cannabisnews.com: The Drug Legalizers Are At It Again
The Drug Legalizers Are At It Again
Posted by CN Staff on July 07, 2002 at 08:44:27 PT
By Guy W. Farmer
Source: Nevada Appeal
To paraphrase ex-President Ronald Reagan, There they go again! Not satisfied with their victory on "medical" marijuana, the drug legalizers are sponsoring another initiative petition on the November ballot to remove criminal penalties for marijuana possession in Nevada.At first glance, the new initiative is innocuous enough. But upon closer inspection, it raises some serious questions about the motives of the measure's proponents.
Because, in my opinion, the decriminalization of marijuana could well be the first step toward legalization of much more dangerous drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine ("crank"), which is a plague throughout Nevada.The Associated Press reported last month that the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project -- hiding behind something called "Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement" -- spent more than $300,000 to collect nearly 110,000 signatures from Nevada voters on a petition to legalize possession of up to three grams of marijuana. In order to become law, the measure would have to be approved by voters this fall, and again in 2004. Nevadans should carefully consider the possible consequences of such a decision before going to the polls in November.Marijuana Policy Project spokesman Billy Rogers told the AP that most Nevadans don't think people should be arrested for possessing small amounts of marijuana. "Three ounces is quite a bit," countered Lt. Stan Olsen, a lobbyist for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. "If we legalize it (marijuana), what's next?" That's what I'd like to know.The drug legalizers contend that marijuana is benign and may actually have medical properties despite the lack of scientific data to support their point of view. But if marijuana is medicine, why did the Nevada Legislature put the State Agriculture Department, rather than the Pharmacy Board, in charge of the medical marijuana program? "Obviously, marijuana isn't medicine," Pharmacy Board Executive Secretary Keith McDonald told me last week. "That's why they gave it to the Agriculture Department."As for the assertion that marijuana is harmless, let's examine the facts. Drivers in three recent fatal traffic accidents in Nevada were marijuana smokers. To refresh your memories, here are the details: Police say retired California firefighter Stephen Scharosch was drunk and had twice the legal limit of marijuana residue in his system when he drove the wrong way on I-80 east of Reno on May 13, crashing head-on into a van and killing five members of a Utah family, including four young children. He has pleaded innocent and will go to trial on vehicular homicide charges. Michael Ball, 24, of Gardnerville, was high on marijuana when his car struck and killed a 46-year-old mother of four, Tamara Dykes, in a high-speed, head-on crash in Gardnerville Ranchos last July. Ball was convicted of driving under the influence of a controlled substance and sentenced to an eight to 20-year term in state prison. And Las Vegas stripper Jessica Williams, 22, had smoked marijuana before her van ran into a median and killed six teenagers in March, 2000. She was convicted of having drugs in her system during the horrific accident and was sentenced to 18 to 48 years in prison.So, as I was saying, there's no scientific evidence to classify marijuana as medicine. Although the main active ingredient in the weed, THC, may help to relieve nausea and induce weight gain in cancer and AIDS patients, pot smoking hasn't been proven to be a safe or effective THC delivery system. According to scientific studies, marijuana smoke contains more than 200 chemicals, many of which produce psychoactive reactions, cause lung damage and -- in cancer and AIDS patients -- increase the risk of pneumonia and weaken the immune system. Besides, THC is available in the prescription drug Marinol.Therefore, it's not surprising that President Clinton's Drug Czar, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, argues that "medical marijuana is a stalking horse for drug legalization." And remember that he worked for the president who didn't inhale.Drug legalizers receive major funding from three elderly billionaires: Peter Lewis, John Sperling and George Soros, described by former U.S. Health, Education and Welfare Secretary Joseph Califano as "the Daddy Warbucks of Drug Legalization." Between them, the billionaires contributed more than $1.2 million in 1996 to California's Proposition 215, which allows pot to be grown and smoked for "any illness for which marijuana provides relief," including ingrown toenails. The U.S. Supreme Court dealt them a setback two years ago, however, by prohibiting the mass distribution of medical marijuana through California's so-called cannabis clubs.Carson City Justice of the Peace John Tatro, who has dealt with hundreds of drug addicts during his seven-plus years on the bench, says that about half of the people arrested for methamphetamine also test positive for marijuana. "They use meth to get 'up' and marijuana to come down," he told me. "And the vast majority of marijuana users who undergo evaluations by professional counselors are found to have more serious drug problems." Judge Tatro also sees "too many 40-year-olds who still live with Mom and contribute nothing to society" because of their lifelong marijuana addictions. How sad!That's what's at stake as yet another drug legalization measure appears on the Nevada general election ballot this November. This time, let's just say no to the drug legalizers.Guy W. Farmer, a semi-retired journalist and former U.S. diplomat, resides in Carson City.Source: Nevada Appeal (NV)Author: Guy W. Farmer Published: July 7, 2002Copyright: 2002 Nevada AppealContact: appeal tahoe.comWebsite: http://www.nevadaappeal.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Marijuana Law: Further Loosening Soughthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13272.shtmlAmendment Would Legalize Marijuana in Nevadahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12808.shtmlSignature Drive: Group Launches Marijuana Petitionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12807.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #39 posted by whig on April 11, 2006 at 19:46:13 PT
And another one
And Las Vegas stripper Jessica Williams, 22, had smoked marijuana before her van ran into a median and killed six teenagers in March, 2000. She was convicted of having drugs in her system during the horrific accident and was sentenced to 18 to 48 years in prison.He neglects to point out she'd also taken Ecstasy.http://tinyurl.com/htc2x
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #38 posted by ekim on July 09, 2002 at 08:43:48 PT
Dear Dr. Ethan
I remember reading in Jacks book about Dr.Woodward I belive that was head of the AMA speaking at the Sen. Hearings against the banning of cannabis. Was the Dr. name Woodward. do you know if he was head of the AMA and any other info you might have on him. I think he was a lawyer also. Dr.Voth needs to be b-slapped with this info as he is attempting to taint the subject.Speak out the forum!
http://www.nevadaappeal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/news_messages?Kategori=OPINION&ThemeID=124&GroupID=23470 Thank you mike
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #37 posted by Industrial Strength on July 09, 2002 at 00:30:12 PT
your right
I must concede the civlity match to you, my ally. It's like beating your head up against a brick wall. That Dr. Voth is something else.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #36 posted by freedom fighter on July 09, 2002 at 00:05:44 PT
Dr. Voth's Statement..
"Great Article!
Guy Farmer hits the nail on the head. The legalizers have been manipulating public opinion and gainng de facto legalization through ballot initiatives that are bought and paid for. It is the ultimate cynical manipulation of a free society--paying for votes. No doubt legalization advocates will attempt to drown out this important message and undermine Farmer. Commonly, a few create alot of noise as they launch diatribes through their smoke-filled brains and try to hammer those of us who try to stand up to them. The reality is, the legalization advocates will stop at nothing to manipulate public opinion, and the public has been duped once again in Nevada.
Eric A. Voth MD
evoth stormontvail.org "Aiiiiieeeeeee! The Crazy Doc. is backkkkkk.. And he is baddddddddd!Of course, you will know what my response would be! Oh so ever civilized!ff
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #35 posted by freedom fighter on July 08, 2002 at 23:39:43 PT
ooooohhhh, Dr. Voth
bothered to posted down at Guy's forum.. Check this out...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #34 posted by freedom fighter on July 08, 2002 at 22:59:10 PT
Mr. Farmer is like a mule
riding on a Jackass pretending he is riding on a High Horse. This mule thinks he is so perfect. Oh, I know he is not even aware he is part of the whole sinster plot. Mr. Farmer probably do not even know where Holland is at. He probably does not even know that Peace officers in Holland do not carry guns nor does he cares. He knows.Even if I would point this out to such a mule like this, he would not say " Oh, really?". Just a blank stare.I'm not kidding you. It is a sad state of affair in the land of free, oh, I meant to say, piss. Oh, I tried that with my diversion officer. I asked, "Sir, do you know anything about Holland?". He stared at me blank. He knows.I swear to my higher power, that these people's skulls are so thick. No brain matter left. They cannot even think for themselves anymore. If the government says "Mules, people says jump!". These kind do not even bother to say, "How high?". They just jump.How bright of a light shining in their eyes? No idea..What good is a mean mule? What does this mule contribute to the society at large? Especially when this mule is riding on a jackass pretending he is on a high horse. Do we use carrot and stick approach? Oh gosh, the mule does not even like the brand of the carrot. Gotta get a bigger stick and whack his jackass!Only problem is that is Jackass is even more stubborn than he is. Please, Mr. Mule go to the left pen, he heads out to the right pen.Gee, would a bullet or two will finally brighten their dimmed witted skulls? I sure hope not!ff
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #33 posted by RavingDave on July 08, 2002 at 22:28:02 PT
Here We Go Again
Oh joy, another blind conservative rant. Let's see, what will it be today? Revisionist history? Selective science? How about a little of both!Because, in my opinion, the decriminalization of marijuana could well be the first step toward legalization of much more dangerous drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine ("crank"), which is a plague throughout Nevada.At least he admits that this is just his "opinion." The use of the word "could" was also helpful here. Of course, to most of his audience, this reads, "You know that they are already proposing legislation to legalize hard drugs like cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine."The drug legalizers contend that marijuana is benign and may actually have medical properties despite the lack of scientific data to support their point of view.You mean, despite the numerous government-sponsored studies, in several different countries (including the U.S.), which all indicate the medical efficacy of cannabis. Other than those studies, there's no evidence at all!"Obviously, marijuana isn't medicine," Pharmacy Board Executive Secretary Keith McDonald told me last week. "That's why they gave it to the Agriculture Department."Of course, this proves it! After all, if it were medicine, they would have given it over to the Pharmacy Board. And since they gave it to the Agriculture Department, it must not be medicine. By that logic, one could say that drug addiction is not a health problem, because, after all, if it were, they would not have assigned it to the criminal justice system. QED.Police say retired California firefighter Stephen Scharosch was drunk and had twice the legal limit of marijuana residue in his system when he drove the wrong way on I-80 east of Reno on May 13, crashing head-on into a van and killing five members of a Utah family, including four young children.Notice how he brushes past the point that this imbicile was drunk. But of course, it was the pot that really pushed him over the edge. And, by the way, if we were to legalize it, then everyone and his brother would naturally start toking it up and driving under the influence. Never mind that the proposed legislation has provisions for DUI concerning marijuana smokers. Facts, it seems, never get in the way of a good rant.I noticed something interesting in these facts, though. The author lists three accidents involving marijuana. The dates listed are May 2002, July 2001, and March 2000. Do you mean to tell me that he had to go all the way back to 2000, in order to find just three fatalities involving marijuana? Never mind that at least one driver was drunk as well. One fatality per year. Those are pretty good statistics, no matter which way you slice it.Therefore, it's not surprising that President Clinton's Drug Czar, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, argues that "medical marijuana is a stalking horse for drug legalization."Never a truer word was said! But Mr. Farmer didn't need to outline any premise to back up this statement. It's self-evident, given the fact the the office of the "Drug Czar," the Office for National Drug Control Policy, exists solely for the purpose of promulgating this position. What else should Mr. McCaffrey say? Any official position on marijuana would have to be a negative one, regardless of what science has to say.The U.S. Supreme Court dealt them a setback two years ago, however, by prohibiting the mass distribution of medical marijuana through California's so-called cannabis clubs.Aside from the fact that this decision was actually rendered last May (only a year ago), this oft-misstated decision actually only prevented the use of a medical-necessity defense in a criminal trial."And the vast majority of marijuana users who undergo evaluations by professional counselors are found to have more serious drug problems."As an intentionally obtuse statement, this one takes the cake. First off, how many marijuana users undergo "evaluations" by "professional counselors"? By the time someone is in counselling, they probably do have significant problems besides marijuana. That's a given, in that marijuana by itself is rarely a problem at all. This statement is tantamount to saying that the majority of people in 12-step meetings are alcoholics.Judge Tatro also sees "too many 40-year-olds who still live with Mom and contribute nothing to society" because of their lifelong marijuana addictions. How sad!Here we go again. Yes, it is sad, Mr. Farmer. Sad, that you feel that your op-ed piece is so soft on facts that you have to play the fear card. Let's make the masses quiver in fear of the threat that the devil weed will turn our society into a bunch of "mama's boys" who can't support themselves. I'd like to see some statistics on just how many people turn out this way. Of course, that might taint your dainty opinion with the cold, hard truth. But this leads me to something I've been wanting to get out for a while. Just why is it any of your, or anyone else's, business whether or not these individuals contribute anything to society? I don't remember anything in our constitution which says that anyone is duty-bound to contribute anything, including taxes. Frankly, if Joe Nobody wants to smoke a joint, lay around on the couch, eat a Twinkie, and watch reruns of "Married with Children," I couldn't care less. Isn't that freedom, or do I need a new dictionary?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #32 posted by Industrial Strength on July 08, 2002 at 21:21:12 PT
negatives
How can you prove "legalization isn't bad"? Well, in the literal sense of the word, you cannot, but you can bring up places like Holland, Portugal, Switzerland, the Lambeth experiment, which are all successes. Doesn't that, if not prove, make a good point towards the benifit of taking new approaches? You think Guy Farmer is part of this whole sinister plot, not just some misguided, uninformed older person who could be shown the light?Freedom Fighter, uh, you said it yourself, civil unrest. Not uncivil unrest.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #31 posted by Number 7 on July 08, 2002 at 17:31:13 PT
Children into snitches
Speaking of children turning into snitches...http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/77661_potkid08.shtmlI found this article today in the Seattle PI. Thought it may be of interest.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/77661_potkid08.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #30 posted by freedom fighter on July 08, 2002 at 17:22:27 PT
Is it too incivilized?
Or is it too uncivilized? Not sure of the which word to use. But anyway.."So you think it is funny when too many of my friends got killed and sitting in cages because of what you wrote today? Hmmm, you actually think it is okay to turn anybody's child into snitches as long it is not your children to fight the dirty war?"This is what I stated after Guy posted his statement. He did not even response to anybody's posting. All he stated was " thought we'd be hearing from the Burning Man crowd, and sure enough -- they're coming out of the woodwork".What I stated in my post #22, I would do that in private setting. I do'nt expect Guy to response to my postings. I just hope that any other average American who would happen to be reading the postings that I am being civilized enough. Maybe I came across as one pissed off American. I dunno and you can point things out.In my viewpoint, civility can be a two-edged sword. It can change the outcome for better or worse. How long can we remain civilized if things do not change? For example, jewish people back in 30's tried to be civilized for long time and we all know what happened. Another example, the America Civil war. Even after the Civil war, the blacks were still being treated differently. That is until there were massive civil unrest in 50's-60's that things actually did changed. Not perfect but alot better nowdays than back then. Is civil unrests just another word for Incivility?Oh boy!ff
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #29 posted by John Tyler on July 08, 2002 at 10:09:38 PT
Civics 101
It is the right and duty of the people to evaluate their laws and change them if necessary, even if the politicians and others with vested interests disagree. People should not be sent to jail for cannabis possession. It is as simple as that. Hopefully, most of the people of Navada will agree. Three ounces is not too much. The $300,000 spent is a bargin for democracy. The gov. spends many time more than that in their anti-drug campaign.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by observer on July 08, 2002 at 07:20:03 PT
Prohibitionists: Emphasize 'Legalize', not JAIL
Notice again the way that this prohibitionist propagandist emphasized "legalize" and never mentions the "Jail" part.That's no accident: he knows that the establishment media has tainted "legalize" to mean ''the first step toward legalization of much more dangerous drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine ('crank').''He's not stupid: he'll scream "LEGALIZER" (meaning, in case you forget): "legalization of much more dangerous drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine ('crank')."Not to worry ... (well meaning) activists will fall right into his hands. "Legalize!" "Legalize!" They shout back.
Guy Farmer is happy: that's exactly what he wants. "See?" He says, look at these "Legalizers!". Now, the "legalizers" get to 'prove' a negative, that "Legalization isn't bad". Guy Farmer and other propagandists chuckle. Since you can't prove a negative, you just look stupid trying to explain why prohibitionists have "Legalization" all wrong. Instead ... those who love freedom should ATTACK JAIL. Don't fall into the propagandists' trap of attempting defend "Legalize" ... rather, attack the jailing of pot smokers. This is why Guy Farmer never mentions jail. (Notice that he does mention "Legalize", "Legalization", and "Legalizers" over and over.)Remember: make prohibitionsts justify jail for adult pot smokers. Do not defend "Legalization" because "Legalization" is defined to Mom and Pop Voter as "shoving crack and crank down our babies' throats."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by Industrial Strength on July 08, 2002 at 01:56:16 PT
well said
Corvallis. Who knows, if you approach the manner respectfully yet still be blunt and honest he may pay attention to what we have to say. I doubt he would if we were to attack him.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by CorvallisEric on July 08, 2002 at 01:06:29 PT
Civility
From comment 22: No amount of civility would change his mind.
Possibly. But you can bet that any incivility will only reinforce his beliefs and may be broadcast as "evidence" to support his cause.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by FoM on July 07, 2002 at 20:33:06 PT
Here's the article
Mixed Message on Cannabis Reform
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13322.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by p4me on July 07, 2002 at 20:11:53 PT
Guardian says class C to come Wednesday
I don't know why it seems important but it finally appears in reputable print that the Class C announcement will come on Wednesday according to the Guardian of Monday July 8: http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,2763,751192,00.htmlHere is the second paragraph:
Mr Blunkett will make his announcement on Wednesday, 48 hours before he publishes much trailed figures showing a sharp rise in recorded crime. The home secretary is also battling to win police and opposition support for his demand that he be given the powers to intervene against failing police forces. 1,2
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by ekim on July 07, 2002 at 20:09:03 PT
Hello earth to Mr. Farmer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2002/07/01/state1919EDT0142.DTL
Last Mon. S.F.Gate .com at least stated the numbers.
Past votes by Nevadans have reflected a tolerant approach to marijuana use. State voters approved a constitutional amendment to allow medical marijuana twice: 59 percent of voters backed the plan in 1998 and 65 percent approved it in 2000.
"Three ounces is quite a bit," countered Lt. Stan Olsen, a lobbyist for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. "If we legalize it (marijuana), what's next?" That's what I'd like to know.
I bet that is what the “Lobbyist “ said when the people voted to regulate gambling, the sex trade, and alcohol . At least Lt. Stan Olsen admits to being a Lobbyist Mr. Farmer should say who is paying him. Notice he offers no figures on how much taxes that this petition will bring in. Lets look at another distortion “the billionaires contributed more than $1.2 million in 1996 to California's Proposition 215,”
No reasonable person would think $1.2 million from three billionaires compares to the Gov’t. annual $19 Billion spent on the drug war to be anywhere close. Lets take that one real slow again that is 19 one thousand millions. The Gov’t spent tens of millions on a Super Bowl ad smearing Cannabis users. And then there is this gem again by “Lobbyist” Carson City Justice of the Peace John Tatro "And the vast majority of marijuana users who undergo evaluations by professional counselors are found to have more serious drug problems."
Hello earth to Mr. Farmer see any conflict of interest here or are you to close to the fire. Every one you site is making money keeping Cannabis Proibitition. Of course Cannabis use will be serious its-- now pay attention to this Mr. Farmer its Illegal. You know when you go to JAIL, have your kids taken away from you, loose your job, your house, Hello. Mr. Farmer lets see what the bookies make the chances of this passing. When they do please report the odds.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by freedom fighter on July 07, 2002 at 19:49:45 PT
Ohhhhh poooooor Guy
No amount of civility would change his mind. I have had dealt with his type before. Heck, Joyce seemed little bit nicer than he is. From the impression I get, he is like a mule. I do'nt get behind his ass by being civilized lest I get kick in the face. I do'nt even bother to attack. Just tell him he would sell his mother's soul for 30 piece of silver.Ohhhhh pooooorrr Guy
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by Industrial Strength on July 07, 2002 at 17:24:02 PT
poor old Guy
Here is his email adress: GWF2138 aol.comFor what it's worth, I think attacking him wont do much good. As hard as it may be, civility is probably the best course of action.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by p4me on July 07, 2002 at 17:17:45 PT
Monday Guardian full on drug and crime stories
Drugs and crime are all the talk on Monday's edition of the Guardian. It is quite unbelievable by American standards:http://www.observer.co.uk/drugs/0,11908,686419,00.htmlI would like to urge everyone to listen to the audio presentations at http://www.democracynow.org/ I listened to Greg Palast and was a changed man. What he says is incredible. Below that listing on the left is an audio presentation by Noam Chomsky, the professor from MIT and critic of US foreign policy. I went through another personal evolution of perspective after listening to his two part series.I mention democracynow.org again today because it represents ideas that are completely suppressed by the conglomerate media whores.1,2
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by Dan B on July 07, 2002 at 14:28:24 PT
Lehder
Your comment 17 is great. I was thinking along the same lines when I read that part of the article, but I am glad you responded to it first because you said it better than I would have.On the lighter side--and quite off-topic--I'd like to submit for your perusal an article about exacting revenge on George W. via colonoscopy . . .http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0707-07.htmDan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by goneposthole on July 07, 2002 at 14:14:05 PT
Just a Hard on, not an erection
The government has a real hardon for cannabis imbibers.An erection implies there is something desirable in order for it to occur.A hardon implies it just won't get soft, and remains that way indefinitely. No satisfaction to come of it. A very frustrating situation.The one the government has for cannabis and cannabis imbibers is a big as the Washington Monument.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by Lehder on July 07, 2002 at 13:41:54 PT
proof of scientific illiteracy...
and plain evidence of a complete lack of any sense at all.Police say retired California firefighter Stephen Scharosch was drunk and had twice the
legal limit of marijuana residue in his system when he drove the wrong way on I-80 Michael Ball, 24, of Gardnerville, was high on marijuana when his car struck and killed a
46-year-old mother of fourAnd Las Vegas stripper Jessica Williams, 22, had smoked marijuana before her van ran
into a median and killed six teenagersThese observations are a great resource for anyone looking for scientific evidence. If scientific evidence cannot be found by examining car wrecks, then there is no scientific evidence to be found anywhere, not even in scientific studies. So, as I was saying, there's no scientific evidence to classify marijuana as medicine. I propose that a scientific study be funded by the government to find scientific evidence. The study would set automobiles into high speed turns with drivers who are drunk on alcohol or high on drugs. In the event of a crash, scientists could examine the scene to see if alcohol or drugs can be used as medicines.All scientific study of medicine should begin with a car wreck. For example, let's examine laetrile: A cancer patient should be injected with laetrile and administered an intoxicating dose of alcohol. The patient should then be put into a vehicle and instructed to drive at high speed until a crash occurs. The wreckage can be examined for scientific evidence for the efficacy of laetrile as a medicine. As a control test, a second - sober - driver should be injected with laetrile and told to drive until crashing. The wreckage can be examined for scientific evidence of laetrile's medicinal powers and compared with the results of the first (drunken) crash.Let's hear it for drug-war science!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by E_Johnson on July 07, 2002 at 13:29:10 PT
Another drug war fluffer
Like a porn film set worker hired to keep the star hard on camera, some coulmnists are hired to keep society hard on drugs.We wouldn't want Nevada going soft!Not when there are so many taxpayers waiting to be screwed out of their money and their rights!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by Nasarius on July 07, 2002 at 13:23:24 PT
Opinion?
"Because, in my opinion, the decriminalization of marijuana..."'Opinions' are meaningless here. There is substantial evidence (Holland, anyone?) that cannabis decriminalization works amazingly well, and huge amounts of evidence that prohibition of any kind is doomed to failure.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by p4me on July 07, 2002 at 12:28:35 PT
San Francisco Gate on Nevada-7/1/02
The SFgate.com didn't have this kind of tone in its July 1st article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2002/07/01/state1919EDT0142.DTL1,2
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by goneposthole on July 07, 2002 at 12:20:09 PT
Update- somewhat off topic
Read about what others also think about John Ashcroft.
http://www.murderoususjudges.com
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by freedom fighter on July 07, 2002 at 12:03:38 PT
Speak out the forum!
http://www.nevadaappeal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/news_messages?Kategori=OPINION&ThemeID=124&GroupID=23470Give an input or two on this stupidity!ff
http://www.nevadaappeal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/news_messages?Kategori=OPINION&
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by goneposthole on July 07, 2002 at 11:51:10 PT
That would be 'President's Speech'
Forgot the apostrophe.I might be dumber than he looks.Nah.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by goneposthole on July 07, 2002 at 11:46:21 PT
Presidents speech
A scripted whitewash if there ever was one. Type in "Bushisms" on a search and find out how he really misuses the english language.He might be dumber than I look.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by goneposthole on July 07, 2002 at 11:37:13 PT
Those other legalizers
Ritalin is a real nice legal drug for 'the children'. Gotta get 'em popping those pills.Hypocrisy runs rampant again.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by FoM on July 07, 2002 at 11:08:21 PT
Inquisitive Minds Want To Know
I agree SirReal, What is twice the legal limit of marijuana?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by SirReal on July 07, 2002 at 10:51:04 PT
Huh?
"....had twice the legal limit of marijuana in..."Soooo,...what's the legal limit in Nevada...??They're resorting to lies and scare tactics....we're winning....snicker snicker
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by qqqq on July 07, 2002 at 10:30:49 PT
....Does ANYONE,,,
.....want to stand up for the pResidents radio address?...I cant blame you if you're kinda scared to agree,,,but there must be someone out there,somewhere,who would like to speak out in defense of our ruler!?..There must be someone who is not at all shocked by this radio address?. After all,, they say he's very popular according to the polls!,,but I'm startin' to think that maybe that the popularity is among Pols!,,He must be popular with Polish people!?.........
....
anyway......I find such things as this most recent radio address ,,astonishingly Dazzling!!! I am dumbfounded and baffled!! ...I am stunned to think this is not fake......
...makes me happy I'm in outer space....
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by p4me on July 07, 2002 at 10:26:00 PT
Condensed garbage
"Three ounces is quite a bit," countered Lt. Stan Olsen
Yes someone carrying 3 ounces might hurt their back from strain. Maybe 3 ounces ought to be applied to cigarettes because that is really poison and amount is everything. There should be a law that a person can only have one pack of tobacco because 3 ounces is a lot.The drug legalizers contend that marijuana is benign and may actually have medical properties despite the lack of scientific data to support their point of view.
There is plenty of data. I myself am a datum along with every other user that has a chronic condition. The fact it is not properly compiled and analysed has to do with a ban on cannabis research in 1975 by Gerald Ford. It has to do with 1966-76 research at American Universities being destroyed by the American government under Reagan in 1983.As far as the $1.2 million the billionaires contributed to Proposition 215- how does that compare to the money the T&A industries put up to fight it. And since Guy Farmer knows the little numbers please tell us if the government spent $950 million or $1.8 billion over the last 5 years to carry out its WOSD. And then again maybe these guys are billionaires and the reason the government is growing a debt of $1.111 billion a day is because they know how to ration money instead of pissing away rivers of it. And if that $1.2 million is so much what do you think of the $1.5 million the (ONDCP)government paid Fox for the storyline in a two-part episode of 90210 in 1999 as reported in this July 2nd posting at Cannabis Culture: http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2493.htmlComplete garbage is all I can say and it has the stinch of Toronto's mounds of garbage as well.1,2
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by MikeEEEEE on July 07, 2002 at 10:07:29 PT
The more noise the better
That means we're doing something right.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by dddd on July 07, 2002 at 09:35:51 PT
...Imagine...
..Imagine that the following is a spoof that I was trying to pull off,,,,a fake rendition of a radio address speech from Dan Quayle in a dubya disguise.........nope,,,this is word for word ,ACTUAL..... You couldnt make this kinda shit up! ..It would seem stupid,,ridiculous ,,and too farfetched.......?..This reads like something from the Twilight Zone of the Outer Limits...........It would be silly,,if it wasnt REAL,,and evidently,,a majority of US citizens see nothing wrong,or strange about it!!!!...d+3.
President Bush's July 6 Radio Address to the Nation
U.S. Newswire
6 Jul 12:02President Bush's July 6 Radio Address to the Nation
To: National Desk
Contact: White House Press Office, 202-456-2580WASHINGTON, July 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is the
text of President Bush's radio address to the nation today:THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, Americans are
celebrating the 226th anniversary of our independence. On the 4th
of July, we count our blessings, and there are so many to count.We are thankful for the families that share our life in this
land of liberty. We're thankful for the opportunities given to us
every day in this country. And we are thankful for our freedom, the
freedom declared by the founding fathers, defended by many
generations and granted to each one of us by Almighty God.Americans know that our country did not come about by chance.
Our nation was first designed as a colony, serving an empire and
answering to a king. The founders had other things in mind. In the
summer of 1776, they declared that these colonies are and of right
ought to be free and independent states. All Americans can draw a
straight line from the free lives we lead today to that one moment
when the world changed forever.From that day in 1776, freedom has had a home and a defender.
Unlike any other country, America came into the world with a
message for mankind, that all are created equal and all are meant
to be free.There is no American race, there's only an American creed. We
believe in the dignity and rights of every person. We believe in
equal justice, limited government and the rule of law, personal
responsibility and tolerance toward others. This creed of freedom
and equality has lifted the lives of millions of Americans, of
citizens by birth and citizens by choice. This creed draws our
friends to us, sets our enemies against us, and always inspires the
best that is in us.In this 226th year of our independence, we have seen that
American patriotism is still a living faith. We love our country,
only more when she is threatened. America is the most diverse
nation on earth. Yet, in a moment we discovered again that we are
a single people, we share the same allegiance, we live under the
same flag -- and when you strike one American, you strike us all.More than ever in the lifetimes of most Americans, our flag
stands for a true united country. We've been united in our grief
and we are united in our resolve to protect our people and defeat
the enemies of freedom. At this hour, more than 60,000 American
troops are deployed around the world in the war against terror.
Many of you have family members serving in the military -- wherever
they are stationed, this nation is depending on them and you can be
proud of them.America's service men and women and our veterans know better
than anyone that our love for country is shown in works. That
spirit of service is alive and strong in America today. As we fight
a war abroad, at home, Americans are answering the call of service,
giving their time and energy to causes greater than self-interest.
This nation is confronting a terrible evil, and we are overcoming
evil with good.Today, as much as ever before, America bears the hopes of the
world. Yet, from the day of our founding, America's own great hope
has never been in ourselves alone. The founders humbly sought the
wisdom and the blessing of Divine Providence. May we always live by
that same trust, and may God continue to watch over the United
States of America.Thank you for listening.END
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by pppp on July 07, 2002 at 09:14:25 PT
....I dont know...
.....Guy W. Farmer..??....yea sure,,,why not "Dude W. Sharecropper",,
,or,"Elliot W. Plumber".....
Huck W. Garbageman"
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by Prime on July 07, 2002 at 09:00:50 PT
What did I miss?
I didnt see why it shouldnt be made legal? Lets see, its presently illegal and all this is taking place. So having it illegal has done... nothing.This is the same ole garbage. Mr Farmer's obviously learned how to cut and paste.
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment