stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Supporting the War on Drugs and the bolded statement are two completely different things. Why?
berndogg Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Supporting the War on Drugs and the bolded statement are two completely different things. Exactly, putting non violent drug offenders behind bars has done exactly 0 to curtail american drug use (see original article), so even if you are for stopping drug use, you can't agree with the way the gov't is going about doing it.
Chilly Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Why? Because you can recognize that there are better ways of dealing with it then spending 50-60 billion dollars a year on an initiative that has completely and utterly failed by any measure.
stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Exactly, putting non violent drug offenders behind bars has done exactly 0 to curtail american drug use (see original article), so even if you are for stopping drug use, you can't agree with the way the gov't is going about doing it. The agenda? By who? Look up Dem House Leader Tip O'Neill, and the legislation he shoved through (in surprising secrecy) with his Congressional Majority. See how he wanted to counter Reagan's crime stance to show himself and his Dems tough on crime. Look up the death of Celtic 1st round pick Len Bias's death, and that 'ole Tippy had to do something. Of course, it was a classic trap - Reagan had to sign the bill about crack cocaine. Right? Or get roasted by O'Neill & Co., right?
stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Because you can recognize that there are better ways of dealing with it then spending 50-60 billion dollars a year on an initiative that has completely and utterly failed by any measure. What are those ways?
Chilly Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 What are those ways? How bout prosecuting the people who make it a crime with victims instead of simply everyone who uses them?
berndogg Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 The agenda? By who? Look up Dem House Leader Tip O'Neill, and the legislation he shoved through (in surprising secrecy) with his Congressional Majority. See how he wanted to counter Reagan's crime stance to show himself and his Dems tough on crime. Look up the death of Celtic 1st round pick Len Bias's death, and that 'ole Tippy had to do something. Of course, it was a classic trap - Reagan had to sign the bill about crack cocaine. Right? Or get roasted by O'Neill & Co., right? I'm aware of this and am in no way supporting liberals, the entire gov't is bass ackwards on this issue. I'm just saying that a lot of "conservatives" support a lot of these things which lead to more government control.
R. Rich Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 The agenda? By who? Look up Dem House Leader Tip O'Neill, and the legislation he shoved through (in surprising secrecy) with his Congressional Majority. See how he wanted to counter Reagan's crime stance to show himself and his Dems tough on crime. Look up the death of Celtic 1st round pick Len Bias's death, and that 'ole Tippy had to do something. Of course, it was a classic trap - Reagan had to sign the bill about crack cocaine. Right? Or get roasted by O'Neill & Co., right? Yeah. The death of Bias' death was even worse than his death.
Chef Jim Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 all uptight people should smoke marijuana Funny how things have changed. I smoke a joint now I get uptight. I drink a nice glass of wine to get mellllllllowwww.
stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 How bout prosecuting the people who make it a crime with victims instead of simply everyone? That's already the case. If I'm stoned and run you off the road and kill you, I will be prosecuted. A question: Say drugs are legal? What happens? Plenty of folks have no qualms about driving with booze in them. Granted, MJ is not the same. But does MJ cloud judgment? Certainly does. Would a medical person having a few saulatory tokes over lunch - it's legal now, remember - give the same scrutiny to your MRI as without? The argument about alcohol doing the same - alcohol use is obvious. One reeks of it by the time in clouds the mind. Take some tokes, walk back to work. I reject any appeal to Amsterdam - a bunch of people in a tiny, tiny nation, toking in a cafe and then walking or taking a bus.
Pete Posted July 1, 2008 Author Posted July 1, 2008 That's already the case. If I'm stoned and run you off the road and kill you, I will be prosecuted. A question: Say drugs are legal? What happens? Plenty of folks have no qualms about driving with booze in them. Granted, MJ is not the same. But does MJ cloud judgment? Certainly does. Would a medical person having a few saulatory tokes over lunch - it's legal now, remember - give the same scrutiny to your MRI as without? The argument about alcohol doing the same - alcohol use is obvious. One reeks of it by the time in clouds the mind. Take some tokes, walk back to work. I reject any appeal to Amsterdam - a bunch of people in a tiny, tiny nation, toking in a cafe and then walking or taking a bus. Did you read the article? "16.2 percent of Americans had tried cocaine at least once, and 42.4 percent had used marijuana." "In the Netherlands, where drug policy is more liberal than the United States, 1.9 percent of survey participants said they had used cocaine and 19.8 percent marijuana." I would say the war on drugs is a waste of taxpayers money!
stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 I'm aware of this and am in no way supporting liberals, the entire gov't is bass ackwards on this issue. I'm just saying that a lot of "conservatives" support a lot of these things which lead to more government control. I agree. But I feel there are no more "conservatives", at least according to my lights. They are no longer electable. The people interviewed in one of Leno's "Jay Walking" are the new electorate.
R. Rich Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Would a medical person having a few saulatory tokes over lunch - it's legal now, remember - give the same scrutiny to your MRI as without? The argument about alcohol doing the same - alcohol use is obvious. One reeks of it by the time in clouds the mind. Take some tokes, walk back to work. Just a guess, but the majority of professionals would probably not indulge, especially considering most D&A offenses would result in them losing their license to practice medicine.
stuckincincy Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Did you read the article?"16.2 percent of Americans had tried cocaine at least once, and 42.4 percent had used marijuana." "In the Netherlands, where drug policy is more liberal than the United States, 1.9 percent of survey participants said they had used cocaine and 19.8 percent marijuana." I would say the war on drugs is a waste of taxpayers money! Then endeavor to make all of them legal, my friend!
R. Rich Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 The people interviewed in one of Leno's "Jay Walking" are the new electorate. Is the statement more telling than the fact that you watch Leno? Hmm....
berndogg Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 I agree. But I feel there are no more "conservatives", at least according to my lights. They are no longer electable. The people interviewed in one of Leno's "Jay Walking" are the new electorate. Agreed, Ron Paul was the only person in this election who would bring any real change
Pete Posted July 1, 2008 Author Posted July 1, 2008 Then endeavor to make all of them legal, my friend! why not? Instead of putting users in jail (1 in 3 people behind bars is a drug crime), instead of wasting billions fighting a drug war we cannot win, instead of allowing gangs and punks to get rich from selling drugs on street corners- how about you legalize everything and tax it? The revenue would be on par with alcohol sales, probably higher
R. Rich Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 why not? Instead of putting users in jail (1 in 3 people behind bars is a drug crime), instead of wasting billions fighting a drug war we cannot win, instead of allowing gangs and punks to get rich from selling drugs on street corners- how about you legalize everything and tax it? The revenue would be on par with alcohol sales, probably higher It won't solve anything. People will just make black market drugs that'll be stronger than the legal crap.
Recommended Posts