The most cursory of internet searches yielded...
- a possession charge? You don't seem to understand the question.
To be fair, this sentence was imposed for "possession" of pot, not "smoking pot."
Then you DO understand the question - and yet you provide evidence of some possession bust?
In short, you are attempting to use a straw-man argument to discredit opponents for whom you have no respect.
I went to the Liberteen home base - LP.org - and it has a link for NORML. I clicked on it. Check out how they attempt to deceive -
War Against Marijuana Consumers
Our country's war on drugs places great emphasis on arresting people for smoking marijuana. Since 1990, nearly 5.9 million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges, a greater number than the entire populations of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming combined. In 2000, state and local law enforcement arrested 734,498 people for marijuana violations. This is an increase of 800 percent since 1980, and is the highest ever recorded by the FBI.
Yet, they too can't cite one example of ANYONE busted for smoking pot - because there aren't any. Propaganda - NORML style.
Care to try again? (Pssssst - the answer to the original question is - "no".)
You sure poked a touchy libertarian nerve.
The Liberteens have no idea what's comin'.
Please leave me in my revelry...
166 posted on 9/21/02 11:36 PM Eastern by Libloather
To which I make two replies.
First, if you roll a fat doob and go find a downtown cop and light it up right in front of him, he'll either arrest you or not. But if he arrests you, it'll be for posession of a controlled substance, not consumption of it. So your objection is a semantic quibble, rather than an argument of substance.
Second, you've made a very broad assertion in your own right with the statement I quote above. Shall we see the evidence supporting your assertion, then?