about today's policies. Are you saying that Nixon/Reagan's reasons are the reason why we have War on Drugs today? Sure, they started it, but no way, I disagree with that reason they are the only reason why we continue to have the Drug War.

Here's one example. It didn't take until when Reagan term was almost over that they decided in O'Connor v. Ortega in 1987 Read this case here that behavior of an government/important position employee is subject to drug testing because they can endanger the people in their line of work. Did you know the details about this case? This is 16 years after Nixon proposed War on Drugs, 6 years after Reagan proposed zero-tolerance drug policy. War on Drugs include this USSC case now as one of the reasons why the law enforcing agencies will continue to use it for their battle against drugs.

2 years after O'Connor v. Ortega, it got specific to why drug use in federal workplace is illegal in National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab of 1989 Read case here. This is already wayyy after Nixon AND Reagan administration. It is Senior Bush's administration now.

It's a strong reason - it's a pretty bad decision to legalize drugs for someone in an important position who kills someone else due to that bad decision.
You wouldn't want your family's surgeon to be taking drugs the day before your operation, would you?
 
I understood, the point here that many not realize the meaning of "Iron clad". "Iron Clad" means a truly concrete, indestructible agreement or deal like a law for example.

Marijuana was already illegal to begin with (Since booze prohibition ERA). Nixon only beefed and tighten the law on drugs to the point of "Iron Clad" style. Which means that it was written to prevent future changes or repeal of that law. This is the reason why politicians, judges, etc aren't willing to be the first one to break that law. Plus DEA do not want to lose funds and lay their staffs off. And your right about Reagan ERA, I remember that clearly and it was Nancy Reagan not Ronnie who campaigned and pushed more federal fund for DEA guys and achieved huge increase in spending for them. During that time of Reagan ERA, more and more new drugs popped up on streets and they are increasing dangerous. Because Marijuana was already illegal, and when one smoke reefer, it can stay in your system for days or even month depending on how often you smoke and the chances of you getting busted so it encourages them find other dope that won't detect though test. Very dangerous, man! kids in high school during 80's using aerosol spray to get high, and other chemicals just to get high without getting busted. That includes increase usage of Meth, and crack cocaine.

Didn't you know that Uncle Sam had already spent over Trillions dollars on so called war on drugs and the availability of dope on street has not even dried up at all. I used to live in bad area and seen em all... Trillions of dollars wasted, how come we the United States are in trillions of dollars of debts.. Go figure!

Right now, we have the hype over gun control after series of stupid but sad shoot outs. Because of these hypes there are politicians out there trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment, but because of iron clad sentence in 2nd Amendment, they are trying to work around find its own loopholes...TSK TSK TSK Will that new regulations and change is going to improve and prevent future tragedies that we have seen and heard recently? I highly doubt it and we need to be realistic... Is this change which is gonna cost us money in long run WORTH the investment? I don't think so.

Also, if you look at timeline of Rockefeller Drug law, it was during Nixon ERA. That time NYS governor Rockefeller attempts to get his image for future presidential and agreed with Nixon and stiffen his own Drug law for NYS. You can see the result of the law in the link. Same goes to Michigan. I know that Rockefeller ancestors wants one of their offspring to become president.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Drug_Laws


Nope, you didn't say Nixon ended the war on drug era. I'm saying you go back a lot in past history and give those examples but I don't think you can apply that to policies today.

You are a history buff, you have good examples on history like prohibition and Nixon, Reagan administration blunders or past that was overhyped. Lead to drug bans and incriminating of drugs. It's not incorrect, you have a point.

Nixon's reasons were pretty simplistic, he did it for too simple opinion (as you have stated):
- Drugs are bad, addiction is bad, Hippies are bad.

Very generic and pretty simpleton reason, not enough to convince someone today about banning drugs. Of course, I agree with that it is not a good reason and very basic without proof, like saying "Deaf do more illegal activity than hearing, therefore we arrest deaf" - bad stereotype.

What about today's policies. Are you saying that Nixon/Reagan's reasons are the reason why we have War on Drugs today? Sure, they started it, but no way, I disagree with that reason they are the only reason why we continue to have the Drug War.

Here's one example. It didn't take until when Reagan term was almost over that they decided in O'Connor v. Ortega in 1987 Read this case here that behavior of an government/important position employee is subject to drug testing because they can endanger the people in their line of work. Did you know the details about this case? This is 16 years after Nixon proposed War on Drugs, 6 years after Reagan proposed zero-tolerance drug policy. War on Drugs include this USSC case now as one of the reasons why the law enforcing agencies will continue to use it for their battle against drugs.

2 years after O'Connor v. Ortega, it got specific to why drug use in federal workplace is illegal in National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab of 1989 Read case here. This is already wayyy after Nixon AND Reagan administration. It is Senior Bush's administration now.

It's a strong reason - it's a pretty bad decision to legalize drugs for someone in an important position who kills someone else due to that bad decision.
You wouldn't want your family's surgeon to be taking drugs the day before your operation, would you?
 
Last edited:
OH thanks for correcting me. now that is worse when she was on deans list a few times. She has to clean up her reputable fast.
Yes, her reputation is going to be really hard to fix... depending on how close she was to finishing school.
 
Oh wow, I was Gally student from July 2011 to Jan 2012 so left due to medical reason.

I can't blame on her because she needs money to survive, so people become drug dealer if they want to make a lot of money.
So, you're saying that it's okay to deal drugs when you have money problems? Isn't that like saying it's okay to steal money from your roommate or family members, mug someone for their wallet, break in someone's house for their things, robbing a bank, etc?
 
So, you're saying that it's okay to deal drugs when you have money problems? Isn't that like saying it's okay to steal money from your roommate or family members, mug someone for their wallet, break in someone's house for their things, robbing a bank, etc?

yes it is OK, as long you didnt get caught :lol:
 
She will graduate next month.
Then that doesn't leave her with much time to fix her reputation since she's leaving soon anyways.

Unless, she gets lucky and starts with a clean slate when she moves elsewhere. However, it will remain on her record if she's ever brought under the police spotlight in the future.
 
The sentence for her has been reached. It look like lesser Felony I sentence.

12 months in DC jail
2 years of probation after that
3 years of supervised release (total)

She can also have her probation & supervised release transferred to Texas.

Sentence
Sentence for Charge # 1, *Attempted Poss W/I to Dist a Controlled Substance
Sentence Date: 05/31/2013
Confinement Type: Confinement
Time: 0 years, 12 months, 0 days.
Time Susp: 0 years, 0 months, 0 days.
Amount To Serve: 0 years, 12 months, 0 days.
Supervised Release: 3 years, 0 months, 0 days, Suspended.
VVCA Amount: 100.00 , Due: 05/31/2014
Probation Type: SUPVP, Start Date: , End Date:
Probation Time: 2 years, 0 months, 0 days
Probation Conditions: Other conditions:
Special Conditions: Intervention Plan from CSOSA in PSI
Probation Conditions: Drug Treatment Program
Special Conditions: as deemed appropriate
Probation Conditions: Other conditions:
Special Conditions: Probation may be transferred to Texas
Sentencing Comments: Supervised Probation may be transferred to Texas.
 
The sentence for her has been reached. It look like lesser Felony I sentence.

12 months in DC jail
2 years of probation after that
3 years of supervised release (total)

She can also have her probation & supervised release transferred to Texas.

[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

one year in jail? wow. poor her.
 
I tried to find whether she was charged as felony or misdeamnor and I reach dead end. I wish DC have same access information as NYS and PA for free. Since there is no felony look up in DC, which means I have no idea if she was convicted as felony or not.

Usually 2 years or longer sentence in jail is a felony charge, less than that usually misdemeanor.

I know one here was sentence 3 years and he gets felony. I am at the point believe that the law was correct and he was indeed guilty. Too bad he will be deport back to his home country at the end of sentence. Even worse he is Deaf, his home country isn't Deaf friendly.

one year in jail? wow. poor her.
 
I tried to find whether she was charged as felony or misdeamnor and I reach dead end. I wish DC have same access information as NYS and PA for free. Since there is no felony look up in DC, which means I have no idea if she was convicted as felony or not.

Usually 2 years or longer sentence in jail is a felony charge, less than that usually misdemeanor.

I know one here was sentence 3 years and he gets felony. I am at the point believe that the law was correct and he was indeed guilty. Too bad he will be deport back to his home country at the end of sentence. Even worse he is Deaf, his home country isn't Deaf friendly.

Misdemeanor is no more than 1 year (12 months max) but felony is more than 1 year - like 14 months, 18 months, 20 months, etc.
 
After serve the punishment, she will have no access to financial aid (federal loan, Pell Grant) for rest of her life because FAFSA has zero tolerance policy on convicted related to drugs.

She will has felony on record too - going be tougher to find an employment, unless she has to work in workplace with ex-convicts.
 
that's crazy, quite excessive maybe 6 months and do the 2 years supervision, i dont like the idea of banning her from grants,loans its just going to create her as a criminal for even longer...tolerance is bullshit
 
that's crazy, quite excessive maybe 6 months and do the 2 years supervision, i dont like the idea of banning her from grants,loans its just going to create her as a criminal for even longer...tolerance is bullshit

Well, US is very strict on sell the drugs - that's more serious than smoking weeds alone.

6 months in jail is typical for misdemeanor charge but felony - 1 year or more.

In most states, if not all, sell the drugs are felony offense - in my state - it is Class B felony. It can land 20 years in state prison.

I think FAFSA tightened up because of misuse or abuse on money by drug addicts so I agree with FAFSA because I don't want drug addicts to use our taxes to fund their drugs.
 
that's crazy, quite excessive maybe 6 months and do the 2 years supervision, i dont like the idea of banning her from grants,loans its just going to create her as a criminal for even longer...tolerance is bullshit

She was committing felonies while on those programs. Obviously it makes sense to shut her off. She was a 31yo hiding in a dorm from the real world.
 
She was committing felonies while on those programs. Obviously it makes sense to shut her off. She was a 31yo hiding in a dorm from the real world.

Yes, that's very serious, IMO.

There are toddlers to teens on GU campus but they are under different division, also I believe Molly Sachs lived in Carlin Hall - that's extremely closer to MSSD - just next the line.
 
Lesson hard learned....feel it's one thing to smoke pot occasionally...but it's major to sell it, especially to kids. At 31 years old, she knew better, so no excuse is good enough from her.

Is this 12 months in jail minus the time she has already served?...then it won't be the full 12 months.
 
Lesson hard learned....feel it's one thing to smoke pot occasionally...but it's major to sell it, especially to kids. At 31 years old, she knew better, so no excuse is good enough from her.

Is this 12 months in jail minus the time she has already served?...then it won't be the full 12 months.

If I am reading the plea correctly, they got her for one of the pill charges.


Also, looks like 0 time served is being applied.
 
3 years on Supervised Release is standard for felony charge?
 
Back
Top