Break out the Bongs...

gonzojournals said:
Too bad Edwards isn't the Congress--- it is still illegal, after all.
Click to expand...
True, but it shouldn't be. Also, the fact that it's illegal is one thing, enforcement policy is something else. There are laws which are effectively ignored by our federal law enforcement authorities. This could be another.
 
The states criminalise it don't they? So is it the case that the feds can only control the medical use provisions?
 
Diuretic said:
The states criminalise it don't they? So is it the case that the feds can only control the medical use provisions?
Click to expand...

Both the federal government and the state governments criminalize it. It's really shaky legal ground for the federal government to be on but they do it anyway and the supreme court lets them. It is apparently "regulating interstate commerce" to put a gradma in prison for 30 years (and federal prisons have no parole, even for non-violent offenders, saint Reagan cut that) for growing pot in her backyard.
 
Ah thanks for that Watermark, I wasn't at all sure of the laws at various levels.

You know in a hundred years time people will look at our (here too) treatment of marijuana and furrow their brows and utter the contemporary (for them) equivalent of WTF???
 
I take back everything I ever said about Edwards and I now like his haircut and will vote for him.
 
OrnotBitwise said:
True, but it shouldn't be. Also, the fact that it's illegal is one thing, enforcement policy is something else. There are laws which are effectively ignored by our federal law enforcement authorities. This could be another.
Click to expand...

No, it should not be illegal, but neither should a man make promises that he cannot keep....marijuana isn't going anywhere unless there is Congressional support as well, and even then many of the states may still illegalise it.
 
And they will watch the revenues slip when they do. Once one feds decriminalise it you will see a flood of states do the same.
 
Desh said:
And they will watch the revenues slip when they do. Once one feds decriminalise it you will see a flood of states do the same.
Click to expand...

Exactly what revenues will be slipping, Desh? Do you even think when you type? How are the revenues on an illegal substance (i.e., non-existent revenues) going to slip if the substance remains illegal?
 
gonzojournals said:
No, it should not be illegal, but neither should a man make promises that he cannot keep....marijuana isn't going anywhere unless there is Congressional support as well, and even then many of the states may still illegalise it.
Click to expand...


The President can set enforcement priorities for the FBI and prevent the FBI from raiding medical marijuana clinics, just like he has promised to do.
 
I wonder if that was why IFC aired "Reefer Madness" last night! That was a ridiculous, extremely biased movie made in the 'thirties, I think, about the evils of marijuana. I tuned in too late to see the funny parts, the end of the trial was underway by that time so I didn't bother. It was a preachy diatribe, full of misinformation, intended to discourage MJ use. Talk about damaging your own credibility!!!
 
Some notes from a show on the History channel.

Over 19 billion is spent a year on the war against drugs. They have not really made a dent over the last three decades, and it really can't be a won war. The home made chemical drugs are even worse of a health hazzard. When there is demand, there will be product. We learned nothing from prohibition. Our prisons are half full of non violent and victimless criminals. Many of them lost their jobs due to incarceration. The law has gone back and forth as far as pot goes. Many think the incarceration destroys people more than the drug itself does. I agree.

IMO, the war against drugs is just a political tool today for election time (like the children), and to employ more federal agents and officers. People that still believe that it is a worth while cause---should brush up on the facts a bit more..
 
Last edited:
$19 billion per year counts only the federal commitment. It's more like $50 billion per year when you consider the $30 billion dedicated to the War on Drugs at the state level.

Even that figure doesn't include the funding for international counter-trafficking operations like Plan Colombo.
 
Young Libertarian said:
$19 billion per year counts only the federal commitment. It's more like $50 billion per year when you consider the $30 billion dedicated to the War on Drugs at the state level.

Even that figure doesn't include the funding for international counter-trafficking operations like Plan Colombo.
Click to expand...


Thats nice to know. Have you got any good source links? Post em. :) Make sure it is as credable as possible though---no bull crap with a picture of the writer--- a hippy with red eyes (because he is stoned writing the damn thing) writing about his sovereignty (which is really---kinda true) and that god put the plant on this earth as a god given gift to man kind.

Damn---the only reason credable people don't speak up is--- because they are successfull, and don't want to risk it.

Ya know what is funny though---lol---I mean man---har har he he---really really funny man?!!? Some people actually believed that Clinton did not inhale!!!! What world are these people from??? :)


Again---got any good sources for those figures. I would love to see links here, if they are credible. I am sure the correct documents are available publically (or they should be), but I don't know where.
 
Jones, Steven T. "What Does the Drug War Cost?" Media Awareness Project. 24 June 1999. 18 Nov. 2007
*****<http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v99/n667/a01.html>.


Robert, Keel. "Significant Events in the History of Our Drug Laws." Drug Law Timeline. 1 May 2007.
*****University of Missouri. 18 Nov. 2007 <http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/180/law.html>.

Mark, Greer. "Drug War Clock." Drug Sense. 18 Nov. 2007. 18 Nov. 2007 <http://www.drugsense.org/
*****wodclock.htm>.

Healy, Rita. "Mellowing Out on Marijauana." TIME Magazine 8 Nov. 2007. 18 Nov. 2007
*****<http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1682111,00.html>.


"Marijuana ." Encyclopedia.com. 2007. The Columbia Encyclopedia Sixth Edition. 18 Nov. 2007
*****<http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-marijuan.html>.
 
It's one of these. Can't remember which. Just wrote an 8 page term paper for a Political Science class advocating MJ decriminalization. I would post it if anyone is interested. It's quite comprehensive, but I doubt anyone would read it all or disagree.
 
Dungheap said:
The President can set enforcement priorities for the FBI and prevent the FBI from raiding medical marijuana clinics, just like he has promised to do.
Click to expand...

And can just as easily lull people into a false sense of security and then have them arrested--- setting up a system of non-enforcement while the laws remain on the books only allows for favouritism.
 
gonzojournals said:
Exactly what revenues will be slipping, Desh? Do you even think when you type? How are the revenues on an illegal substance (i.e., non-existent revenues) going to slip if the substance remains illegal?
Click to expand...

They cal them tax revenues on sales of a legal product... that is if it's legal. So if some states legalize, and others do not, those who do not will want for the tax revenues of the states that do legalize.

All clear?
/hits the bong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top