Skip to comments.
Officers in Call to Legalise Use of Drugs
Edinburgh Evening News (UK) ^
| 14 Apr 2006
Posted on 04/15/2006 2:21:22 PM PDT by Know your rights
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 221-226 next last
To: Sir Francis Dashwood
You sound like a Jack Chick tract.
To: tpaine
"Under our Constitution, legislators shall make no law respecting the theories,establishments, dogmas, etc, of the Catholic Church, nor any other religion."Like I said, then don't ask for a religious source of our laws.
To: muawiyah
Controlling and regulating something does give the cops the privilege of pushing around the users doesn't it?That's exactly the problem; anyone not violating the natural rights of others (nor posing clear and present danger of such violation) shouldn't be pushed around at all by anyone.
83
posted on
04/17/2006 3:40:00 PM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: robertpaulsen
"Dry" states, however, found that alcohol was being shipped in from "wet" states. They petitioned the federal government for help and Congress passed the Webb-Kenyon Act, forbidding this activity. It wasn't effectiveTough beans. Who ever promised any state that they could effectively enforce any damn-fool law that entered their heads?
84
posted on
04/17/2006 3:43:30 PM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: muawiyah
Having grown up next door to a Mafia soldier, I can assure you that the black market for alcohol never disappeared. It's alive and thriving.Have any evidence, or are we supposed to just take your word for it?
85
posted on
04/17/2006 3:44:43 PM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: Know your rights; pennboricua
Well, whatever place "natural rights" has in this argument, I was responding to a statement by Pennboricua which was: "Way to go, they should do the same here in the USA, when prohibition was revoked, we did not see as far as I know excessive use of alcohol, it was regulated, licensed, controlled.."
Regulation, licensing and control necessarily entail the use, to one degree or the other, of LEO.
In the end recombinant DNA technology is going to take care of the problem of "natural herbs" by allowing for the displacement of the crops you have come to know by those which turn into alcohol if heated to 180 degrees (due to an enzyme produced by the modified genome).
We know how to handle alcohol if not MJ.
86
posted on
04/17/2006 3:49:28 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: Know your rights
"Who ever promised any state that they could effectively enforce any damn-fool law that entered their heads?"So turning the drug legalization decision over to the individual states, therefore, would be pointless. Why, then, do you support this approach?
To: Know your rights
Sure, he got arrested toting cocaine at the age of 80.
You want his name, or what?
88
posted on
04/17/2006 3:51:02 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
"Well, whatever place "natural rights" has in this argument"None whatsoever, in that it's a philosphical libertarian approach to writing laws, having no connection to history or reality.
BUT, if you buy into it, MrLeRoy's job to convince you to legalize his precious drugs is that much easier.
To: Dan Evans
after they become invalids from drug abuse?What you mean after, square? Free drugs, free crib, free food, free condoms, free sex, NOW, NOW, NOW dude!
90
posted on
04/17/2006 4:01:33 PM PDT
by
Navy Patriot
(Another handgun jumps to the aid of a person in danger.)
To: robertpaulsen
All these guys have done is convince me that recombinant DNA technology MUST resolve the natural herb issue ~ turn them all into "franken herbs".
Reduce them to chewing and swallowing the stuff ~ no smoking allowed or it's a Richard Pryor "head trip" first ~ running downhill with their hair on fire sort of thing.
91
posted on
04/17/2006 4:03:39 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Why couldn't that same technology be used to say, create a THC producing tomato? Or coca producing Kudzoo?
To: somniferum
Recombinant DNA tech is expensive.
93
posted on
04/17/2006 4:49:19 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Cartels' could muster a large R&D budget.
To: somniferum
Still, your typical cartel manager is the type of guy who's going to go out and hire junkie scientists because he can get them for a pile of coke a week.
There's nothing cool about a narcotrafficante.
95
posted on
04/17/2006 5:07:15 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Oh, no doubt about that. However, if faced with extinction by a 'silver bullet' technology such as you are describing, the multi-billion dollar industry (the people at the top of it anyway) would probably commit significant resources to overcoming the technology.
To: somniferum
That would be contrary to their "risk model". 100% of the growing is done by people OUTSIDE the marketing network.
If fields are burned, the narcotrafficantes suffer no loss.
We'll have the new seed, weed and bush in place, growing invisibly among the old stuff before these guys catch on.
I suppose a sign of a bad crop would be if we stopped using herbicides on it.
97
posted on
04/17/2006 5:17:31 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Maybe I am just overestimating the intel gathering capabilities of these organizations (Too much TV! =P)
To: Sir Francis Dashwood
it is CHEMICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE! So you think we should have a declaration of war, and deploy the military to the streets to engage the enemy?
99
posted on
04/17/2006 5:28:55 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: robertpaulsen
Does Congress have to power to prohibit certain types of commerce among the several states -- in other words, does the phrase "to regulate" include (among other things) "to prohibit"?"Certain types"? Pray tell what types of "commerce" does your interpretation of the Commerce Clause preclude Congress from regulating?
100
posted on
04/17/2006 5:31:29 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 221-226 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