Skip to comments.
Seize marijuana market from criminal class
The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, VA) ^
| 2/9/2003
| Kevin B. Zeese
Posted on 02/11/2003 6:49:57 AM PST by MrLeRoy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-295 next last
1
posted on
02/11/2003 6:49:57 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
To: *Wod_list
Wod_list ping
2
posted on
02/11/2003 6:50:14 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: MrLeRoy
Ah, morning in America. Birds signing, children laughing, the smell of coffee...and a few dozen free my dope threads.
To: MrLeRoy
Shouldn't this be posted over at ReeferPublic instead of FreeRepublic?
To: VRWCmember
Watch out. The Libertarian church ladies will be here to swing purses at you.
5
posted on
02/11/2003 6:52:32 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
(Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.)
To: MrLeRoy
Prohibitionists counter: Ending marijuana prohibition "sends the wrong message" that legalizing drugs supposedly connotes societal approval of drug abuse. Oh, really? Then we need to bring back alcohol prohibition because, by that logic, legal alcohol sends the message that alcoholism and alcohol abuse are OK. Obviously, that's not true. And we're not going back to alcohol prohibition. We need to turn in a different direction.
This is probably the most important part of the article. It shows the truly statist mindset of the Drug Warriors. In its implication that legality implies government approval, it goes beyond mere statism and approaches totalitarianism.
-Eric
6
posted on
02/11/2003 6:53:22 AM PST
by
E Rocc
(what part of "it's a failure" don't they understand?)
To: AppyPappy
It is amusing to observe how they don't allow minor annoyances such as war distract them from their petty crusade.
To: MrLeRoy
Since marijuana was first federally outlawed in 1937, prohibition has had the perverse effect of making marijuana more popular, particularly among youth and the counterculture. Actually he got it partly right. Marijuana is the drug for the radical left counterculture, but before the radical leftist counterculture sprang up in the 60's, marijuana wasn't popular.
8
posted on
02/11/2003 6:55:24 AM PST
by
Dane
To: VRWCmember
Shouldn't this be posted over at ReeferPublic instead of FreeRepublic?Which part of "free" did you not understand?
9
posted on
02/11/2003 7:00:27 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: CWOJackson
Brilliant rebuttal. You convinced me, the WoSD is a vital Federal pursuit.
10
posted on
02/11/2003 7:01:14 AM PST
by
MileHi
(NOT!)
To: Dane
before the radical leftist counterculture sprang up in the 60's, marijuana wasn't popular.Provide evidence for your claim.
11
posted on
02/11/2003 7:01:58 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: MrLeRoy
What a crock of BS! Pot smoke contains just as many if not more carcinogens as tobacco. and BTW, I smoked the crap for 25 years so I consider myself somewhat of an expert on the subject. Uh, What were we talking about? LOL
Comment #13 Removed by Moderator
To: SirFishalot
Pot smoke contains just as many if not more carcinogens as tobacco.So should they both be banned or both be legalized?
14
posted on
02/11/2003 7:12:18 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: CWOJackson
It is amusing to observe how they don't allow minor annoyances such as war distract them from their petty crusade.As opposed to the gun rights crowd here, or the ban abortion crowd? Actually, there is a war here, the War On (some) Drugs which is a war against US citizens on US soil, in which the first casualty is the Bill Of Rights.
To: CWOJackson
It is quite possible for the US military to pursue a just war overseas while at the same time NOT throwing hundreds of good young people in jail everyday as punishment for recreation.
16
posted on
02/11/2003 7:18:30 AM PST
by
Sender
(-A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. -WOPR-)
To: CWOJackson
It is amusing to observe how they don't allow minor annoyances such as war... Have you tried the Haile Selassie ghanga peace plan, war what is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
17
posted on
02/11/2003 7:18:30 AM PST
by
TightSqueeze
(From the Department of Homeland Security, sponsors of Liberty-Lite, Less Freedom! / Red Tape!)
To: MrLeRoy
"...before the radical leftist counterculture sprang up in the 60's, marijuana wasn't popular."Provide evidence for your claim.
How would you like your evidence: from the literature or anecdotal?
In my reading on drug use, the 60's are widely acknowledged as a time of expanding drug acceptance. Pot was not popular among a wide audience until the 60's youth seized onto it as part of the Revolution. Prior to that, the artist/poet/grifter/drifter set knew all 'bout it, more likely in the form of hashish.
In my experience with it personallyI was born in '62my parents reported that in their generation alcohol was the glamour drug, with harder substances still only used by "bad" folks. Pot was not popular among their generation.
It was popular enough among mine that I eventually tried it and after off-and-on attempts at it I found out I liked it...enough to become a bit of a pothead for awhile.
This link seems to discuss the 60's connection fairly well if you're interested: Marijuana and Ginsberg
18
posted on
02/11/2003 7:36:23 AM PST
by
avenir
To: CWOJackson
It is amusing to observe how they don't allow minor annoyances such as war distract them from their petty crusade. That's a good question. Why are the feds wasting time and money on such a picayune herb like cannabis, when we have a war against terrorism on American turf?
19
posted on
02/11/2003 7:37:16 AM PST
by
William Terrell
(Advertise in this space - Low rates)
To: MrLeRoy
Actually that is a very difficult question to answer because of the complexities of the subject.
You see, tobacco is just barely legal today. The anti tobacco crowd, mostly liberal BTW, have attempted to eliminate tobacco all together by taxing it to death (which by the way affects the poor more than any other tax on the books), by suing the tobacco companies (which benefited a few select law firms far more than anyone else), by limiting age, by limiting places you can smoke, with massive ad campaigns against it, with school "education" programs, and etc. They have done this in the name of benefiting society. This has lead to wide spread bootlegging, shipment thefts, and smuggling in many places such as here in New York.
Since pot is, in my very informed opinion, at least as dangerous if not more than tobacco, I can only see legalization leading to the same scenario as above. That means to me that trial lawyers will benefit, taxes will affect the poor far more than anyone else, and bootlegging will thrive anyways.
So based on that, I don't feel pot should be legalized.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-295 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson