I'm all for the bad, bad, evil, law-breaking, won't-someone-think-of-the-children pot smokers going to jail and everything. Even more so when they're dealing the drug. But doesn't it seem that a 55-year sentence for selling marijuana is just a little bit harsh?
This leads into my problem with these mandatory minimums. You can have situations where someone committing a relatively (in comparison) minor crime can get a vastly longer prison term than someone who committed, say, murder or rape. It's all the letter of the law, true. But mandatory minimums eliminate the need for context when it comes to determining prison sentences.
One crime is worse than another, and we should let the judges, you know, judge.
Why it is legal for me to brew up a batch of beer but not grow marijuana defies logic.
Which would you rather be around at a bar? A rowdy drunk or a stoned person? Notice I didn't say rowdy stoner because that's just about impossible.
Not that I know what I'm talking about, because drugs are bad, m'kay?