Pro-Pot Group Challenges Bush Marijuana Policy (BARF ALERT)

Focus On The Family | January 9, 2003 | David Brody

[Sparta]

A pot-legalization group is taking on the White House over marijuana.

A group that wants to see marijuana legalized is angry with the Bush administration because they say the government is being too critical of pot.

The issue all started with a letter from Scott Burns, the deputy director of the Office of National Drug Control. In the letter, Burns told district attorneys across the country that they must better educate the public about marijuana use.

Keith Stroup, who heads up the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), claims the administration is going over the top suggesting that marijuana is the biggest drug threat in America.

"We're simply going to call them on this lie," Stroup said. "The Bush administration, for some reason, is in the process of ignoring the real drug problems we face and instead focusing their entire anti-drug apparatus on responsible marijuana smokers."

But Burns said it's time to get serious about the problem.

"It's something that the administration, I believe, has an obligation to talk about," Burns said.

He added that in some parts of the country heroin is the biggest problem. In other parts, it's cocaine. But the common thread is marijuana.

"We can't ignore marijuana," Burns said. "Sixty percent of the folks addicted to drugs in this country are using marijuana. If we don't talk about it and talk about it loudly, we're ignoring two-thirds of the problem."

As for his letter to prosecutors to raise awareness about marijuana, he said the response has been sobering.

"I've received calls from prosecutors all across the country who have said, 'I didn't know,' " Burns said.

That is precisely the reason for the letter: to make sure everyone knows that the problem is getting worse every day.

[unspun]

"The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained..."

They have samples, huh?

Also, what was proscribed in the Bible is not to be confused with what the temple priests may have done by the time Israel became corrupt. They even sacrificed children to their gods of lust, eventually. (Hmm... sounds like America.)

But this does seem to show how drugs are matters of religious proportion to so many.

In fact the Bible equates the use of narcotics to occult shamanism, consistent with what we see in primitive cultures to this day. You may want to look up Web sites that show how the use of narcotics, "channelling," and demonism are linked.

[Mr. Mojo]

You may want to look up

Not necessary; I believe you. I just thought that you'd find both the site and the article amusing. But understand that marijuana is not considered a narcotic. It's a hallucinogen, although that's not an entirely accurate description either.

[unspun]

Not necessary; I believe you. I just thought that you'd find both the site and the article amusing. But understand that marijuana is not considered a narcotic. It's a hallucinogen, although that's not an entirely accurate description either.

Thanks for the explication.

Also a euphoiric. Perhaps not narcotic by a very narrow definition, but certainly by a commonly used definition. Just the kind of thing that should be readily available to all our family, friends and neighbors. ( ') (, )

narcotic
adj 1: of or relating to or designating narcotics; "narcotic addicts"; "narcotic stupor" 2: inducing stupor or narcosis; "narcotic drugs" [syn: narcotizing] 3: inducing mental lethargy; "a narcotic speech" [syn: soporiferous, soporific] n : a drug that produces numbness or stupor; often taken for pleasure or to reduce pain; extensive use can lead to addiction
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University

[jayef]

Is this the study where he virtually asphyxiated monkeys? Is this the study that has been so thoroughly debunked as to not even deserve much of our attention here? Come on man. A bunch of the monkeys died from apoxia. How many pot smokers have you seen smoke to the point of apoxia?

[asneditor]

Good for you. I just signed up with NORML too!

[jayef]

OK. That's damn funny. You're allright, unspun. Wrong . . . but allright!

[jayef]

Choices. What choices? When did the people of the United States choose drug prohibition?

So no we come to today. The tide is turning my friend. Thanks to the internet mostly, people are seeing through the lies and deceptions that are evident throughout the history of Drug Prohibition and the Drug War.

It many not happen under George Bush, but it will happen. At the very least marijuana will be decriminalized. Hopefully soon thereafter, people will begin to see the logic and reason behind ending prohibition of all drugs.

[headsonpikes]

"Better legalize heroin, then!"

Actually, you're correct. There would be much greater 'harm reduction' by legalizing heroin and cocaine than by legalizing pot. Opium and coca extract could be sold as well to encourage moderation. Thousands of lives per year would be saved; billions of dollars worth of property theft and damage would be prevented; and billions of tax-payer's dollars could be employed at preventing terrorism, for instance.

Pot, OTOH, is not resulting in many deaths comparatively, either through use, or by associated poisoning and other crimes against persons and property. Mostly, it's inconvenient that it's illegal, not life-threatening. Pot-smokers are managing, somehow, to survive and kvetch about how hard done by they are. ;^)

This is judging the matter from a moral point of view, of course.

I realize that's not normally much of a consideration when it comes to unconstitutional laws.

But the next generation may be more 'sensitized' to the consequences of unconstitutional usurpations by the State.

[headsonpikes]

I think old Fred 25 left in a fit of pique.

He was an interesting fellow; we exchanged a few friendly freepmails back in the day. ;^)

[unspun]

Hopefully soon thereafter, people will begin to see the logic and reason behind ending prohibition of all drugs.

(No comment here - just wanted to repost this for everyone to see.)

[unspun]

"Better legalize heroin, then!"

Actually, you're correct.

(No comment here - just wanted to repost this for everyone to see.)

[unspun]

nm, you wrote, "I have not tried to 'win' an argument; I have only expressed my opinion. To me, this is not a game ...."

But speaking of games, this reminds me of back in the day, when I used to play Dungeons & Dragons. Characters were supposed to choose "alignments." They were to choose along the spectrum of lawful-neutral-chaotic, as well as good-neutral-evil.

Totalibertarians tend to get more and more "chaotic-neutral," as they go, which leaves everything up to raw (fallen) human nature. (I liked playing "netrual-good," characters myself.) This tends to fit their sentiments (at least #3, below):

an·ar·chism
n. 1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2.Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority: ?He was inclined to anarchism; he hated system and organization and uniformity? (Bertrand Russell).

(And btw, as I've said, I don't think people should be incarcerated simply for owning a bit of cannabis.)

[TigersEye]

It doesn't surprise me that he would have left in a huff. Rather emotional fellow. We had some very friendly FReepmails to each other but in the forum it was all blood and guts. Thanks for the reply, headsonpikes.

[headsonpikes]

"just wanted to repost this for everyone to see"

That's sporting of you. ;^)

[Liberal Classic]

We have the freedom to legislate about such things.

The basis of freedom is not the freedom to legilate. Freedom is not the government legislating what legitimate things people are allowed to do. Rather, in liberty the government is empowered by the people to do a limited number of legitimate things. All else the people are free do to. We do not need to justfy our choices.

[jayef]

I'm hostile to Libertarians' goal of transforming the USA into the NSA, the Narcotic State of America, dissipating our country's minds and our freedom to govern.

No comment. Just reposting for everyone to see.

[unspun]

We have the freedom to legislate about such things.

The basis of freedom is not the freedom to legilate. Freedom is not the government legislating what legitimate things people are allowed to do. Rather, in liberty the government is empowered by the people to do a limited number of legitimate things. All else the people are free do to. We do not need to justfy our choices.

If we don't see the need to justify our choices, then by all means we the People need to elect representatives who will legislate in measured ways to keep us from being unruly as well as unaccountable.

[jayef]

Lets have narcotics dispensers next to Lotto ticket machines! It would be another great source of tax revenue! Narc out the nation!

No comment. Just reposting for everyone to see.

[unspun]

z);->

[jayef]

Legalization would make a very grimly black market mainstream (or I might say "mainline.")

No comment. Just reposting for everyone to see.