California judge blasts drug war at pro-marijuana rally in Reno

Las Vegas Sun ^ | May 03, 2003 | MARTIN GRIFFITH

[MrLeRoy]

RENO, Nev. (AP) - A Superior Court judge sharply criticized the drug war and renewed his call for the decriminalization of marijuana at a pro-marijuana rally Saturday.

Judge James Gray of Orange County, Calif., said the drug war has cost billions of dollars and resulted in the United States having the world's highest incarceration rate - with no end in sight to rampant drug abuse.

The former federal prosecutor said he has never smoked marijuana, but supports the strictly controlled distribution of pot to adults.

"We have made an illness into a plague. (This is) a failed and hopeless system," Gray said.

"I believe people should be entitled to do what they want to their bodies, but that they should be held accountable," he added.

Gray, 58, a lifelong Republican until he became a Libertarian earlier this year, has been a judge for 19 years. He's the author of "Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It."

More than 60 people attended the "Rally for Cannabis Liberation" at Reno's Idlewild Park.

The rally was sponsored by Cures not Wars, a pro-marijuana group that was to hold similar rallies around the country this weekend.

Group spokeswoman Michelle Buck of Reno said the purpose of the rally was to raise awareness that tens of thousands of Americans are in prisons for non-violent drug crimes.

Of particular concern, she said, are thousands who have been arrested for legally or illegally supplying medical marijuana.

Some people held signs that read "Free Ed Rosenthal." The Oakland, Calif., man's arrest last year was among a string of federal raids of medical marijuana suppliers in California.

A 1970 federal law does not recognize any medical purposes for marijuana. A federal judge refused in January to allow Rosenthal to tell jurors he was operating under state law.

Jurors convicted Rosenthal. When they learned the details they were not told during the trial, several jurors said they regretted their verdict.

"We're here to show our support for people like Ed," Buck said. "Marijuana is not the evil drug the federal government has made it out to be."

In November, Nevada voters rejected a measure to legalize possession of up to three ounces of marijuana by a margin of 61 percent to 39 percent.

Gray, appointed by Gov. George Deukmejian to the bench, was the keynote speaker at a Libertarian Party of Nevada dinner Saturday night in Virginia City.

[MrLeRoy]

Because alcohol is good and the rest are bad.

Provide evidence for your claim.

[biblewonk]

Provide evidence for your claim.

Jesus didn't turn water into weed.

Hey Jesus they have run out of weed.
Woman what does your problem have to do with me?
Do what ever he says to you.
Go take that rope to the master of the feast and have him pull a hit off of it.
Ohhhhhh Woooooow, normal people light up the good weed at the beginning of the feast and save the ditch weed for later but you have saved the best weed until now. What's up with that? Got any chips I'm hungry.

[StringTheory]

If the rest are bad, that means we should legalize them to lower death rates and prevent innocent people from being killed.

The only way we are ever going to have a drug free society, is if you legalize all drugs. The dangers of these substances will then be realized by our children, and we can finally take a step foward in the right direction.

More children today use marijuana SOLELY becuase it IS illegal. Think about it. Marijuana is worth it's weight in gold, there are numerous teens in public schools selling and pressing this stuff on their fellow students. When I was in High school, just 3 years ago actually, I had many people try to give me free samples of there product. Why? Becuase they want to sell it! At least with alcohol, a high school student would have to wait until he got home to have his older bother buy it. But with marijuana, you sons and daughters can buy it in their History classes.

Yeah... great laws we have.

[MrLeRoy]

alcohol is good and the rest are bad.

Provide evidence for your claim.

Jesus didn't turn water into weed.

At most, that proves that alcohol is not bad; it says nothing whatever about other drugs.

[biblewonk]

When I was in HIGH school, or was it Jr High, I think it was Jr Hi, a kid lit up in Art class while the teacher was out for 5 minutes. We all laughed our asses off as she came in trying to figure where the smell was coming from but no one saw anything. It was way more than 3 years ago.

At Disturbed in CR a couple of weeks ago the weed was burning big time even with cops all over the building. If weed was legal, there would have been way way way more. A concert wouldn't even be right without weed and tits.

Uhhhhh, so what was your point?

[newgeezer]

Uhhhhh, so what was your point?

That society is getting better, and the only reason most kids ever use drugs is SOLELY because the drugs are illegal.

Makes perfect sense, right? </sarcasm> ;O)

[biblewonk]

Makes perfect sense, right? ;O)

Yeah, teens will quit having sex when we tell them that it's ok to have sex too. Yeah. "Nothing ever happened to us"

[newgeezer]

A concert wouldn't even be right without weed and tits.

When I see The Glenn Miller Orchestra here on June 12, I'll have to keep my nose and eyes open! The septuagenarian crowd will surely be appalled. I'll try to be deeply saddened.

[StringTheory]

Well it isn't a crime to have sex, and you obviously didn't get what I was saying...

Because marijuana is illegal, private groups of individual citizens are the only suppliers. With me so far? The current laws have made selling marijuana a social activity! Please tell me one way, without legalization, how we can stop our children from selling the crap to each other??

[StringTheory]

Uhhhhh, so what was your point? That society is getting better, and the only reason most kids ever use drugs is SOLELY because the drugs are illegal.

Damn, why is it whenever conservative argue in favor of our current drug laws they use very stupid and "LIBERAL" arguements!

How in the world did you come up with "the only reason most kids ever use drugs is solely becuase the drugs are illegal"?

I SAID more children use the current illegal drugs, than if the current illegal drugs were legal. yeah it's a little complicated but I'm sure you can understand. You see I going futher and better defining what you think I said. Maybe you have closed your eyes so much to what we're saying when you read something, you take it for a completely different meaning?

[newgeezer]

Because marijuana is illegal, private groups of individual citizens are the only suppliers. With me so far?

Yeah, sure, that part was pretty clear. But, back in #143, you said:

"The only way we are ever going to have a drug free society, is if you legalize all drugs. The dangers of these substances will then be realized by our children, and we can finally take a step foward in the right direction."

Now, this is where the logic gets sort of, let's say, "fuzzy." Last time I checked, alcohol is legal. But, it seems the kids don't have too much trouble getting it, and it seems they still want it, too. (Alcohol-related traffic incidents are the #1 cause of death among teens, aren't they?)

So, just how long do you predict it will take before "the dangers of [this substance] will ... be realized by our children, and we can finally take a step foward in the right direction"? Are you saying that's bound to happen once all drugs are legalized (in addition to alcohol)? Please explain.

[GLDNGUN]

Recent studies by the RAND Corporation, and by economist Steven Pudney of the University of Leicester, have deflated the "gateway theory."

And when it gets dark do you try to come up with another theory other than the sun set? BOTH of these studies AGREE that the FACTS SUPPORT the "gateway theory". They just choose to ignore the obvious and try to come up with another possible reason most hard drug users started with pot.

"Deflated"??? LOL With all the hot air, it's not surprising they haven't deflated a thing.

Here's something NEW for you to try. COMMON SENSE. Give it a whirl and you'll see that OF COURSE somoene who has already stepped across one line and smokes pot is going to be much less resistant to stepping across another line and try a harder drug. You think a "clean" person just wakes up one day and says to themselves, "You know, I think it's time I injected some heroin into my arm. Yeah, that's my goal for today"?

Here's another eye-opener. If you never abuse drugs, you'll never be a drug abuser. Now go find a study to de-bunk that little "theory". :-)

[newgeezer]

I SAID more children use the current illegal drugs, than if the current illegal drugs were legal. ... Maybe you have closed your eyes so much to what we're saying when you read something, you take it for a completely different meaning?

No, really, it's because your theory -- however you choose to word it -- is totally NUTS. That's why.

Your logic would seem to say teenage drinking would be a LARGER problem than it is today, if alcohol was totally illegal, rather than being available at every convenience and grocery store.

This gem of yours really said it all:

The only way we are ever going to have a drug free society, is if you legalize all drugs. The dangers of these substances will then be realized by our children, and we can finally take a step foward in the right direction.

That is such an incredibly, outrageously goofy, utopian prediction, totally devoid of any reality in regard to human nature, it's hardly worth any response.

I don't know what you're using, but it must be some bad-ass stuff, Man. Just don't drive while you're doing it.

Later.

[StringTheory]

Ok, you right there, I was being sarcastic with a completely drug free society.

But the problem with alcohol is adults and the entertainment industry make alcohol very appealing. Thank you Hollywood. What do you think the reaction would be to something like the Budweiser frogs saying "mari" "wan" "na". You would hear from a few angry people. But I'm not sure if we could ever rely on popular culture to regard as drug use as wrong and immoral. But with enough advertising I'm sure would could have a positive impact. But just remember, there won't be any change to what is happening now, there wont be anymore regular users if we legalized.

My contention to that statment is if you legalize the current illegal drugs, we can start off on the right foot. Hopefully the government wouldn't allow their to be any brands... no reason for advertising. Which would prevent the pot frogs from ever happening.

I'm hoping most children will just stick with alcohol or even marijuana and not get into the hard stuff. That's what most studies have shown in countries that have legalized all drugs. How many people have used marijuana in the past month in the US? Currently it’s 10% of the population, how about the Netherlands? Less than half that, only 4.5%. Cocaine? Americans use it 3 times more readily than their Netherlander counterparts. Heroin? America has it too, .3% of the population compared to their .1%. Are you beginning to question are drug laws? Now I don't support the way that they did legalize their drugs, it has caused one problem. But that's becuase their liberal idiots and don't do what needs to be done. Get the drug abusers off the streets and throw them in prison for a while.

What about this? In 1992 when Bill Clinton became president, one of his first moves to gain support was to broadly expand the war on drugs. During Clinton’s first 4 years in office, he spent more on battling drugs than Ronald Reagan and George H. Bush did in 12 years. And the results after tripling funding, what happened to drug use? From 1992 to 1999, marijuana use doubled among adults, and more than doubled among teenagers. Where else in government policy has tripling funding caused a negative impact.

So if it really is that simple, what would you rather have. The same number of drug users while spending tens of billions of dollars trying to force them to stop. Or pass laws were we can focus on keeping the innocent people safe, and let the idiots that want to poison themselves with brain killing chemicals have at it.

I would rather see 100 drug users overdose and kill themselves than see one innocent person die. I hope that's not too heartless. Maybe not.

[StringTheory]

Wow, you again misunderstood what I was saying.

Your logic would seem to say teenage drinking would be a LARGER problem than it is today, if alcohol was totally illegal, rather than being available at every convenience and grocery store.

That's a hypothetical scenario, you have the right to make hypothetical predictions since of course my logic is transgressing into the hypothetical..
but I wasn't talking about alcohol was I, I was talking about the illegal drug known by the name of marijuana. Known back in the 1930's as devil's-weed. I'm sure you've heard this before. Let me get to my point... marijuana will always be available... The question then is... Which is more preferable? Children having someone to buy their marijuana for them... at a government store like liquor in some states... Or... do you want it pushed at them all the way throught school? Marijuana shouldn't be a commodity.

Marijuana that is decriminalized remind you. No brands, thus creating no incentive to adverise, it's preventing product recognition. In this scenerio it's a probably a fact that there would be less marijuana smokers. According to the data in my last post above, it's hard to explain otherwise. If you can I would be willing to read it.

But to get back to your hypothetical, your questioning would more children or people, drink alcohol than now? I don't know... I bet it wouldn't be a whole lot less! During prohibition the people abviously missed alcohol... there were just as many users during prohibion than after.

Also a pointer out. The stress on the american school children... that's becuase of one fact... people after leaving, graduating, whatever from school, who use any illegal drug for the first time, are 5 times less likely to continue to using that drug than a highschool student. It appears the teenage years are the key.

[biblewonk]

Please tell me one way, without legalization, how we can stop our children from selling the crap to each other??

I'll keep making the sexual analogies. Please tell me one way we can get teens to stop having sex before they are married. The answer is that we can't but condoning it is obviously not the solution.

[biblewonk]

stringtheory: So, just how long do you predict it will take before "the dangers of [this substance] will ... be realized by our children, and we can finally take a step foward in the right direction"? Are you saying that's bound to happen once all drugs are legalized (in addition to alcohol)? Please explain.

I didn't think it was a serious statement.

[biblewonk]

That's a hypothetical scenario, you have the right to make hypothetical predictions since of course my logic is transgressing into the hypothetical.. but I wasn't talking about alcohol was I, I was talking about the illegal drug known by the name of marijuana. Known back in the 1930's as devil's-weed. I'm sure you've heard this before. Let me get to my point... marijuana will always be available... The question then is... Which is more preferable? Children having someone to buy their marijuana for them... at a government store like liquor in some states... Or... do you want it pushed at them all the way throught school? Marijuana shouldn't be a commodity.

Marijuana that is decriminalized remind you. No brands, thus creating no incentive to adverise, it's preventing product recognition. In this scenerio it's a probably a fact that there would be less marijuana smokers. According to the data in my last post above, it's hard to explain otherwise. If you can I would be willing to read it.

But to get back to your hypothetical, your questioning would more children or people, drink alcohol than now? I don't know... I bet it wouldn't be a whole lot less! During prohibition the people abviously missed alcohol... there were just as many users during prohibion than after.

Also a pointer out. The stress on the american school children... that's becuase of one fact... people after leaving, graduating, whatever from school, who use any illegal drug for the first time, are 5 times less likely to continue to using that drug than a highschool student. It appears the teenage years are the key.

After trying to make sense out of these sentences I have to think you must be a teenager. That isn't suppose to be an insult, just an observation. Will you admit it if it is true?

[newgeezer]

But just remember, there won't be any change to what is happening now, there wont be anymore regular users if we legalized.

(With more than due respect,) B*llsh*t! As a former daily stoner who quit every time -- including the final time -- due to inconvenience (moving away from college and not knowing where to get it), I can say "B*llsh*t!" to that without ANY reservations.

[MrLeRoy]

They just choose to ignore the obvious

No, they apply Occam's Razor and prefer the simpler theory---people who are disposed to using drugs use drugs, and marijuana is more accessible than other drugs---over some mysterious "gateway" effect for which no biochemical mechanism has ever been proposed, much less demonstrated.

OF COURSE somoene who has already stepped across one line and smokes pot is going to be much less resistant to stepping across another line and try a harder drug.

Then alcohol is THE gateway drug, since most illegal drug users started there. Shall we therefore ban alcohol?