Did you read the attachment I included? In it you would have seen that a Kenyan sentence for possession of a roll of bhangi is far more lenient than a US mandatory minimum for the same crime.
Obienga:
I actually have been arrested in the USA for possessing a small amount weed in a non-weed-friendly part of the country. I paid a small fine, and that was that. Can you tell me about this harsh mandatory sentence and why it would not have applied in my case? My first piece of advice to you was that you learn to read. Apparently, you are unable or unwilling to do that, even when it is material that you are providing! Yes, I did read the document at
http://famm.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Chart-All-Fed-MMs-NW.pdfMarijuana is mentioned twice under "
Drug Trafficking": for possession of
100+ kiliograms/100+ plants and
1000+ kiliograms/1000+ plants.
That's a little bit more than a roll. The law then has guidelines on the frequency of offense and reasons & effects for/of possession. Let's take, as a minimum, the 5-years for a 1st offense in the first category and compare that with numerous cases that you will find in
Kenya:
Here's one, three years ago, in which a man got a
life sentence for 48 rolls of weed. Yes,
48 rolls. Valued at Sh. 1,300:
http://www.ccguide.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=16343And here's one of a guy going in for
two years for just 2 rolls---yes two rolls.
http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/1144030465/bhang-peddler-jailed-for-two-yearsAnd not too long ago a 75-yr old man in Kenya was sentenced to six months in jail for the possession of 6 rolls of weed.
Further explanations: I think you ran into some requirements that suited your arguments and then, without careful reading or taking into account of context, you ran with what you got. Now, read carefully:
(a) Even taking into account the current "fuzziness" in the difference between Federal and State law, marijuana possession is largely treated as misdemeanor.
(b) A great deal depends on how much weed the person has and what they intend to do with it.
(c) If you want a better understanding of US Federal Law on such things, here is a summary even you should be able to understand:
http://norml.org/laws/item/federal-penalties-2Be sure to read the whole page & slowly!
(d) Once you have read that, try to understand that Federal Law is not necessarily the same as State Law. Many US states (and even cities within states) have very liberal weed laws when it comes to personal use, and Federal prosecutors will not waste time chasing minor potheads and the like when even the state laws won't bother with them.
If mental illness was a defense for every offense, every court in this world would grind to a screeching halt. I cannot imagine the endless nature of such an excuse for lack of personal responsibility. "My lord, I exposed myself because I was mentally ill", "My lord, I was speeding because I was mentally ill".
First, in countries with proper judicial systems, once issues of mental health come into the picture, there are almost always careful procedures for handling the matter, and they are lengthy enough that arraignment and sentencing could not possibly happen in one day. But the courts in those places are not full of people claiming to be ill. Why is that? Let's make that your homework for today, and we'll look into your answer tomorrow.
Second, as I have already explained, the issue is not that a person who claims mental illness should get a free pass. It is whether such a claim is properly investigated.
Get real, this was a deliberate act committed by a sane person who is sane enough to be a University student.
This might surprise you, but, then again, you are you: Being a university student, or a university professor, or ... does not make one immune to mental illness.
