Home ยป Discussion Forum

Man made alcohol,...G_d made pot

Thu, 10/07/2010 - 11:13pm | buzorro

Anyone remember or know that both Presidents Nixon & Carter formed unbiased, professional panels that toured the country to investigate, gather facts, study , and make recommendations on what the 'Official Policy' should be concerning the 'Marijuana problem' should be?  Remember that both panels recommended that pot possession should be decriminalized?  That the present policy was 'making criminals' out of otherwise law-abiding citizens?

*******

BILL TO DECRIMINALIZE MINOR POT POSSESSION OFFENSES SIGNED BY GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER

http://www.canorml.org/news/1449signed.html

It's a 'no-brainer.' (no pun intended)

Forums (1):Discussion Forum

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

sahuoy wrote on October 16, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Just because God made pot

Just because God made pot does not mean it should be used just like the fruit of the forbidden tree. You see what that has done and where it has gotten us. Ohio was ticketing offenders that smoked cigarettes inside their vehicles. Same with California, New York and several others I can't recall. While our government is abolishing things deemed physically harmful to non-users as well as users, what body, department or entity is ever going to abolish this government that claims to be broke, spending more than ever before, has created 20 million unemployed, 50 million without health insurance, allows illegals to flourish. Don't these have an even greater impact on everyone's well being, abilities to sustain, cope or exceed the demands of pursuing life, liberty and happiness. Dazzle with glitz n glamour while throwing peanuts at em... Just sayin...

buzorro wrote on October 16, 2010 at 8:10 pm

I would agree that not all

I would agree that not all G_d-created items are beneficial to mortal man. The thread title looks good on a protest placard though.

I also agree with your observations of what this subject has to do with the 'big picture.'

My observation is that what has not been mentioned is the subject of 'We the People' vs the US government' on his topic. Many states have voted to approve pot's use for medicinal use, yet the Fed's position is that 'We don't care what the people want!' Land of the free? Government of the people, by the people, and for the people? This is precisely what I referred to in my latest post to Oliver about how our nation has 'devolved.' Moscow was to the USSR as Washington DC is to the US.

Is it too late? Have we slid down too far on that slippery slope? One thing's for certain, there cannot be an economic recovery without job growth in manufacturing. Shifting paper around does not create jobs. Flipping hamburgers or cleaning houses will not replace creating widgets that people in other countries want to buy. Putting our grandkids' grandkids further in debt so we can improve bridges with short-term construction jobs, as well as maintaining our empire will not lessen our federal debt (the interest alone on this debt will soon outgrow our too-big allotment to the Pentagon), Woe is us...

The best argument against a democracy is learned by having a five-minute conversation with the average voter. - Winston Churchill

selguy wrote on October 17, 2010 at 2:10 am

Does the Torah provide any

Does the Torah provide any insights into the legalization of marijuana?

thechampaignlife wrote on October 09, 2010 at 1:10 am

I've never smoked tobacco or

I've never smoked tobacco or marijuana and have no interest. I barely drink alcohol. But if alcohol and tobacco are legal, I see no reason marijuana shouldn't be. It's basically just like a combo of the two and should be regulated as such. No smoking inside public buildings, no driving under the influence, etc. While many other recreational drugs have much more severe consequences, I've heard nothing that sets marijuana apart from tobacco and alcohol. As for it being a gateway drug, it is only so because it is the least harmful and most popular illegal drug. If it were legalized, meth or something similar would be the gateway drug. I'm sure alcohol was considered a gateway drug during Prohibition and I think you'd be hard pressed to convince a significant population today that a glass of wine will lead someone to shoot heroin.

buzorro wrote on October 12, 2010 at 4:10 pm

Two interesting sidenotes

Two interesting sidenotes concerning the Prohibition of alcohol in the Twenties and Thirties:

1) The 'possession' of alcohol was NOT illegal.

2) When the government wanted to take the assets of prohibition offenders (asset forfeiture), a judge deemed that to be unconstitutional. He reasoned that it would open the door to police abuse (they'd focus on busting rich people).

buzorro wrote on October 08, 2010 at 10:10 pm

I won't take the time to talk

I won't take the time to talk about the history of pot use and why it's illegal because of money & power. I will point out that of the 15-20 million estimated illicit drug users, probably 90% of them smoke pot only. I'm sure that the same regulations that apply to alcohol would apply to pot. My company has a zero-tolerance policy on both alcohol & drug use, and I'm sure that that wouldn't change. Same with non-smoking buildings. As far as other drugs are concerned, the famous statesman George Schultz advocated decriminalizing all drugs. Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, ands it's obvious that it isn't working to halt the recreational use of drugs. IMHO, if drug abuse had originally been considered a national Health concern instead of a criminal act, we wouldn't be witnessing nearly the amount of drug abuse and the criminal activities that surrounds it. But classifying it as criminal all these years has led to a boon in the prison industry, defense lawyers, prosecutors, cops, dogs, well you get my drift. It also enabled the first real encroachment on the 4th Amendment. Peace out...

Oliver wrote on October 11, 2010 at 2:10 am

There's an incredible amount

There's an incredible amount of blanket indictment in your "drift".(almost like suggesting something like F.D.R. was behind the bombing of Pearl Harbor)

As for the guarantee against unreasonable searches, I don't know what percentage of drug busts are mistakes. I don't know how many are fishing expeditions. I don't know how many may have been illegal to plant the evidence. I do know that drug raids can be effective. Just next door I've been told one person was sent to prison for being a felon possessing a firearm, this only about 30 feet away from me. Best advice: don't have anything illegal on, with or in you or in your car or on your property.

(sigh) You will probably get your wish about pot becoming a national health issue after pot is legal and new sets of problems crop up. With the increased use will come more car accidents, more under-age use using up additional enforcement resources, 2nd-hand pot smoke issues, cancer concerns possibly, fires (I assume) caused by carelessness, more overeating and its health consequences......

Even with pot out of the illegal category, there'd be plenty of grist left for criminal activity. All the remaining unavoidably addictive, mind and body destroying drugs will get a necessary boost of attention from the criminals and it would seem that one by one those *real* problem illegal drugs would be given in to and legalized. And even after all the drugs, pills, medicines , meth and glues are readily available at the local merchant (gee, who might become "excessively wealthy") there would still be child pornography for the criminals to traffic.
Would there be a cry even for that to become legal?

buzorro wrote on October 12, 2010 at 4:10 pm

There's an incredible amount

There's an incredible amount of blanket indictment in your "drift".(almost like suggesting something like F.D.R. was behind the bombing of Pearl Harbor)

*****That's a documented fact, sir.

...With the increased use will come more car accidents,...

*****No studies have shown that driving while stoned on pot only equals more accidents.

...more under-age use using up additional enforcement resources,...

Perhaps this is why the biggest donors to anti-pot ads are the makers of alcohol and cigarettes.

...cancer concerns possibly...

It's difficult finding a 'clean air' environment to prove that.

...fires (I assume) caused by carelessness...

A lit joint will go out if left unattended, one of tobacco's 600+ additives keeps those cigarette's burning.

... more overeating and its health consequences.....

The most dangerous side-effect of smoking pot.

Your last paragraph points out the what I said before. Let me put it this way,... What kind of war would the 'war on drugs' be if 90% of the 'enemies' suddenly became non-combatants because of the decriminalization or legalization of marijuana? The billions and billions of tax dollars spent fighting the war would be cut by 90%, less prisoners, less cops, less dogs, less states' attorneys, less defense lawyers, less judges, less DEA agents, less criminals, less money for gangs, etc., etc. ad nauseum...yeah, like that's going to happen.

Prohibition didn't work for alcohol and it isn't working now, but that's how the monster we created likes it.

Oliver wrote on October 15, 2010 at 1:10 pm

For at least my record, I did

For at least my record, I did reply to buzorro's line-by-line dismissal of my previous post. I have no clue as to why it is not here since I obviously am able to post as proved by your reading these words.

Anyway, I shall not try to resurrect that post.

My mentioning of F.D.R. and his involvement with Pearl Harbor has turned out to be enlightening as I'd never read such a detailed investigation of the matter as buzorro obviously has.

I was also enlightened to learn that a lit joint would never cause a fire directly though indirectly I've read an item where the sunlamps used to cultivate the stuff caused a massive fire.

As for the rest of his dismissals, I see them more as opinions vs opinions rather than factual. In dismissing the side-effects of pot as only appetite enhancing, it is contended that smoking pot can cause psychological dependence. http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

Oh well, enough of my Sunday afternoon picnic lobs of the old softball for the big batters to hit out into the pastures. .^.

buzorro wrote on October 16, 2010 at 7:10 pm

My line-by-line 'dismissals'

My line-by-line 'dismissals' were my opposing view on the observation being made. They were not intended to be 'dimissals' per se, rather 'retorts.' Everyone has a right to their opinion (although some opinions cannot be uttered in public) and I'm glad that you gave the link to the information that you base your opinion on, and I'm very glad that it was not coming from the boob tube. I would point out though that the article is 26 years old. Twenty years before that, encyclopedias were stating that pot was a 'physically' addictive drug.

...it is contended that smoking pot can cause psychological dependence.

I'm not 'dismissing' this statement but I would like to put that into context. Many people 'have to have' their morning cup of coffee, which is to say that they have a 'psychological dependence' of it. Many other people 'have to have' a variety of things ( the latest episode of 'Survivor,' or a morning walk, or 'texting,'...get my drift?)

...I was also enlightened to learn that a lit joint would never cause a fire directly though indirectly I've read an item where the sunlamps used to cultivate the stuff caused a massive fire...

Er...uh...well, yeah...I guess...You're predicting a rise in fires if pot was re-legalized? Oookkkaaayyy...

...I'd never read such a detailed investigation of the matter as buzorro obviously has...

Gee, thanks. Actually, you can Google 'FDR and Pearl Harbor' and find an article that will explain how FDR promised to keep out of 'Europe's War' and was re-elected because of that. How FDR found a way to break that promise and why he felt that he had to. How our military broke the Japanese encrypted codes months before that 'Day of Infamy,' which enabled FDR to know precisely the day and hour when the Japanese would attack.

I know a lot about some things, and some about a lot of things. I do not watch the boob tube, except the first ten minutes of local stations. I do not read fiction, time is too short. My curiousity is aroused by history, how we, as a nation and society, have devolved over the years. I'm also aware that the history books are written by the victors.

I will close by giving a quote that I hope everyone will remember forever. Some years ago, a group challenged the DEA's classification of pot as a Schedule I drug, along with heroin and other 'hard drugs of no redeeming value.' Both sides presented their arguments with facts, etc. to the DEA. After listening to all of the accumulative evidence presented, Francis Young, Chief Administrative Law Judge for the DEA stated: 'Cannabis Hemp is the safest therapeutically active substance known to man.' He called Hemp, '...safer than many of the foods we buy in the grocery store.'

Oliver wrote on October 17, 2010 at 12:10 am

(sigh) Somehow '84 doesn't

(sigh) Somehow '84 doesn't seem that long ago......
(sigh) I've become addicted to novels this year, just finished Captains Courageous and started Oregon Trail.....Have been reading some non-fiction piece meal too, the development of air power set in WWI, a book about American scandels, and one about the private lives of the former Presidents (and they don't seem to really dig up too much dirt on old Harry it seems, very surprising someone hasn't accused him of knocking off F.D.R.)

I wonder if I should try to become hooked on pot at the appropriate legal time.....Giggling or binging or whatever the thrill is sounds cool. Probably won't though, I'm toooo cheap-which is fortunate since I'm materially poor. And I can giggle or binge without any Cannabis Hemp circulating through these old veins. Actually I can feel happy and fullfilled and creative and social (well, in my hermit ways) and even excited when I think of MM standing on that subway grate--all without any therapeutically active substance. Alas, I am but one unrelaxed old dude and the pot call is reaching a fever pitch. I'm being told pot is nothing, really, nothing at all, and yet, it is everything, that it alone can do even what powerful drugs cannot do for sick people...

Very well. I only hope when it is used daily for hours at the time nearby, it will be done in some non-stinky fashion, I mean so I don't have to be polluted with it. If it could be chewed or shot up like heroine that would be nice, and thoughtful, too since I wouldn't be offending the pot users in like-fashion.

I also hope when buzorro's forever quote is put to the test of time that it holds as true as he believes it to be, for all of our sakes. Because if for some unforeseen reason(s) it doesn't....... you may complete the sentence. I deleted what I had typed.
Oliver
504 Harvey
Danville IL 61832-4916-047

Oliver wrote on October 08, 2010 at 9:10 pm

(Pardon the irrelevancy in

(Pardon the irrelevancy in advance, if possible.)(Sorry, didn't read the link.)
So, pot use becomes legal. U.S. Presidents can finally make speeches while taking drags along with reading off the teleprompters. Pretty good progress, like, man. The local convenience stores become stocked with "Reefer's Madness", "RMYU" (Relax, Man, You're Uptight) brands. The tax revenue creates surplusses beyond anyone's wildest predictions!

But, will there be hassles? Can under-18s buy it? Can one stock up a ton of it? Can one drive under its influence? If so, at what level? (state established I'd assume--an interesting thought of how Springfield would *go* about deciding what % level) Can one smoke it in all the places cigarette smoking is now banned? Would the anti-cigarette people go after it?

And looking ahead to still further progress, what should be the *next* recreational drug to go legal? Meth seems to be popular, and could benefit the farmers and ensure that firefighters have jobs. But, the real nasties seem to center around coke.... Decisions, decisions.