Cannabis should be decriminalized for the same reasons that alcohol is

The Prometheus Institute ^ | 8/28/2006 | Editorial

[tang0r]

It turns out that alcohol is legal for the simplest, most nostalgic, and most American reason of all. Despite its risks and harmful side-effects, adults are reserved right to drink because they are independent adults in a free country. For all of the empty rhetoric about economics and black markets, the end of Prohibition was due to a single principle: even if drinking may be bad for society, government has no right to keep the people from doing it. The ability to get drunk is an inalienable right that we have forever confirmed with the 18th Amendment.

[mugs99]

Yes...It's the first 'enviro' movie and so overacted it's funny, but a classic!
Delicious and Nutritious Soylent Green...lol
.

[monkfan]

cool beans. I'll watch it real quick before the nannies ban it.

[philman_36]

I'm somewhat new here...
Oh, that was easily enough determinable. If you hover your mouse over your own screen name you'll see a date pop up. Sometimes that alone brings grief. Wade through the probable "newbie bashing" phase and you should be okay.
...and I thought the readers would get it.
Well, that varies by poster. Some do and some don't, as you've witnessed earlier.
Am I supposed to spell out sarcasm and hyperbole?
You can, though it isn't necessary. One does so with an "/sarcasm" at the end of the reply. Sometimes an emoticon can be utilized. ( {;^)...for example...note the wink) A seperate posting is sometimes used for such things. (like with the onion) There have been several interesting threads over the years with folks tripping all over the place.
Sometimes it's kind of fun, and funny, watching people "trip" then showing them the very small crack they've tripped over.
The reactions of posters are often determining factors in the opinions others form of them. Some people just don't get the joke, and they can't take a joke either.

Now that that is over, quit responding to me. I'm an overbearing ogre (purportedly) and certain somebodies might get the wrong impression of you if you keep it up.

P.S. There is an HTML Sandbox here if you aren't familiar with HTML. If you are, post away. BTW, welcome to FR.

[philman_36]

The libertarian utopia that you are advocating is no better then the socialist utopia that is espoused elsewhere !!!
Kirk wishes libertarianism to be equated with socialism, thus denigrating/demeaning it and hopefully distancing/insulating others from such concepts.
Is that why you keep going back to the libertarian rants, kirk. Libertarian concepts must worry you horribly else you wouldn't kick against the stall so forcefully.
It's nothing but Saran Wrap...you can see right through it.

[philman_36]

He doesn't seem to want you to...
Probably not.
...but why don't you anyway? Come on, do it for the lurkers.
Why? They've seen it before and they don't do anything but continue to lurk. They're tiring on me. Newbies jump into the fray quicker than the lurkers.
Besides, you don't hand out ammunition to someone who never intends to fire their weapon, do you?
(well, in retrospect, when an opponent is firing blanks I guess it doesn't really matter...the thinking must be...let others fight the fight while I comfortably hide in my foxhole, never considering that a large, concerted push will drive the opponent from the field)

I guess they fear giving offense...
Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings. Patrick Henry

[freedom moose]

If you want to go bankrupt on this, that's your business, but I'd rather you left me out of it. Quit reaching into my pocket to fund your so-called war.

Since I'm about 100% sure osideplanner was being sarcastic and you missed it, it's possible that you were also being sarcastic by pretending not to get his sarcasm and I missed it. But I don't think so.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

#2. Also, moderate amounts of beer and wine (why did you leave out a good bottle of cab?) are good for your health (anyone over 40).

[DungeonMaster]

The burden of proof is on those who are sqaundering taxpayer money on a failed moral crusade. Can you show any progress to justify the billions spent on this crusade to rid society of temptation?

Actually it's not. Pro drug people are the ones that have to make a case and so far the case is pretty weak. Claiming that more people are on drugs because it is illegal is laughable.

There is only one factor. The Drug War is an un Constitutional religious crusade that is responsible for 80% of the citizens locked away in our dungeons. Today, the USA keeps more than two million people behind bars -- compared with only 200,000 three decades ago...thanks to the drug war.

1.6 million people are in jail for selling or taking drugs?

Keeping people from destroying themselves and their neighbors with drugs is hardly a religious crusade. Society is simply not capable of living without laws.

The drug war is evil and anyone who supports it is evil.

Drugs are evil and...

[DungeonMaster]

Yes, actually the prohibited status of drugs is largely responsible. I posted a link to one bit of research on this in #230. I can give you more if you like.

If drugs destroy families then drugs are clearly bad. If a destroyed family resorts to drug dealing instead of honest work then drugs are clearly bad. Liberal welfare policy is what is destroying families and filling prisons.

[ActionNewsBill]

But without question there needs to be some limit on a persons' ability to destroy their lives.

...there's a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there's too much freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it."
-- Bill Clinton, 3-22-94, MTV's "Enough is Enough"

" The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people"
--Bill Clinton, during an interview on MTV in 1993

[in hoc signo vinces]

yeah, of course it is, but in not so great numbers...so, hey, let's just legalize the stuff and have it happen in even greater numbers....remember (other than welfare dole, wich isnt cradle to grave) we arent a true nanny nation (like Holland) that can have an entire nation on the government dole and could still exist with a nation of unemployed (or underemployed), unproductive, X-Box playing stoners...

Whether or not it's going on right now, doesnt matter...the last thing we need is legislation that in "any" way encourages sloth...and just enables a bad situation to grow.

[Ouderkirk]

You all seem to want to pry me off my position that drugs should remain illegal. The liberty, cost of enforcement, right to privacy, how does it hurt me, etc..

Drugs have been illegal for all of my 45 years on earth and quite frankly all of your arguments to legalize them are specious at best. You want to question my critical thinking skills...hey knock yourself out.

I have no interest in living in a society such as the one you advocate, and since the majority of the citizens (more importantly the majority of voters) do not share your enthusiasm for fresh experiences, drugs will remain illegal for the foreseeable future.

Your quotes of Clinton are a nice try to paint me as a socialist/statist. Aren't you so smart.

You don't seem to think that there are any negative consequences for making drugs legal. It's all going to be just a happy place and we can all sing kumbaya.

Right...good luck with that. You're going to need it.

[ActionNewsBill]

Your quotes of Clinton are a nice try to paint me as a socialist/statist.

You painted yourself with that brush.

It's hillarious how folks like you call themselves conservative when your thinking is more in line with that of the liberals.

[osideplanner]

are you being sarcastic? LOL

[osideplanner]

Thank you.

[delphirogatio]

So basically this person admits that they have insufficient data to arrive at a conclusive determination...and then proceeds to do so.

Nevertheless, my comment stands...we hear very frequently about people on drugs committing crimes. They then go on to say that, but for their drug habit, they wouldn't be committing the crimes. How manty treatment professionals have you heard of advocating legalization as a way to help?

[monkfan]

"Since I'm about 100% sure osideplanner was being sarcastic and you missed it, it's possible that you were also being sarcastic by pretending not to get his sarcasm and I missed it. But I don't think so."

You were right the second time. The part you missed is that it's been addressed twice already. Or, more likey, you're at the beginning of the thread and haven't made it to the part where I eat crow. Patience my friend...

[mugs99]

Claiming that more people are on drugs because it is illegal is laughable.

That is the claim of law enforcement officers, DEA agents, prosecutors and judges who are fighting the drug war.

"The stated goals of current U.S.drug policy -- reducing crime, drug addiction, and juvenile drug use -- have not been achieved, even after nearly four decades of a policy of "war on drugs". This policy, fueled by over a trillion of our tax dollars has had little or no effect on the levels of drug addiction among our fellow citizens, but has instead resulted in a tremendous increase in crime and in the numbers of Americans in our prisons and jails. With 4.6% of the world's population, America today has 22.5% of the worlds prisoners. But, after all that time, after all the destroyed lives and after all the wasted resources, prohibited drugs today are cheaper, stronger, and easier to get than they were thirty-five years ago at the beginning of the so-called "war on drugs"...Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

All you have to do is click on the link and read the volumes of documented fact, but you just can't do that...
.

[monkfan]

scratch that. You were right the first and third time, but not the second. I'm off to another bad start today...

[philman_36]

Thank you.
My pleasure.