Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It's time to legalize pot
Sentinel Review ^ | 9/5/2002

Posted on 09/06/2002 8:59:47 AM PDT by MrLeRoy

It's enough for a big thumbs up ... or a big light up, if you prefer.

Canada should legalize marijuana use by adults, a Senate committee recommended Wednesday. The report comes on the heels of a two-year study of public policy relating to pot.

The present system of prohibition on marijuana just doesn't work, the committee found. Obviously, the committee learned something from early 20th-century history, when alcohol was prohibited in the United States. Then, prohibition simply gave gangsters a product to move and people to shoot.

Instead of the current system that penalizes people for having small quantities of pot on them, there should instead be a regulated system for marijuana, perhaps like our current system for alcohol, the committee determined.

"Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should be treated not as a criminal issue but as a social and health issue," said Senator Pierre Claude Nolin, the committee chair.

It's true that taking pot still involves the harmful intake of smoke, which the committee recognized. But, as the committee pointed out, it's more of a health issue than anything else.

In addition, making pot legal would clear the way for our police to tackle other, more harmful crimes relating to the public good. Really, would you rather see a pot smoker or a child molester behind bars?

Whether the federal government will ever adopt the Senate recommendations is up in the air. Hopefully the feds won't throw up a smokescreen on this to cloud the issue, and goes ahead with legalization.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marijuana; pot; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 521-528 next last
To: gdani
I'm not quite sure, really -- I'm not big on teatotalling Christianity. I was just suggesting that we stipulate it for now to keep the discussion uncluttered.
161 posted on 09/06/2002 12:51:35 PM PDT by WindMinstrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
How is engaging in trivial debate of an arcane topic a productive use of my time?

Uh, if it's not a productive use of your time you could always simply stop posting to this thread.

162 posted on 09/06/2002 12:52:13 PM PDT by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
How is engaging in trivial debate of an arcane topic a productive use of my time? Get the issue before SCOTUS and I may have more to say on the matter. Our drug laws have been challenged tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of times in court. I see no need to alter or change them, only a greater committment to enforcement and prosecution.

That's a lot of wasted type to say "I can't."

163 posted on 09/06/2002 12:52:50 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: WindMinstrel
Exactly - those who don't sin simply because they are stopped from sinning by force are no more moral than sinners.

"If a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man."
- Anthony Burgess

164 posted on 09/06/2002 12:52:51 PM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
How is engaging in trivial debate of an arcane topic a productive use of my time?

The subterfuge by which the feds have unconstitutionally grabbed near-limitless power over us is "an arcane topic"?!

Our drug laws have been challenged tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of times in court.

Cite a single court ruling that states that federal drug laws are consistent with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Then explain why we should give that any weight, considering that upholding the Ninth and Tenth Amendments would collapse the welfare state that the liberal-dominated judiciary loves so much.

165 posted on 09/06/2002 12:55:42 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
It's about this time that even stalwarts like Roscoe cut and run . . .
166 posted on 09/06/2002 12:59:44 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost; gdani
Uh, if it's not a productive use of your time you could always simply stop posting to this thread.
That's a lot of wasted type to say "I can't."

The correct interpretation is that "I won't" waste my time on such diversions.

It's much more productive simply stating my opinion as to how enforcement should be intensified.

167 posted on 09/06/2002 1:00:56 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Galatians...chapter 5

13] For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
[14] For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
[15] But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
[16] This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
[17] For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
[18] But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
[19] Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
[20] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
[21] Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
[22] But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
[23] Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
[24] And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
[25] If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
[26] Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gal.6

[1] Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
[2] Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

168 posted on 09/06/2002 1:02:33 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Cite a single court ruling that states that federal drug laws are consistent with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

Cite where SCOTUS has ruled all our drug laws are unconstitutional on these grounds.

169 posted on 09/06/2002 1:03:50 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Any sins would be between the sinner and God. They are no business of yours. According to your own Bible, no man is fit to judge another. You least of all with your lies and hypocracies.
170 posted on 09/06/2002 1:06:23 PM PDT by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
2 questions for you.

1. Would you rather have potheads or child-molesters in prison?

2. Who owns my body (and I never have used pot or other illicit substances and won't, even WHEN they are re-legalized)? You and FedGov or ME?
171 posted on 09/06/2002 1:06:46 PM PDT by dcwusmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
It's much more productive simply stating my opinion as to how enforcement should be intensified.

That's great. So you won't mind when I brand you a New Dealer, right?

172 posted on 09/06/2002 1:07:06 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
God created you...all of us---to be ignorameouses?
173 posted on 09/06/2002 1:07:56 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
You made the assertion that the SCOTUS has already ruled them Constitutional. It is up to you to provide the evidence.

Where did you learn to debate? The Clinton School of Public Speaking?

174 posted on 09/06/2002 1:08:44 PM PDT by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
I'd go one-on-one with you but I can't keep a straight face that long. Sorry. You're well named. Your silliness is totally destructive of my funnybone. I have to bypass your comments most times so I don't show TOO much disrespect by laughing at you.
175 posted on 09/06/2002 1:09:29 PM PDT by dcwusmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Let's get Saddam first before we start debating anything else.

If we don't get Saddam, and soon, then all other debates are meaningless. America may no longer be here.

176 posted on 09/06/2002 1:10:28 PM PDT by joyful1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Main Entry: ig·no·ra·mus
Pronunciation: "ig-n&-'rA-m&s also -'ra-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mus·es also ig·no·ra·mi /-mE/
Etymology: Ignoramus, ignorant lawyer in Ignoramus (1615), play by George Ruggle, from Latin, literally, we are ignorant of
Date: circa 1616
: an utterly ignorant person : DUNCE
177 posted on 09/06/2002 1:10:42 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
It's much more productive simply stating my opinion as to how enforcement should be intensified.

How is that "productive" when you can't even make a case that the laws should exist?

178 posted on 09/06/2002 1:10:58 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
No, God created us in His image to follow Him. Following Him, however, does not give us the right to force others to follow Him. Christians aren't supposed to practice baptism by the sword.

You don't really think that God is pleased if a non-christian gives up a sin, do you? Of what value is it if someone stops sinning but doesn't know Christ?

Jesus didn't call us to be moralizers, he called us to live moral lives ourselves.
179 posted on 09/06/2002 1:11:40 PM PDT by WindMinstrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Considering I don't believe in your version of God in the first place, I would have to say my parents are the most likely candidate for being "my creator". The evidence really stacks up in their favor.

Staying within your theology though, God created us and gave us free will. Hypocrits like you would remove that gift from God by making all of those moral choices for us. Be they right or wrong, they are still our choices to make. the consequences of such actions are also ours alone to bear.

In the real world, "the Devil made me do it" is not a valid defense.

180 posted on 09/06/2002 1:11:53 PM PDT by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 521-528 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson