Posted on 06/23/2018 2:47:03 PM PDT by Mariner
Some day soon, even as sweet, skunky smoke drifts in from the streets outside, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other staunch opponents of marijuana may draw inspiration from a true believer named Morris Sheppard. After the repeal of national Prohibition in 1933 and until his death in 1941, the Texas senator embraced a yearly custom. A progressive Democrat often considered “the father of Prohibition,” Sheppard would rise on the Senate floor to rail against alcohol and call for a repeal of Repeal.
“It was a ritual,” Daniel Okrent, author of the 2010 book “Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition,” explained in an interview. “Clearly he didn’t expect anything was going to happen. It was paying homage to his cause.”
Sheppard, a proponent of bank reform and an advocate of women’s suffrage, may have been the country’s most sincere Prohibitionist, but he ended up on the losing side of history. As such, he faced a dilemma that may soon become familiar to another group of prohibitionists: marijuana opponents. When society turns away from a cause, how long should its supporters fight on? After committing themselves to a lengthy, even decades-long struggle, how can they simply let it drop?
On July 1, Massachusetts will join states such as Colorado, Washington, and California, whose voters have chosen to legalize cannabis for recreational purposes. The implementation of the law has been bumpy, not least because Sessions and the federal Justice Department still have the authority to crack down on cannabis use.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
I hear it all the time by the stoners.
We never got a Bill Of Permissions. What would you want “the approval of the Federal government” for, the ability to blow your nose?
Concede defeat and move on.
Me, smoked a bunch, drank a bunch - they have different effects but either can mess you up a little or a lot depending how much you use (and I've been both messed up a little and a lot on each). And both are bad for you. And none of that is any of government's business ... apart from keeping the messed up from driving, keeping it away from kids as criminalization has failed to do, and truth in labeling.
Argument by name-calling. How about being called one of the anti-freedomers?
And vice versa.
It’s hard to argue that the repeal of Prohibition didn’t seariously harm the country.
Blowing your nose and acting like God- putting yourself into a state of euphoria on demand (with diminishing returns) while hurting your body, mind, and soul are not the same.
I don’t know...ask Dave
Do you hear it on FR? If not, why bring it up on FR?
The marijuana plant was originally banned due to lobbying efforts by the cotton barons. Hemp (from the marijuana plant) is far more versatile than cotton. Marijuana can be grown with very low levels of THC rendering it useless to smokers, but can be a valuable source of rope and clothing material.
Most people no longer smoke pot. Most use edibles and oils now.
Dave’s not here.
False. The rest of your unsupported claims I will ignore.
"America had experienced a gradual decline in the rate of serious crimes over much of the 19th and early 20th centuries. That trend was unintentionally reversed by the efforts of the Prohibition movement. The homicide rate in large cities increased from 5.6 per 100,000 population during the first decade of the century to 8.4 during the second decade when the Harrison Narcotics Act, a wave of state alcohol prohibitions, and World War I alcohol restrictions were enacted. The homicide rate increased to 10 per 100,000 population during the 1920s, a 78 percent increase over the pre-Prohibition period." - https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa157.pdf
As I said, the use of alcohol is not even comparable. It takes years of heavy drinking (exceeding the BAC considered to be impaired several times a week) to begin to cause equivalent damage to what even “casual” use of marijuana or other schedule one drugs causes. Marijuana causes physical damage and alters the function of the brain. Furthermore, our bodies have a dedicated metabolic pathway that exists only to destroy alcohol. We have no equivalent for any schedule I drug, so they stay in the body longer, exacerbating the ill effects of the drugs.
I can tell stories of addiction, too. The addicts I’ve known used a variety of substances. The addiction is the issue, not the specific drug used.
“””Argument by name-calling. How about being called one of the anti-freedomers?””””””
Anti-freedomer????
If you pretend it is a freedom issue then do you believe cocaine, meth and heroin must be legal?
“You got smart but wish the stupidity and waste of time on the rest of the country with the approval of the Federal government?”
What do you have to say about President Trump, who said he would support getting fedgov out of intastate mj regulation?
Here is PDJT throwing mj prohibitionists under the bus =>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M53XLBd54Y
It helped the country - crime dropped.
>>Sheppard, a proponent of bank reform and an advocate of women’s suffrage, may have been the country’s most sincere Prohibitionist, but he ended up on the losing side of history.
Except that states and nations are pushing the BAC standard down to Sweden’s of 0.01 (CDC wants to go there incrementally first by dropping to 0.05 and then 0.03). A low BAC that results in misdemeanor in the US will still ban you from Canada as a “felon”.
And cigarettes? Banned by employers even in off hours, penalized by insurers and employers, prohibited in parks, cars with children, and in homes (look at California). And “tax the hell out of it”.
But pot smokers believe that they can toke behind the wheel and smoke in public because they are different after 50 years of demonizing tobacco and beer as “impure poisons” while promoting pot as “all natural” and saying it “cures cancer”.
There is neo-prohibition in this world of demon rum (restricted hours of purchase in all but 3 cities) but we aren’t supposed to notice.
The woman who founded MADD left that organization decades ago because even then it became apparent that the goal was neo-prohibition, she was never against its use even publicly. She didn’t like serious repeat offenders getting ignored or a slap on the wrist.
Will you be posting evidence - or excuses for not posting evidence?
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.