Federal court says yes, you can talk about pot

American Medical News ^ | Nov. 18, 2002 | Tanya Albert, AMNews staff

[Illbay]

Wrong. FIRST the decision should be made by the people of each state, whether these substances should be legal at all for any reason.

You and I both know that despite all the silly arguments, people know what pot is, and what it's for. Here you have Nevada, one of the most permissive states in the union, and pot couldn't get even close to approval.

This "let the doctor and patient decide" garbage is just the most outrageous red-herring.

people don't want the camel in the tent with them, so when its nose appears, they whack it with a club.

[ActionNewsBill]

"Medical marijuana," what a joke!

You and your failed drug war are the biggest jokes around Illbay.

The fact that there are myriads of other medications, each of which are far better for the purpose than pot, not to mention the fact that THC can be extracted, and even synthesized...these are things you "medical marijuana" frauds won't even address.

I'll take the advice of these doctors rather than believe anything that comes out of your keyboard.

[jayef]

I've already asked you once Illbay. I thought we had an understanding. As far as anyone forcing me into rehab. You better come strong buddy. I mean real strong.

[Illbay]

Yet more myth from the reality-challenged: The drug war has "failed."

LOL!

We have more of you little creeps behind bars than ever, and you aren't running around on the streets, committing more crimes to feed your sad habit, killing our children while behind the wheel of a car, and generally making the world sh*tty with your presence.

That's SUCCESS, buddy.

Keep it up, and you can go join your friends in the slammer. That's be my pleaure to see, I can assure you.

[realpatriot71]

Nowhere in the Constitution is it prohibited to commit murder. Therefore, if the real-world version of Tony Soprano wants to rub someone out, it's his "God-given right."

Straw man - right to life is an established inalienable principle. Your comparisan is juvenile.

[Illbay]

Two groups of miscreants who can absolutely count on having us "come strong": The Iraqi Armed Forces, and the dopers.

Remember, "buddy," there are a LOT more of us than there are of you.

[ActionNewsBill]

Keep it up, and you can go join your friends in the slammer. That's be my pleaure to see, I can assure you.

And may you be blessed with some goons from your local SWAT team breaking down your door at 3 AM looking for drugs. It's not just the "guilty" who are threatened by your drug war, Illbay.

We have more of you little creeps behind bars than ever, and you aren't running around on the streets, committing more crimes to feed your sad habit, killing our children while behind the wheel of a car, and generally making the world sh*tty with your presence.

I would rather have drug users on every block in my town than to have to live anywhere near a pathetic fascist like yourself.

[RJCogburn]

Wrong. FIRST the decision should be made by the people of each state, whether these substances should be legal at all for any reason

We disagree.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

That's where your argument gets shot clear to h*ll (as it did last week in Nevada).

Question for you: who was campaigning ad nauseum against the Nevada ballot question? Wasn't a federal official now, was it?

You've been trumpeting the fact that all states have drug laws, it's a state issue, etc., but the plain fact of the matter is that the Federal government is using the bully pulpit to push the Drug War on the states. And it's much more than rhetoric. It's money, it's power, it's political influence.

When the Feds stay out of it, you may very well get a different tune altogether in the states: SIXTY percent of Massachusetts voters asked a nonbinding ballot question about marijuana decriminalization voted for decriminalization. Sixty percent.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

We have more of you little creeps behind bars than ever, and you aren't running around on the streets, committing more crimes to feed your sad habit, killing our children while behind the wheel of a car, and generally making the world sh*tty with your presence.

Is this some sort of Viagra pill for you or something? Jesus Horatio Christ, you sound as if you actually get off hearing about people getting thrown in the brig for smoking a plant. What a petty little man you must be behind your keyboard.

[jayef]

So now posse commitatus laws mean nothing in your dope war. Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton are rolling over in their graves. Go threaten somebody else, old man!

[PaxMacian]

Pax: What more basic God given right can there be then to determine what you consume?

Ill: That's an odd statement. The most basic God given right would be that of self-protection.

Pax: I beg to differ, sustenance comes before protection if it is not a form of protection itself,(as in an aid to better health)

[robertpaulsen]

That was a non-binding ballot -- I look at it as more of a polling question than a vote. Neveda had similar expectations, but when it came down to a real vote, the people spoke their true thoughts. But the important point is that the Massachusetts vote was for decriminalization, not legalization. Huge difference.

As a matter of fact, I've seen polls where 72% of people were in favor of some type of decriminalization -- so I wouldn't be bragging about Massachusetts' paltry 60%.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

That was a non-binding ballot -- I look at it as more of a polling question than a vote. Neveda had similar expectations, but when it came down to a real vote, the people spoke their true thoughts.

I know exactly what it was---I was actually presented with the ballot question---and I draw a different inference from the results than you do. The results tell me that without any outside influence from either side, without the Drug Warriors crying hippies with guns on the streets and the MJ weirdos waxing eloquent about how MJ cures cancer and allows airplanes to fly, 60% of those polled said yes, they'd prefer that marijuana "offenses" be handled administratively vice criminally.

But the important point is that the Massachusetts vote was for decriminalization, not legalization. Huge difference.

As a matter of fact, I've seen polls where 72% of people were in favor of some type of decriminalization -- so I wouldn't be bragging about Massachusetts' paltry 60%.

As a practical manner, how do you believe decrim differs from legalization?

[PaxMacian]

Illbay: You're one of those "Christians for Cannabis" types, I guess. Sort of like "Radical Islamists for Peace."

Christian? Yes, first and foremost.
for cannabis? Yes, and coincendentally so is the Bible and God.
I am nothing like a radical follower of a heretical false prophet.
Though, peace is something all should be 'for'

[philman_36]

That's the way a Republic works.
In their frustration, those who are greatly outnumbered because their anti-social notions are consistently rejected try to assert that no one has the right to MAKE such laws.
That's funny! You speak of a Republic and how it works one second and in the next breath you espouse democracy.
"Greatly outnumbered" means the majority rules, right?
Do Rights not begin with the individual?

[tpaine]

PaxMacian:
Nowhere in the Constitution is it enumerated what one may put into ones body. Therefore, what you consume is your natural God given right.

"Nowhere in the Constitution is it prohibited to commit murder. Therefore, if the real-world version of Tony Soprano wants to rub someone out, it's his "God-given right." - illbilly

Trolls will take any position, no matter how irrational, to further their agenda.

[PaxMacian]

RE: As a practical manner, how do you believe decrim differs from legalization?

First of all, it is actually relegalization and this is the reason for the difference.
Legalization connotes the validity of criminalization and provides support for limits and controls.
However, decriminalization usually refers to possession rather than sales and leaves government the ability to enact rehab programs for out of control users.

[philman_36]

Although you Libertines love to pout about the Feds, the fact is the the preponderance of drug laws, and drug enforcement, happens at the state level.
And what prompted the States to make those drug laws? The Feds or the people of the States?