Probably the only thing on which I would agree with Barney Frank.
It's long past time to end the war on drugs. Over a trillion dollars spent on it and what have we gained: militarized police forces, no knock warrants, drug gangs and cartels, corruption of law enforcement, mothers arrested for buying too much cold medicine, citizens and their dogs shot, patients in pain because of doctor intimidation. And the drugs are more readily available than ever.
If people want to harm themselves the government cannot and should not interfere. It's called freedom.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
To: Second Amendment First
Grow my own weed. Grow my own tobacco. Distill my own spirits. All without interfernce or taxation from the government.
Even I can agree with him and I don’t smoke or drink.
Amen Brother Paul, Amen . . .
36 posted on
06/22/2011 1:41:33 PM PDT by
Macoozie
(Go Sarah! Palin/Bolton 2012)
To: Second Amendment First
I’d have to be stoned out of my gourd to vote for either one of them.
49 posted on
06/22/2011 1:51:58 PM PDT by
dblshot
To: Second Amendment First
No need to legalize dope...they’ve already been elected to congress.
53 posted on
06/22/2011 1:54:30 PM PDT by
RasterMaster
(Invoking the spirit of Walt Kowalski,...Please take care of Daisy)
To: Second Amendment First
If pot, why not meth? Heroine? Crack Cocaine?
55 posted on
06/22/2011 1:55:11 PM PDT by
fwdude
(Prosser wins, Goonions lose.)
To: Second Amendment First
During a lightning round where candidates were asked to answer questions about the issues that would give them the most problems during the primaries, both libertarian candidates Paul and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson were asked to defend their liberal stances on drugs. First was Rep. Paul, who Foxs Chris Wallace confronted with his controversial position that drugs and prostitution should be legalized. His unapologetic response elicited cheers from the crowd, as he argues that, just as you dont have the First Amendment so you could talk about the weather, civil liberties do not exist to protect personal rights upon which most agree. He later likened private freedoms like this to religious freedoms, prompting Wallaces follow-up: Are you suggesting that heroin and prostitution are an exercise of liberty? After tripping up a little, Rep. Paul replied yes, then found himself arguing in favor of legalizing heroin, asking, if we legalize heroin tomorrow, is everyone is going use heroin? How many people here would use heroin if it were legal? The question was greeted with cheers, to which Wallace replied with a smile, I never thought heroin would get an applause in South Carolina.
Yeah. I want my kid to have easy access to heroin. [do I need a sarcasm tag or isn't it obvious]
66 posted on
06/22/2011 2:01:46 PM PDT by
McGruff
(Why do they fear her so?)
To: Second Amendment First
Hey, a way to subdue and pacify the public. Expecting that public will be less and less happy in the coming years.
Life sucks? -- LETS GET STONED!
77 posted on
06/22/2011 2:11:28 PM PDT by
dhs12345
To: Second Amendment First
Reps. Frank and Paul: Let states legalize pot
Ron Paul and Barney Frank live in fantasy-land, with unicorns and unisex marriages and other mythical creatures.
Their dope-legalization effort is an invitation for the rest of us to join them.
81 posted on
06/22/2011 2:14:29 PM PDT by
LearsFool
("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
To: Second Amendment First
I'm happy so many Freepers agree with me that this isn't a big deal. I've heard all the arguments, and I see the pros outweighing the cons that legalizing it is such a bad thing.
My big problem is all the damn punker and snobs this will bring from Europe. “I hate everything your country stands for, but Amsterdam made it illegal so this is the only place I can get a legal fix.” Hopefully, they will cling to the big cities and of course does not apply to good, pleasant European tourists.
84 posted on
06/22/2011 2:16:06 PM PDT by
nerdwithagun
(I'd rather go gun to gun then knife to knife.)
To: Second Amendment First
There is no “war on drugs”.
That is like saying there is a “war on bank robbers”.
The dope fiends cry about “a war on drugs” so they have a platform to whine about legalizing drugs.
Unless you want America to slide further down into the sewer then there should be a war on drugs.
To: Second Amendment First
It’s a HORRIBLE idea! My brother lives in LA county and since the legalization of marijuana and all the pot shops showed up everywhere, the quality of life for those who don’t smoke or use drugs has suffered tremendously. You can’t even walk down the street without being accosted by Drug addicts who loiter and it makes an unsafe environment for children. It used to be a fun oddity to visit LA, now its a decrepit pit hole.
93 posted on
06/22/2011 2:26:55 PM PDT by
MissMack99
(BO Stinks!)
To: Second Amendment First
It's long past time to end the war on drugs. Over a trillion dollars spent on it and what have we gained: militarized police forces, no knock warrants, drug gangs and cartels, corruption of law enforcement, mothers arrested for buying too much cold medicine, citizens and their dogs shot, patients in pain because of doctor intimidation. And the drugs are more readily available than ever.
Agree, the WOD is a terrible, costly joke on the American people.
All while big pharma now rakes in *trillions* with half the population using *their* drugs.
95 posted on
06/22/2011 2:27:34 PM PDT by
dragnet2
(Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
To: Second Amendment First
A bipartisan team of Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Ron Paul, R-Texas, will introduce federal legislation that would permit states to legalize, regulate, tax and control marijuana without federal interference. First, they need to repeal the Constitutional Amendment that made this a Federal issue....oh, wait, nevermind!
To: Second Amendment First
Bawney, I think you are misunderstanding the term “Sucking on a joint.”
To: Second Amendment First
Aren’t these folks late to the party? States like Kalefornia and the People’s Republic of Colorado already have De facto legalized pot sales at the corner “Medicinal Marijuana” Storefronts. Maybe they mean those terrible backward states that arrest drug dealers and aren’t really on board with the new cigarette packages. Smoke dooby good, smoke tobacco bad! If they collected a 300% tax the idea would be palatable, except that it would put more money in the hands of the elected criminals.
100 posted on
06/22/2011 2:35:58 PM PDT by
Steamburg
(The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
To: Second Amendment First
To: Second Amendment First
Wow, I feel wierd agreeing with Barney Frank.
But a broken watch is still right twice a day.
112 posted on
06/22/2011 2:55:37 PM PDT by
Ueriah
To: jimrob
Looks like I logged into Libertarian Republic.
119 posted on
06/22/2011 3:57:30 PM PDT by
McGruff
(Why do they fear her so?)
To: Second Amendment First
look at it this way... if pot were legal and free(if you grew it) prolly a half a billion dollars would go into the US economy instead of going to the pot growers in mexco
120 posted on
06/22/2011 4:05:40 PM PDT by
Chode
(American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
To: Second Amendment First
I agree with Barney. Let the states decide. I want to live in a state where pot is leagal and marrige is only allowed between a man and a woman.
163 posted on
06/22/2011 5:35:05 PM PDT by
TBall
To: Second Amendment First
More stoners= more Obama voters
259 posted on
06/23/2011 8:55:56 PM PDT by
dennisw
(NZT - "works better if you're already smart")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson