January 24, 2014
— Ace He specifically says he's not in favor of legalization, but of decriminalization.
“As governor, I have begun to implement policies that start us toward a decriminalization” by introducing alternative “drug courts” that provide treatment and softer penalties for minor offenses, Perry said during an international panel on drug legalization at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.It's the first time the governor, who's voiced support for drug courts in the past, took a position on decriminalization in Texas.
His spokeswoman confirmed that Perry is staunchly opposed to legalization of marijuana because of the dangers that have been associated with the drug but is committed to policies that would lower the punishment for its use to keep smokers out of jail.
“Legalization is no penalty at all, whereas decriminalization doesn't necessarily mean jail time (for minor possession offenses). It means more of a fine or counseling or some sort of program where you don't end up in jail but in a rehabilitative program,” said Lucy Nashed, a spokeswoman for Perry.
“The goal is to keep people out of jails and reduce recidivism, that kind of thing,” she said, adding that decriminalization would exclude violent offenders and dealers.
These remarks were made in Davos, Switzerland, in a panel with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Decriminalization is clearly superior to the current regime (though legalization may be superior to both; I don't know). I always hear pro-War-on-Drugs people making the point that, despite the 750,000 marijuana arrests per year, only a tiny fraction of people are in jail for simple possession of marijuana.
Okay that's a fact. I accept that. But in that case we have a law on the books -- with prosecutors permitted to seek long jail sentences for simple possession, even if they routinely do not seek such sentences -- at their discretion.
So, even per the pro-War-on-Drugs' argument, we're already in a state of partial decriminalization. So Bill O'Reilly's arguments about how decriminalization will have disastrous effects seems contrived -- out of his own mouth, he's constantly talking up the fact that we're already in such a system.
However, it's selective decriminalization. A prosecutor can still threaten you with the full sentence and scare the living shit out of you and induce you to copping to some lesser charge via that threat. And there are a small number of people -- just a small number, but they exist -- who are actually serving time in prison only because they were found with pot in their pockets.
I think it is elementary that the law should say what the law actually is. It is a strange situation where we keep laws on the books, justifying their continued existence by saying, "Well, you know, we really don't enforce the jailtime-for-pot-possesion law" (or, a few years back, "Well, you know, we really don't enforce anti-sodomy laws, so there's no problem keeping them on the books.")
It is a basic premise of law -- a false one, most of the time, but still a premise of it -- that the ordinary citizen should know what the law is, that he could know what the law is if he read the statutes (this is part of the reason they're published and publicized), and, therefore, that he is presumed to know what the law is if he is caught violating it, and cannot plead ignorance of the law as an excuse.
Laws which are on the books, but not enforced, or enforced in a strikes-like-lightning sort of way -- 98% of simple marijuana possession defendants do not go to prison, which makes it an unfair shock to the 2% who do -- are anti-democrat and an affont to the idea that the average man ought to, or at least could, know what the law really is.
And in these types of "crimes" where 98% of offenders are not punished with jail, but then, kapow!, 2% are, this makes What The Law Really Is almost entirely dependent not on the law but on men -- Has this particular prosecutor decided that, in his jurisdiction, for the cases he prosecutes, the full jailtime-for-pot laws are in operation? Did you piss off a cop a little too much with smart-mouth?
Do prosecutors suspect you of crimes they can't prove but can prove that you had some pot on you, and thus will seek to jail you as if they had been able to prove those more serious crimes they suspect you of?
Many people will call that last one a benefit. The reasoning goes: Well, they suspect this guy of more, but they can't prove it. So the fact they got him on drugs is a good thing. Otherwise, that guy would get off completely. It's like getting Capone on tax fraud.
Is this really a good thing, where prosecutors get to effectively jail you for crimes they suspect but can't prove, and thus impose jailtime for simple possession when 98% of other simple-possession-offenders don't get jail time?
Do we really want prosecutors empowered to throw people in jail for crimes they actually don't have enough evidence to prove?
That's a benefit? That seems like a deeply corrosive thing. That seems, actually, pretty unAmerican, in as much as the American system is pretty firm on the point that people should go to jail for crimes only after having been duly convicted of them by an airing of evidence before a jury of their peers.
That's not a "nice to have" feature of American justice. That's supposed to be a "must have."
If the actual law is that simple pot possessors don't go to jail (except for the 2% who do, on a prosecutorial whim), then that should be the written law as well. There should not be these great divergences between the Law As Written and the Law As Actually Applied.
The two should track each other almost perfectly. Sure, the Law As Written will never completely describe the Law As Applied. But neither should we deliberately build gigantic discrepancies into it.
I think... Perry's halfway position will be the "conservative position" in five years or less.
Because most people who support the War on Drugs will say they don't favor prison for possession, by and large. They just want to have it recorded in the law that drugs are bad, and they'd like to see people nagged, hectored, and otherwise dissuaded from doing drugs.
And I'm being snarky on that: I happen to agree, drugs are bad. While many people can do drugs without any particular consequence, you will also have a great many people who like the drug too much, and they'll become addicted, and unable to perform any kind of useful work, and ultimately either wards of the state that taxpayers have to feed and clothe, or criminals.
Or, and this is the wonderful part: Often both.
But most people who favor the War on Drugs say they don't actually want prison to be on the menu of penalties for simple possession. So Perry's sort of approach, paternalistic, yes, but not excessively punitive, might wind up being acceptable (or even preferable to the current regime) to the prohibitionists.
Posted by: Ace at
07:47 AM
| Comments (667)
Post contains 1226 words, total size 8 kb.
And let's stop spending billions of dollars on law enforcement of a weed.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 24, 2014 07:50 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 24, 2014 07:51 AM (4Ryku)
Posted by: Heywood Jablowme at January 24, 2014 07:53 AM (jsWA8)
Posted by: Seems legit at January 24, 2014 07:53 AM (A98Xu)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 07:54 AM (ZshNr)
I'm down with a small fine, but sending casual tokers to "rehabilitative program" just seems like a way to funnel tax dollars to cronies.
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 07:54 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Chaos the other dark meat at January 24, 2014 07:54 AM (oDCMR)
Posted by: maloderous at January 24, 2014 07:54 AM (p2s4o)
Posted by: Muad'dib at January 24, 2014 07:55 AM (KjlbF)
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Mid Winter sale! Thinly Veiled Contempt 1/2 Off! at January 24, 2014 07:55 AM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 07:55 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Lloyd Loar at January 24, 2014 07:55 AM (9u2hL)
Posted by: CPAC Yeast Inspector at January 24, 2014 07:55 AM (Cs2tJ)
Posted by: backhoe at January 24, 2014 07:56 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: Seems legit at January 24, 2014 07:56 AM (A98Xu)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 07:56 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 24, 2014 07:57 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: non-purist at January 24, 2014 07:57 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: Chaos the other dark meat at January 24, 2014 07:58 AM (oDCMR)
Posted by: joncelli, turning Japanese at January 24, 2014 07:58 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Chaos the other dark meat at January 24, 2014 07:59 AM (oDCMR)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 24, 2014 07:59 AM (hpVGZ)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 24, 2014 11:57 AM (TIIx5
No better TV show ever made in history.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 07:59 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Tom Servo at January 24, 2014 07:59 AM (8Fa5Z)
Red! Red! I want red
There's no substitute for red
Red! Paint it red
Green ain't mean compared to red
Posted by: Sammy Hagar at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (TIIx5)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (z+Xap)
........
I fully agree. I have used your same arguments against libtards who argue the savings on law enforcement is enough reason to legalize.
Pot is not the only illegal substance. But, decriminalizing it will still save lots of money on prosecution and enforcement.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 24, 2014 11:57 AM (7ObY1)
Didn't we try that once?
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: lindafell at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (PGO8C)
One thing is for sure: People who want to get high will get high.
When I was in high school and early college and smoked pot, part of the reason I did this was because it was easier to score pot than it was to score alcohol. Think about that for a second.
What it shows is that, right or wrong, the "war on drugs" is an abject failure, and should be abandoned in its current form.
Posted by: dan-O at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (D0bIN)
Posted by: RWC - looking out for ya at January 24, 2014 08:00 AM (fWAjv)
Well, ok then.
It will still be illegal, but there won't be any penalty, nor prosecution. We will just put you in the hospital until you get better.
Meanwhile, all those convicts in prison because they were convicted for something other than mere possession, are still in prison, correct? Isn't that the whole argument for 'decriminalizing pot, because there are so many convicts in prison for mere possession.
Posted by: Francosis La Rosisus at January 24, 2014 08:01 AM (yxttw)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: --- at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (MMC8r)
Why go half way we must embrace, celebrate, provide, and venerate the herb...and why stop there.
I guess Perry is "okay" for a wanker but you know us crazy 10th amendment types Ace...
we're not to be trusted.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice, retired Snipe at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (kFCo1)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (hpVGZ)
Awwww, who fixed the post? Shouldn't we wait until at least 100 comments, just to amuse The Horde?
Killjoy.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 24, 2014 08:02 AM (TIIx5)
Posted by: Barack "Choomifex Maximus" Obama at January 24, 2014 08:03 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Chaos the other dark meat at January 24, 2014 08:03 AM (oDCMR)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 08:03 AM (zOTsN)
----
Dichotomy.
Smoking in public banned almost everywhere.
Legalize pot.
Will the same restrictions to tobacco apply to smoking weed???? Or will that be selective enforcement as well???
Posted by: fixerupper at January 24, 2014 08:03 AM (nELVU)
can you help me understand the legal precedent for Barack T Ogabe's "Benign Blindness" Ploy vis a vis Colorado?
I am dying to know how this is not Royal Whim undermining the rule of law.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 24, 2014 11:59 AM (hpVGZ)
Yes, for a recent example see Virginia's AG who has declared his interpretation of the Law As Applied to be completely contrary to the Law As Written!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (o3MSL)
What does Obama think about all of this? He has the pen and the 'phone.
Posted by: Francosis La Rosisus at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (yxttw)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (z+Xap)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 08:04 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: dan-O at January 24, 2014 12:00 PM (D0bIN)
Ask Columbia or Miami if it was a failure. The problem I believe is that when you say it is a war you expect that there will be an eventual winner and loser. Maintaining civilization is a never ending war.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, SGT - Cotton Mather Purity Death Squad (M) at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (JDIKC)
or sinus pills, or that other weed Opium, or Hashish, or Krokodil...
I don't understand why the hippies chosen kick is superior to other folks'...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (g1DWB)
It's bad for you. Not as bad as other things, but not good. Then again, too much booze is bad for you too. I should know, I abused my liver so hard in my misspent youth that it filed for a temporary restraining order. We allow certain things that are bad for you in excess because they are socially/culturally tolerated. Weed has reached that point: that is, everybody knows it's not good but more people are willing to tolerate its use in moderation.
We have laws against use for two reasons: 1. We think weed is bad for you, and 2. It helps prosecutors to have a law to get users to snitch on their dealers. The problem is, just about anybody can deal weed, including little old ladies. You don't need a lab to produce it. That means that the possession laws are less effective (and more pointless).
I'd rather legalize than decriminalize, because there will always be prosecutorial discretion and prosecutorial abuse. It's too intrusive. But if decriminalization with rehab is the best I can get, I'll take it, because criminalizing weed in particular is a losing game for everybody.
Posted by: joncelli at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 24, 2014 08:05 AM (hpVGZ)
Posted by: RWC - looking out for ya at January 24, 2014 08:06 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 08:06 AM (GaqMa)
Smoking pot is good and supports entrepreneur that grow local weed, so there is no reason you shouldn't be able to smoke it anywhere!
Smoking tobacco is bad because it supports Big Tobacco, thus it never be smoked, chewed, or handled anywhere in the known universe!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:06 AM (o3MSL)
While I agree on an intellectual level Jeff, I am of the opinion we are simply empowering codified uneven application of the law against US this time not the other direction.
But whatever...it's all good.
Wanna know why I came around to "to the moon!?!"
To take away the King's discretion.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:06 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:06 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Lloyd Loar at January 24, 2014 08:07 AM (9u2hL)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 24, 2014 08:07 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: Judge Pug at January 24, 2014 08:07 AM (E4MKN)
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 24, 2014 12:05 PM (nTgAI)
Time to draw a clear line in the sand since this has never happened before and it is best to make an example to encourage others to refrain from such behavior!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:08 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:08 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: DangerGirl Telecommunications at January 24, 2014 08:08 AM (z+Xap)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (naUcP)
It will still be illegal, but there won't be any penalty, nor prosecution. We will just put you in the hospital until you get better. Posted by: Francosis La Rosisus at January 24, 2014 12:01 PM (yxttw)
Will that be covered by Obamacare?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (m2Pxu)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (GaqMa)
Well happily this brave new American era will remove all shadow economy and underground growth...as a matter of fact the state should BUY the user a hydroponic grow lab and consider it "DREAM investments"...
Live large America you are on rock solid footing finance wise.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:09 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at January 24, 2014 12:09 PM (naUcP)
That's really going to happen in the Progressive States of America!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:10 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:10 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (ZPrif)
Fuck it, there will be no negative impact here folks.
The guy in the funny Cat in the Hat Hat explained it all...
I know if I ever go back to working on ramp operations they will be more exciting but goddamnit I like excitement.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (TE35l)
--
*scratches head*
Dag no understand
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (hpVGZ)
The problem is, the objective of the war on drugs is not to punish drug cartels. The objective is to get illegal drugs off the streets. So we have taken out a number of cartels as times goes on? Great!! But that isn't what the ultimate objective is.
Like I pointed out, it is easier to get illegal drugs when you are under 21 than it is to get alcohol.
This means that the current strategy is a failure. There really isn't much getting around this. I don't claim to know what the solution is. This is just a fact that needs to be confronted seriously.
Posted by: dan-O at January 24, 2014 08:11 AM (D0bIN)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: X at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (KHo8t)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (IXrOn)
I don't understand...
how can Heroin or Coke be dangerous?
They are just intoxicants like a fifth of Jack at a sitting.
I think we need to move past the hysteria...how would you like it if the government tried to ban your doritos?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (TE35l)
Yup. Many people either have smoked pot or know someone who does but makes it to work on time every day anyway that I think Perry's position is the natural evolution. Plus it's a naturally conservative position: reducing the power of Leviathan, if only slightly.
Posted by: Ian S. at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (B/VB5)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 24, 2014 08:12 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:13 AM (bb5+k)
EXACTLY X two wrongs do make a fucking right...
down with the pigs THAT is conservatism baby.
Thanks for clearing that up bud.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:13 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Judge Pug at January 24, 2014 08:14 AM (E4MKN)
Dag confused.
Dag angry!
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:14 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Draki at January 24, 2014 08:14 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 08:14 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 08:14 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: noone, really- looking forward to The Next Hill Not To Die On [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:15 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 08:15 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:15 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:15 AM (ZPrif)
That's delusional. It's the reverse.
Progressives also want to treat children as if they were objects, not human, not children. Same with adults. Progressives dehumanize everyone who does not agree with them.
It's the conservatives who see children growing up and becoming responsible adults with moral values.
Progressives attack conservative moral values because progressives don't want any limits on their behavior.
Posted by: Francosis La Rosisus at January 24, 2014 08:15 AM (yxttw)
Posted by: Draki at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (L8r/r)
Rick Perry walks into a bar with a couple of friends.
The bartender says, " What can I get you?"
Perry replies " I need three drinks for me and my friends. Give me a Budweiser, a scotch and water and a ...a .....uh...a....damnit!
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (m2CN7)
Post hoc ergo proctor hoc is a fallacy, but it's a damn persuasive fallacy.
Yeah, but there's a much more likely thing to blame for California's downfall: the 1986 amnesty.
Posted by: Ian S. at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (B/VB5)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (zOTsN)
Just keeping score big guy...
can Tobacco users be considered human again or are we still slut shaming them?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (TE35l)
Possession
Up to 30 grams. Penalties include a fine of $100 to $250. Subsequent convictions of this type within a two-year period are punished with a $250 fine, and between five and 60 days in jail, in addition to participation in a mandatory drug education program. A third or subsequent conviction is punished with a fine between $250 and $500, and between five days and six months in jail. (Miss. Ann. Code § 41-29-139(c)(2)(A).)
This law has been in effect for quite a few years, too. Penalties are harsher if they find the pot in the passenger area of a car though, and you best not be caught selling at all. Selling ten pounds or more can get you life in prison with no parole.
As to the whole ignorance of the law dealie, there is no way to know all the laws any more. With 50,000 pages of rules and regulations added last year alone to the Federal Code; yeah, good luck with that.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 24, 2014 08:16 AM (cHZB7)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:17 AM (/FnUH)
Bingo.
Like alcohol, pot should have penalties for misuse, and they should be enforced consistently.
Driving while stoned should be a violation of law. Employers should have the right to expect sobriety from their employees.
Doesn't mean you can't get a buzz on on your own time, or in controlled (i.e. non-driving) situations. As long as you are under a modicum of control (your own, or society's) knock yourself out.
To me that's the central issue. Do what you want, but when it puts you in a position of potentially causing harm to others, or affects performance at work, that's another story.
People should take responsibility for their own behavior. But when they don't society has to step in, either via possible criminal penalties or social/moral pressure.
Posted by: MrScribbler at January 24, 2014 08:17 AM (ff7/5)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 08:17 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:17 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: Simon Jester at January 24, 2014 08:17 AM (yAewn)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 24, 2014 12:12 PM (RZ8pf)
Sure. There are probably morons out there who think opium is the stuff of life. The ones who argue that weed is harmless are going to come to a point where they are 30 years old and it takes them 60 seconds to process a choice between Cheetoes and Fritos, at which point their argument self-refutes.
Posted by: joncelli at January 24, 2014 08:18 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: joncelli at January 24, 2014 08:18 AM (RD7QR)
A lot of guys in prison on drug charges actually committed some more serious crime and just plea bargained down to the possession charge, but we shouldn't have laws just to give prosecutors something to plea bargain with. Let them prosecute the actual crime, it won't hurt them.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (ZMzpb)
Hunting hobos should be legalized.
Drug addled hippies should be classified as hobos.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (c6N69)
Any cool places to hang out in TX? Anywhere to rent exotic cars?
Posted by: Justin Bieber at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (32Ze2)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, SGT - Cotton Mather Purity Death Squad (M) at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (JDIKC)
Except they aren't saying that. They are saying we need a traffic court for pot. And another method of punishment that doesn't include jail time, but still must be supervised by the state.
Posted by: no good deed at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (vBhbc)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:19 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: baldilocks at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (36Rjy)
Meth was prescribable until 1978.
Truckers used it routinely along with pilots...
but "Meth bad" so let's keep attacking it...
along with crack etc etc etc because this ONE drug is noble and should be elevated.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (PYAXX)
Huge waste of money. Counseling and rehab can only help someone quit if they actually want to quit. Anyone who believes "smoking a doob on Friday night in my own home" is the same as "having a beer on Friday night in my own home" isn't going to stop smoking pot because the government sends them to therapy. They're going to laugh, much as I would laugh if you forced me into AA because I have a beer on Friday nights in my own home.
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 11:56 AM (GaqMa)
Concur. I did two counter-narcotics deployments when I was in the Navy.
Pot seized: 0
Cocaine seized: 13.5 Metric Tons
Posted by: G. Gordon Liddy at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: Ian S. at January 24, 2014 12:12 PM (B/VB5)
anectdotal but I know far more people that pot has negatively effected their life than I know that smoke it regularly with no ill effects. That said, I think jail time for possesion of weed in the amount designated as personal use is overkill. It should be at the most a hefty fine.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:20 AM (m2CN7)
I'd rather legalize than decriminalize, because there will always be prosecutorial discretion and prosecutorial abuse. It's too intrusive.
Posted by: joncelli
Eh. I'm not sure prosecutors are going to waste a lot of time on charges that only result (as proposed ) in fines or 'treatment.' Not exactly a thing about which you'd run around the office looking for high fives.
I'm curious as to how this would affect asset seizures. That's the kind of thing that needs to be extinguished yesterday.
Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at January 24, 2014 08:21 AM (cxs6V)
Posted by: Ribald Conservative riding Orca at January 24, 2014 08:21 AM (RFeQD)
Posted by: Draki at January 24, 2014 08:21 AM (L8r/r)
=====
At one time in this country, all drugs were legal.
Now, what could have happened to cause the majority of the populace to agree that a formerly legal activity should now be illegal?
99.9% of libertarians will answer with some variation of "Bible Thumpers!"
Suppose we ought to peruse history--outside of High Times "George Washington Grew HEMP!!"--for an honest answer?
Posted by: RoyalOil at January 24, 2014 08:21 AM (VjL9S)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 24, 2014 08:22 AM (AgbpA)
Again you misunderstand me, but whatevs...
It's all good chief I just was wondering if we can you know allow dumb motherfuckers to be dumb about their diet, sodas, etc etc
I am WAY past you onth ifull bore full-throated SUBSIDIZE IT!
Hell I can make a pothead style argument too man....
Hey Ace, the USPS is in DIRE fucking financial straits man...but if we have the feds SHIP POT FOR FREE TO THE POOR EVERYONE WINS!
//Stoner Joe
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:22 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: njrob at January 24, 2014 08:22 AM (snXEy)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:22 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, aka MrCaniac lover of KaBoom Cereal at January 24, 2014 08:23 AM (HxSXm)
By the way, Heroin was legal once upon a time. And we are still here.
Here's the thing about the war on drugs: it is an attempt to regulate human nature, which will fail every time. Some people will find a way to get faded and/or become addicts to something. Alcohol, pot, opiates, benzodiazepines, whip-its, standing on your head for a long time, whatever. People will find a way. You hear stories about what people do in jail to get high, and it amazes.
And some people won't ever get into that crap, even if it is legal.
I'm not saying everything should be legalized. I'm just pointing out that ESPECIALLY conservatives should be cautious about the temptation to attempt to legislate the bad aspects of human nature out of citizenry. It doesn't work. This is what the left is all about.
Posted by: dan-O at January 24, 2014 08:23 AM (D0bIN)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 12:15 PM (PYAXX)
I do agree, hesitantly.
What you're right about is it's not binary. Nothing is. But once you start getting too far down into the weeds, you get lost.
My best friend, my hero, is a sheriffs dpty. He stops these kids all the time. He's a binary guy. He's never handed out a warning. Ever. He brings the hammer 24/7.
Me? I don't take up taxpayer money for some idiot that has 0.25oz of weed. I scare the shit out of him and press.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:23 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 24, 2014 08:23 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:24 AM (/FnUH)
----
The problem with this argument is not only another tax, but the great probability that the tax revenues will be diverted to some other pet project and not used to "pay for the ills". See: tobacco taxes. Most states take the windfall and use it for graft.
Posted by: Biff Boffo at January 24, 2014 08:24 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 08:24 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:24 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 24, 2014 08:25 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Reefer Madness at January 24, 2014 08:25 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: backhoe at January 24, 2014 08:25 AM (ULH4o)
That national figures devote even one sentence to this topic, given the situation, sort of sums up our chances. A sub-trivial issue excites passions while unprecedented official lawlessness, barely concealed federal race- and politically-based persecution runs rampant, Third World-style rent-seeking and corrupt state/business schemes further destroy markets and erode individual freedom, fiscal insanity accelerates, national defense swirls the drain while forced to perform stupid circus tricks on stupid social matters (DADT) and idiotic "environmental" fantasies (renewable fuels), the global scene gets more dangerous every day, and on and on.
I really don't care if pot use is made mandatory for first-graders, or if on the other end pot possession leads to immediate execution. Don't care. Any more than those who do care, or the society around them, cares whether I have any personal, economic, or political freedom, or whether the structure of ordered liberty they were so lucky to inherit is dismantled willy-nilly.
Posted by: non-purist at January 24, 2014 08:25 AM (afQnV)
D'Souza faces $1 mm fine for $20k donation. When a donor to Biden did that, it was a misdemeanor.
They aren't even trying to disguise it.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 08:25 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:24 PM (/FnUH)
Alcoholic. Recovering. 3 years sober.
Is what it is.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (x3YFz)
If the GOP does go into some sort of tough-on-drugs approach that I'm sure the Santorum/Huckabee wing will want to push in response, it really will be a party that's a dead man walking.
Posted by: McAdams at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (W9bii)
Posted by: ChicagoRefugee who still likes Sam Clovis for Senate at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (2scyq)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:26 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:22 PM (/FnUH)
Nobody (or none of the sane people) is arguing all or nothing.
By your own admission, MJ use is not a particularly healthy or productive pastime. Why can't we regulate its use based on those points without being accused of being busybodies, or even worse, the second coming of Michael Bloomberg?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 24, 2014 08:27 AM (QFxY5)
I got pulled over driving across the country. I was doing 76 in a 70, and I was behind a U-haul in the slow lane. The driver of the U-haul was some amish looking dude with big quaker oat hat. They let him go and kept me. They searched my car, and low and behold they find weed, which they never showed me, cuffed me, towed the car, and I spent the night in jail. The next day in court I was sitting with 30-40 people from ALL walks of life. Black, white, old, young, male, female, etc.
On the desk next to the judge was all the files. ALL....ALL were weed busts. No domestic shit, no shoplifting, no DUI, no theft, nothing. ALL weed busts, every person in that room. Statistically impossible, yet there it was. Nice little operation they had there.
There was no fucking weed in my car.
Posted by: Berserker- Dragonheads Division at January 24, 2014 08:27 AM (FMbng)
Is what it is.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 12:26 PM (x3YFz)
God bless you. One day at a time.
Posted by: joncelli at January 24, 2014 08:27 AM (RD7QR)
not at all...
just checking b/c so far "legalize it" is "well sorta decriminalize it but don't actually you know undermine Wickard v Filburn and uh the end war on drugs thing it is war on DRUG guy"
so maybe I have a contact high because the left and society's goal posts seem to move on this rhetorically.
So we are establishing precisely zero undermining of the legality of the IMHO unethical war on drugs, we are in fact not undermining the structural basis for the Federal Overreach on the whole matter, and we are STILL asserting that "well this level of buzz is a-okay BUT THAT legal more recently than pot one is still a no-no"...
just keeping score to explain to my grandkids.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:27 AM (TE35l)
Or coerce testimony against your friends and neighbors. Which they do even with the pull your license part of driving violations.
Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at January 24, 2014 08:28 AM (DL2i+)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 08:28 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:28 AM (0HooB)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:28 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: baldilocks at January 24, 2014 08:28 AM (36Rjy)
Posted by: Berserker- Dragonheads Division at January 24, 2014 12:27 PM (FMbng)
They say that Libertarianism is something that happens to you.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 08:29 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:29 AM (ZPrif)
Oh I'd far prefer the more ethical abandonment of the entire war on drugs than bullshit hypocrisy wrapped up in a shiny bow of "my body is MY own*"
*for pot only
but I am gonna lose, I accept it...just like we can't fix the economic freedoms first and by GOLLY we can count on the Libertine Left to aid economic liberty to let those of us who get our high off hard work not uh get their high so freely.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:29 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:29 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: joncelli at January 24, 2014 12:27 PM (RD7QR)
Not to turn it religious, folks get squirrely about that... but hammer-anvil faith. Solid.
Made the difference. One single step at a time.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: The Bandit at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: red sweater at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (oATMN)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: RampantConsumerism at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (2/+6A)
Yeah ethical and legal consistency how does it work?
All these people swear Pot makes you more responsible and better drivers...
maybe Crack would make you a better stockboy on third shift?
Who am I to judge man?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:30 AM (TE35l)
It gets a lot of support as a compromise position, but what does "decriminalization" really mean?
As Perry described it, possession is still a crime with offenders still subject to punishment in the form of fines or mandatory treatment. Don't pay the fine, and you end up in jail anyways.
Others describe decriminalization as turning a blind eye to illegal behavior- at the discretion of the prosecutors and police.
"Decriminalization" also does nothing to deal with the problems associated with the black market, be they issues around enforcement or criminal activities of the smugglers and dealers.
Make it legal or don't. Reducing the penalty for personal possession is fine if that's what they feel is right, but don't call it "decriminalization". If it's illegal with associated punishments for breaking the law, it's a crime.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 24, 2014 08:31 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 24, 2014 08:31 AM (CJjw5)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:31 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: --- at January 24, 2014 08:31 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Judge Pug at January 24, 2014 08:31 AM (E4MKN)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (IXrOn)
==========
About 100% I'd say. Either that, or they had priors that triggered the mandatory sentence or the possession violated probation.
Posted by: RoyalOil at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (VjL9S)
Posted by: D-Lamp at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: zombie herbert hoover at January 24, 2014 12:28 PM (NU/ou)
the hell?
Posted by: The Chicken at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (x3YFz)
Fuck you Bandit my democrat buddies are working on forcing yo ass into a goddamned Volt or Fiskah b/c "liberty" sumbitch...
//Sheriff Buford T Justice(ret)
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:32 AM (/FnUH)
That said, we don't need to spend my tax dollars on assisting drug users. They should pay their own way.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 24, 2014 08:33 AM (/i3Yt)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:33 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 24, 2014 08:33 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: zombie mary todd lincoln at January 24, 2014 08:33 AM (NU/ou)
See Cavil you're being a racist...or a fake libertarian...or something man....
ending the "war on drug" is important man b/c "liberty"...
now if you and I want to start fracking in Ohio "regulation and law" bud but the herb is the most vital thing after single sex coupling in the Republic.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:33 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 08:34 AM (VtjlW)
ISWYDT
Posted by: Country Singer at January 24, 2014 12:30 PM (L8r/r)
there was no way anyone would get that... +1
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:34 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, planting landmines on his lawn at January 24, 2014 08:34 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:34 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:32 PM (/FnUH)
My views changed forever that day. They kept my bail money too, some shit about me being from another state.
Posted by: Berserker- Dragonheads Division at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (FMbng)
Re: China and opiates
Keep this in mind: opium didn't attack the Chinese people. It isn't like the stories of forced prostitution where the sex traders inject heroin into their sex slaves to purposefully turn them into addicts.
There was a moral sickness in the country at the time that led a substantial portion of the population over the cliff of addiction. And opium was an easy vehicle for this.
Wanting to get high and dream away the problems of life is a perennial problem in human nature. The problem isn't that this drug or the other drug exists. It is that some people will get high on anything they can to avoid their problems.
As conservatives we have to be careful to not attempt to legislate away the bad aspects of human nature.
Posted by: dan-O at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (D0bIN)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Draki at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:32 PM (/FnUH)
Exactly right. It's clear that Government doesn't trust the governed. They shouldn't even occupy that space. It is not their role to trust or not trust us. It is the other way around.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 08:35 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 24, 2014 08:36 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: --- at January 24, 2014 08:36 AM (MMC8r)
Exactly...one day maybe 50-500 years from now we'll get back to the President not being able to use the IRS as a personal hatchet team BUT FIRST let's reward his young backers!
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:36 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:36 AM (IXrOn)
...
i could be in favor of that, depending on how the experimental decriminalization of pot turns out.
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:34 PM (/FnUH)
I believe in the freedom to fuck up your life as you see fit. Right up to the point where it fucks up other people's lives. It's a short walk.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:37 AM (x3YFz)
==========
Funny how the people with the most experience in distribution and marketing gained prior to legalization were not retirees, teachers and stay-at-home moms?
Rather, they turned out to be hardened criminals who also enjoyed the income from other illegal activities. And brought said contemporary activities with them to the newly legalized pot shops.
I guess we'll take it on faith it'll be different here?
Posted by: RoyalOil at January 24, 2014 08:37 AM (VjL9S)
Posted by: Caliban at January 24, 2014 08:37 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:37 AM (ZPrif)
My micro analogy on a macro issue regard the comparison of alcohol legalization and weed criminalization.
If you are a diabetic but you eat a snickers bar once a week and take an extra does of insulin to counter act it, why decide to add a mounds bar later on and use the excuse well I eat a snickers bar so what's the harm.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:37 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: baldilocks at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (36Rjy)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, planting landmines on his lawn at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (naUcP)
Legal marijuana, same sex marriage, abortion, Benghazi, forced euthanasia, gender neutral bathrooms, gay adoption, compulsory gun registration, Fluke's free diaphragm, Iranian nukes ...whatever...
Could care less about any of that compared to whether I am going to keep my job; my house; or stay off welfare.
( Obama's endless recession is a plan, I'm telling you.)
Posted by: Vredesco at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (Xv7f/)
And yet, although those here seem opposed to admitting it, ol' Dinesh apparently DID break the law. So far, I haven't seen any of his supporters deny that.
It may well be that this is Selective Enforcement by a power-mad bureaucracy that uses the law to push its own agenda. Probably is.
But if he did violate the law, he should face the consequences. As should every other motorscooter -- including a vast number of Choom Boy's enablers -- who have done likewise.
And the DoJ, IRS et. al. are doing this because they can. We are not stopping them.
Posted by: MrScribbler at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (ff7/5)
Breathe deep the gathering gloom!
Posted by: Caliban at January 24, 2014 12:37 PM (DrC22)
I'm going to need a bigger boat.
Posted by: Natural Selection at January 24, 2014 08:38 AM (x3YFz)
China was so dumb to ban opium.
Chinese society was so freaking awesome when opium was king. Thanks to the progressive Europeans.
But then China got all socon and banned it again.
Losers. Posted by: Flatbush Joe
I know it's a tiresome example, but what about alcohol? Isn't that the same reasoning that was used for Prohibition?
On any given day, a person can walk into almost any grocery store and buy enough alcohol to put himself into a drunken stupor every day of the week.
There's bars on every corner that also allow this type of activity, yet somehow society seems to function with people having this liberty.
In fact, there's FAR more deaths from alcohol related activity than marijuana.
I'm not pro-weed, but I think the arguments against a compromise like decriminalization are just a different flavor of the nanny state.
Posted by: McAdams at January 24, 2014 08:39 AM (W9bii)
Let the bodies hit the floor...
I don't understand how a 12 year old is fit to get an invasive medical procedure with a mortality rate without adult permission or oversight but she can't get stoned?
And why should little Johnny be denied his fun>?
To the floor people.
Hold their feet to the floor.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:39 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:39 AM (/FnUH)
It's strategic, see? Our betters have a plan.
First gay marriage then pot legalization then we will reduce the size of government.
Promise!
Posted by: noone, really [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (5ikDv)
That hasn't been true in my lifetime, and I don't think it ever will be.
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (CJjw5)
This is my libertarian side on this issue, if there is a law, the punishment should be a small fine, although I favor the constitutional argument the feds have no jurisdiction.
*lights up doobie, being in CO*
But if F'ing cigarette smokers get near me, be prepared for a throwdown. Man, there ought to be a law!!!!
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (n0DEs)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:40 AM (RJMhd)
Not in Indiana.
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (ZKzrr)
Defenestration only leads to worse problems.
Posted by: Some Czech Protestants at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: jwest at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Dear Leader Barack I at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (cVMdY)
Posted by: Draki at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 08:41 AM (VtjlW)
Outstanding work, sir. Outstanding.
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 12:39 PM (/FnUH)
Brother, you're en fuego this week.
We need a Vegas decompression vacation/jail time.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (8/DeP)
so eat the cost for their self-selection...
demand total legalization and subsidy...
too much is seldom enough
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (TE35l)
Chicago Refugee and baldilocks, how right you are. Actually the Prop 187 outrage nicely encapsulates much of the national degradation in once neat package.
Large majority feels compelled to intervene in an obvious outrageous case of lawlessness (illegal foreigners benefitting from "safety net" programs) via proposition. Wins. Then a small group of unfit, unserious autocrats completely outside their lane just arbitrarily reverse the unanswerably correct affirmation of common sense by the voters. Fiscal and legal decline, chaos, and degradation ensue (but not without the populace rolling over and taking it, much as America as a whole is taking it today).
Of course the '86 act and an open border weaponized this situation so that disaster could follow. But it's remarkable, in a depressing and horrifying way, how what was once the best-run state in the country just gave up on itself after one large instance of unconstitutional federal misrule. Now of course you have a state dominated by ignorant, freedom-hating, race-obsessed, economically illiterate, NPR-stupid coastal "elites" whose smugness matches their authoritarian impulses. And "public employees" who are anything but (this incl. law enforcement).
Posted by: non-purist at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:42 AM (/FnUH)
It's a damn shame he never learned to speak in public, otherwise he could have made something of himself.
-
His problem was that he was high when he was debating in the primaries. *
-
* high on prescription pain killers for his back surgery.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (/i3Yt)
Posted by: Brother Cavil, planting landmines on his lawn at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (RJMhd)
And yet, although those here seem opposed to admitting it, ol' Dinesh apparently DID break the law. So far, I haven't seen any of his supporters deny that.
Posted by: MrScribbler at January 24, 2014 12:38 PM (ff7/5)
Not only do you have an opinion that he broke the law you are so sure you had to capitalize it. You must have some great inside info that Dinesh is not going to put up a defense and just plead guilty.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 12:41 PM (ZKzrr)
Indiana can suck my ass. Thats were my experience was.
Posted by: Berserker- Dragonheads Division at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (FMbng)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:43 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (IXrOn)
I could support tritium, polonium, and plutonium in medicinal quantities if a fucker wants to shoot up Sulphur it is not my lookout right?
I thought the notion was "our bodies are our own" we justify Closet Babies with it, we justify a lot with it...
go big or go the fuck home.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (8/DeP)
It's a damn shame he never learned to speak in public, otherwise he could have made something of himself.
Posted by: jwest at January 24, 2014 12:41 PM (u2a4R)
you could have just smashed a dead cat on your keyboard and it would have made more sense.
See... the thing about sarcasm is it has to have a premise... aww fuck it. It's like explaining quantum statistical mechanics to Corky.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (x3YFz)
-
* high on prescription pain killers for his back surgery.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 24, 2014 12:43 PM (/i3Yt)
Unfortunately Perry has a history of this prior to his back surgery.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (m2CN7)
Actually...
Posted by: Maryland Resident at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (oATMN)
Posted by: rfichoke at January 24, 2014 08:44 AM (2G73v)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: Regular Moron at January 24, 2014 12:40 PM (oGrEy)
[Turns head ever so slowly] Dude.
Posted by: The Deer Dudes at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: artemis at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (2XMD1)
Posted by: The Chicken at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Romeo13 at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:45 AM (0HooB)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:46 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, aka MrCaniac lover of KaBoom Cereal at January 24, 2014 08:46 AM (HxSXm)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:47 AM (IXrOn)
The gist of the argument for me is that the right can't hold itself out as the party that represents liberty and then out of the corner of their mouth say, "except this shit over here."
If you want to fight the social battles - and there are those worth fighting - then they need to be fought and won socially, not imposed.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 08:47 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 08:47 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:47 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:47 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (RIN2o)
Yes, what's really being proposed is a change in sentencing guidelines for pot possession. Not exactly ground breaking stuff. More along the lines of, if you get caught with your personal stash, you get a slap on the wrist. Removing pot possession for personal use as one of your strikes may have a greater effect lessening some of the stresses on the prison system.
Posted by: no good deed at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (vBhbc)
I will say this, and I think actual legalization will occur in most states, because of the taxes. There will still be unlicensed dealers, but they will learn a harsh lesson on how real the enforcement will become once taxes are at stake.
Just look at alcohol.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (n0DEs)
Posted by: Simon Jester at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (yAewn)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, SGT - Cotton Mather Purity Death Squad (M) at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: zombie sherlock holmes at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (NU/ou)
buy enough alcohol to put himself into a drunken stupor every day of the
week.
Not in Indiana.
Posted by: HR
Which is either a result of some offshoot of an antiquated blue law or the liquor store lobby having their way. A liberty-loving conservative should be opposed regardless.
Somehow, almost every other state is allowed to buy beer at a grocery store and society hasn't collapsed.
Something tells me the "tough on drugs" crowd would also like to bring back many of the "blue laws" that were on the books.
Posted by: McAdams at January 24, 2014 08:48 AM (W9bii)
Posted by: I need a cool new sig at January 24, 2014 08:49 AM (q177U)
A huge number of criminals also use the sidewalk.
That it gives the cops justification to go on a fishing expedition isn't a good reason in my opinion.
The police can still go after people for littering (for example). Few would argue that it be made legal, and from what I've seen in my part of town, the criminal element does a whole shitload of littering.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 24, 2014 08:49 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:49 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (PYAXX)
You can bet that once busted on a DWS, you will fail the background check and the registards will soon be coming for the firearms that you can no longer possess!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (o3MSL)
Grocery store? Try most gas stations too. But I know, I know, people don't drink beer to get drunk. They drink it for the taste and stuff.
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 12:47 PM (0LHZx)
As an alcoholic? (sober for a few years) I can tell you outright that people just get smashed to get smashed.
That's it.
Everyone has a "reason" to justify it, but it's just smashed.
Oh, and it fucking wrecks your life, so there's that.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Muad'dib at January 24, 2014 11:55 AM (KjlbF)
At this point, what difference does it make? They're both for amnesty, and Walker won't touch Common Core. Thanks, Chamber of Commerce!
Posted by: Channeling Hillary in the Hinterlands at January 24, 2014 08:50 AM (hrIP5)
Posted by: Prez'nit 404 at January 24, 2014 08:51 AM (Dwehj)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 24, 2014 08:51 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:51 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:52 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 08:52 AM (0LHZx)
The costs would be lower overall workforce productivity and more casual users in the population, but I am assuming employers would still be free to fire anyone testing positive, which would not be possible under legalization to the best of my knowledge.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 24, 2014 08:52 AM (/i3Yt)
That's because once you go DWS, you dream of sweet, sweet death.
Posted by: Maryland Resident at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (oATMN)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (ZshNr)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (4Ryku)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (3rOpV)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, aka MrCaniac lover of KaBoom Cereal at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (HxSXm)
Posted by: Romeo13 at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (8/DeP)
Like for the next one you could require that everyone argue in the manner of a foppish French aristocrat. Or another, we end every sentence with, "and my balls."
Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at January 24, 2014 08:53 AM (cxs6V)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 08:54 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Reactionary at January 24, 2014 08:54 AM (rf46I)
Yep. Perry is getting in on some of that sweet "Big Dope" lobby campaign cash.
Posted by: noone, really [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:54 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: --- at January 24, 2014 08:54 AM (MMC8r)
Just because you couldn't stop at one doesn't mean no one else does.
Posted by: HR at January 24, 2014 08:55 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: ace at January 24, 2014 08:55 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:55 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 08:56 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: ChicagoRefugee who still likes Sam Clovis for Senate at January 24, 2014 08:56 AM (2scyq)
Posted by: The Chicken at January 24, 2014 08:56 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Herman Cain, & Newt Gingrich at January 24, 2014 12:52 PM (0LHZx)
As a really well pickled alcoholic, I can tell you that it all tastes like shit.
Also note, that in every TV show, someone's drinking. Noticed that?
Why, the fk, would anyone buy non-alcoholic beer when you've got slushies 6 feet away for half the price?
Beer tastes like shit. Whiskey tastes like a chemical dump. Vodka is liver death in a glass.
Bad fucking plan, all around.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 08:57 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 08:57 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Jinx the Cat at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (l3vZN)
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (VtjlW)
Assuming the records still exist, I would love to see D'nesh's lawyers pull out Obama's 2008 donor list ( when he turned off the identification filters) and add up the donations from "Mickey Mouse" and "Adolph Hitler".
Posted by: noone, really [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Adam at January 24, 2014 08:58 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 08:59 AM (YIZv0)
Somehow, almost every other state is allowed to buy beer at a grocery store and society hasn't collapsed
------
Same here in PA. You have to get cases of beer at a distributor. You can get take out beer at licensed corner stores, or taprooms, but no more than a 12 pack. (Which usually cost as much as a full case). Wine and liquor? You have to buy at the State Store.
Corbett and the GOP-run legislature couldn't pass a privatization bill, mainly because the Liquor Store Employees Union (no joke) put out an ad blitz that threatened a holocaust of drunk driving fatalities, locusts, etc. And they helpfully added that several hundred of their civil servant workers might have to find real jobs.
Delaware isn't good for much, but they have some awesome alcohol supermarkets there. I visit often.
Oh, used to drink to get drunk. Still do, kinda, but I''ve become a craft beer snob and the buzz is a happy side effect of my sampling.
Posted by: Biff Boffo at January 24, 2014 09:00 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: That guy at January 24, 2014 09:00 AM (Dwehj)
Kitchen floor, broken jaw from when the passed out and hit the marble counter.
Blood, vomit and shit everywhere from massive organ failure.
That was my 32 year old brother.
Don't drink. ProTip.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:00 AM (x3YFz)
As has been noted, practically nobody goes to prison for possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Would dealers no longer be punished with prison time? How about smugglers?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 24, 2014 09:00 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Darles Chickens at January 24, 2014 09:01 AM (z4vvZ)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:01 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: drowningpuppies at January 24, 2014 09:01 AM (012vu)
Posted by: --- at January 24, 2014 09:02 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Darles Chickens at January 24, 2014 01:01 PM (z4vvZ)
-----
My guess???? Amnesty.
Posted by: fixerupper at January 24, 2014 09:02 AM (nELVU)
Posted by: TenthJustice at January 24, 2014 09:02 AM (qB8lN)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (oE+Ss)
Possession => pay me
DUI => pay me
Posted by: Fritz at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (UzPAd)
Would dealers no longer be punished with prison time? How about smugglers?
-
Under the three strikes rule, if posession is a felony, they would face prison. As for dealers and smugglers, I am assuming defelonization does not apply to them.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (/i3Yt)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (0LHZx)
win/win
Posted by: noone, really [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (5ikDv)
I want pot to be the gateway freedom to the loosening of nanny state oversight of seat-belts, motorcycle and bicycle helmets, tobacco smoking, and much more.
Posted by: Typo Dynamofo total SothereCon at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (FtCW+)
Posted by: stone r. at January 24, 2014 09:03 AM (NU/ou)
Posted by: Tommy Christopher at January 24, 2014 09:04 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:04 AM (PYAXX)
I don't know about legalize, but decriminalize ..... maybe. There are drugs that are very scary in their ability to 'hook' the user. A lot of family tragedies as a result. I am not sure what the answer is. Prohibition does not work. If you want it bad enough you will get it..... and my balls.
Posted by: Truck Monkey at January 24, 2014 09:04 AM (32Ze2)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:04 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:04 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:05 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Fritz at January 24, 2014 09:05 AM (UzPAd)
You cannot stop the trade in a drug, or any other contraband solely by attacking the supply side. As long as a demand exists, suppliers will spring up to meet that demand. If there is a cheap, legal supply available, then there will be a relatively small window of profitability for illegal suppliers. Bootleg booze exists, but it's not a huge problem, because nearly everyone has access to legal booze, and the taxes aren't normally high enough to make consumers want to risk potentially toxic bootleg liquor.
When it comes to pot, we have to decide how to deal with it. Do we continue to keep it illegal, with significant penalties for consumers, as well as sellers, or do we go for full legalization? Decriminalization is a half-measure, that won't save any enforcement dollars. All it may do is buy votes from the more foolish subset of users. Let's face it: right now, pot users have it pretty good. You can get killer weed pretty cheap, with ZERO government meddling in its makeup. And unless you are a complete idiot, the chances of getting arrested and thrown in jail for it approach zero.
My own feeling is legalize it, tax it, and set some controls on strength and purity, exactly the same as is done for booze, and drink the sweet tears of the potheads who find that their drug of choice has become both weaker and more expensive.
And for hard drugs, like cocaine, heroin, crystal meth, and the like, a 3-strikes law for users and dealers alike. Third conviction gets you a bullet in the head. Full stop.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at January 24, 2014 09:05 AM (pFqpP)
See the problem?
Posted by: [/i]KG at January 24, 2014 09:05 AM (p7BzH)
Posted by: Eric "Chinless ShitStain" Holder at January 24, 2014 09:06 AM (lIrqW)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:06 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:06 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:06 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2014 09:06 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (MhA4j)
Widicuwous and wudicwous, mon gentilhomme!
Posted by: zombie comte de neuchatel at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (NU/ou)
apparently DID break the law. So far, I haven't seen any of his
supporters deny that.
Assuming the records still exist, I would love to see D'nesh's lawyers pull out Obama's 2008 donor list ( when he turned off the identification filters) and add up the donations from "Mickey Mouse" and "Adolph Hitler".
Posted by: noone, really at
------------------------------
To me, this is what fascism will look like. Law enforcement applying different standards according to somebody's politics. With enough laws on the books, you can nail anybody for anything if you look hard enough.
Let's say Disnesh did what's being charged. It's an incredibly petty violation that he gave more than the legal amount, yet he was arrested and being charged.
What about Tim Geitner who cheated on his taxes to the tune of something like $100k? Why wasn't he arrested for such a flagrant crime? And that's just the tip of the iceberg for this Administration.
Posted by: McAdams at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (W9bii)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (oE+Ss)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 01:06 PM (0LHZx)
uh... asking that here is like rolling into a church and asking where the nearest brothel is.
Do you have like zero self awareness or what?
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:07 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:08 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Zombie Kierkegaard at January 24, 2014 09:08 AM (Dwehj)
Posted by: Mandy P., lurking lurker who lurks at January 24, 2014 09:08 AM (qFpRI)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 01:08 PM (0LHZx)
I'll accept your Freudian slip and chalk it up to karma.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:09 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:10 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:10 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2014 09:11 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:11 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:11 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:11 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:12 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:12 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:12 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: zombie comte de neuchatel at January 24, 2014 09:12 AM (NU/ou)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 24, 2014 09:13 AM (+X+Dp)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at January 24, 2014 09:13 AM (lIrqW)
Posted by: Darles Chickens at January 24, 2014 01:01 PM (z4vvZ)
Jazz
Posted by: Mandy P., lurking lurker who lurks at January 24, 2014 01:08 PM (qFpRI)
heh...
Posted by: EC at January 24, 2014 09:13 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: rfichoke at January 24, 2014 09:13 AM (2G73v)
Just look at alcohol.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 24, 2014 12:48 PM (n0DEs)
Or get a reality show on the Discovery channel.
Posted by: Tickle at January 24, 2014 09:14 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: zombie comte de neuchatel at January 24, 2014 09:14 AM (NU/ou)
Posted by: garrett at January 24, 2014 09:14 AM (dnhml)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:14 AM (YIZv0)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:15 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:15 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:15 AM (09o/X)
Just as absolutes are rarely good, limits aren't always bad. Fortunately, humans have the capacity for rationality.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 09:16 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:16 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:16 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Zombie Madalyn Murray O'Hair at January 24, 2014 09:16 AM (Dwehj)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 01:15 PM (09o/X)
Isn't being able to offend people one of the natural rights?
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 09:16 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 09:17 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 09:17 AM (LWu6U)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:17 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 01:16 PM (BZAd3)
Haven't seen much of that demonstrated by any government officials in quite some time!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (o3MSL)
One way that alcohol is better than weed is that it loosens women up better. A lot of chicks just don't like weed, seems to be a male-dominated activity (though obviously many women do). Just sayin'.
Posted by: Blacksheep at January 24, 2014 12:47 PM (8/DeP)
You obviously don't know any hippie chicks.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (32Ze2)
Posted by: blaster at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (W6bkf)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (k3l60)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (YIZv0)
Possession of small amounts consistent with personal use is (typically) a misdemeanor.
Different jurisdictions obviously have different laws, but felony possession almost always implies large amounts consistent with dealing or smuggling.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 09:18 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 01:18 PM (o3MSL)
Many people don't exercise that capacity. But it's there.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (PYAXX)
I really hope this pot issue doesn't waste any more time this election cycle because the issue has diminishing returns.
A winning position for R's is either indifference of leaning-towards-legalization. And that's it. Move on to another issue.
Posted by: soothsayer, with arms akimbo at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (gYIst)
Brothers, brothels...whatever floats their boat. Plenty of good upstanding church goers do both.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 24, 2014 01:10 PM (0LHZx)
Full disclosure and honesty: I'm a devout christian. My faith is my shield.
I do not attend church, as it's filled with nitwittery (been there, seen it, have the t-shirt).
However, you are a troll. Where'd you get your degree from? Lawyer, right?
So you're a special kinda troll. The kind we never kill but continue to abuse without you even having the slightest inkling you're being abused.
Ace: never ban this guy. He's entertainment and red meat for the horde.
Horde: this clown is an opportunity for you to sharpen your troll hunting gladius. Slow is fast, fast is slow.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:19 AM (x3YFz)
Let all the millennials stay home and get high on election day. It could save us trillions!
Posted by: gastorgrab at January 24, 2014 09:20 AM (FX38i)
Posted by: alexthechick - Skittle fueled Godzillette at January 24, 2014 01:18 PM (VtjlW)
BRB, more research to do!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 09:20 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:20 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:20 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:20 AM (YIZv0)
----
No kidding. I'm not interesing in creating a new beauracracy to oversee, license, and tax weed.
wassup , my stoner bitchez?
Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 09:21 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Bigby's Waving Hands at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (FpybW)
I didn't say "offend people without consequences".
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (YIZv0)
hear Rush right now?
The Left are exactly like Al Qaeda and Palestinians. They will NEVER like us because they were taught to Hate us. That hate is in now ingrained in their brain.
Posted by: soothsayer, with arms akimbo at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (gYIst)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:22 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:23 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:23 AM (o4Xc4)
The slow blade penetrates the shield.
Posted by: EC at January 24, 2014 09:23 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:24 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 24, 2014 09:24 AM (i2C8K)
Posted by: steevy at January 24, 2014 09:24 AM (zqvg6)
Posted by: garrett at January 24, 2014 09:24 AM (dnhml)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (YIZv0)
You've got that right. Every day, innocent little girls are being forced to get whore vaccinations. Who will speak for them?
Posted by: Michele Bachmann at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (MhA4j)
I'll go even further. I'm not a nicotine user or an alcohol consumer. I did pot a handful of times a few decades ago. It was never something I could see fit to spend my own money on, so that was a severely limiting factor. I had no end of opportunities to obtain or sample pretty much anything, and I should have been a prime candidate for being a serious substance abuser, with my natural tendency towards depression.
From what I've seen, nobody who really wanted to get high was going to be stopped by any laws that weren't absurdly draconian, like summary execution in the street for possession. If anything, especially among teens and young adults, legal strictures added an element of rebellion that was at least as enticing as the high itself. There are a few dozen different plants growing natively in Southern California that will get you high in a very similar fashion to cannabis but almost nobody who regularly smokes pot can name any of them because they aren't regulated and have forbidden fruit attraction.
The stupidest thing about the pot issue was that they created a problem where none had existed. They took something that was known solely to an obscure subculture and made into something every American knew about in detail, to the extent it has been part of grade school curriculum for decades. What could have been left as a habit of a small minority, alongside similar habits the world over, has instead been something we've wasted numerous classroom hours and mountains of money making sure every kid was curious about.
Maybe we should start teach kids about khat chewing in Africa and enact laws against it. We'll have a thriving black market in no time.
Posted by: Epobirs at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (bPxS6)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 01:23 PM (PYAXX)
Ah yes, sweet reciprocity!
A society with local consequences is a more polite society. An armed society is very polite!
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (o3MSL)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (LWu6U)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, aka MrCaniac lover of KaBoom Cereal at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (HxSXm)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 24, 2014 09:25 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:26 AM (RIN2o)
So I hope weÂ’ll hear something about jobs Tuesday night, and some pushback against deficit hysteria. But if we mainly hear about inequality and social justice, thatÂ’s O.K.Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 01:20 PM (RJMhd)
We don't want to hear gloom and doom.
We want to hear choom and Kaboom.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 24, 2014 09:26 AM (m2Pxu)
Posted by: Country Singer at January 24, 2014 01:25 PM (L8r/r)
Which park bench?
Posted by: EC at January 24, 2014 09:27 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:27 AM (RIN2o)
Of course they'd be hurt by it, just as The Mob was hurt by the repeal of prohibition.
That doesn't mean that the cartels will cease to exist, but taking away a major revenue stream can't not impact them.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 24, 2014 09:28 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: NAMBLA at January 24, 2014 09:28 AM (dnhml)
You get caught with dope that you bought from "Dimebag Darryl", then you get busted.
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, aka MrCaniac lover of KaBoom Cereal at January 24, 2014 01:25 PM (HxSXm)
How does one determine the origin?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (m2Pxu)
Posted by: steevy at January 24, 2014 01:26 PM (zqvg6)
So sex is off the table for that guy, right?
Posted by: Maryland Resident at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (oATMN)
Posted by: Piercello at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (jJ97i)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: EC at January 24, 2014 01:27 PM (GQ8sn)
Family basement, evidently. http://tinyurl.com/lzt84sw
Posted by: Country Singer at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (L8r/r)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (RIN2o)
Posted by: England, c. 1774 at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (PYAXX)
We have that particular black market already. It's not big yet but it's there.
Hint: a metric fuckton of recent Somali immigrants in the Midwest.
It's their "taste of home".
Posted by: torquewrench at January 24, 2014 09:29 AM (gqT4g)
No kidding. I'm not interesing in creating a new beauracracy to oversee, license, and tax weed.
--
Same ones that collect the tobacco & alcohol taxes.[/]
Right. No opportunity for expanding government there. I'm sure that our current regime will just delegate that authority to the 12 guys at each state's State Office of Drug Enforcement.
Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 09:30 AM (5ikDv)
This is the thing, the LEO love these laws since every traffic stop of a young driver, immigrant or minority (or anyone else that looks like they don't belong on our roads) is a potential high profit violation for possession. The lawyers love these laws since when you get caught, you hire a lawyer and pay thousands since the risk of high fines and jail is too high. and the gov. loves these laws because the fines are so high. In NJ there are fines for thousands of dollars even for "paraphernalia". On top of that there are victim compensation funds, court costs, etc.
And the worst part was listening to the asshole judge (BIRM) explain to each kid caught with an empty bong in the back seat that he should thank the lord and the cop that pulled him over that he got caught when he did instead of after he totaled the car on a telephone pole.
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 01:25 PM (LWu6U)
wide sweeping generalities don't hold merit here.
You're posting on a site chock full of active duty, retired military and LE.
There are bad police. I know first hand bad police, because they're people I used to count as friends. I also know very solid police, people that live by the code, understand restraint, and view their position as a responsibility, not a power.
So, tread lightly. Overgeneralizations make you look like an asshole.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:30 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:30 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 24, 2014 09:31 AM (oE+Ss)
Posted by: England, c. 1774 at January 24, 2014 01:29 PM (PYAXX)
Let George do it.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 24, 2014 09:31 AM (m2Pxu)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:31 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: ExSnipe at January 24, 2014 09:31 AM (LKJt3)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:31 AM (YIZv0)
I assume people do know that during prohibition it was not illegal to consume alcohol.
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 09:32 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: ginaswo at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (SI/uf)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (PYAXX)
When the War on Drugs started under Nixon, the monies allocated went towards treatment and a pittance went to law enforcement, mostly for community education Officer Friendly-style outreach. There were NO incentives created for police to bust more pot users, there were NO additional powers granted for search, seizure, prosecution or punishment, there were NO property forfeitures.
That changed in the 80s with the advent of crack cocaine, mostly, but the first thing to go was the monies allocated to treatment programs.
I suppose if the GOP were to recover the original vision for the War on Drugs it might be a workable position, but its a lot of law enforcement crap to unwind - which I support 100000%
Posted by: Bigby's Waving Hands at January 24, 2014 09:33 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:34 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:34 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at January 24, 2014 09:35 AM (1hM1d)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:35 AM (PYAXX)
Exactly who am I to say no to hooped up imported Somali Jihadists?
because "liberty" and we can tax the fuck out of it...
because it should be legal like alcohol only grown at home....like uh corn...except you can be sued into penury for growing Corn if the feds shit out a new reg again.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:35 AM (TE35l)
Read your comment this morning on last night's ONT about Woodbridge/Garfield.
I went to Gar-Field in the early 70s. You are right.
Posted by: ExSnipe at January 24, 2014 01:31 PM (LKJt3)
Oh I hate akula51's nick.
Yukla-27... sounds too much like it and Randy Parsley and the other 31 32 friends dead in 30 seconds.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:36 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 24, 2014 09:36 AM (YIZv0)
.
What a shithole.
The Graduation ceremony was like going to the zoo.Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/i][/u][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:36 AM (JpC1K)
because APPLE JUICE IS LEGAL AND ALAR KILLS!
guy quit looking for consistent logic Gabe just zapped me with a 24 year aging ray to make me 65 unless we establish some guidelines on the ethics of why we're legalizing things...
fuck that introspection and reason are for pussies closers get the choom bub.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:37 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:37 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 24, 2014 09:37 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: polynikes at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: RWC - looking out for ya at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (o4Xc4)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (C3Wjb)
Decriminalize? Yes, reasonable and potential money-saver.
Fines? Sure, if it isn't legal.
Rehab is where it starts to get sticky, and where any money potentially saved will go right out the window. rehab/counseling is ALREADY part of the cost of the war, and a fine scam it can be!
My son and a few friends, all minors, were picked up for joyriding in the car of one of the dads. One of the boys had a pipe in his pocket, but no pot, either on his person or anywhere in the car. Under "community policing", which gives them six hours before they have to call parents even if the kids are minors, they were driven to a hospital in a neighboring county to draw blood for testing. Kept cuffed the entire time, except when their veins were tapped (son's hand was numb for two days).
Not arrested, but referred to the magistrate. He called when the deputy decided to press charges on the last day statutorily able to do so. Lots of charges, including possession, under the influence, etc, all of which were dropped, so fine, probation and community service on the joyride.
Plus COUNSELING.
My son made his visits with his P.O., passed his drug tests, did his 50+ hours for the county, but had to have his probation extended to accomodate the counseling. Why? Because they didn't tell us until after we'd been through 15 hoops and a few counselor visits later deemed unacceptable, that the ONLY counseling that would fulfill the court order was through county mental health.
County mental health doesn't take insurance.
Six extra weeks and hundreds of dollars later, my son's debt to society was paid. Took us longer than that to pay the debt to the county counselors, for sessions that were long on confrontation and worksheets, often rescheduled after we were in the waiting room, and in general pretty useless IMO.
Heard from one of the local deputies that the law here now is "if it's enough to test, it's enough to charge"--they call it flake, and it means if there's a seed in your pocket or shoe, you are technically in "possession", and if it's enough to share, they can call it intent to distribute.
meanwhile, here in our suburban milieu we have an actual heroin problem.
Why?
Because heroin on the street is cheaper and easier to get, hassle-free nearly, than mommy's prescription opioids.
Posted by: barbarausa at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (WWeoI)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) Ah, F It. at January 24, 2014 09:38 AM (PYAXX)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:39 AM (FpybW)
Exactly who am I to say no to hooped up imported Somali Jihadists?
If I can't chew government funded prescription Khat and receive taxpayer funded rehab afterwards, the terrorists have already won.
Posted by: noone, really [/i][/b] at January 24, 2014 09:39 AM (5ikDv)
Ever wonder how The Left keeps their factions united
By making them focus on the Big Enemy, especially when they get restless.
Posted by: soothsayer, with arms akimbo at January 24, 2014 09:39 AM (gYIst)
Posted by: Libtardo at January 24, 2014 09:40 AM (+5ahd)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 09:40 AM (LWu6U)
Horsefuck.
Thanks.
Your method is not doing SHIT about the Xth amendment unless it undermines the Wickard v Filburn ruling the entire goddamned fucking hyper-regulatory fiat system is based on...and you know how that gets done?
By having Eric Holder sue your state and SCotUS having a moment of fucking MAGICAL clarity and saying "wow you know the idea that corn used for internal to a farm consumption for a farmer's own meat stock is well pretty fucking retarded to classify as motherfucking interstate commerce...." from shit I wish Scalia or Alito had the balls to say....
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: gekkobear at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (HZiic)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: garrett at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (JWqua)
Gee you think?
They'll use grey market techniques to bootleg in pot to be sold in head shops untaxed...
it is so fucking transparent.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:41 AM (TE35l)
Although I support rolling back the War On Certain Drugs nonsense, I demur from the idea that pot is merely that.
I was a teenage toker and I quit when I decided I wanted to make something of my life. That "mild intoxicant" guaranteed that for several days after a smoke, my short term memory and quantitative reasoning skills would be shitcanned. Not really for the best for someone intending to study and enter a STEM field, so the stems, the shake and the buds alike had to go.
There is much talk today in medical circles of early onset psychosis, especially in young males, and especially with the ultrapotent new "skunk" strains. This may not be merely Reefer Madness prohibitionist nonsense. The empirical science behind it appears solidly grounded.
And, again to be frank, I personally saw what I would now call prepsychotic effects among certain pothead friends, smoking the much less powerful weed of decades past. Some of those people are dead or crazy or in prison today.
So while I am okay with reducing the law enforcement footprint on pot smokers, I do not expect this is going to be a universal boon nor trivially harmless. Even the Dutch figured out that it's not either of those.
Posted by: torquewrench at January 24, 2014 09:42 AM (gqT4g)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:43 AM (MhA4j)
wow.
I've got nothing except empathy and rage.
We will fix this.
Posted by: tangonine at January 24, 2014 09:43 AM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 09:43 AM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:43 AM (FpybW)
Possession in public = open container = fine. Leave that shit at home.
For shits and giggles, let's tweak the hophead's behavior until he's acting like a circus clown for his nasty habit.
Posted by: Fritz at January 24, 2014 09:44 AM (TKFmG)
Exactly...Christians get to eat their Jello desserts and Obama needs more Muslims here....I want to fight Teahadist terror and get Somalis ramped up on khat...Mn-StP deserves it.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:45 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Lea at January 24, 2014 09:45 AM (lIU4e)
right as opposed to the war on tobacco, alar, AGW cult...etc etc
you guys are lucky your habit is the ONLY magical one on Earth with no downside and in fact health multipliers...I read it in High Times once when I was passed out drunk in a bar, Dr. Feelgood had compelling data.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 09:46 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 09:47 AM (MhA4j)
Ace wrote, "...Because most people who support the War on Drugs will say they don't favor prison for possession, by and large. They just want to have it recorded in the law that drugs are bad, and they'd like to see people nagged, hectored, and otherwise dissuaded from doing drugs."
I guess you could say I'm a pro-war on drugs kind of guy, which is ironic, I guess, because I spent a great many years using them and a great many more years after that recovering from using them.
A good friend of mine, a guy who helped me through every step of early recovery, relapsed and disappeared from sight a few years ago--never a good sign when they disappear from sight. He turned up dead in a meth lab explosion out in the country in southern Indiana. The people in the nearest house, about a mile away, called police after they heard the explosion and his screams as he burned to death. Another friend of mine overdosed 30 years ago on what the dealer called LSD but what was probably a mixture of strychnine and speed, and hasn't been right since. I could go on but won't. More people I cared about are dead or insane or in prison or disappeared than I care to count.
I hate drugs. Hate them. They destroy lives. But, you say, it's only weed. Ever talked at length to a lifelong, heavy smoker of dope? You're telling me they're not brain-damaged? You're telling me THC isn't addictive?
Making drugs legal gives them de facto societal approval. Fuck that.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 09:49 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:50 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:52 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 09:52 AM (LWu6U)
tangonine, even my kid admitted he was guilty, did something stupid, and did not begrudge the service and punishment. He thought MORE community service would be better restitution, in that it does repay some debt to the community to pick up trash in parks, scrub floors at the community center, etc.
He is soured on counseling forever ATM, simply because of the process he was put through, and his horror at what it cost (my husband went ape when he saw they did not take insurance--over $200 every freaking session, and there were a lot on the list).
One kid in our local high school had a football scholarship to a top-tier football school. USED to have.
He does heroin now.
Another is awaiting trial for a variety of f-ed up things, and his mom spent the summer trying to tell the cops it was the community's fault, and if her son was to be arrested then everyone's should be.
That doesn't make sense? Sure it does, if you know that the first time he left home it was because of the fight the two of them had when she caught him taking her Percoset.
I don't know what the answers are, but I do know I am wary as hell of how the system already works.
Posted by: barbarausa at January 24, 2014 09:54 AM (WWeoI)
Posted by: CAC at January 24, 2014 09:54 AM (RTqHi)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:54 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:55 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 01:50 PM (09o/X)
False analogy. Go to hell.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 09:56 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 09:58 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 09:59 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:01 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: [/i]KG at January 24, 2014 10:02 AM (p7BzH)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:03 AM (09o/X)
for the record I've had 1:45 minutes of sleep in 3 days.
The stoners wrap themselves up in some thrilling moral cause flag actually several.
1) it's OUR bodies man we have the right to use what we will
2) the war on drugs sucks maaaannn we need to end this invasive police state
3) Alcohol, Tobacco, Cookies are way worse maaaan free the herb
4) it is NATURRRAALLL man like you are warring on a weed
There's more I'll truncate:
1) often argued in bad faith they are not arguing for sovereignty of self they are arguing their SHINY DRUG should join the other currently legal drugs they often demonize "fucking retarded logic"
Also a particular corollary to this is the invocation of some imaginary Xth amendment win that is not based on ANY precedent busting paradigm and relies on benign indifference just charms the fuck out of me.
2) related to one is the admission to try to sway that "cmon man my best man is a stoner should I want HIM in jail...it's just pot legalize the herb" which means they are not undermining the insane and too empowered DEA police state at all they are in fact simply moving the "allowed intoxicant banner for their cookie" ie not war on drugs, war on Drug Allen...DRUG not altering the battlescape of law or liberty an iota beyond one evidently "desperately needed drug"
3) Again always a pleasure to have this fucked up form of argumentation Allen...X broke it out earlier... "fuck drug testing man all cops are drunk or stoned too yo" yes of course when one magnifies error it of course reduces said error sets intensity.
SCIENCE!
4) It's natural(kinda it is THC magnified NATURAL weed would take a barn to get you high when they say G Washington was a spliff jockey they are conflating gutter tobakky with wacky weed)
You know what else is natural? Khat, Opium, Cacao, Peyote, Hash, frogs etc etc
Ah but Sven see those are "bad" drugs and by golly this drug is MAGIC b/c "liberty"...sure.
I can't see any defensible assertion that there is a difference between cultivating the intoxicating properties of pot, versus Coke, Heroin, or Khat.
Then the "test" becomes "why how fucked up does this make folk REALLY?" Well guess what that is a judgement call, and I loathe saying "well okay this one SPECIAL group gets a dispensation b/c dude it's time"
They are not arguing that I am allowed to ingest what I will b/c "freedom", they are not in fact arguing against the police state, they are arguing that we should throw another fucking log on the fire. My kick of choice was uppers and downers all legal when prescribed somehow these MUST stay on the class II or up table but Rocket Brand Wakky Tabakky gets a pass?
Yes Sven b/c pills have deleterious health impact...
Uh yeah so does pot, booze, tobakky, ho hos you name it.
Life is a full contact sport.
That is not even to address the space that is allowed for partisan or racial prosecutorial shennanigans.
Nah legalize it all, subsidiz and let people do what they will.
THAT is liberty not this game of "I wanna new boundary"...
I mean yeah I could give three fucks in the end and I am destined like so many things I guess to lose but quit fucking lying about the nobility of what the fuck you're trying to accomplish here potheads you are not doing anything but mainstreaming YOUR kicks.
Nothing wrong with that, but nothing inherently noble either.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:03 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:03 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 10:05 AM (MhA4j)
Regular Moron, we have quite a few ladies who are on antidepressants, some of whom take a glass of wine with their pills.
Or six.
And a lot of kids not only get into the medicine cabinet, they sell their Adderal and Ritalin.
Apparently quite a market for the Adderal among a subset of the kids with a lot of AP courses and community activities and a 4.0.
Posted by: barbarausa at January 24, 2014 10:07 AM (WWeoI)
Not a coincidence. I chose it for its analog to the cannabis use in 1930.
The history is really bizarre. During the congressional hearing the Surgeon General asked repeatedly, "Why are we doing this? Hardly anyone knows what this stuff is." It was legislation in search of a problem to outlaw.
Posted by: Epobirs at January 24, 2014 10:08 AM (bPxS6)
Horsefuck, but fun horsefuck HJ.
I am sincere in saying legalize it all.
In my game of Reductio Absurdio there *was* in fact a rhetorical point.
The path being taken is reducing NO amount of tyranny save one.
That is fine, but spare me the rhetoric and how noble all this is ok?
If a pill popper can't go home and get hammered like Mom and Dad used to be able to do on Valium I don't think we've established anything but a new brand of "A-list intoxicant" and sadly ONLY one of the less lethal ones.
I am about as "blindly red team" as Charlie Crist these days bud.
That ship has sailed, melt the whole fucking thing just don't play delusory games.
An angle of attack failing to aid the cause of the Xth amendment in undermining predatory regs from EPA and Interior is as useful to me as a cock flavored lollipop. I don't imbibe in sips of penis so I am likely not to need that lollipop if a person wants it fine.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:08 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 01:59 PM (09o/X)
You were comparing drug use to sex without marriage, thus creating a false equivalence between illegal drug users and unmarried, consenting adults engaging in sex (what was once, many years ago, considered illicit sex). Having sex and doing drugs are not equivalent, at least not to most people; that is, people who don't get high all the time. A false equivalence is a logical fallacy usually employed by disengenuous assholes who Just Know they're right but aren't sure how to go about making the argument. Because they're doing drugs.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:08 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: Dave at January 24, 2014 10:09 AM (CYKf3)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 24, 2014 01:33 PM (C3Wjb)
Wait what? I thought we wanted to end the War on Drugs, so what is this about penalties? Heh.
Posted by: [/i]KG at January 24, 2014 10:09 AM (p7BzH)
Golly sounds a LOT like the AGW scam no?
I am not a fan of the war on drugs, I want to legalize this and send the Keystone Kommandos home.
This way is not doing any of the things attacking Wickard v Filburn hardway accomplishes.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:10 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:11 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:12 AM (09o/X)
I'm an almost 14 years sober alcoholic Dave, when have I ever argued other people can't drink because I cannot drink?
I am arguing that I as a drinker who prefers Wine cannot in good conscience support banning beer or whiskey "because."
That is an ethical stance see?
I favor legalization of drugs to remove another way for the feds to fuck with you, legalizing just weed does not accomplish that.
What has me irritated is the hypocritical wrapping ones' self up in the Liberty banner when what is being fought for is simply moving the lines of this fucked up "normalcy" a little bit.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:13 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: panzernashorn at January 24, 2014 10:14 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:14 AM (09o/X)
Who the fuck is calling you a stoner for wanting to end the war on DRUGS?
I am laughing at thinking ending the war on DRUG does any such thing as ending the DEA's out of control bullshit.
You are free to do what you will HoboJerky maybe in 50-500 years we'll get those other lost liberties back like unfettered mineral rights, security in one's papers, the right to privacy in political connections but I guess I need to start small and "pray."
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:15 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 02:11 PM (09o/X)
Didn't say you were a stoner. Said you were disingenuous, a poor debater who employs ham-handed logical fallacies to buttress your position. Being high while doing so might actually serve as a mitigating factor.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:16 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:16 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:17 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:18 AM (09o/X)
Demolition Man is already happening, but it's being administered by Idiocracy.
Posted by: barbarausa at January 24, 2014 10:21 AM (WWeoI)
Exactly correct.
I have bounced before I have had to toss psychotic drunks and psychotic stoners...
the stoners fought more skillfully per times wasted getting stoned.
Didn't matter b/c I can look like Bruce Lee next to a person on depressants.
It does not matter b/c pro-pot wants what they want they are not reasoned into the position it is not based in many cases on anything beyond "legalize THIS"...
Ok.....I'll go you one better and say we should pass a Constitutional Amendment saying you have a right to a pot ration per day if you'd like...
just knock off the bullshit false fucking data and glory hounding.
Legalize it and ending the war on drugs means something and I frankly think it is retarded, stupid, fucked up and not what will aid this country in getting out of the depression we're in...
but I also don't give a fuck anymore.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:21 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Dave at January 24, 2014 02:09 PM (CYKf3)
*shrugs*. Good for you. Good for them. Don't know why you used "scare quotes" around "brain damaged", but yes, sustained pot use does cause changes to the brain. Look it up.
As an aside, how you can write "certainly not brain damaged" is somewhat of an exaggeration--unless, of course, you're a physician or neurologist or some such thing.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:22 AM (2jF2B)
"Your analogy is a fallacy because [INSERT REASONING HERE]"
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 02:18 PM (09o/X)
You don't do this reasoned argument thing very well, do you?
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:23 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:24 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:26 AM (09o/X)
Really?
Okay one of my less over the top efforts given X argues exactly that point and is here but I digress.
I am told constantly how evil and bad tobacco, alcohol, tater chips and a lot of shit is...
Stoner nation argues EVERY pot datapoint is false info from the Man.
Not a problem, like I said it is MAGIC the only vice that is a life enhancer...
which makes me wonder why it can be called a vice at all?
Coke made one of my girlfriends fuck like a minx and smile like a devil....
I guess there's no downside to coke either other than that disinformation bullshit from the feds right?
I mean yeah I've been in an ER with cardiacs dropped off DOA from Crack...but "occupational risks"
Kind of like my Amphetamine habit when I was a distance runner making my heart prone if I am startled to beating like I have been running 10 miles at the fastest clip I can manage now what 24 years later since I quit?
You takes your cookie you takes your chances....
I support empowering everyone to end their lives in bliss.
It's the noble thing to do or so I am told by Euthanasia fans.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:27 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:28 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:32 AM (09o/X)
A sensible POV, and if I believed liberty was truly advancing and we'd get other freedoms back one I'd embrace whole.
This is not a healthy Republic, and the cause of Liberty is not advancing.
I support total legalization because I cannot comprehend how a is to b as c is to b but we must ban C....
if the principle in play is the public right to destroy one's self how can I say to hardcore druggie B he is not entitled to state sanction of his intoxicant?
That is what Pothead is arguing vice alcohol yes?
I envy you AOP you live in a serious nation with serious business on its mind by way of citizenship.
Get all the money you can from down here and when the time comes runs like hell.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:32 AM (TE35l)
I knew an airline pilot who handled cocaine fine...
why can you ban his kick if he can handle it champ?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:33 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:34 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: Dave at January 24, 2014 10:34 AM (E0PaU)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:35 AM (09o/X)
We all have our little whimsies.
My personal fave is how I am in the Cotton Mather War on Strumpets and Wastrelhood Night Rider Brigade because I think a bitch who can take a $32,000 vacation in spain can buy her own fucking baby blocker pills like the wife and I did.
It's our whimsies that get us through the darkness.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:35 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:38 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 10:38 AM (09o/X)
Sure you are and as someone who has worked on a Ramp Operation with 200 or more airliners on it I have to say "game on!"
In legalizing pot which has so far as I know no method for a hard test of efficacy at an interval you are empowering legally protected impaired driving.
I LIKE dodging shit around DC-8 Jet Engines...
it's exciting.....kind of like when you see a cargo Utility Loading Device get sucked onto a nacelle from 14 feet...
I harbor no illusions about the next dominos to fall on this battlescape.
Sharpton and friends want to undo Employer Criminal Background and Credit checks, and the next great cause will be pre-employment drug screening.
We'll get a blood test after folks lose tissue.
Again "occupational hazard" and part of the game...
some asshole named mike nailed my right achilles tendon through my boots one night because he was speeding on ice in the indoor sort area....
I missed about 20-25 minutes of work and then went back out to finish the sort.
Got nicknamed the tank after that Manager said he had never seen anything like it.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:40 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at January 24, 2014 02:32 PM (09o/X)
I don't drink either, but that doesn't make me a prohibitionist. I like dancing but dance badly so don't dance much in order to spare others the sight of a slightly robotic white man jerking discordantly to the music. That said, how I live has nothing to do with the argument I'm making, which is that legalization of currently illegal drugs legitimizes their use and essentially gives them a societal stamp of approval, which in turn has a deleterious effect on society as a whole.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:41 AM (2jF2B)
Quite the contrary Akula.
You argue for YOUR kick to be legal b/c "medicinal" or what the fuck ever.
Me, I consider any intoxicant a vice, and I also do not favor controlling vice impacting only adults through law.
Your business buddy, of course I do notice that unlike my position you decide to appoint yourself referee of what kicks are allowed and which are prohibited.
You have an explanation for that beyond morals?
In applying these morals that freeze out some users how is a drunk who decries pot on any less moral ground?
Just asking, I am the alcoholic child of alcoholics I am not in the habit of casting aspersion on use or addiction.
If it is okay for Pothead to toke why can't pillpopper get rolling?
I am dying for a non-moral argument on this that does not devolve back to the magic non-injurious nature of weed.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:44 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:45 AM (FpybW)
While in a saner nation I'd be inclined to agree Troy, let's just accept that in Seattle and LA the stoners already toke happily and unimpeded by libraries and other public buildings that would get a smoker slutshamed.
We lost, time to move on buddy let them build this brave new ethical and morally equal world.
I look forward to leaving this asylum.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:46 AM (TE35l)
Right YOUR cookie.
Moving the line of tolerance, not any line of ethical or judicial worthiness of the fucked up laws on seizure and such.
Again, congrats and again yip-fucking-eee
I am still dying to know why Pothead gets to get HIS shiny alone.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 10:48 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:50 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 10:52 AM (FpybW)
Posted by: akula51 at January 24, 2014 02:52 PM (FpybW)
I work out every day after work, whether I'm working through the day in studio or at a client site. After a run (or that old man shuffle I call a run), I typically beat the hell out of BOB, my body opponent bag. Poor armless bastard doesn't stand a chance.
That's what I do, how I cope. It's the choice I made as a way to deal with stress. For others it's different.
Posted by: troyriser at January 24, 2014 10:59 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: Barry at January 24, 2014 11:01 AM (8KPHv)
*a* plant...like Coke?
*a* plant like Hash?
*a* plant like Opium...
oh no one plant my bad...yeah YOUR cookie bud.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:05 AM (TE35l)
Exactly, what a fucked up nation we live in that I can't easily go get my high by doing heavy industrial air freight loading 6 hours a day b/c "bankruptcy" with the old company?
I begrudge no one their indulgence that harms no other person.....
I have a hard time explaining why pot b/c "freedom" when I can't get over the counter Testosterone or Vitamin B12 shots....
but hey gang "liberty, freedom"
"yeah"
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:08 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 11:35 AM (lIdTF)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 11:35 AM (LWu6U)
But when we let states decide which federal laws they will enforce, the entire system is threatened. Add this to the basic lawlessness of the Obama Regime, and the Republic is endangered. If the people don't respect the laws or that they will be evenly enforced, the polity cannot survive.
Marijuana is listed as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. It should not be, it is not like heroin or cocaine or LSC or Ecstasy or methamphetamines, and everyone knows that. So its very prescence on the list undermines the law. BUT is remains a federal law and until amended, the states cannot just decide to ignore it.
The Laws Must Change - http://po.st/YqunyE
Posted by: Adjoran at January 24, 2014 11:40 AM (473jB)
so I can go buy a class III weapon without a stamp now(not that I would do such a thing) but if I can use a bump stock to go full auto why the charade?
Oh it is just the little plant///
my bad.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:47 AM (TE35l)
I see...so we can as a nation ban my sinus medication allotments but we can't control magic plants?
Great let's get rid of customs, and the Coast Guard and Border Patrol....
I'm game.
Magically we can control Opium conversion here in CONUS though...
got it.
Pot Growers use hydroponic grow cycles to increase the amount of THC extant in the plant artificially magnifying the intoxicant factor...
todays weed ain't the late 70s weed...
but "socially acceptable" is an explanation for just moving the lines of tolerance not actually doing ANYTHING about the idiocy of the laws or the foundation the regulatory fiat state is built upon then?
Ok...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:50 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 11:51 AM (LWu6U)
What about Prescription meth?
Easily obtainable until 1978 is this okay or are we back to "has to be a plant sven"?
You magnify the THC in the plant by altering the light cycle the plant is exposed to, you control the potency of coke, heroin, and hash by how clinical your prep environ is and how professionally the cycle is ran....same with Meth.....
If we "legalize it baby" the state is now the pusher
May as well give the client laboratory quality drugs I'd imagine....
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:53 AM (TE35l)
Okay, decriminalize possession. Good. There's no reason that anyone should ever be thrown in gaol for firing up a doobie. But one of the problems with the War on Drugs is that it pushes production and distribution underground. You can smoke weed, but you still can't grow it, ship it, or engage in legitimate business with it. So all the organized (and not-so-organized) crime surrounding pot remains.
But now there's more demand. Now people who weren't interested in breaking criminal laws but are okay with civil infractions (if we start treating pot like a parking or speeding ticket) will start smoking. And where will they get their weed? Criminals. Criminals who can't go to the law for protection. Criminals who protect their business interests not with lawsuits, but with bullets.
Either keep it illegal and keep demand down by threatening users with jail time, or legalize it. But don't drive up demand while keeping production and distribution illegal.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at January 24, 2014 11:55 AM (xN1DB)
Now see Ace will say and has said you are looking for excuses now...we don't toss drunks off the dole...
so indulge the Libertine/"Libertarian" cross party fusion and subsidize it all and legalize it all and let them have that cake and eat it too.
Multiple wrongs make right after all.
If the GOP "libertarian" wing grabbing their cookie can't be assed to win economic liberty first let's reward them by magnifying the welfare state to include intoxicants.
The nation is falling the fuck apart Obama is undermining the one segment of our economy that is gangbusters...
we may as well let stoners be happy for the augering in of the crash.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:56 AM (TE35l)
but just weed right Pete?
Not war on drugs cease firing war on DRUG...yes?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 11:57 AM (TE35l)
---------
Not just weed, although I'd want to go one step at a time.
If consumers could predict the potency and safety of meth, cocaine, and heroin the way they can predict the potency and safety of beer, wine, and hard liquor, the chance that they would accidentally poison themselves or overdose would be diminished.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at January 24, 2014 12:03 PM (xN1DB)
Nah I disagree, I am at a loss why it has to be phased but whatever.
Meth and Amyl Nitrate each were theorized to shave 8-12 years off the average serial users life...
Let's just turn the US into a never ending party for anyone who wants that....we'll subsidize their habits to the level of "free" if need be and use the USPS to deliver.
If you're gonna indulge go for the gold and leave Amsterdam sucking wind.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 12:08 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at January 24, 2014 12:08 PM (LWu6U)
in Jedi handwaving one drug with a specious Xth amendment dodge indulged by Imperial Whim the law is actually more prone to abuse not less.
I want Wickard v Filburn attacked and this done by the numbers to undermine the police state....
Libertine Leftists wants his doobie...
I am thrilled that the right leaning pro pot folk can't wargame the long game.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 24, 2014 12:14 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 24, 2014 12:46 PM (FpybW)
Posted by: Steve In Tulsa at January 24, 2014 01:16 PM (UnFIU)
Posted by: SH at January 24, 2014 01:40 PM (lIdTF)
Posted by: bigdaddygeo at January 24, 2014 04:13 PM (fmwpc)
Posted by: HammerOfJustice at January 24, 2014 06:40 PM (WGIwP)
Posted by: PhilHartmanonic at January 24, 2014 09:16 PM (u0ZiS)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.5169 seconds, 795 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Inspector Cussword at January 24, 2014 07:49 AM (UfYXk)