Posted on 10/14/2003 1:53:04 AM PDT by ambrose
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:06:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
MISLEADING TITLE ALERT
Interesting. Rush could be a drug worshipper and a Rush basher himself, at the same time.
Thanks for coming clean with your real objections to marijuana relegalization.
They just deliver to where you're getting a Rooty Tooty Fresh and Fruity.
You are such a fool.
L
Last time I knew, there was no law on the books saying you couldn't drink your own pee. You and I of course wouldn't do it...well, at least I know I wouldn't do it, unless I was lost in the desert and had no other means of liquids...and even then, it would take alot of thinking on.
"Rush took drugs to make himself feel better. Fact is, everyone taking drugs does it for that same reason."
There's no problem with Rush or anyone else taking prescription drugs as long as they are prescribed by a physician. There are still laws in this country. Unfortunately for some folks however, the law of the land isn't "If it feels good, do it!"
No, it isn't. It isn't about history and tradition, either. It's about control, fear, and manipulation.
I used to ride motorcycles barefoot at 100+ mph. Silly me. Never got hurt -- but that's because I wised up. Friends of mine have lost their feet, others their midsections to telephone poles, thumbs to grated bridges, heads to guardrails. Mz. Cocaine loves you dead or alive.
Yeah right.... It's usually the anti-wod folks who're hopping from thread to thread and calling everyone dopers and crack-heads. Wanna make a bet that I could pick 10 WOD threads at random and come up with 90% figure for the WODders being the first to start the namecalling idiocy?
KaBOOM! Any other races/ethnicities or classes of people you don't want influencing our culture?
I nominate Rush as the first 'small time' user for the gallows.
Waddya say buddy? You want to pull the lever?
L
To all lurkers who want to know the damage repression of liberty can do to a society, do a google search with the words, "Opium Wars". The inability to control one's destiny led to an escapism that devastated 19th century China, a historical fact that is lost on many tyrannts, IMO.
That's what they told Rosa Parks as she sat in the front of the bus. You are on the wrong side of liberty on this one and laws will be overturned.
Find where I've done that.
that all cops are criminals,
Find where I've said that.
and our "rights" are being taken from us because there are laws against drug use,
Find where I've said that (hint, there might have been a few times where I've said that, but I certainly can't remember them).
However, be sure to count the "neo" labels (in the various forms), the "Bushie" labels, the "Rhino" labels, along with the assertions that those who believe the idea of legalizing drugs to be both immoral and politically stupid
I could see the RINO label being a problem, but if WODders don't like being called "neoconservatives" then they should consider adopting a different philosophy. Do you also want me to count use of the word "person?" This might be a more difficult task if you want me to actually dig to see if a label like "Bushie" is misapplied; it should not be counted as an insult when used with reference to a genuine Bushie.
to be thick of skull, unable to understand the deep thinkers and the true partriot platoons at FR
Not sure where that comes from either. Most anti-wod people around here don't paint themselves as deep thinkers as it's really childsplay to figure out that prohibition generates a black market and a criminal supply line. As far as being true patriots, an inability to abide by the constitution does not necessarily exempt one from that class.
"those who believe the idea of legalizing drugs to be immoral .. unable to understand the deep thinkers and the true partriot platoons at FR" Nor do you know history.
Here, for your and dennisw's edification is some history:
The Addiction Doctor
History of Drug Laws
The Harrison Narcotic Act[excerpt]
Even so, the process of passing and enacting the Harrison Act was difficult. Trade organizations, such as the American Medical Association and the American Pharmaceutical Association, were concerned about the infringement of the federal government into the practice of doctors and pharmacists. Manufacturers of patent medications were concerned about loss of sales and profits. The Treasury Department, which would be responsible for promulgating the Act, questioned its enforceability. Many legislators were of the opinion that a federal law overseeing what was usually considered a matter for state governments would eventually be ruled unconstitutional. Many of these concerns were subordinated to the growing fear of widespread drug addiction, especially among minority groups. Hamilton Wright embarked on a crusade to convince professional organizations, law enforcement bodies and legislators that restriction of prescribing, sales and possession of drugs was imperative. Much of the debate centered on racial issues. Cocaine was believed to make the Southern Black male impervious to bullets, and to generally encourage rebellion against laws designed to restrict the rights of African Americans. Opium was believed to be used by Chinese men to seduce women into white slavery. Marijuana was believed to make Mexican migrants bold enough to challenge oppressive working conditions. Every attempt was made to link drugs to specific minority groups. By race-baiting, popular support for narcotic legislation grew.
The Harrison Act was passed in 1914. Originally, it was meant to be a registration law: doctors, pharmacists and vendors would submit paperwork on all drug transactions. But the Treasury Department quickly used violations of the law to shut down legitimate practices as well as dope clinics and illicit drug stores. The Harrison Act contained no specific wording about the prescription of narcotics by doctors in the treatment of drug addiction. The Treasury Department assumed that any prescription for a narcotic given to a drug addict by a physician or pharmacist – even in the course of medical treatment for addiction - constituted conspiracy to violate the Harrison Act. Restricting the practice of medicine was not the original intent of the Harrison Act, but following two 5-4 Supreme Court decisions (U.S. vs. Jin Fuey Moy, 1916 and U.S. v. Doremus, 1919) the court held that the federal government could assume that a physician’s prescription of a narcotic for the comfort or maintenance of an addict was a violation of the “good faith” practice of medicine, and therefore a criminal violation. Thousands of arrests were made – of physicians, pharmacists and addicts.
The War on Drugs had begun.
Race and the Drug War: History of ProhibitionA century ago opiates and cocaine were freely available and used both medicinally and recreationally by people throughout the U.S. Scores of patent medicines, elixirs and liquid concoctions contained substantial amounts of opium or cocaine. Studies published between 1871 and 1922 paint a striking portrait of the typical opiate or cocaine addict in the early 20th century: a middle aged, rural, middle- or upper-class White woman.(1) The peak of opiate dependence in the United States occurred near the turn of the century, when the number of addicts was estimated at close to 250,000 in a population of 76 million -- a rate never again equaled.(2) Yet despite the relative prevalence of addiction, the prevailing attitude at the time was that drug addiction was a health problem, best treated by physicians and pharmacists.
Public attitudes about drug use began to change as perceptions about drug users shifted. Opposition to opium smoking grew as it was increasingly linked to Chinese immigrants in the western United States. Strong anti-Chinese sentiment, exacerbated by a growing fear of competitive cheap Chinese labor, led to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which forbade further immigration. Reports that the upper classes were taking up opium smoking in New York and other cities led to heightened alarm. Fears that respectable white women were being seduced into a life of prostitution and debauchery in opium dens were inflamed by vivid reports. In 1902, the Committee on the Acquirement of the Drug Habit of the American Pharmaceutical Association declared: "If the 'Chinaman' cannot get along without his 'dope,' we can get along without him." In 1909 the United States' international war on drugs began when California prohibited the importation of smokeable opium.
In 1910 Dr. Hamilton Wright, considered by some the father of U.S. anti-narcotics laws, reported that U.S. contractors were giving cocaine to their Black employees to get more work out of them.(3) A few years later, stories began to proliferate about "cocaine-crazed Negroes" in the South who had run amuck. The New York Times published a story that alleged "most of the attacks upon white women of the South are the direct result of the 'cocaine-crazed' Negro brain." The story asserted that "Negro cocaine fiends are now a known Southern menace." Some southern police departments switched to .38 caliber revolvers, because they thought cocaine made Blacks impervious to .32 caliber bullets.(4) These stories were in part motivated by a desire to persuade Southern members of Congress to support the proposed Harrison Narcotics Act, which would greatly expand the federal government's power to control drugs.(5) This lie was also necessary since, even though drugs were widely used in America, very little crime was associated with the users.(6)
When marijuana was popularized in the 20s and 30s in the American jazz scene, Blacks and Whites sat down as equals and smoked together. The racist anti-marijuana propaganda of the time used this crumbling of racial barriers as an example of the degradation caused by marijuana. Harry Anslinger, head of the newly formed federal narcotics division, warned middle-class leaders about Blacks and Whites dancing together in "teahouses," using blatant prejudice to sell prohibition.(7) In 1931 New Orleans officials attributed many of the region's crimes to marijuana, which they believed was also a dangerous sexual stimulant. During the Great Depression, the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act came into law, again using racism as its chief selling point. The same Mexicans who were vying with out of work Americans for the few agricultural jobs available, it was said, engaged in marijuana induced violence against Americans.
Thanks for the tip, Dane. You're so smart!
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.