Some Find Hope for a Shift in Drug Policy

NYT ^ | February 15, 2009 | WILLIAM YARDLEY

[SolidWood]

SEATTLE — Washington State law prohibits the possession of marijuana except for certain medical purposes. Hempfest is not one of them. Yet each summer when the event draws thousands to the Seattle waterfront to call for decriminalizing marijuana, participants light up in clear view of police officers. And they rarely get arrested.

“Police officers patrolling are courteous and respectful,” said Alison Holcomb, drug policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington.

One reason for the officers’ approach, said Ms. Holcomb and others who follow law enforcement in Seattle, is the leadership of R. Gil Kerlikowske, the chief of the Seattle Police Department and, officials in the Obama administration say, the president’s choice to become the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, known as the drug czar.

[DJ MacWoW]

Great. Let’s make it worse and legalize street sales of drugs. Just the thing to do! /s

[SmallGovRepub]

You fight your culture war. I’ll push for laws that make sense.

[DJ MacWoW]

It’s a waste of money trying to protect morons from themselves.

Protect the innocents from morons. That's what this is about.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Stupid argument. We don't jail guns or drugs. It is people who are dysfunctional. And you want to make it easier to be so.

Prohibition was all about legislating morality. It didn't work then and it won't work now because criminals don't obey laws.

[DJ MacWoW]

Obama is not going to legalize drugs.

Crack Daddy may just do so if he can expand government and tax the crap out of it. In office 2 months and look what he's done so far.

[MeanWestTexan]

The drug laws do nothing to protect innocents from morons.

DUI, public intox (which apply to anyting, not just alcohol) and similar laws do that.

If people want to rot themselves, they will.

[DJ MacWoW]

It isn't just a culture war. It is protecting the innocent. It's bad enough that there are drunk drivers. We don't need drugged up drivers on legalized drugs too.

Btw, MY culture war? Have you read Jim Rob's statement about the purpose of this forum?

[microgood]

That is naive and delusional.

Actually it is quite common. You just have no argument against it.

What it reveals, however, is that you also support alcohol prohibition.

Stupid argument. We don't jail guns or drugs. It is people who are dysfunctional. And you want to make it easier to be so.

And you think that keeping it illegal makes it harder. It does not. It is easier for kids to get pot than alcohol. That is because there are pot dealers that look for customers. Legalization of pot would eliminate the dealers, therefore making it as difficult to get pot as alchohol.

[DJ MacWoW]

This isn’t about “prohibition”. These drugs have not been legal. And it’s about public safety. There’s enough out there that we don’t have to legalize more crap for the dysfunctional.

[SmallGovRepub]

Now you are tattling on me because you don’t like my opinions? Great. You are a piece of work, lady. I’m done with you.

[DJ MacWoW]

Drug laws do something. You can cheer for more insanity if you like. I prefer common sense.

[narses]

You're an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about so I'm not really all that hurt by the things that you say.

LOL, you are the one name-calling. You admit to having used pot. You now somehow see pot as not a problem. You are wrong. Your years as a lawyer (if they exist, this is the net where anyone can claim anything) fade compared to your admitted past drug use and your advocacy for legalizing same. Plus you seem unable to abide by rules.

Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks , NO racism or violence in posts.

[DJ MacWoW]

No it is not common sense. You think that people are just going to smoke it before bed?! That si naive and delusional.

Legalization of pot would eliminate the dealers, therefore making it as difficult to get pot as alchohol.

And again with the slippery slope. "My daughter gets birth control and condoms at school so I might as well make it easy for her" and "My son would go out and drink so I'll let him have all that he wants at home where I can watch him".

That kind of reasoning is what leads to a lack of morality. "It's too hard", They'll just get it anyway"., "I might as well give in because I can't win". Defeatism has no place on a conservative forum.

[MeanWestTexan]

Sorry, drug laws do nothing to reduce drug use.

For example, the drug use rates in the Netherlands are actually LESS than in the USA, go figure:

Lifetime prevalence of marijuana use (ages 12+) 2001 36.9% 1 17.0% 2
Past month prevalence of marijuana use (ages 12+) 2001 5.4% 1 3.0% 2
Lifetime prevalence of heroin use (ages 12+) 2001 1.4% 1 0.4% 2
Per capita spending on criminal justice system (in Euros) 1998 €379 5 €223 5

http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/67

[DJ MacWoW]

Haven’t you been here long enough to know that if you mention another freeper in a post it is considered FR etiquette to ping them?!

[microgood]

That kind of reasoning is what leads to a lack of morality. "It's too hard", They'll just get it anyway"., "I might as well give in because I can't win". Defeatism has no place on a conservative forum.

No, my argument is that prohibition does not work. It never has and never will. Especially when it relates to things that are for personal use and are not perceived by the individual to be harmful to others (i.e. there is no criminal intent).

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

[SmallGovRepub]

You started with the name calling. You called me a pothead and you kept calling a me a pothead even after I told you I don’t smoke pot. I consider that a personal attack, and I think anyone else would too. If you are going to lecture me about the rules, why don’t you follow them.

Look, I’m done arguing with you. Have a nice life.

[DJ MacWoW]

You want to emulate EUROPE?

And you expect me to believe a website by someone on the board of the Cannabis Action Network?! LOLOL!!!!

[Ken H]

Have you read Jim Rob's statement about the purpose of this forum?

I did find this:

A return to a strictly Constitutional form of federal government will automatically repeal and abolish all unconstitutional federal involvement in states issues such as: crime, health, education, welfare and the environment. The Tenth Amendment will again be in effect, which will bar all federal attempts at legislating social issues.

http://www.freerepublic.com/about.htm

Where do you stand on the fedgov using the Commerce Claus to legislate on crime, health, and social issues?

[DJ MacWoW]

No, my argument is that prohibition does not work.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Then we are back to my original post.

There are still murders, should we stop arresting murderers?

People still B&E, should we stop arresting burglars?

There are still assaults, should we stop arresting assaulters?

There is still child abuse, should we stop arresting abusers?