Drug War Policy for Democrats

[Axiom_Blade]

Oh gosh, I'm sorry! I am confusing the issue with FACTS. As all Republicans know in their hearts, "Facts are stupid things."

"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." ---Homer Simpson

 

[Axiom_Blade]

More immediate concern is the risk of brain damage.

What brain damage?

 

[HoverBoarder]

NORML Responds to Similar Question:
"The war on cannabis is not a government conspiracy against poor people or minorities. Cannabis Prohibition goes into its 75th year because well under 1% of cannabis consumers are involved in their own liberation.

You're incorrect that NORML will never be successful as 14 states have decriminalized cannabis and 16 states have 'medicalized' cannabis; when NORML was founded in 1970 9% of the US supported legalization, today it is 50%.

Medical patients in states like CA and CO are standing in line and buying cannabis products, hash and edibles.

Sounds like progress to NORML, with much more to come as anti-prohibitionism regarding cannabis spreads wider and farther in America.

If New York Times statistics guru Nate Silver's estimates are correct, at the current rate of reform, 60% of the US public will want cannabis legalized by 2021.

What is needed to legalize cannabis is not negativity or being a Doubting Thomas, instead, it is to better organize current cannabis consumers to become politically visible stakeholders to their elected policymakers. This means that cannabis consumers have to come out of their smoky closets.]"

http://blog.norml.org/2011/12/29/20...events-that-shaped-marijuana-policy/#comments

While I would agree that the more people that are talking out against a policy that is hurting all of us the better, I do not think that NORML's idea is the best way to ensure that change will happen.

There is a reason why only 1% of people who smoke speak out, since they are engaging in what is now an illegal action. Advocating for those people to put themselves in legal jeopardy is not a wise decision for them, and it is not the best way to ensure that reform occurs on this issue anyways. It's the same reason why it would not have been a good idea for those people during prohibition who were making their own alcohol to speak out against that law in the 1930s.

What NORML, and other groups like it need to do is to continue to make a convincing and well supported case for why everyone in this country is being hurt by a law that is making everyone less safe, and wasting billions of our tax dollars.


The regular talking points for ignoring the serious damage that is perpetuated by this policy are well rehearsed, and we have heard a number of them on this thread. However, they are not reasonable, rational, or logical. The legalization side needs to strengthen their own talking points in order to inform all Americans of the damage that this policy is doing to them, and how they can help.

We need to get to a situation where politicians cannot feel that it is acceptable to laugh off questions about reform on an issue that is unnecessarily causing 100s of unnecessary deaths and billions in wasteful spending.


This is an issue of a wasteful government program that negatively affects all Americans (as well as many other people around the world), and we need all American citizens to speak out against it in order for real improvements to be enacted.

 

[case#46cw39]

While I would agree that the more people that are talking out against a policy that is hurting all of us the better, I do not think that NORML's idea is the best way to ensure that change will happen.

There is a reason why only 1% of people who smoke speak out, since they are engaging in what is now an illegal action. Advocating for those people to put themselves in legal jeopardy is not a wise decision for them, and it is not the best way to ensure that reform occurs on this issue anyways. It's the same reason why it would not have been a good idea for those people during prohibition who were making their own alcohol to speak out against that law in the 1930s.

What NORML, and other groups like it need to do is to continue to make a convincing and well supported case for why everyone in this country is being hurt by a law that is making everyone less safe, and wasting billions of our tax dollars.


The regular talking points for ignoring the serious damage that is perpetuated by this policy are well rehearsed, and we have heard a number of them on this thread. However, they are not reasonable, rational, or logical. The legalization side needs to strengthen their own talking points in order to inform all Americans of the damage that this policy is doing to them, and how they can help.

We need to get to a situation where politicians cannot feel that it is acceptable to laugh off questions about reform on an issue that is unnecessarily causing 100s of unnecessary deaths and billions in wasteful spending.


This is an issue of a wasteful government program that negatively affects all Americans (as well as many other people around the world), and we need all American citizens to speak out against it in order for real improvements to be enacted.

I agree with most of what you are saying. Fear of exposing yourself, your friends, your d's, is palpable. Once known is revenge possible from local police? This has been the problem from the beginning - before the internet and relative obscurity (and strength in numbers). It was considered winning the war to keep the lines open and score. That itself is winning and a big accomplishment, keeping the liberation alive for some 40 dark years.

Then with the advent of the internet, and with the general loosening of opinion by the general public, and overwhelming presence of the young who are against prohibition, people started expressing their opinions and starting groups on the internet. This was a huge force for change.

So while I agree with your point in general, there are ways now a days to make your voice heard without danger, such as article comments, forums, etc. But I think if you go beyond this, things could get hairy. I myself quit, and broke all contacts in order to say what I want where I want without fear.

But the power of the internet that could unleash millions of anti-prohibition activists in email blasts to the White House etc. could have the effect of bringing this issue to the front page.

But like you said we would need to have our argument unified, and well-formed, to get the national debate truly going and unable to be forgotten again.

I think the way to do this is via a cost-benefit analysis that will show even non-users that>

THEIR TAX MONEY IS BEING GROSSLY WASTED BY THE BIG GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS.

This has got to make everybody, including the neo-cons and extreme right wing FURIOUS. Throw the bums out!

 

[Triterope]

Fair enough, I am not one to say that there is no harm from marijuana or other drugs, but there is a LOT more harm being done to all of us by having it illegal.

This is the crux of our disagreement, I think. I question whether a reasonable-sounding proposal like "legalize marijuana and eliminate the cost of policing it" considers the implicit social costs of marijuana use. Which, in my observation, are very high: disinterest in economic activity; incomplete education; underemployment; financial dependence on the government or family members; strained relationships. And I've seen plenty of examples of all five of those.

Maybe my experience observing marijuana users isn't typical, but it's all I've got to go on. No one's life is a random simple. But from what I've seen, it is too powerful and seductive a substance for most people to use judiciously. There are some who can. But I've met very few. Your mileage may vary.

Don't get me wrong, I don't entirely oppose legalization. I'm highly ambivalent about the subject. I think the status quo, where the drug is illegal but largely acceptable, is the worst of both worlds. I think they should either have strict drug laws and enforcement, or just make it legal. And in this political climate, the more revenue-friendly approach is going to win. (Next stop: online poker .)

 

[Triterope]

I can't believe you're even suggesting these people would not be living this way if not for cannabis.

I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that people who cannot meet their basic responsibilities in life should not be using cannabis. And they certainly should not be given public money to buy cannabis, and then get high and cause problems that cost more public money to fix.

And hey, you should be on my side here. You want to convince mainstream voters that marijuana should be legalized because it is a safe, positive substance that can be used responsibly and does no collateral harm. But if a voter's experience with marijuana users is mostly like I described, that becomes a tough sell.

 

[case#46cw39]

I think they should either have strict drug laws and enforcement, or just make it legal.

Do you drink alcohol?

If so put your hands up. Get into that cage or I will shoot you in the head.

Now give me your car and your house. Now shut up and rot.

By applying your own standards to the just as destructive alcohol and a tyrant's love for strict "laws" this is where you end up.

Does this seem right to you? Better learn what liberty is. This ain't KGB Russia.

 

[Robrob]

Do you drink alcohol?

If so put your hands up. Get into that cage or I will shoot you in the head.

Now give me your car and your house. Now shut up and rot.

By applying your own standards to the just as destructive alcohol and a tyrant's love for strict "laws" this is where you end up.

Does this seem right to you? Better learn what liberty is. This ain't KGB Russia.

OTOH, none of what you posted resembles life in the USA either.

Argument by hyperbole isn't very convincing.

 

[case#46cw39]

happens all the time. arrest. property confiscation. Sure don't smell like liberty to me. And that's all I need to figure it out.

I dont want to be a drunkin hypocrite. I know the damage done by alcohol. In my town I see the poor on welfare carting cases of Budweiser out of the supermarket at 12 noon. that's the drug of choice for the majority of the poor. So by same standards he wants to apply ...

 

[case#46cw39]

Nov 30, 2011 Two arrested at Palmdale home where marijuana was being grown ...
latimesblogs.latimes.com/.../two-arrested-alleged-marijuana-cultivatio... – Two men were arrested and a 160-plant marijuana cultivation operation was dismantled by Los Angeles County Sheriff's detectives doing a ...

Dec 3, 2011 Man arrested after pot grow operation discovered in Aptos home ...
abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/south_bay&id...– An Aptos man was arrested Monday after a large indoor marijuana grow operation was found during a search of his home.

Jan 13, 2012 3 Arrested in Grow House Bust - 8NewsNOW.com Home
www.8newsnow.com/story/16518260/3-arrested-in-grow-house-bust – Three people were arrested after a major drug bust at a home in Southern Highlands on Thursday night. Inside the home, police found a grow ...

You don't know their houses are confiscated? That this happens?

Four arrested at three Arcata grow houses - Times-Standard Online
www.times-standard.com/ci_19405684?source=most_viewedNov 24, 2011 – Arcata police arrested four people Wednesday after search warrants uncovered marijuana grows at three homes on Aloha Way in Arcata.

Police arrest 3 San Jose men in bust of marijuana grow operation ...
www.ktvu.com/news/news/police-arrest-3-san...grow-o/nF49C/19 hours ago – Three 30-year-old San Jose men were arrested by Milpitas police earlier this month after police searched a home and busted a marijuana grow ...

Selah men arrested for home pot grow | Yakima Herald-Republic
www.yakima-herald.com/.../selah-men-arrested-for-home-pot-growOct 18, 2011 – Selah men arrested for home pot grow. Yakima Herald-Republic. Links. Email_black_18 E-mail · Print_black_18 Print · Subscribe ...

Napa Indoor Marijuana Grow Raided; 2 Arrested « CBS San Francisco
sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/.../napa-indoor-marijuana-grow-raided-2-a...2 days ago – Agents served a search warrant on a home in the 2100 block of Soda Canyon Road, where they found a grow house that appeared to be using ...


Two Arrested For Marijuana Grow House In Hollywood
www.ericmathenylaw.com/.../Two-Arrested-For-Marijuana-Grow-Ho...Oct 25, 2011 – Two people have been arrested after police discovered a marijuana grow house inside a Hollywood home. On Monday, authorities found 36 ...

Deposit Marijuana Grow Arrest - WIVT/WBGH Newschannel34
www.newschannel34.com/...Grow-Arrest/t8UTC9CdekCi08b91wXD...Dec 20, 2011 – A Deposit man is accused of growing marijuana inside his home. The Broome County Special Investigations Unit and Deposit Police arrested ...

Home Marijuana Grower Arrested
northfloridanow.com/home-marijuana-grower-arrested-p5267-92.htmA Marion County man is in jail after drug agents found 130 marijuana plants and over 500 grams of packaged marijuana in his home in Silver Springs Shores.


For a continuously updated world map of major drug interdictions see http://drugs.globalincidentmap.com/

 

[Virus]

Well they are drug dealers.

 

[bit_pattern]

What's it like being on the same side as the guy who wrote the raving idiotic tract in the OP?

Irony!!!!!

How does it feel being YOU?

 

[Virus]

How does it feel being YOU?

Pretty awesome.

 

[bit_pattern]

Pretty awesome.

You inspire fear in yourself? That's hella reactionary

 

[stokes234]

This is the crux of our disagreement, I think. I question whether a reasonable-sounding proposal like "legalize marijuana and eliminate the cost of policing it" considers the implicit social costs of marijuana use. Which, in my observation, are very high: disinterest in economic activity; incomplete education; underemployment; financial dependence on the government or family members; strained relationships. And I've seen plenty of examples of all five of those.

You'e jumping to the conclusion that marijuana use is causing these problems. It could easily be the case that the kind of people who are more likely to drop out of school are the same kind of people who are more likely to smoke marijuana, and they could drop out of school even if it didn't exist. The same goes for all the other activities you mention.

 

[Toontown]

To be consistent the Drug Wariors must put their just-as-dangerous or more so alco-drug down and be calling for a War on Alcohol. But they don't. Because they couldn't care less. It's all a fraud and this (85,000 alcohol deaths a year) proves it.

I have called for a War on Alcohol, more than once. In each instance, I've been mass-attacked by swarms of hyena-like characters looking to suppress my freedom of speech by sheer, irrational, probably drunk, numbers. No argument ever has any effect on the hyenas, who just keep coming, blindly. And there are very powerful arguments against alcohol. The crap is pure poison.

Screw em. Let them suck on their bottles til they die. But we'll need lots of prison space in which to house them when they go nuts and jack up bad. Hey. Actions have consequences. Can't do the time, don't imbibe the fermented urine-like substance.

Pot? I love the stuff. I would not argue with the legalization of pot. But I don't smoke it, because I don't need the hassle, and even more because I don't like the idea of giving money to drug cartels, which are slaughtering people at this moment. I also quit cigarettes cold, and cut way back on the carbs and fats. But that's just me. Drug, cigarette, and junk food peddlers would quickly go bankrupt if they had to depend on people like me.

I understand that weaklings can't do without drugs, and will go to great lengths to obtain them, which causes severe problems. It sucks, but such is the deeply flawed nature of the human monkey. It also sucks to try to fob off drug dependence as an essential freedom, when in reality it is nothing more than a manifestation of the deeply flawed nature of the denizens of the man-jungle.

 

[case#46cw39]

What else would freedom be but the ability to kill or harm oneself (race car driving, etc) so long as you are not harming others involuntarily (causing involuntary pain, disease, death)?

 

[Toontown]

What else would freedom be but the ability to kill or harm oneself (race car driving, etc) so long as you are not harming others involuntarily (causing involuntary pain, disease, death)?

Gee, I dunno - the ability to refrain from killing or harming oneself? That would be as much a "freedom" as killing or harming oneself.

The problem with alcoholics is, they tend to do their "race car driving, etc" on the highways, taking a lot of people with them when they go - when they aren't beating their wives and children half to death. And I suppose tolerating the equivalent of a Vietnam war every two years for the benefit of Big Booze and it's little alkies is a "freedom" also.

Yeah, we be some free muthas over here. Not too smart, but free.

 

[stokes234]

I have called for a War on Alcohol, more than once. In each instance, I've been mass-attacked by swarms of hyena-like characters looking to suppress my freedom of speech by sheer, irrational, probably drunk, numbers. No argument ever has any effect on the hyenas, who just keep coming, blindly. And there are very powerful arguments against alcohol. The crap is pure poison.

Screw em. Let them suck on their bottles til they die. But we'll need lots of prison space in which to house them when they go nuts and jack up bad. Hey. Actions have consequences. Can't do the time, don't imbibe the fermented urine-like substance.

I have called for a War on Fast Food, more than once. In each instance, I've been mass-attacked by swarms of hyena-like characters looking to suppress my freedom of speech by sheer, irrational, probably fat, numbers. No argument ever has any effect on the hyenas, who just keep coming, blindly. And there are very powerful arguments against Fast Food. The crap is pure poison.

Screw em. Let them chomp on their happy meals til they die. But we'll need lots of hospital space in which to house them when they get fat and have heart attacks. Hey. Actions have consequences. Can't do the exercise, don't consume the greasy lard-like substance.

 

[Toontown]

I have called for a War on Fast Food, more than once. In each instance, I've been mass-attacked by swarms of hyena-like characters looking to suppress my freedom of speech by sheer, irrational, probably fat, numbers. No argument ever has any effect on the hyenas, who just keep coming, blindly. And there are very powerful arguments against Fast Food. The crap is pure poison.

Screw em. Let them chomp on their happy meals til they die. But we'll need lots of hospital space in which to house them when they get fat and have heart attacks. Hey. Actions have consequences. Can't do the exercise, don't consume the greasy lard-like substance.

False equivalence.

I'd be very surprised if someone stopped her car and fell asleep in the middle of an interstate highway as a result of having eaten a happy meal.

An alcoholic co-worker actually went sober as a result of having barely survived smashing into the rear of that car while in a drunken stupor of his own. Too late for him, though. His short-term memory was already burned out. On the bright side, that was one of those miraculously fatality-free encounters between highway drunks, but don't try to make anything of it. 35% of auto fatalities involve drunks.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIssues/1101913925.html