Drug War Policy for Democrats

[IDB87]

I guess my friends just get too high

Friends...

Ja.

 

[BenBurch]

An olive branch to the Prohibitionists; Get me a grant to study the matter, and of course the appropriate DEA clearances, and I'll work night and day to try to find the lethal dose for you. Of course, like all human studies of this type, ethics demands that only the investigator be put at risk.

 

[excaza]

Of course, like all human studies of this type, ethics demands that only the investigator be put at risk.

Or test subjects who have given informed consent!

For science!

 

[IDB87]

An olive branch to the Prohibitionists; Get me a grant to study the matter, and of course the appropriate DEA clearances, and I'll work night and day to try to find the lethal dose for you. Of course, like all human studies of this type, ethics demands that only the investigator be put at risk.

I'll bring the peanut butter sandwiches.

 

[BenBurch]

Or test subjects who have given informed consent!

For science!

Look at me still talking, when there's science to do
When I look out there it makes me GLaD I'm not you
I've experiments to run, there is research to be done
On the people who are still alive

 

[BenBurch]

I'll bring the peanut butter sandwiches.

Deal. We'll budget you in under "catering."

 

[Virus]

Make sure you test for brain damage too.

 

[IDB87]

Make sure you test for brain damage too.

If it's anywhere near the level caused by alcohol, please present your evidence.

 

[excaza]

Make sure you test for brain damage too.

*citation needed

Also, why are you running?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7866410&postcount=51

 

[000063]

Ah, yes, "medical marijuana".

I'd be in favor of making alcohol illegal. Great way to make money.

They tried that. It also turned out to be a great way to make corpses. From bullets. Because people got shot.

...
I'm aware of the hallucinogenic properties of the drug.

But then:

Weed may make you a better driver

That looks like apples and oranges to me. "Medical weed was legalized in these states, and driving fatalities dropped! Clearly, there's a connection!" DUI's from weed are still illegal in most states with MM.

Also, even if the point was valid, that might not justify legalization.

If it's anywhere near the level caused by alcohol, please present your evidence.

Alcoholics aren't usually viewed as much better than smokers.

Personally, I don't smoke, and rarely drink. But it seems that few of the people who say weed is less dangerous than alcohol seem to be campaigning for the abolishment of alcohol.

 

[BenBurch]

Make sure you test for brain damage too.

Been done! Do your research.

 

[excaza]

They tried that. It also turned out to be a great way to make corpses. From bullets. Because people got shot.

So the reason weed is still illegal is because people don't generally gun people down over pot? The solution is to start shooting people? Also, it was a joke.

That looks like apples and oranges to me. "Medical weed was legalized in these states, and driving fatalities dropped! Clearly, there's a connection!"

Did you just ignore the last paragraph?

Alcoholics aren't usually viewed as much better than smokers.

I'm not sure why you're focusing on a minority group of users. People other than alcoholics drink alcohol. Casual tobacco use or alcohol consumption are not taboo, so why is pot so demonized?

 

[BenBurch]

Actually, they have found that for moderate doses (what they tested) drivers tended to be more focused on the task at hand, and they lowered their speed significantly.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/03/990325110700.htm

 

[IDB87]

Ah, yes, "medical marijuana".

They tried that. It also turned out to be a great way to make corpses. From bullets. Because people got shot.

Please re-read and detect the humor.

That looks like apples and oranges to me. "Medical weed was legalized in these states, and driving fatalities dropped! Clearly, there's a connection!"

The article says that since Medical marijuana was available in those areas, alcohol sales went down and because of that the number of motor accidents involving alcohol went down as well.

Also, even if it did, that might not justify legalization.

Is this an argument for the criminalization and prohibition of alcohol?

 

[case#46cw39]

So we have seen that "Pot kills." is not a legal reason for a war on pot. If it was, then they would want a War on alcohol because 85,000 a year die from it. But they don't. They couldn't care less about that. It's all a fraud and fraudulent reason.

Now we have "Pot damages the brain therefore there should be a war on pot." Problem with this is the same as above; alcohol causes well-known brain damage. It's called alcohol dementia:

"Excessive drinking over a period of years may lead to a condition known as Alcohol Dementia, which can cause problems with memory, learning and other cognitive skills. ... Confusion may be the most obvious symptom of dementia, but this confusion is also accompanied by obvious memory problems. ... Alcohol has a direct effect on brain cells, resulting in poor judgment, difficulty making decisions and lack of insight."
http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/dementia/a/aa990714.htm
[This alcohol dementia is probably what we are seeing in Rick Perry with his memory lapse and gaffes. Red cheeks is a sign of alcohol dementia, which you see all the time in politicians and business executives.]

Those who call for drug wars should be appalled by this damage done by alco-drug. (Not to mention fetal alcohol syndrome) To be rational they should call for an alco-drug war. And to be consistent call for testing for all government and business executives and managers who are making critical decisions. But they won't, because drug abuse whining is all a FRAUD when you do it with alcohol in your hand and legal.

Conclusion To be consistent, what's done for pot or any intoxicant must be done for alcohol. What this means ultimately is the Drug War must end due the to individual liberty of adults in a free society. It must be taxed and strictly regulated, and treated like a medical problem. As Portugal Case proves this is less expensive and works better then Prohibition. Drug use and abuse dropped across the board. The Police organization Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) has given the reasons for ending the Drug War, and the correct way to regulate all drugs very clear. And their plan is the future. Portugal is glad they ended their Drug War, due to the results, and will never go back. It's unlawful, ineffective and creates more problems then it solves. (See Portugal Case above.)

 

[case#46cw39]

OK, So now for my Drug War Policy for Democrats. Fellow Democrats, it recently dawned on me that Republicans could EASILY be the ones to call for the end of the Drug War, win an election on this plank, and actually end the Drug War, thus becoming the "people's hero" (college age, etc.), the saviors of America (individual liberty, our core value), and based on this establish America as their empire for 100 years, with the Democrats forever secondary in modern American history (2000-?).

This is a dire warning and we can't let this happen. How did I make this prediction? Easy. Ron Paul. If the prefect Ron Paul candidate comes forth who calls for end of Drug War due to government bloating and individual liberty, and believes to a tee and strongly on all their social issues, and has no crazy ideas in the mix, they will vote for him as well as 50 million pot smokers and he will win.

I've always wondered how young, relatively poor people who will never directly benefit from millionaire guardianship policies could be Republicans. What do they see in it?

Well recently I saw a program where they asked a bunch of them why they are Republicans. They all said some combination of these three issues:
1. Debt needs reduced and kept at zero.
2. Small Government - Government needs to be shrunk and made cheaper.
3. State Rights - States do what they want, get federal gov. out of their decisions.

Ending the Drug War does a huge amount to solve these three primary problems.

1. Debt - see below on costs; a huge drain of taxpayer money is stopped. Then we have to consider how much revenue would be generated by ending the Drug War. "One policy change that can reduce deficits is ending the drug war. ... that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, ..." http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/end-drug-war-save-billions-in-wealth/

2. Small Government "There is a lot of money to be made in law enforcement. If we were to legalize, you could get rid of one third of every law-enforcement agency in this country. ... $52.3 billion spent each year — which is, incidentally, almost enough to pay for universal health care." - Neill Franklin Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/drug-war-facts-090109#ixzz1iRpXvuPS

3. State Rights It gets the feds off the State back because they force them to spends huge amounts of tax dollars on it, and have proven they will overrun the State's rights by beginning the process of fighting back against pot dispensaries in individual states.

So as you can see, if this is sold properly to the Republicans by a charismatic figure with no crazy ideas and their social values, he will win by a landslide and the Republicans will be the heroes and saviors of modern America.


I signed a petition at the WhiteHouse to legalize marijuana. it got over 20,ooo signatures, in order to be considered as an amendment to the constitution. After signing this petition, I got an following email from the Obama White House stating his policy on ending the Drug War (pot specifically here). I did some research and quickly found out that EVERY ONE OF THE DEMOCRAT'S REASONS WERE LIES OR DISTORTED INFORMATION.

I will show you the letter and my point by point rebuttal in the next post.

 

[HoverBoarder]

What we need are respectable, main stream people analyzing the situation who are not just out to get high, or have any bias, so that naysayer people will feel assured they are getting honest answers from people who have lived the Drug War. Such people are the Police and DEA Officers of a group called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition LEAP.CC

The following is from their website ...

"Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) is an international organization of criminal justice professionals who bear personal witness to the wasteful futility and harms of our current drug policies. Their experience on the front lines of the “war on drugs” has led them to call for a repeal of prohibition and its replacement with a tight system of legalized regulation, which will effectively cripple the violent cartels and street dealers who control the current illegal market. We believe that drug prohibition is the true cause of much of the social and personal damage that has historically been attributed to drug use. It is prohibition that makes these drugs so valuable – while giving criminals a monopoly over their supply. Driven by the huge profits from this monopoly, criminal gangs bribe and kill each other, law enforcers, and children. Their trade is unregulated and they are, therefore, beyond our control.

History has shown that drug prohibition reduces neither use nor abuse. After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes. After a drug dealer is arrested, however, neither the supply nor the demand for drugs is seriously changed. The arrest merely creates a job opening for an endless stream of drug entrepreneurs who will take huge risks for the sake of the enormous profits created by prohibition. Prohibition costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars every year, yet 40 years and some 40 million arrests later, drugs are cheaper, more potent and far more widely used than at the beginning of this futile crusade.

We believe that by eliminating prohibition of all drugs for adults and establishing appropriate regulation and standards for distribution and use, law enforcement could focus more on crimes of violence, such as rape, aggravated assault, child abuse and murder, making our communities much safer. We believe that sending parents to prison for non-violent personal drug use destroys families. We believe that in a regulated and controlled environment, drugs will be safer for adult use and less accessible to our children. And we believe that by placing drug abuse in the hands of medical professionals instead of the criminal justice system, we will reduce rates of addiction and overdose deaths."

So what needs to be done in order for this to become a serious political issue that politicians will take the desires of their constituents seriously on?


Economic studies?

Commercials?

Lobbyists?

Legal action?


This is an issue that nearly the vast majority of the country thinks needs to be corrected, but less than 1% of politicians are willing to even talk about. It is a serious issue that is costing us lives and money by ignoring, but nothing is being done in Washington about it.

How can we make our politicians adhere to the will of the people that they were elected to serve?

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Red cheeks is a sign of alcohol dementia, which you see all the time in politicians and business executives.

And rosacea sufferers, and people in cold climates...

 

[Triterope]

So what needs to be done in order for this to become a serious political issue?

I would say, the total eradication of any actual serious political issues.

Until our nation finds solutions to joblessness, national debt, wealth inequity, international terrorism, fair taxation, violent crime, increasing health care costs, slipping educational standards, immigration, abortion, ethnic and racial strife, environmental issues, energy prices, and the lingering effects of the housing bubble, then maybe we can indulge your self-assigned right to smoke weed.

Until then, you're just another petty special interest group. Get in line with the others.

 

[HoverBoarder]

I would say, the total eradication of any actual serious political issues.

Until our nation finds solutions to joblessness, national debt, wealth inequity, international terrorism, fair taxation, violent crime, increasing health care costs, slipping educational standards, immigration, abortion, ethnic and racial strife, environmental issues, energy prices, and the lingering effects of the housing bubble, then maybe we can indulge your self-assigned right to smoke weed.

Until then, you're just another petty special interest group. Get in line with the others.

So we shouldn't deal with this problem because we also have other problems?

I do not smoke marijuana or partake in any drugs myself, but I do care about the social and economic state of the country I live in; and the fact is that by keeping marijuana illegal, we are wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and making our country less safe.

That is an issue that seriously adversely affects me and every other citizen in this Country, and if we are serious about dealing with our debt and wasteful spending problems, than this should be the first issue on our list. If we are worried about making our cities safer, and focusing on real crimes, than this should be the first issue on our list.

All of the issues you listed are definitely problems that we should continue to work on, but none of them will ever be solved in any of our lifetimes. It would be idiotic to ignore fixing problems that we can actually fix right now because there are problems that we will never be able to fix.