The Advocates for Self Government sent me this:
"It's hard to think of a more spectacularly bad, long-term policy failure than
our government's 70-year war on marijuana users," <!--break--> said Rob Kampia, executive
director of the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) in Washington, D.C. "Since the
federal government banned marijuana in 1937, it's gone from being an obscure
plant that few Americans had even heard of to the number-one cash crop in the
United States."
MPP points out:
* Federal government estimates indicate that marijuana use has increased
approximately 4,000 percent since the Marijuana Tax Act took effect.
* A study by researcher Jon Gettman, Ph.D., published in December 2006 and
based on government data, found marijuana to be the country's number-one cash
crop, exceeding the value of corn and wheat combined.
* The federally funded Monitoring the Future survey reports that approximately
85 percent of high school seniors describe marijuana as "easy to get" -- a
figure that has remained virtually unchanged since the survey began in 1975.
* In 2005 (the most recent figures available), U.S. law enforcement made an all-
time record 786,545 marijuana arrests -- 89 percent for possession, not sale or
trafficking.
We could add more. Marijuana prohibition is a giant federal subsidy to criminal
gangs. It keeps a proven therapeutic substance out of the hands of untold
thousands of desperately sick people who, doctors and researchers agree, could
benefit from it. It wastes precious law enforcement and criminal justice
resources. All this for an impossible ban of a substance that is safer than
alcohol or tobacco.
And finally, in a country allegedly based on individual liberty, the idea that
people can't grow, smoke, and sell a common plant, is outrageous.
"Marijuana prohibition is easily the government's biggest long-term failure
since its disastrous experiment with alcohol Prohibition from 1919 to 1933, but
the marijuana prohibition disaster just lives on," Kampia said. "It's time to
steer a new course and regulate marijuana like we do alcohol."
Well said. (Except that we'd like to see alcohol deregulated, too!)
(Source: Marijuana Policy Project:
http://www.mpp.org/s...
{4E2B134D-699F-4AAD-B5BE-284DAB9E31F3}¬oc=1 )
===
And for a final clue at how I've LONG been laughing like most farmers laugh at "citified" people, go see my remark at: http://www.dailypaul... and think about all that pollen on your car every spring.
JMR
Comments Policy
and, in further proof of abject, longterm failure...
August 16, 2007 - 08:14 ET by sarcasmo"The FBI has determined that in some cases, it's better to let innocent
people be assaulted, murdered, or wrongly sent to prison than to halt a
drug investigation involving one of its confidential informants."
It's costing more & more in terms of both dollars & civil liberties, but it still ain't workin', folks.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Actually...
August 16, 2007 - 08:18 ET by UnsaneSure it is. The United States still has the world's largest and most advanced economy, and this is achieved by not encouraging internal rot, as you are so eager to do.
(Eagerly anticipating "you are full of crap as usual", "failed ninth grade debate again", "full of BS" or another warm, friendly line for daring to commit the greatest transgression of all: disagreeing with Mr. Knowitall.)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Show me
August 16, 2007 - 08:28 ET by sarcasmoWhere I "encourage internal rot."
You can't. You don't even know basic big government alcohol Prohibition history, because you no-doubt believe what the socialist schools teach. And I would love it if, for once, this could be about honest debate instead of personal attacks, but this is YOU we're talkin', buddy.
Everyone knows your style of "debate," and it's not exactly the most intellectual around these parts. Act more respectable and you'll get more respect from me, but for now, you've already said it. If I were like you, at this point I'd be accusing you of being ok with the FBI letting innocent people go to jail, but your reply completely evaded that actual debate, concentrating instead on your usual ad hominem tactics, which indeed do flunk debate class around me.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
crime&punishment
August 16, 2007 - 10:48 ET by BrillianceThis particular issue is ripe for compromise.
I believe marijuana should remain illegal, however, the current penalties border on judicial tyranny.
If you're pulled over and found to be in possesion of a small amount of marijuana (an ounce or less), the penalty SHOULD be something along the lines of a 50 dollar fine and confiscation of said marijuana.
You go on your way - You don't even have to show up in court, just pay the fine.
You've had a bad day!
To me, this seems a reasonable penalty.
Of course, since marijuana would remain illegal, authorities could pursue large quantity "dealers" with due zeal ( possesion penalties would increase severly and exponentially for larger amounts).
Legalize it. Gets rid of
August 16, 2007 - 16:24 ET by ThoughtPoliceLegalize it.
Gets rid of the 70% of non-violent offenders in jails; gets rid of "drug dealers" as they are today; If it is regulated by some FDA type department, it would (hopefully) be safer.
Too many reasons to legalize ..
ban cigarettes but legalize
August 16, 2007 - 16:32 ET by TruthMongerban cigarettes but legalize pot - ya just gotta laugh:)
the left is damn funny ya gotta admit
Heh, think how _I_ feel...
August 17, 2007 - 06:34 ET by sarcasmoOn the one hand, despite a constant series of deadly FDA regulatory failures during his lifetime, a lefty posts in "my" thread claiming more regulation would solve the problems only capitalism can ever-solve. Then on the other hand, a person on the right -- well meaning, perhaps -- in responding to the lefty totally ignores the link to the Daily Paul and the argument I've made there regarding the fact that God just might not create mistakes.
Logically, if God's not the one making mistakes, it might instead be big government politicians makin' 'em, at least in my book. What might Jesus think of a government that subsidizes feed-corn destroying ethanol while stupidly ignoring one of God's greatest creations' potential as a food source which can grow on marginal farmland "like a weed" for the sake of a failed tax and spend drugwar whose cost is itself rapidly-approaching a tithe? This argument sends sparks out of people's hair for some reason, but I'll keep using it because I have yet to see it refuted. (Generally, the tactic employed at this point is name calling, sadly, but I'd really-love to see some logic instead.)
In the meantime, Unsane studiously-ignores the basic-farming 101 fact (also easily found by clicking that same link) that if freedom of farming were relegalized in this country, the air would literally be filled with male hemp pollen. Pollen does not respect property lines and can travel for miles, which would actually make life harder for the potheads he hates so passionately, since they don't want seeds in their weed and when they do want seeds they don't want rope-genetics in their dope. And then, a small birdie whispers in my ear that those raging liberals over at the National Review have literally declared defeat a decade ago, and it's as if this thread doesn't even discuss the actual intellectual issue. Sheesh. I rest my admittedly-somewhat-insulting Daily Paul case...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
For The Record, when you
August 17, 2007 - 10:07 ET by DontTreadOnMeFor The Record, when you preface your argument by labeling people who disagree with you unrational, hysterical, holier-than-thou, and flat out stupid, expect to get the same kind of feedback in return.
With that said, I also think it should be legalized. It is not manufactured by man at all, it is grown by God. And IMO it is 10 times worse than Cigarettes and Alcohol. And with the cost and effort it will save Law Enforcement Im dumbfounded as to why it hasnt already happened. The only argument I hear is the one where it is a gateway drug, but then if anything is a gateway and gets you to do things you normally wouldnt do, its not Marijuana but Alcohol.
If you are going to have cigarettes and alcohol (drugs manufactured by man) legal there is no reason why marijuana shouldnt be. Its really quite hypocritical in my mind.
For the counter-record
August 17, 2007 - 10:15 ET by sarcasmoI've been labelled that exact way, myself (see above...) so your admonition might explain my responses. Respect is a 2 way street with me. Anyway, I agree, let's quit with the invective and argue the issues nobody seems to want to address, whether fiscal or civil-liberties. Let's see some intelligent arguments.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I'm all for outlawing
August 20, 2007 - 13:39 ET by TruthMongerI'm all for outlawing alcohol as well, and cigs...
It just makes me laugh that the same people on a crusade to ban cigs tend to also be the people who favor the legalization of pot - I've never seen cig smokers disabled on the job or in school like the potheads are - they just tend to die off a decade or two earlier - my chain-smoking dad bit the dust in his mid-fifties...
This is a social-ill issue. And the libertarians just don't see social ills - you need Jesus glasses like me - libertarians don't see potheads stoned on the couch wasting away as a social ill - or prostitutes at Disneyland, porn (yes including CP), Amsterdam heroin parks, rampant gambling, pit-bull and cock-fighting, snuff films, total anarchy, AIDS and VD galore, etc, etc, etc...
The above is libertarian paradise...
Go for it and see how it works! You just have to outvote me and my fellow fundies - or just keep working the MSM and the judicial system to continue overturning our democracy...
We'll just set up more recovery ministries as an ever-expanding plan B:)...
Thanks for your honesty
August 21, 2007 - 07:48 ET by sarcasmoThanks for your honesty about prohibition. As you know, I'm against banning alcohol, tobacco or anything else. Would you agree with me that Prohibition was with alcohol and remains with various other substances a dream come true for the mafia? And why subject law enforcement to the corrosive effects of corruption engendered by consensual "crimes"? Is illusory control which has consistently failed over my entire lifetime really worth that much? As a Christian, do you feel that it's important for politicians like George W. Bush & John McCain to keep promises about the 10th Amendment?
Do you think it's possible that people like me DO see the increasing social ills which worry us too, but -- in seeing those ills through our own Jesus glasses -- people like me might question whether a government (which asks many tithes, and demands total control) works better to "get the pothead off the couch" than, well, God (who asks but one tithe, and gives us freedom of choice as a birthright instead of constant political control-freakery). There are 2 roads in social policy, convince or coerce, and "convince" seems harder at first, but it has a history of working better in the long run.
Naturally, I disagree on your description of "libertarian paradise," and ironically it brings to mind liberal John Dorschner's article referenced by Dave Barry in my old-favorite interview. The bottom line is (and someone much wiser than I am first said this, but I forget who it was) that freedom is one of those things you can't ever have until you give it all away first. But even though we disagree, thanks for your reply.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Yes I went overboard with
August 21, 2007 - 13:46 ET by TruthMongerYes I went overboard with my gross characterization of you libertarians and your paradise - didn't know you were down for a serious discussion! Awesome and refreshing - so sorry about that...
Would you agree with me that Prohibition was with alcohol and remains with various other substances a dream come true for the mafia? And why subject law enforcement to the corrosive effects of corruption engendered by consensual "crimes"? Is illusory control which has consistently failed over my entire lifetime really worth that much?
Yes it is a dream come true for the mafia. It does corrupt law enforcement. It fails all the time at great tax expense. I prefer to keep the existing pot bans in place and increase the bans to the other substances you mention.
As a Christian, do you feel that it's important for politicians like George W. Bush & John McCain to keep promises about the 10th Amendment?
I favor states rights over the feds accross the board.
Do you think it's possible that people like me DO see the increasing social ills which worry us too,
Yes, I do...
but -- in seeing those ills through our own Jesus glasses -- people like me might question whether a government (which asks many tithes, and demands total control) works better to "get the pothead off the couch" than, well, God (who asks but one tithe, and gives us freedom of choice as a birthright instead of constant political control-freakery). There are 2 roads in social policy, convince or coerce, and "convince" seems harder at first, but it has a history of working better in the long run.
God grants us free will - as opposed to coersion. But He still has laws for us. If we break them we die. If God is not coercive than laws cannot be coercive, can they...?
For me civic laws, like Biblical laws, are an integral part of "convincing" people about right and wrong. Does that make sense?
Naturally, I disagree on your description of "libertarian paradise," and ironically it brings to mind liberal John Dorschner's article referenced by Dave Barry in my old-favorite interview. The bottom line is (and someone much wiser than I am first said this, but I forget who it was) that freedom is one of those things you can't ever have until you give it all away first. But even though we disagree, thanks for your reply.
Thanks for you insights on this, too. For me the founders intended US freedom to be the freedom to live as God intended. To worship properly, choose your own occupation, etc. I don't think it was about getting drunk, pot-smoking, gay marriage, prostitution, pornography, etc, etc...
But even so you are actually free to smoke pot right now - no one is stopping you as long as you are careful. And if it's legalized you may get the state off your back but you're still going to have people like me hassling you for spiritual and community health reasons, etc - you'll never be totally free on this...it's just a matter of degree really...
Now we could "legalize" these "traditional vices" and have people like me stop hassling you and probably move along fairly well as a nation, I'm sure. We just aren't going to thrive, probably will collapse eventually as a result. I'm fine either way. I do not depend on the survival of the US for my fulfillment - but I think maybe you do to a great extent?
I'm glad you favor states' rights
August 22, 2007 - 02:38 ET by sarcasmoI'd hope you'll join me in actually pressuring President Bush to keep such promises, despite your distaste for illegal drug users. How you feel personally shouldn't matter, because "God does not create mistakes" and some medical patients DO need cannabis despite the political inconvenience of the plant's positive effects on them. Also, even for politicians, not-keeping promises is morally wrong, in addition to these stupid raids being a blatant waste of tax money during a time of war. One would think more conservatives would join libertarians in objecting to these cowardly raids for that reason alone. And for perhaps the umpteenth time, it's still not about me smoking anything (hell, I'd move to California or Alaska if the issue was that important to me personally, and I expect the control-freak lobby to try to outlaw my tobacco, eventually!).
It's about freedom, and to me it's also about what looks like bigtime hubris via coercive-not-convincing laws. The "stop hassling" for me would be when I pay less taxes to jail nonviolent people on stupid "minimum mandatory" sentences, while at the same time letting Jessica Lunsford's killer/rapist out early, and then loudly-insisting nothing's morally-wrong when I bitch about the fact that but for the drugwar, a sweet little girl would be alive today. A government which is this immense and takes this many tithes to obviously-fail at a dumb policy seems to be a good definition of hubris to me, but obviously mine is -- as usual -- a minority view regarding what God might think about how we're trying to run things. And I'm not sure what you mean about me depending on the survival of the US for my fulfillment, but I think our best chance of survival is with vastly less spending on stupid crap like the tax and spend drugwar.
JMR
PS Take a look sometime at just how much alcohol people drank in George Washington's day vs these days before you try to claim it's not about getting drunk, because the freedom to get drunk is just as much a part of freedom as the freedom to worship God. Hell, just try George Washington's recipe for eggnog this coming Christmas. And I won't even get into George's illegal written instructions to his slave regarding separating the male and female hemp plants, but you don't get better rope that way, and you do get better dope.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Your arguement mentions
August 30, 2007 - 10:41 ET by Bob Dole PineappleYour arguement mentions God, therefore you are basing your argument of fairytales.
Look, Thor like to smoke weed. So did Zeus and Posideon. Get with it.
Heh. We've got another one, folks.
August 30, 2007 - 10:45 ET by RJAnother smug, know-it-all juvie, practicing for (or re-living) the sophomore lunch table.
What percentage of the world has drug prohabition?
August 17, 2007 - 10:30 ET by MightyMouthWhat percentage of the world has drug prohabition?
It's not just the US folks. Read the link and see if you agree with Levine. I thought it a little too "conspiratorial", but he makes several good points to ponder.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
The week's funniest drugwar-story
August 17, 2007 - 10:37 ET by sarcasmoSee, I'm not ALL policy-stuff when it comes to illegally-selling drugs, especially when they're big-pharma's new media-pushed sacrament -- boner-drugs. Woohoo!! :)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Here you can see the
August 22, 2007 - 15:04 ET by ThoughtPoliceHere you can see the blatant hipocricy of our gov't.
Hemp for Vicory, 1942
If you research the uses of Hemp, it's literaly unbelievable. It's the strongest natural fiber known to man; it used to be used for paper and is a better source for it (guess what the Declaration of Independence is on); it's a source of clothes and fuel; Hemp seed (oil) has the highest abundance of essential fatty acids in the world; etc. etc.
If people took the time to educate themselves, they would see how we've been swindled on a number of things and issues.
There is such a conspiracy
August 22, 2007 - 15:12 ET by TruthMongerThere is such a conspiracy against pot... !
I know how to shut the libs up on this...
Legalize pot, have RJ Reynolds make a fortune selling it, then have the subsequent lawsuits against "big weed," and finaly have the libs will run their "don't smoke pot" ad campaigns during Sunday football, etc...
In the meantime outlaw tobacco, then libs will find amazing medicinal and textile qualities within it, and begin to promote it's use
then just repeat the whole cycle again for fun and laughs - its all good...
Big Weed!! LOL Check out
August 22, 2007 - 15:15 ET by Jack BauerBig Weed!! LOL
The only problem with your theory...
August 23, 2007 - 13:34 ET by sarcasmoIs that stupid-ol' reality. God created cannabis with superior fiber/biomass/food properties along with the medicinal/recreational stuff you obsess-on as a JOKE ON PEOPLE LIKE YOU, and I'm trying, desperately, to make you "get it." He obviously has quite a sense of humor, as well as quite a bit of obvious tolerance for the folly of His unintentionally-hilarious creations.
I still can't believe the hubris of a multi-tithe-costing YET STILL FAILING (see above, as if anyone wants to address the points of my post instead of go-off into tangent-fantasies about libs & banning terbacky despite the fact that "conservative" Dubya appointed a tobacco prohibitionist as Surgeon General!) big government policy.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
God has made a lot of
August 23, 2007 - 14:02 ET by Conservative VoiceGod has made a lot of things, doesn't mean we should smoke it. I am OK with using hemp for fiber, and as a prescription. ( even though the prescriptions in CA was abused ).
Nor should we
August 23, 2007 - 14:07 ET by sarcasmoThrow people in jail for using the stuff medicinally, which is what's happening with your tax dollars and in spite of the 9th & 10th amendments, right now. And go try to grow some hemp for fiber as a capitalist in the USA only if you want your butt to quickly land in jail, again at taxpayer expense...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
God doesn't make tobacco? I
August 23, 2007 - 14:08 ET by TruthMongerGod doesn't make tobacco? I need to check the label...
Why yes!
its "Made in Hell" by Satanic Industries, LLC!
not exactly...
August 23, 2007 - 14:13 ET by sarcasmoBut according to a certain Bush appointee, tobacco's another one of "God's mistakes." I like my control-freaks consistent and out-front on the issues, but for some reason Mr. Bush never mentioned this particular position during his campaign, despite this consistently control-freak appointee....Hmmmm.....
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I think each thing has its
August 23, 2007 - 14:17 ET by Conservative VoiceI think each thing has its purpose. Tobacco is great for bruises, bad for the lungs. Hemp is great for fiber, bad for the lungs and brain activity. I can drive heavy machinery after smoking tobacco, can't say the same with hemp. TMs take on legalizing hemp is the fastest way for anti-big-weed commercials is funny because its true.
sarc there's no mention of
August 23, 2007 - 14:22 ET by TruthMongersarc there's no mention of "god's mistake" in your link...
must be an honest "mistake" on your part
or maybe that's why Bush hasn't mention it...?
Agreed.
August 23, 2007 - 14:35 ET by sarcasmoAnd no mention in the laws which imply God made a mistake creating cannabis. Doesn't change the implication that God somehow made a mistake, or therefore the hubris inherent in such laws, IMO. I guess this is why we were all created with different opinions, though.
I really WANT to somehow be convinced that it doesn't seem like we're constantly -- in effect -- worshipping a multi-tithe-costing big-government that grows so horribly & quickly. It's just not likely to happen, on this subject at least...But PLEASE, if you're a nonfarmer and a fan of the drugwar, at least see my link at the end about pollen & unintended consequences.
Yeah, I may have worded it in a somewhat-insulting way, but that's the physics-101 of pollen, and that would be the effect of legal hemp on the recreational pot industry -- which remains HUGE, despite all the wasted taxes. Look, I'll be totally-honest with you -- I don't recall much about those concerts in the late '80s, but I do remember that seeds tend to make your joint explode in a shower of sparks!
Don't you want exploding joints happening to the hated potheads? Why not allow hemp capitalism freedom to grow what they want for family farmers, as Ron's proposed bill would-have?? And no, the fact that Barney Frank thinks it's a good idea too doesn't count as a good reason! :) Barney's like a stopped clock, he's GOT to be right occasionally!!
JMR
PS Didja happen to see the "bearing false witness" PM, by chance??
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Sarc, God created mercury
August 23, 2007 - 14:38 ET by TruthMongerSarc, God created mercury and lead
but don't drink it
it will "harm" you, so to speak
and i don't want pot heads
August 23, 2007 - 14:40 ET by TruthMongerand i don't want pot heads heads exploding either
i care about pot heads - that is why i oppose pot - i think it does them damage...
its love and concern dude
they are worth the money to me - they are priceless
TM...
August 23, 2007 - 14:45 ET by LionKingI personally do not favor the legalization of pot, but I think you are missing his point...it is about personal responsibility. I suppose I could be persuaded to legalize it if companies could discriminate against the hiring of pot smokers and still have it be a terminating offense from a job.
It would, after all, be about choice, freedom, and responsibility.
me too - so lets toss all
August 23, 2007 - 14:51 ET by TruthMongerme too - so lets toss all of the laws and go with personal responsiblity - legalize theft, murder, peeing on the sidewalk - i think i'm forgetting a few, but...?
we'll save a fortune on the justice system no question
and we can spend it all on pot:)
TM...that was childish
August 23, 2007 - 14:55 ET by LionKingI did not advocate anarchy nor has anyone else. Legalization means changing the laws, not abandoning. Again, I personally have no personal interest in pot, legal or otherwise. My point is simply there are more important issues to worry about. I thought you did not like the notion of the nanny-state...am I wrong in that assumption?
dude, i'm serious -
August 23, 2007 - 15:01 ET by TruthMongerdude, i'm serious - according to your fine logic why do we need any of these laws? sarc says they burn up a ton money and he's right
i want to civically outlaw everything, or nothing - just be consistent at least one way or the other
TM...I am truly surprised
August 23, 2007 - 15:06 ET by LionKingTM...I am confused. If you are upset with sarc and others, don't take it out on me. It is beneath you to equate pot smoking with murder and rape.
Take a deep breath...if you are at home smoking pot, are you victimizing anyone (except yourself)? With murder and rape, there is obviously another person being victimized. Surely you can see the difference.
My only contention has nothing to do with COST to the criminal justice system...it has to do with personal responsibility and being law abiding.
LK - do i look upset (big
August 23, 2007 - 15:10 ET by TruthMongerLK - do i look upset (big hug) ?
I couldn't be happier. I didn't equate anything. They are different. But they're all laws - why do we need murder laws but no pot laws?
I'm just saying let's do the honor system your talking about a save a ton of money...it sounds great to me...
Or otherwise outlaw consistently - as sarc correctly says - tobacco and alcohol is much worse, so why the hell is pot illegal?!?!? It makes no sense
TM...what?
August 23, 2007 - 15:17 ET by LionKingWhat honor system?
Whether intentional or not, getting rid of all laws is in fact equating pot smoking with rape and murder...an essentially victimless crime with crime against a person.
I am done discussing...you are free to get the last word in.
[btw...You do seem upset with your irrational responses. I am far from being a libertarian and consider myself very conservative. All I said was that I understood their point of view. If enough people want to legalize pot, then majority rules. This should not be diffiuclt to understand or appreciate...it should nver be about money though.]
irrational? the last
August 23, 2007 - 15:24 ET by TruthMongerirrational?
the last word may be me shaking my head:)
ok, how about this?
where do you draw the line on these laws then please?
pot smoking is not victimless in my, uh, "irrational" experience
(he said humbly and quietly, with reverence, peace, goodwill and complete respect for contrary opinions:)
xoxoxo
TM...
August 23, 2007 - 15:33 ET by LionKingMy intent was not to offend.
I consider smoking pot on par as drinking alcohol, except, smoking pot is currently illegal. The only victim is self...falls under personal responsibility. As far as the potential of committing other crimes because of the influence of pot, that is the same as any other crime that may involve being under the influence.
How do you see pot smoking as not being a victim-less? I am curious.
thanks for responding LK
August 23, 2007 - 15:40 ET by TruthMongerfundies like me see it as a social-ill thing - with highly intangible yet negative ripple effects throughout the community...
so are these "victimless" in your book (he asked honestly and openly with a genuine interest in someone elses viewpoint)?
prostitution
a 16 year old enthusiastically engaging in porn
opening a casino anywhere you want to
abortion
TM...
August 23, 2007 - 15:47 ET by LionKingQuick answers:
I fail to see how any of this compares to smoking pot...care to ellaborate?
pot smoking - victims.
August 23, 2007 - 15:58 ET by TruthMongerpot smoking - victims. several people involved - user (mind altering substance - affects judgement, can become emotional crutch or addiction, kills brain cells - loss of education, job, career, community contributions, etc - this also affects family, friends - dealers, distributors and growers also suffer as a contributing party, all involved suffer physically, emotionally, spiritually - costs society considerably in terms of required social programs and support, medical costs, lost community productivity, crime, accidents, relationship disfunctions)
sorry, this is not entirely exhaustive - just off the top of my head
P.S. what sorts of detailed negative things happen to your victims listed above?
Not true. Link or slink.
August 23, 2007 - 15:06 ET by sarcasmoWhere have I ever advocated the repeal of any law against a crime with actual victims, such as murder? Find the cite. Link or slink.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I'm advocating it for
August 23, 2007 - 15:11 ET by TruthMongerI'm advocating it for consistencies sake and to save money...
I'm running with your fine logic - seriously...
Nope!
August 23, 2007 - 15:15 ET by sarcasmoYou're clearly seriously lying about what I advocate. Is that truly what you consider good, either morally or as an argument?
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
lying? isn't smaller gov
August 23, 2007 - 15:28 ET by TruthMongerlying?
isn't smaller gov what you advocate?
someone help me out here
i'm starting to like your pot-legalization idea - but then why do we need all of these other laws - what purpose do they serve?
and BTW i appreciate the feedback but try answering the questions instead of psychoanlyzing me - I'll save you some time - I'm quite f*cked in the head - and you need some very serious training, experience and probably a PhD or two if you even want to have a chance at getting any work done on my pea brain
Laws against crimes with victims
August 23, 2007 - 15:37 ET by sarcasmoServe to put people like Jessica Lunsford's rapist/killer in a cage, instead of releasing him early like the present system did due to space considerations caused by the tax and spend drugwar's mandatory minimums. I've explained this to you over and over. And sadly, I'm not qualified to help anyone else much, I'm too busy trying to help just myself to understand things like life or how others think about things which seem obvious to me.
JMR
BTW, the same idea goes for prostitution, and I'm not "for" it when I say that, I'm just "for" freedom and think it works best where it's legal. I also think that if these things were taxed/regulated like other businesses, big government's involvement would ironically make them a lot less attractive. Everyone who's against the idea thinks these things would become MORE attractive if legal, though, so that's another minority view of mine, but I truly believe it...
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
this "victimless" crime
August 23, 2007 - 15:44 ET by TruthMongerthis "victimless" crime thing has always been an interesting notion to me...
how do you determine that a crime is victimless (he again asked honestly and openly with a genuine interest in someones opinion?)
there are so many intangibles in certain cases
One way to tell...
August 23, 2007 - 15:51 ET by sarcasmoIs to look at whether lots of political/law-enforcement corruption gets engendered by the policy in question. For example, the mob certainly still exists, but their Murder, Inc. branches do not seem to have had the political pull during my lifetime of the coke-mobsters. Remember, I grew up in Miami...
Another way to tell would be the civil liberties implications (see original post) and rising taxpayer costs despite failure of the policy.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Are you insisting that
August 23, 2007 - 16:13 ET by TruthMongerAre you insisting that police corruption will be greatly reduced if pot is legalized?
Yes.
August 28, 2007 - 15:29 ET by sarcasmoThe evidence all points that way, even if (much like the "cloaked" evidence of Netherlands kids using pot less than US kids...) control-freaks desperately want to try to ignore it. Amsterdam exists. Usage rates here and there have been measured, they're facts just as corruption in law enforcement over consensual "crimes" is a fact. Ignoring facts has a bad history of changing them...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
ok sarc
August 28, 2007 - 15:33 ET by TruthMongerbut won't the mafia just move on to something else? they won't just go away will they?
I don't think so...
August 28, 2007 - 15:43 ET by sarcasmoBut relegalizing drugs (that "re" is important for remedial history, which I end up teaching a lot these days when it comes to cannabis, because government schools are so-political and so-lousy) would give them less opportunity for profit. Who knows? Some might choose an honest living.
Look at mob-growth and the attendant police-corruption-growth during the failure of alcohol prohibition, which -- despite being a social failure from its inception -- only ended when a fiscal crisis came and big-government needed tax-money (sound familiar?). The control-freak impulse is and was clearly powerful-enough to totally-ignore a policy-failure based on blind faith in big-government, which, as I keep-saying, people seem to worship in fact, regardless if whether they always wish to admit it when I say-so.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Under true capitalism, LionKing
August 23, 2007 - 14:56 ET by sarcasmoIt might be either a firing offense or a hiring requirement, depending on the business owner's decision, not big government's. Ultimately, though, freedom and personal responsibility arguments don't win arguments with the control-freak lobby, when you look at our history. It takes fiscal crisis, instead.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Hey, great idea!
August 23, 2007 - 15:09 ET by sarcasmoLet's make pages & pages of laws against drinking mercury, and then spend lots of taxes on enforcing them!
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
sounds good! see you in
August 23, 2007 - 15:13 ET by TruthMongersounds good! see you in court
TM...response moved here
August 23, 2007 - 16:06 ET by LionKingYour comment.
So...the only DIRECT victim to pot smoking is the user himself. Again, this falls under personal responsibility. If the user has a family, he needs to take responsibility for his family and consider the implications of his pot use...again, personal responsibility.
I do not understand your point about dealers/distributors...this discussion is based on the legalization only.
The stuff about spirtualality and jobs again falls under personal decisions. Legislating morality seems to be failed premise. Are you in favor of criminalizing alcohol?
I am confused----
August 23, 2007 - 16:28 ET by misterbillSarcasmo's stand has had me study as much as I can about the war on drugs. I have slowly moved to the decision that this war has cost billions of dollars and damaged countless numbers of lives, especially young lives. I, for years, held, that legalizing drugs was caving in to the wrong people for the wrong reasons. I no longer feel that way. I am still adamantly against what I will call "strong" drugs. (Coke, meth, morphine, etc.) I post the following excerpt from Drexel re: the ;atest UK study on marijuana use:
"The study, conducted in the U.K. and published in The Lancet, a prestigious European medical journal, concluded that marijuana use can increase the risk of psychotic illnesses by 40 percent for casual users and up to 200 percent for heavy users. The findings scared many, and have the U.K. government considering more arrests, tougher laws and longer jail sentences to combat marijuana.
It sounds bad, but by contrast a study done by Johns Hopkins University found that alcohol increases the risk of psychosis by 800 percent for men and 300 percent for women. The study conducted in The Lancet; however, could not directly link marijuana to increased psychotic illness."
I believe we should legalize marijuana, but control its sale as we do alcohol. Call me naive, but I do not believe pot necessarily leads to stronger drugs usage.
Save billions. clear the criminal records of those who were criminalized for pot. Wage a bigger, stronger war on "hard" drugs.
Where am I wrong??
well we certainly couldn't
August 23, 2007 - 16:32 ET by TruthMongerwell we certainly couldn't outlaw alcohol too - for some reason...
we can outlaw tobacco tho...
and bringing Bibles to school...
I just love consistency
that's why i really hate it here sometimes...
TM...
August 23, 2007 - 18:19 ET by LionKingSounds like you favor the totalitarian style government of Saudi or Iran...that's where the government limits your freedoms for your OWN good.
War od Drugs
August 23, 2007 - 18:22 ET by LionKingMr Bill...I too am having to rethink how I feel about the legalization of pot. In the scheme of things, it is far less important than our borders, the WOT, and maintaining our sovereignty.
Hay gang, Way too much money in seizures, fees and fines!
August 25, 2007 - 15:44 ET by upcountrywaterAny government in the world knows this fact:
There is way more money in siezures, fines and fees, than from some puny 10 - 20% tax.
One thing is for sure, this 93 year old victim is now a democrat, seeking welfare, because the government erased his business, home, and bank account.
So forget EVER seeing this prohibition ending.
Entitlement over infrastructure every SINGLE time.
and he was a good old
August 25, 2007 - 16:13 ET by Conservative Voiceand he was a good old republican before? He knew the risk of being in that business, I don't feel sorry for him, and he can't vote anymore anyway.
LMAO, Well yea unlikely he's a Republican, 97-3%
August 25, 2007 - 22:05 ET by upcountrywaterNow he's a 100% democrat. No need to vote, just pick up gov checks, + ?
HOWEVER,
This siezure mentality is creeping into other areas of our lives.
Just look at how fast the MADD gang took over, the HUGE fees & fines, for driving with some amount of a legal substance in your body. Shirk all responsibility of improving the highway system, now blame it on the ( unluckey-failed the test) user of that system.
Are you on a city sewage system? Well if you are they can mass produce this testing tool.
Have that sucker installed NOW on drain line flowing from 123 Elm St. Why limit it to drugs ;try "toxic" levels of whatever?
Dream come true you get to own land on the beach in PARADICE get a "permit" to do some things to your land and whammo..NOOOOO. You may go now, bye bye.. aloha
Do you think this will only remain on the Mauka side of highways, or spread Makai too?
Fascism sez: ohh: You can have private property, but you can only use it, with our approval, blessing, fee, tax, fine ,whatevers. Beings that most governments lean towards Gaia, we're screwed.
Entitlement over infrastructure every SINGLE time.
What? Just wondering if
August 25, 2007 - 22:13 ET by mandrakeWhat? Just wondering if anyone can translate that into plain english for me?
Hay mandrake, nice of you to drop in here,WITHOUT reading ^ up ?
August 25, 2007 - 23:16 ET by upcountrywater? The point is Government is using every means possible to suck up monies from the public. Be it via ,fees fines taxes or just plain seizures.
It don't bother u at all i guess.
Entitlement over infrastructure every SINGLE time.
Why does the government
August 26, 2007 - 21:50 ET by Conservative VoiceWhy does the government fight the mafia? Because it doesn't like the compition :)
upcountrywater, I agree to a point. The 5 cent fee on cans and bottles is lame, eminient domain is lame, the shake down of the tobacco companies is lame, seat belt laws are lame, etc. Not ok with the Hawaii supreme court ruling that the Ferry system here
can't drive their ships over the ocean until they do a multi million
dollar environmental study...thank you Sierra Club who probably weren't
from Hawaii, but from Seattle. Wasn't happy with the shakedown with
Microsoft, ( which I think happened because Bill Gates didn't give
enough to Bill Clinton ). Not ok with taking property from a farmer because his tractor happened to run over an endangered species.
However, I am not against all fines or fees. Camping and hunting fees make sense, its a user tax. Fines for crimes such as starting a forest fire, destruction of property, drunk driving, sending the police on a wild goose chase, even parking fines I am ok with.
Maybe the drug fines are excessive, especially since there doesn't seem to be an equal fine for murder or molesting kids, and since evidence can be planted on someone who just happens to own property the government wants. However, I don't see the problem with fining criminals...it helps pay for fighting crime, and acts as a punishment for the crime againts society. At least Government isn't chopping off hands for stealing a loaf of bread.
WTF is wrong with you
August 30, 2007 - 10:48 ET by Bob Dole PineappleWTF is wrong with you people? Why are you so concerned about what another person does to his body when it doesn't effect you in anyway? Smoking weed is a victimless crime. Marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol and tobacoo. You folks really need to stop sticking your noses in other peoples business. They aren't trying to tell you to stop believing in fairytales (God), waste the world resources, or not to eat all your meals at McDonald's. Do what you want, just don't hurt other people while doing it.