Posted on 12/10/2015 10:17:56 AM PST by ConservingFreedom
NAPLES, FL - They're normally the guys locking people up for marijuana possession, but a group of current and former law enforcement officers will meet in Naples to push for people's right to get high.
Not all law enforcement officers are on board, however. Legalizing marijuana, it's a hot-button issue in Florida.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition is pushing for the change to save taxpayer dollars and valuable resources.
"Sixty-thousand people get arrested every year for marijuana possession. That's a waste of law-enforcement resources," said Ray Strack of LEAP.
The group meets Thursday in Naples. The Florida Sheriff's Association is not on board with the plan or Charlotte County Sheriff Bill Prummel.
"No, I don't want to see that in Florida. We want to be known for our sunshine, our beaches, and Mickey Mouse. We don't want to be known for marijuana," said Sheriff Bill Prummell. "I'm just kind of surprised that fellow law enforcement are 'pro' this."
At the top of Thursday's agenda? Promoting initiatives to legalize recreational marijuana.
"We believe strongly in a regulated market. That's what we have [with] alcohol and tobacco," said Strack.
We found people Wednesday who said the current pot penalties are a waste of time.
"I think people would be surprised there's a lot of up-standing people that do it; they just haven't gotten caught," said Punta Gorda resident David Choken.
But Sheriff Prummel said catching pot smokers usually leads to other crimes.
"I don't see it as a waste of time because, like I stated before, they're likely involved in something else, or they're going to expand into something."
The meeting is free and open to the public Thursday at 6 p.m. at the Collier County Library Headquarters in Naples. If you plan on going, you can expect to learn about three amendments focused on the decriminalization of marijuana.
BTW, some would argue that the politicians did not want or allow victory in the war on drugs. Rather, in the past boot-leg politicians used money and influence in league with organized crime to have anything they wanted as our new breed of nefarious politicians and lawyers support drug runners today.
Politicians did not allow victory in the war on drugs in the past and will not allow in the future.
“We need law to regulate individuals in society that do not have the intelligence or ability to regulate themselves.”
You don’t speak for the collective “we”, buddy. I prefer a system based on individual liberty and personal responsibility to a paternalistic state that thinks it needs to intervene in my life “for my own good”.
Yes Boogie, please do NOt misunderstand my post. But, society MUST regulate by law those incompetent to regulate themselves, i.e. rape, theft, murder. You may not have read my prior threads/ posts but I am a very conservative, constitutional patriot
BTW, I’m NOT a fella! LOL
When I see the words "behaving in a manner that negatively affects the quality of life of others" I think of something like the liberals saying we should stop using internal combustion engines because of the effect on the environment.
It's interesting to see the viewpoint presented that simple consumption of a plant is the equivalent of rape, theft, or murder.
Looking at women wearing ugly "fashions" negatively affects my quality of life - is that government's business?
Therefore, we have laws to: protect people against themselves,
So government should ban smoking and overeating?
enforce the rights of others
Selling and using pot violates no rights - no person has the "right" to demand that another person not use pot.
and solve conflicts justly.
In Florida specifically, politicians and attorneys continue to place the legalization of pot on the ballot even though it voters have repeatedly rejected the proposition to legalize pot.
So? The voters can keep voting against it - doesn't sound much like "organized criminals".
If medical marijuana is necessary,m pharmaceutical companies develop pills that administer exact dosages per pill.
Pills are harder to titrate because slower-onset ... and can be hard for patients with nausea to keep down.
Yes, prohibition did result in decreased consumption of alcohol.
So you claim.
Rape, theft, and murder violate the rights of unwilling victims - pot sale and use involve only willing participants.
Politicians did not allow victory in the war on drugs in the past and will not allow in the future.
Another reason not to entrust government to the task of reducing drug use ... leave it to a new temperance movement of noncoercive social pressure and public education.
Do you agree that under the Tenth Amendment, the states should decide on intrastate mj legalization?
hmmm, well, most crimes i.e. murder, embezzlement, DUI, theft etc. are against the law in every state.. so
No, there is no correlation to internal combustion engines... pick the felony of your choice. However, pot, alcolonism, heroin addiction can directly relate to rape, theft & murder [I’m originally from Detroit]
Not quality of life.,. LIFE!
Drugs DIRECTLY puts others in society at risk. If folks want pot so badly have them turn in their Drivers Licenses!
These politicians and attorneys continue to place the legalization of pot on the ballot WHILE setting up & investing into a dispersal system.
If medical marijuana is necessary, the pharmaceutical companies can develop pills, capsules, & even suppositories that would THEN administer exact standardized dosages per pill rather than random quantity of drug now.
hmmm, well, most crimes i.e. murder, embezzlement, DUI, theft etc. are against the law in every state.. so
I am not sure what you mean. Is your answer 'yes' or 'no'?
If you meant a correlation to commission of felonies it might have been better to say that than saying we need to have federal laws against "behaving in a manner that negatively affects the quality of life of others". When my neighbor mows his lawn while I'm listening to my stereo it negatively affects my quality of life.
As to whether there should actually be a prohibition on marijuana due to it correlating to felonies, I'd argue that the prohibition leads to more serious crime than does marijuana itself.
Alcohol prohibition is what led to the huge increase in organized crime in the early 20th century. Murders as the gangs fought over their share of the enormous profits now possible. Buying of police, judges, and politicians.
The same situation has resulted from the prohibition of marijuana. If it was legal to buy, sell, and grow in the US, we wouldn't have a narco state on our southern border and we wouldn't have illegal grow operations in our national parks and national forests. Because of the profits, there is undoubtedly more corruption in the US. And who can really blame the people being corrupted? If somebody offers to either pay you in silver or lead, either look the other way while we commit our crimes or don't, most people would choose the silver if they believe the threat of the lead to be real. Take away the profit incentive of the smuggling or illegal grow operations (whether on public land or private) and you not only stop the smuggling but stop the corrupting of government employees becoming complicit in the crime.
“If you meant a correlation to commission of felonies”
YES
As to whether there should actually be a prohibition on marijuana due to it correlating to felonies
YES
Alcohol prohibition is what led to the huge increase in organized crime in the early 20th century. Murders as the gangs fought over their share of the enormous profits now possible. Buying of police, judges, and politicians.
YES, LET THE THUGS TAKE EACH OTHER OUT ALONG WITH CORRUPT POLITICIANS
PROSECUTE. We have more than enough attorneys
NO, YOU WANT TO ALLOW WHAT IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION & GANGSTERS THAT REFUSE TO HONOR AND OBEY THE RULE OF LAW? THEN, YOU NO LONGER HAVE A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE RULE OF LAWS BUT RATHER ABJECT CORRUPTION, DEBAUCHERY AND DEGENERACY. CONCEPTUAL COROLLARY: I DON’T WANT THERE TO BE ETERNAL PUNISHMENT SO I REJECT THE CONCEPT OF HELL.
Even then though, there were people like you that thought there was only a need for stricter enforcement.
You are entitled to your opinion.
Looking at women wearing ugly "fashions" negatively affects my quality of life - is that government's business?
Not quality of life.,. LIFE!
"Quality of life" was YOUR criterion - see above. Your continually changing your argument suggests that you don't know why you believe what you believe.
Drugs DIRECTLY puts others in society at risk. If folks want pot so badly have them turn in their Drivers Licenses!
No, drug use IN COMBINATION WITH DRIVING puts others in society at risk. That's no more an argument for banning drugs than it is for banning cars.
In Florida specifically, politicians and attorneys continue to place the legalization of pot on the ballot even though it voters have repeatedly rejected the proposition to legalize pot.
So? The voters can keep voting against it - doesn't sound much like "organized criminals".
These politicians and attorneys continue to place the legalization of pot on the ballot WHILE setting up & investing into a dispersal system.
How does preparing for possible new legal opportunities, while attempting through legal means to bring about those opportunities, make them like organized criminals?
If medical marijuana is necessary,m pharmaceutical companies develop pills that administer exact dosages per pill.
Pills are harder to titrate because slower-onset ... and can be hard for patients with nausea to keep down.
If medical marijuana is necessary, the pharmaceutical companies can develop pills, capsules, & even suppositories
Capsules and even suppositories are harder to titrate because slower-onset.
that would THEN administer exact standardized dosages per pill rather than random quantity of drug now.
Legal regulated marijuana is of known and controlled potency.
No, you have a conservative recognition of the limits to what good government can bring about. Government resources ( = taxpayer money) can no more bring about an end to "debauchery and degeneracy" than they can an end to poverty.
(And please STOP SHOUTING. It doesn't make your case any stronger.)
Capitalization for emphasis is a technique used when repetition has not assisted comprehension. Changing the law to no longer criminalize “debauchery and degeneracy” may be expedient by merely the ultimate capitul ation.
(And please STOP SHOUTING. It doesn't make your case any stronger.)
Capitalization for emphasis
fails to achieve its ends when overused as in capitalizing 60 consecutive words.
Changing the law to no longer criminalize "debauchery and degeneracy"
A great deal of "debauchery and degeneracy" is already legal; is government authorized or competent to exert force against, say, fornication?
may be expedient
Straw man - the issue is not expedience but a conservative recognition of the limits to the good that government can bring about. Government resources ( = taxpayer money) can no more bring about an end to "debauchery and degeneracy" than they can an end to poverty.
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.