Posted on 06/02/2005 4:40:30 AM PDT by Wolfie
Since the original post you replied to was not made by a druggie, nor did it advocate free drugs, but simply pointed out the Constitutional problems with the current drug war, then there has to be more to it than that. Tell me more about this glorious revolution of yours, and this new, improved Constitution. You plan on writing that yourself?
The Supreme Court just now said I'm right and you're wrong.
Will you hold their opinion as authoritative in the case of Roe v. Wade, or are you simply an opportunist? Justice Clarence Thomas dissents with the court's decision (any you). Can you tell my where the fault lies with his reasoning?
http://www.aas.org/publications/baas/v26n4/aas185/abs/S8110.html
One of many sources.
With that said, MJ should be legal.
Same could be said about countless other things.
Who is going to force the bus driver to smoke pot?
But "responsible adults" smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and down unknown quantities of "legal" drugs.
Force masks on them? No. But provide free bags to put over their heads when taking a closing time queen home on Friday? Yes.
I must be clueless and have a very active imagination becauuse I regularly see news reports about MJ busts.
I would wager my lifes fortune that if you tried, you could not get a constitutional amendment banning MJ if your life depended on it in the next 15 years.
No. The Supreme Court ruled that states can not ignore federal law and pass law that violates federal law. The Supreme Court further said that congress can change the current federal law to allow for states to do differently.
Of course when you say drugs you mean cocain marijuana and shrooms but what about perscription drugs and there users and addicts. More people die in one year from perscription drugs than the amount of people who die from marijuana in ten years. Perscription drugs and Alcohol are far more addictive and deadly that marijuana will ever be.
I think your post 414 should have been directed at muawiyah, not me.
The U.s. figures were never anywhere near that level when opiates were legal ... and as Ken H has shown, the available evidence (provide better if you can) indicates that the U.S. rate was raised by criminalization.
Chou En Lei and Mao Tse Tung finally put an end to this incredibly high rate of addiction through the remarkably simple expedient of removing addict's heads from their necks.
The Communists made many changes that made their War On Drugs easier to conduct, but very few of which we would want to adopt in this free country.
Here's the difference: the WoT creates no incentives for terrorism, whereas the WoD does create incentives for crack neighborhooods by increasing the relative benefit for users to congregate.
You've discussed the 'extermination' of 'druggies' as a means to end the war on drugs. How about instead of killing millions of people to end this 'blight' on our nation, we take a realistic look at drugs and how we deal with the situation. The keyword being 'realistic' you drugnazi. Recreational drug use has been around since man found that by eating certain plants he got buzzed, and that was probably long before we invented fire or the wheel.
When the user becomes the used, there is a problem, and that goes for everything from marijuana to chocolate cake. If a responsible adult wants to get high in his living room and watch three hours of spongebob squarepants, what business is it of yours or the government if they wake up and go to work the next day without a problem?
Those who get hooked on drugs are destined to do so, consider it social darwinism. Those who cannot cope with reality wind up falling away from it. Those who wish to escape it from time to time always come back, just as good if not better than before. Consider it a vacation that lasts a few hours instead of two weeks.
You are and unfortunately always will be a blind idealogue, something which you cannot deny. If you ever open your eyes to reality, come back to the debate. Until that day, stop commenting on things you cannot understand.
Unless you're willing to do something about it the current state of the law, per the LIBERAL MAJORITY on the USSC is that MJ is a regulated commodity.
I think it's absolutely hilarious that the druggies who otherwise suck mightily on the orifices and appendages of the Liberals and Libertarians in high places are stuck with a dissenting opinion by Justice Thomas, Chief Justice Rhenquist and Justice O'Connor.
I am sure you share with me the sense of irony this brings.
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.