I am excusing nothing. He came to his senses years ago. Now if he slides into use while sitting in the White House I will be one of the first to state that he should be impeached.
so, you demand your politicians are teetotalers?
and how do you know he hasn't?
I mean, he fell off a couch...you really believe that he was just eating a pretzel?
A person kicks an addiction 16 years ago and OH MY GOD he fell off a couch. WOW! Pretty bad stuff. Yup, that's a drunk. That guy shouldn't even be a dog catcher.
i watched my cousin fall up a set of stairs while playing paintball at his now-brother-in-law's bachelor party 4 years ago and he was sober too. of course he fell up them because someone hit him in the ass with a paintball too.
hey...how about some more thrilling facts about drugs?
hemp has an estimated 50,000 non-drug commercial uses including paper, textiles, fuels, food and sealants, but these uses are also banned by existing laws. Sources: Encyclopedia Britannica, federal documents and historical records.
laws against marijuana were passed a year after the invention of a machine to harvest and process hemp so it could compete commercially against businesses owned by Hearst, the DuPonts and other powerful business interests. (in other words, the drug laws against hemp are a classic case of using law to restrict fair competition in the marketplace...a decidedly unAmerican idea...so much for capitalist freedom)
Coptic Christians, Rhastafarians, Shintos, Hinus, Buddhists, Sufis, Essenes, Zoroastrians, Bantus, and many other sects have traditions that consider the plant to have religious value. (so much for religious freedom)
the laws against marijuana are just about the best example of really bad law there is.
They are my fellow citizens, so I'd say that it is of my concern....but as long as they are adults, and are posing no threat to others...it's really none of my business.
Said the man that wants me to pay for his healthcare
all I said was it shouldbe
it should be that you want to pay your part in making sure that everyone gets health care...it shoud be that those that want to are enough in numbers to afford it.
how about, since our health care revolves around drugs, when make pot legal, tax it, and use the money for everyone's healthcare...I mean, that's what healthcare is all about, the meds.
how about, since our health care revolves around drugs, when make pot legal, tax it, and use the money for everyone's healthcare...I mean, that's what healthcare is all about, the meds.
That's not a bad idea. Tax the pot smokers to pay for all the problems it will create.
it should be that you want to pay your part in making sure that everyone gets health care...it should be that those that want to are enough in numbers to afford it.
We don't want your socialism, crabs. It is inherently inefficient and has been proven not to work. You socialists want everyone to put all their money into a big pot and distribute it as you see fit. You people are not smart enough to make such a system work. The major fault is the system ignores human nature.
Tax the pot smokers to pay for all the problems it will create.
what problems?
I can tell you about the problems the laws create, please say what you are talking about when you say "problems it will create". It' won't create problems, it will alliviate the problems that the laws create.
People will still do drugs, sure, they always will. That won't change. If you think that if the government tells people it's okay to take drugs without having to be a criminal that all these people who don't want to use drugs are all gonna think that they now HAVE to do drugs or something? Is that what you think?
People do drugs anyway. Making them illegal doesn't work.
Let me ask though, are you comfortable knowing that you support laws that are demonstrably racist?
By Neal Peirce, The Washington Post   Source: International Herald TribuneÂÂ
The United States, rarely shy about condemning other nations for human rights abuses, will get a dose of its own medicine when the World Conference Against Racism opens in Durban, South Africa, on Aug. 31. The target will be America's "war on drugs," in which black men are being imprisoned for drug offenses at 13 times the rate of white men.
A team of American lawyers, clergy and drug experts, organized as the Campaign to End Race Discrimination in the War on Drugs, will assert that America's criminal justice system has been turned into an "apartheid-like" device.
I'm sorry, I thought I had been providing documentation. what do you want documented?
Only minorities use illegal drugs?
no.
that's the point. all different people use drugs. only minorities go to jail for it in percentages many times the rate that white drug users go to jail for it. the laws are used to criminalize minorities. if white people got arrested for drug use based on their drug use in the same percentage that blacks do, we would have 1/3rd of everyone in a jail cell.
I agree, J.T. I don't think the intent of the laws was ever racist, nor do I think the outcome is intentionally racist. Drugs are a way for poor people to make big money off of other poor people. Most of the action occurs in minority ghettos.
Just curious to those who think it's bad to have drugs be illegal. I am being serious here BTW. I am torn on the issue and admit i'm not that pasionate about it. I see both sides in some ways.
Crabs and Muskwa made the statement.
WOD has killed more people than the use of the drugs themselves
exactly
any law that causes more damage than it seeks to prevent is bad law.
number of documented cases of marijuana actually killing someone? zero
O.K you notice that in that exchange between you two that Muskwa said the WOD has killed more people than the use of drugs themselves. And crabs said. "number of documented cases of marijuana actually killing someone? zero"
You need to clarify. Is it Drugs or just marijuana ? If you have a credible source on the statement that the WOD has killed more than the use of drugs themselves I'd love to see it.
Dr. Mary J. Ruwart in her book "Healing Our World" states:
About 7,000 people die each year from drug overdose. About 5,600 are due to impurities and other factors that would not be present in legal preparations. That leaves 1,400 due to actual drug use.
Turf wars over drug territory result in gang shootings in which about 1,600 innocents die annually. Because needle sales are banned, needle sharing causes about 3,500 new cases of AIDS each year. Because drug prohibition makes the price of drugs about 100 times higher than it would be if drugs were legal, many drug users resort to crime to support their habit, causing about 750 deaths per year.
5,600 + 1,600 + 3,500 + 750 = 11,450, as opposed to 1,400.
These estimates are consistent with the death toll per capita from drugs in Amsterdam, which does not prosecute users. About 60 people per year are killed by drugs in a population 20 times less than that of the US.
First off it's a guess as to how many die from impuritites vs. taking too much.
Turf wars over drug territory result in gang shootings in which about 1,600 innocents die annually.
Turf wars aren't just about drugs either they've had them for years, fist fights and knifings are now replaced by drive by's.
Because needle sales are banned, needle sharing causes about 3,500 new cases of AIDS each year.
Ahhh and that's included in the death toll too ? Hmmm.
So you're telling me they can find drugs but not needles ? So there's no places to get needles ? It wouldn't have anything to do with being high and making a bad call as to use a dirty needle would it ? Nah, can't be. I'm sure if someone was high on good govt. regulated heroin they'd make great decisions.
Because drug prohibition makes the price of drugs about 100 times higher than it would be if drugs were legal, many drug users resort to crime to support their habit, causing about 750 deaths per year.
First off how does the author know what the price of govt. drugs would be ? They charge you 4.00 for a pack of smokes, god knows byt the time they get through with it how much it would be. People also resort to crime that results in death for other reasons too, should we get rid of the cause ie: the law ?
I mean if she's going to include all these deaths compared to an arbitrary number on overdoses then can we include things like vehicle accidents from those who are high ? If you're going to include one you'd have to include the other.
These estimates are consistent with the death toll per capita from drugs in Amsterdam, which does not prosecute users. About 60 people per year are killed by drugs in a population 20 times less than that of the US.
People will still do drugs, sure, they always will. That won't change.
Yes some people will do drugs no matter whether they are legal or not. But more people will do drugs if they are legal. With the increased use will come the increased problems that comes with drug use. There is no question in my mind that laws against certain actions reduce the occurances of those acts. For instance if murder were legal I know there would be a few people no longer in this world!!!
With the increased use will come the increased problems that comes with drug use
what increased problems are there that aren't due to the laws against them?
laws against certain actions reduce the occurances of those acts.
what actions are you talking about? what actions that we don't already have laws for?
For instance if murder were legal I know there would be a few people no longer in this world!!!
the difference is that smoking a weed doesn't make me kill anyone. It doesn't do anything to anyone else at all. and if it causes my to make an action that interferes with someone else, we already have laws against those actions...like murder and such
Rob, the cost of a pack of cigarettes is hugely increased by taxes, but you don't see gang wars and overseas drug cartels dealing in smokes. That's because they are legal and easily available.
Now what are the social costs ?
OK, you're pushing one of my buttons here. Too often I have seen that term used to justify increased taxes and restrictive laws because of some vague and unidentified "social cost" that is never defined and the amount of which is never quantified. It is used by nanny staters who want to stop behavior they don't like regardless of whether it actually, provably hurts anyone else. Please be more specific.
They harm their families, they harm themselves and they harm society.
The vast majority do no such thing. And there are already laws against harming people, laws which are properly aimed at harmful action itself and not what someone MIGHT do if they take a drug.
so, you demand your politicians are teetotalers?
and how do you know he hasn't?
I mean, he fell off a couch...you really believe that he was just eating a pretzel?
so, I take it you spoke out when Rush attacked Chelsea
so, you agree with me that the government has no business in my personal business?
that's not what you were saying before.
so, you demand your politicians are teetotalers? No, I was referring to Bush's excesses and allegations of use of illegal substances.
and how do you know he hasn't? Obviously I can't know for sure. But it seems highly unlikely. I think someone would let such a story out.
so, I take it you spoke out when Rush attacked Chelsea
I didn't know that he did. Or if he did what it is that he said. But I really don't care either way.
so, you agree with me that the government has no business in my personal business?
No, that is your viewpoint. It just goes to show you what a hypocrite YOU are.
A person kicks an addiction 16 years ago and OH MY GOD he fell off a couch. WOW! Pretty bad stuff. Yup, that's a drunk. That guy shouldn't even be a dog catcher.
I fell up the stairs a couple weeks ago.
I was stone cold sober.
i watched my cousin fall up a set of stairs while playing paintball at his now-brother-in-law's bachelor party 4 years ago and he was sober too. of course he fell up them because someone hit him in the ass with a paintball too.
all I was saying is that you don't KNOW.
something that bodine has backed me up on...
hey...how about some more thrilling facts about drugs?
hemp has an estimated 50,000 non-drug commercial uses including paper, textiles, fuels, food and sealants, but these uses are also banned by existing laws. Sources: Encyclopedia Britannica, federal documents and historical records.
laws against marijuana were passed a year after the invention of a machine to harvest and process hemp so it could compete commercially against businesses owned by Hearst, the DuPonts and other powerful business interests. (in other words, the drug laws against hemp are a classic case of using law to restrict fair competition in the marketplace...a decidedly unAmerican idea...so much for capitalist freedom)
Coptic Christians, Rhastafarians, Shintos, Hinus, Buddhists, Sufis, Essenes, Zoroastrians, Bantus, and many other sects have traditions that consider the plant to have religious value. (so much for religious freedom)
the laws against marijuana are just about the best example of really bad law there is.
Jethro against the drug war
Lance Brown 3/31/03 3:15pm
They are my fellow citizens, so I'd say that it is of my concern....but as long as they are adults, and are posing no threat to others...it's really none of my business.
now that's the spirit of America
that's also the attitude of free people
and you know Chaz, that's another good point
as long as your concern doesn't interfere with their rights, having concern for fellow citizens is quite all right.
that's also the attitude of free people
Said the man that wants me to pay for his healthcare.
Here we go again.
Cue Elton John and "Circle of Life"
all I said was it shouldbe
it should be that you want to pay your part in making sure that everyone gets health care...it shoud be that those that want to are enough in numbers to afford it.
that's obviously not the case with you
which is why I said I thought it shouldbe
how about, since our health care revolves around drugs, when make pot legal, tax it, and use the money for everyone's healthcare...I mean, that's what healthcare is all about, the meds.
desparate attempt to get back on topic
how about, since our health care revolves around drugs, when make pot legal, tax it, and use the money for everyone's healthcare...I mean, that's what healthcare is all about, the meds.
That's not a bad idea. Tax the pot smokers to pay for all the problems it will create.
Actually, I was being sarcastic.
it should be that you want to pay your part in making sure that everyone gets health care...it should be that those that want to are enough in numbers to afford it.
We don't want your socialism, crabs. It is inherently inefficient and has been proven not to work. You socialists want everyone to put all their money into a big pot and distribute it as you see fit. You people are not smart enough to make such a system work. The major fault is the system ignores human nature.
There already is a pot tax in MN.
Bill, thanks for reaffirming my view on you.
And we all know how important "Feelings" are to a Liberal.
:-)
no, not "we", you, you don't want.
if I don't get to be "we", neither do you
fine with me
what problems?
I can tell you about the problems the laws create, please say what you are talking about when you say "problems it will create". It' won't create problems, it will alliviate the problems that the laws create.
People will still do drugs, sure, they always will. That won't change. If you think that if the government tells people it's okay to take drugs without having to be a criminal that all these people who don't want to use drugs are all gonna think that they now HAVE to do drugs or something? Is that what you think?
People do drugs anyway. Making them illegal doesn't work.
Let me ask though, are you comfortable knowing that you support laws that are demonstrably racist?
Let me ask though, are you comfortable knowing that you support laws that are demonstrably racist?
I think your contention that drug laws are racist is a bunch of garbage.
Now, enforcement of those laws may be racist, but that's a whole different monster.
The WOD has killed more people than the use of the drugs themselves.
no, it's not. do I need to provide more documentation? I mean, how and why they got made is a simple matter of history
a law is only as good as the result it produces
this law was created to be used in a racist fashion
exactly
any law that causes more damage than it seeks to prevent is bad law.
number of documented cases of marijuana actually killing someone? zero
it is not a different monster...same monster...the monster is called "bad law"
By Neal Peirce, The Washington Post ÂÂ
 Source: International Herald TribuneÂÂ
The United States, rarely shy about condemning other nations for human rights abuses, will get a dose of its own medicine when the World Conference Against Racism opens in Durban, South Africa, on Aug. 31. The target will be America's "war on drugs," in which black men are being imprisoned for drug offenses at 13 times the rate of white men.
A team of American lawyers, clergy and drug experts, organized as the Campaign to End Race Discrimination in the War on Drugs, will assert that America's criminal justice system has been turned into an "apartheid-like" device.
do I need to provide more documentation? I mean, how and why they got made is a simple matter of history
Yes, documantation would be nice. Maybe this is common knowledge to you but it's not for me.
this law was created to be used in a racist fashion
Only minorities use illegal drugs?
I'm sorry, I thought I had been providing documentation. what do you want documented?
no.
that's the point. all different people use drugs. only minorities go to jail for it in percentages many times the rate that white drug users go to jail for it. the laws are used to criminalize minorities. if white people got arrested for drug use based on their drug use in the same percentage that blacks do, we would have 1/3rd of everyone in a jail cell.
I want proof that drug laws are racist.
You're last post only proves my point that the law itself is not racist, but the way it's carried out may be.
I agree, J.T. I don't think the intent of the laws was ever racist, nor do I think the outcome is intentionally racist. Drugs are a way for poor people to make big money off of other poor people. Most of the action occurs in minority ghettos.
Just curious to those who think it's bad to have drugs be illegal. I am being serious here BTW. I am torn on the issue and admit i'm not that pasionate about it. I see both sides in some ways.
Crabs and Muskwa made the statement.
O.K you notice that in that exchange between you two that Muskwa said the WOD has killed more people than the use of drugs themselves. And crabs said. "number of documented cases of marijuana actually killing someone? zero"
You need to clarify. Is it Drugs or just marijuana ? If you have a credible source on the statement that the WOD has killed more than the use of drugs themselves I'd love to see it.
Dr. Mary J. Ruwart in her book "Healing Our World" states:
About 7,000 people die each year from drug overdose. About 5,600 are due to impurities and other factors that would not be present in legal preparations. That leaves 1,400 due to actual drug use.
Turf wars over drug territory result in gang shootings in which about 1,600 innocents die annually. Because needle sales are banned, needle sharing causes about 3,500 new cases of AIDS each year. Because drug prohibition makes the price of drugs about 100 times higher than it would be if drugs were legal, many drug users resort to crime to support their habit, causing about 750 deaths per year.
5,600 + 1,600 + 3,500 + 750 = 11,450, as opposed to 1,400.
These estimates are consistent with the death toll per capita from drugs in Amsterdam, which does not prosecute users. About 60 people per year are killed by drugs in a population 20 times less than that of the US.
Thanks for posting that Muskwa.
I would take exception to some of that though.
First off it's a guess as to how many die from impuritites vs. taking too much.
Turf wars aren't just about drugs either they've had them for years, fist fights and knifings are now replaced by drive by's.
Ahhh and that's included in the death toll too ? Hmmm.
So you're telling me they can find drugs but not needles ? So there's no places to get needles ? It wouldn't have anything to do with being high and making a bad call as to use a dirty needle would it ? Nah, can't be. I'm sure if someone was high on good govt. regulated heroin they'd make great decisions.
First off how does the author know what the price of govt. drugs would be ? They charge you 4.00 for a pack of smokes, god knows byt the time they get through with it how much it would be. People also resort to crime that results in death for other reasons too, should we get rid of the cause ie: the law ?
I mean if she's going to include all these deaths compared to an arbitrary number on overdoses then can we include things like vehicle accidents from those who are high ? If you're going to include one you'd have to include the other.
O.K fine. Now what are the social costs ?
People will still do drugs, sure, they always will. That won't change.
Yes some people will do drugs no matter whether they are legal or not. But more people will do drugs if they are legal. With the increased use will come the increased problems that comes with drug use. There is no question in my mind that laws against certain actions reduce the occurances of those acts. For instance if murder were legal I know there would be a few people no longer in this world!!!
no
no they won't
no one is making a law for them
what increased problems are there that aren't due to the laws against them?
what actions are you talking about? what actions that we don't already have laws for?
the difference is that smoking a weed doesn't make me kill anyone. It doesn't do anything to anyone else at all. and if it causes my to make an action that interferes with someone else, we already have laws against those actions...like murder and such
Rob, the cost of a pack of cigarettes is hugely increased by taxes, but you don't see gang wars and overseas drug cartels dealing in smokes. That's because they are legal and easily available.
Now what are the social costs ?
OK, you're pushing one of my buttons here. Too often I have seen that term used to justify increased taxes and restrictive laws because of some vague and unidentified "social cost" that is never defined and the amount of which is never quantified. It is used by nanny staters who want to stop behavior they don't like regardless of whether it actually, provably hurts anyone else. Please be more specific.
jethro wrote: But more people will do drugs if they are legal.
crabs response: no
no they won't
You are a damn fool if you do not believe more people will use the drugs if they are legal. And those that are already using the drugs will use MORE!
So what if they do? A hundred people not harming others is no worse than ten people not harming others.
They harm their families, they harm themselves and they harm society. Now you can keep your eyes closed to that if you want. But I will not.
They harm their families, they harm themselves and they harm society.
The vast majority do no such thing. And there are already laws against harming people, laws which are properly aimed at harmful action itself and not what someone MIGHT do if they take a drug.
so what if they do?
why would someone who doesn't want to use drugs now all of a sudden decide to use drugs? because it's legal?
there are plenty of things that are legal that I don't do just because it's legal
it sound like you are afraid all the drug people are gonna be able to sit in the front of the bus with you
If marijuana were legal, I know quite a few people who would use it to relieve nausea and chronic pain. I think it's a crime that they CAN'T use it.
the laws have a long history that is firmly rooted in racism. they are a type of Jim Crow law.
they are ALSO intended to unfairly squash free competition in the markeplace.
and BTW, you know who else is for the drug laws?
drug dealers
organized crime
terrorists
that's who's for the drug laws
nice company you keep there