cannabisnews.com: Don't Hold Your Breath in All This Smoke










  Don't Hold Your Breath in All This Smoke

Posted by FoM on June 05, 2001 at 09:15:49 PT
By Elizabeth Bromstein 
Source: Montreal Gazette 

"I don't think I want pot to be decriminalized," a friend once told me as we sat on his balcony, him smoking a spliff, me yammering on about the evils of the war against drugs. "It's the only law I break on a regular basis," he continued. "It makes me feel like I'm doing something taboo. The rest of the time I'm such a good guy." It's a good thing he feels that way, because it's not going to happen. If you are a marijuana advocate who has been fooled by the attention the war on drugs has been getting in the media lately, wake up and smell the smoke being blown up your ... oh, right, can't write that. Onward. 

Of course, we can't touch this issue without making the medicinal/recreational distinction. Medicinal toking might be legalized and the cops around here might have to find other ways to make themselves feel like big men besides busting places with names like the Compassion Club. But beyond that, nothing is going to happen, even though anyone with an IQ of over 70 knows decriminalizing pot would be the smartest thing to do. Last Tuesday, Jean Chretien told reporters that although he supports legalization for medicinal purposes, he simply said No when asked whether his government intends to decriminalize marijuana possession. Why? For the same reason he probably wouldn't have shoved that protester if he didn't know he was well protected. He doesn't have the guts. And who can blame him? Canada has invested a lot of money in the war against drugs and as you might have read in Saturday's Gazette, cannabis offences accounted for three-quarters of drug-related offences in 1999. Remove those offences and, as Tom Naylor, professor of economics at McGill University, pointed out, the so-called "drug problem" becomes quite minuscule. That would be embarrassing. But the embarrassment would be nothing compared with the wrath of the United States, the superpower with whom we share the longest unprotected border in the world. How long do you think all that good will would last if we were to decriminalize the herb? We're talking about a country that invested $1.3 billion in Plan Colombia, the purpose of which, according to that country's president, Andres Pastrana, is to help eliminate the production of drugs, generate employment, boost trade and bring peace to the country - the practice of which includes aerial spraying of herbicides on to legal and illegal crops alike, killing the livelihood of peasant farmers, not to mention poisoning waters and endangering Colombia's fragile ecosystem. We're talking about a country that bars people from entering if they've ever smoked pot in their life. And they do ask you. I know people who have been asked. Smuggling would become an immense problem and the U.S. would never put up with it. Knock, knock! Who's there? A Canadian. Get out of the car and keep your hands where I can see 'em! And what would all that ill will do to trade policies? Can we afford to find out? Let us suppose for one moment that there might be one or two corrupt cops or politicians out there working with the Mafia and the bikers who control the drug trade. And let us just suppose that the Mafia and the bikers might not want pot decriminalized because it would cut into their revenue. That also might cause a little ill will. Back to reality. The fact of the matter is, Chretien simply won't take the risk, and I can't think of a politician who would. Joe Clark has made his pro-decriminalization stance clear but a) Will the Tories ever get into office again? And b) If they did, would his conviction go the way of Chretien's GST promise? I'm willing to bet $17 (that's all I have in the bank) that the answer is b. I hope I'm wrong and if anyone in office is reading this, please take it as a challenge. Stand up and do something right, you pussy! Come on. Prove me wrong! I dare you. Source: Montreal Gazette (CN QU)Author: Elizabeth BromsteinPublished: June 5, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Gazette, a division of Southam Inc.Contact: letters thegazette.southam.caWebsite: http://www.montrealgazette.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmPM Says No To Looser Drug Lawshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9895.shtmlMarijuana Use Will Remain a Crime: Chretien http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9894.shtmlCanada Moves Toward Decriminalizing Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9892.shtml

END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help









 


Comment #42 posted by lookinside on June 07, 2001 at 18:52:56 PT:

thanks for sharing...
did i mention i'm also a member of a powerful trade union?which happens to support worksite drug testing?my employer had lunch with the shrub last week...afterwordshe commented that the shrub isn't very bright...(dumb as astick) interesting, coming from a republican..(anintelligent one)
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #41 posted by Damien on June 07, 2001 at 12:07:20 PT:

Lehder's comments
In England we have a very well defined class system which means that entry to certain clubs or office is restricted to the few that benifit from private education.Your comments sound just like those of the elitte upper class.Yes all people are born the same.What makes people what they are is the envioment in ehich they were brought up in.If you are never informed then you may sound thick.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #40 posted by Damo on June 07, 2001 at 11:44:44 PT:

How tough is it?
Can some Americans from the New Jersy area please answer a question for me?How hard is it to get a good smoke of strong weed in New Jersy?I've been offerd a job in there and would like to know the cost and how long does it take to get some?(do you have to order in advance like a friend recently told Me?Cheers.Damien in England.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #39 posted by FoM on June 06, 2001 at 23:05:33 PT

What's Wrong
I just wondered why people are arguing instead of discussing different opinions. I don't have the time or the energy to figure it out right now. I hope we will not fight in this forum. That means a lot to me. Thanks!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #38 posted by just me on June 06, 2001 at 22:59:30 PT:

lookinside...
Spoken like the 5th generation Democrat you are. It's ok for you but not others, it's ok as long as it falls with what you believe. I could care less if you believe me or not, in fact, you can kiss my Republican ass. I've got nothing more to say in reply to you. You no longer exist as far as I'm concerned. G.W. Bush Won, get over it.goodbye,
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #37 posted by lookinside on June 06, 2001 at 19:38:22 PT:

just me...
something that has bothered me online since first startedparticipating are folks who will belittle, harass, andgenerally behave in an insulting manner sitting at a keyboard...in my mind this is cowardice...if you behaved toward myself or one of my guests that way inmy home, i would remove you bodily...your behavior here hasbeen at asinine...you claim various heroic acts...if they are true, mycongratulations...what i detect in your behavior is an inability to live andlet live...who died and made YOU god?one thing i appreciate in this forum is that the regularstend to comment in a positive and productivemanner...educating and expressing positive ideas onpromoting the decriminalization and/or legalization ofmarijuana...i wish you could do the same...i was being flippant concerning alcohol andmethamphetamine...it was an attempt to point out that yourattitude is a little out on the edge...i do read...i just don't BELIEVE everything i read...it ismy opinion, based on EVERYTHING i've read that thepresidential election was not decided...the supreme courtstopped it before it was finished...
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #36 posted by freedom fighter on June 06, 2001 at 19:34:44 PT

Poetic Internet Justice!
Never say NeverOh, God, that was a good one!It will happenThat sure one smart person, here is the nutshellThe U.S. drug lawscomming to a town near youWelcome, DamienAnd where do the antis get these ideas?Let's not irk the criminals!Oh, for a world of instant justicehollandhollandWhy Support Cannabis Prohibition...to "tones" re:" Holland...you're out of line, Just Meout of line...notBush is no fool, but the Democrats are...republicratswrong again...just me?You suck, no YOU suck, no YOU suck, no YOU suck.i'm a lifelong democrat from at leastding! round 3Right wing WASP thinking that got us Ashcrofthere we go again...one for the road...just me, try decafenough flame warsGreat well thought out pointsthe trouble with antisDamn, it got hot in here!and we thought this was over...'drug war'Interesting article, huh?Vote Your Conscience!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #35 posted by mayan on June 06, 2001 at 17:10:43 PT

Vote Your Conscience!
 There is no such thing as a wasted vote, that is unless you fail to vote your conscience. Remember Jesse? A wasted vote? Say what you will about him, but at least he tells it like it is. A vote for the RepubliCrats is a vote for an oppressive centralized government imho. Just look at our system now! LMFAO!!! This government will topple under it's own weight unless it sheds some real quick. Are we truly free? Is there liberty? Do we have justice? If you can answer yes to any of those questions then please enlighten me.... Anybody. I pray we can all direct our energy towards the same goal, for if we don't we will NEVER achieve it.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #34 posted by arcturus on June 06, 2001 at 09:03:22 PT

Interesting article, huh?
smile...
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #33 posted by observer on June 06, 2001 at 07:17:41 PT

'drug war'
Whereas, I believe the drug war started in 1937Although Nixon did step up rhetoric and funding, the term "drug war" is used, for example, in the 30s classic Reefer Madness. (It is not spoken, but flashed on the screen for less than a second in a newspaper headline montage.)
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #32 posted by just me on June 06, 2001 at 06:05:03 PT:

and we thought this was over...
Libertarian: I don't even drink coffee. If you had read what I wrote you'd see that, at this time I'm clean but when I choose to partake it's Marijuana only. Republicans are not Nazi's were closer to the Founding Fathers. If you speant a little time reading The Federalist Papers and the Anti-federalist Papers, you'd have 1/2 a clue. As for the U.N. they're one of the most liberal organziations in the world, bent on global government and a global ban on guns. Any Libertarian worth his weight in the feces you spew forth is AGAINST the U.N. because Libertarian's are pro-gun. You better go back and read what I'm for. I don't follow the party line on everything, but I refuse to give up my guns. Well, if they get my guns they'll be HOT and EMPTY. I'm pro-choice and pro-death penalty, go figure. I'm pro-gay rights, pro-womans rights, pro-gun, anti-racist, basicall Pro-RIGHTS period. Including our Constitutional Right to Free Speech (that our founding fathers fought so hard to give us) and our right to Keep and Bear Arms. My right to Self-preservation is just one reason why I won't vote for a Democrat that would LOVE to disarm our great nation. I could care less what you do in your bedroom. I do, however, care when Slick Willy lies to Congress. While his afair was between him and his wife, Billary, when asked under oath about it, he shouldn't have lied. We've already covered teh various parites involved and we all agree there's more than 2, it's just that only 2 are viable right now."Vote Libertarian, or don't complain about your lack of liberty." For one; I don't tell YOU how to vote, quite teh contrary, I support your right to vote as you wish, don't try to tell me how to vote. Second; Don't try to censor MY right to Free Speech, this is the internet, after all and it wouldn't do you any good anyway.Third and lastly: I'm not complaining about my lack of liberty, I'm trying to insure that I KEEP my rights and not hand them over to the likes of the Liberal Democrats who would gladly take them away or sell them for bloated social programs. jorma nash: I though I had made myself clear but some people just don't get it. By "wasted" I don't mean to imply invalid, just not effective in combating the Democrats from taking my guns. There are wide differences in Dems and Reps, as even Libertarian pointed out. Not every one follows the strict party line, as I don't, but Gun-Grabbing is NOT an option I'd care to chance. The reason i pointed out that President Roosevelt was a Democrat was in response to, "Current Drug War ignited: under Nixon. one of your precious republicans." Whereas, I believe the drug war started in 1937, I will not argue that both sides escalate it however. In fact there are more reformists, NOW, that are democrat. As we get more like Gov. Gary Johnson we'll see more sweeping national reform. It will happen, I say. It's just a matter of how long. "i also find it encouraging that people with diverse political views can agree on the insanity of the WoSD." It's been my opinion that the only ones for the WoSD are the ignorant and they can be educated. I've been working for reform for a while now, just not here in this forum. I'm also active about Gun-control and the danger to society it entails. I've found I can advocate many positions. Mr. Tuck: Man, you don't have to tell me about red-necks, I lived in Bakersfield for a while, that's where they're hatched, I think. I, however, am not a red-neck either :) My friends, who know me, laugh when people call me that for my pro-gun, pro-America, pro-Constitutional stance. I'm actually an ex-surfer/stoner from SoCal Far from redneck but completely informed about The Consitution, our founding fathers, our fight for freedom, patriots and I'm also a damn fine shot ;) I stand by my patriotism, I say what I mean, although I sometimes use the wrong words to express what I'm trying to say. I honestly don't buy the anti minority stuff. Bush comes from Texas which is heavily Hispanic. I tehink our justice system tends to punush minorities disproportionally but that's not something President Bush ordered. It's just the ignorance that still hasn't been completely educated out of America. I never said it was perfect, just worth fighting for. I think as far as racism goes, we'll see MUCH less in a few more generations. Growing up in SoCal, I never really understood racism for a long time, I grew up around all races, they were just people to me. My father was born in 1918 and race did matter back then. My father was one smart man and he quickly figured out that what he was taught, just didn't make sense. He was the best MAN I ever knew. As I've said time and again the WoSD is being waged by the ignorant and they can be educated. Many of the same ignorance, lies and fear that caused The 1937 Marijuana Tax Act, with a few more tossed in as time passed are still believed today. We just have to teach them the truth and the Web is going to be a great tool for that. If you doubt me, still, just look at: http://www.norml.org/news/index.shtml#story2 If Walters can learn, even just a little for now, then anyone can. I've lived in Mexico for a while but I've never had the chance to visit Europe, yet. I've learned from otehr forums enough to know I will NEVER give up my Constitutional Rights to live in the Netherlands. Also, since I grew up in SoCal, and lived in Mexico, I'm a tropical kind of guy, so I'll never live where it snows, either. :P Flee if you must, I will stay and fight for change. It'll be easier to change things if the informed are here to teach the ignorant. Unfortunately our school teachers are among the ignorant, for the most part. There used to be respect for the law here and someday I hope to see it again. "Also how can winning the popular vote by a wide margin be construed as stealing an election,..."First; It wasn't all that wide of a margin.Second; The popular vote isn't what elects our President, it never has. Ask any Constitutional scholar, they all say that's it's doubtfull that the electoral college will ever be overturned. It's what our founding fathers wanted."good luck living in the revolutionary bloodbath coming"I'll reply to that with this quote:"Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains or slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me Liberty or give me death." -Patric Henry Lehder: HAHAHAHA, damn, man, that's funny. I'd only disagree to one point though. Check the link I posted about Walters, if he can learn any one can. Drugs, even pot, are NOT for everyone. Some people just "don't got a head for ganja."kaptinemo: Not to get into depth here, but the first federal gun ban was in the 30's and it banned automatic weapons. Thanks, again President Roosevelt. While George Sr. did damage you'll find more Dem gun-grabbers than Rep Gun-grabbers. `nuff said."Are the actions of pols in violation of the Constitution? That's the only yardstick I apply to gauge their performance. Because if their actions do indeed violate that document, then they violate us all." Very well said and it's my belief that abolishing the 2nd Amendment or attempting to even would be such a violation. I'm all for a complete repeal of all anti-gun laws which is not to say that I advocate the use of guns for crime, which should remain illegal. I'm also for the repeal of The 1937 Marijuana Tax Act. and subsequent legislation regarding the WoSD.Sheesh, that was long! NOW, I *REALLY* hope that I've been clear enough THIS time. :)
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #31 posted by kaptinemo on June 06, 2001 at 04:56:18 PT:

Damn, it got hot in here!
(Pulling on my old Nomex flight suit.)Someone turn on the AC, quick!Look, friends, we will all sooner or later find out that there are some things we will have to 'agree to disagree' with. I certainly don't share all the opinions that are expressed here. For example, anyone concerned for the survival of the 2nd Amendment should realize that the so-called "assault-rifle" ban was instigated by none other than NRA member and former US President George H. W. Bush. (Klinton didn't originate it; he merely expanded upon it.) That's hardly the action of a supposedly staunch defender of the Constitution. More like the actions of a "Liberal gun-grabber."I said it before, labels don't mean a thing. They are bunkum for the edification of Joe Sixpack, who doesn't want to expend any more of his remaining alcohol-destroyed brain cells in trying to discern true motivations and allegiences of 'his' pols. Political labels are little more smoke and mirrors to confuse the easily distracted. "By their works, ye shall know them." If a Republican votes for a gun control measure, according to the reasoning of some, they are not a Republican...despite the label. If a Democrat votes for the opening of wilderness areas for oil drilling, some of us might be tempted to say that they are not Democrats. But what it all comes down to is this: Are the actions of pols in violation of the Constitution? That's the only yardstick I apply to gauge their performance. Because if their actions do indeed violate that document, then they violate us all.   
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #30 posted by Lehder on June 06, 2001 at 04:23:29 PT

the trouble with antis
some of my favorite people are called hippies or hipsters because they are hip to things, meaning that they understand various things because they think about many things at length and in depth. (i don't recommend this sort of activity to everyone, just as i would not recommend that you, stranger, take any sort of an illegal drug or herb.)now if you hop into a powerful elevator in a one story building you're most likely going to encounter a few problems. and if you try making a large addition, a study or a library, onto your small home and you live alongside the freeway or on a muddy california precipice - well, you really ought to get some good outside advice.if you try to raise your consciousness and there's absolutely nothing upstairs, well, may god help you. if you're intent on expanding your mind and have only an ort of dried out meat to work with inside a very tough little pignut shell, well then, it's really going to hurt!drugs are not for everyone and they can indeed be dangerous; mind-numbing liquors and lethal cigarettes might be the best things for you. the trouble with antis is that they simply lack the mental capacity to benefit from illegal drugs. call me a bigot if you like, but we are really not created equal: a good many of you are inferior to a good many others, and i believe there's a dim bestial awareness of this fact and a resentment there and a jealousy that accounts for the hatred that infuses Your Drug War. no, drugs are not for everyone. take marijuana for example. for many people the only possible uses are, perhaps, medical ( though you might not care to risk it ) or recreational ( collapsing in a pile of useless giggles). i won't go into this matter in any more depth since you either already know or else you cannot be taught. drugs are not for everyone. check with a hippy first, make sure you're not a godd*mn imbecile. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #29 posted by Steven Tuck on June 06, 2001 at 04:08:41 PT:

Great well thought out points
Just Me, Those are good points you bring up and part of me agrees with you on some level, but you must also see our point all these analogies and right-wing rhetoric is what I have thrown in my face by knee-jerk, red-neck, high schools diploma carrying(probably played football like my hero Al Bundy also) pigs up here in N. Cali everyday who parrot it like brainwashed cult members only because it serves their racist/elitest views. I was wrong to join in your negativity exercise and like you gave a knee-jerk response that was hasty at best. But if you would present your point in a more calm and rational demeanor then the concepts that you espouse would not be so offensive to so many. Tolerance of others viewpoints along with truth are the victems of living in a police state. While I am glad that you have so much faith in the very people you rail against to wake up and change but I fear that I am way to much a realist to buy Bush's song and dance. I too was a republican for years until I realized many of their policies were subtle ploy's to keep minorities and poor whites "in their place", just look at who he named to his cabinet. He just lined up with the most rabid drug warriors in the world. John Ashcroft on CNN saying he wants to re-invigorate the war on drugs. With the disproportionate numbers of black men in jail or disenfranchised, do you really believe that 12% of the nation commits 70% of the crime; selective perception? We must all disagree in a civil fashion like true citizens in the whole meaning of the word. I also challenge you to go to Holland and see freedom for yourself(almost anywhere in Europe for that matter and I'am not just talking about dope either), when was the last time you saw someone who wasn't a town "good ole boy" walk up to a cop in USA just to talk or BS. It happens everyday there because the people there respect the rule of law because it's not been twisted to maintain the status quo. I am sorry for being rude to a fellow vet but I believe that all like us must flee for our safety until this shrub madness blows over, one thing though is I believe he will push this police state so far that eventually Amerika will eventually puke it out and go to a more Jeffersontonian form of gov't. Also how can winning the popular vote by a wide margin be construed as stealing an election, but I am no fan of Gore either. That's why me and many others like me are leaving for a saner world, good luck living in the revolutionary bloodbath coming. Steve  
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #28 posted by jorma nash on June 06, 2001 at 04:03:54 PT

enough flame wars
 ok, the flame war has been fun,but it's not something i usually indulge in.i'll try to finish this off without the personal insults.(oh, just consider 'republicrat' as shorthand for'both the republican and democratic parties' if the word bothers you.)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"While I'd most likely come closer to being a Libertarian myself, I wont waste my vote trying to get one in office"a defendable argument, and the usual reason people won't vote Libertarian.my response is: just because a "third" party (or "second," as i number them) can't win, doesn't mean a vote for them is wasted.if a "third" party generates enough interest, the republicrats adopt their platforms to match.example: ross perot didn't have a chance to win, but he got the republicrats talking financial reform.i think if people stopped voting for which republicratic faction they consider the "lesser evil," both factions would be radically transformed by now.to my thinking, a vote for any republicrat is a vote for the status quo. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"If you want to know who was President when the WoSD (1937 Marijuana Tax Act.) started, it was Franklin D. Roosevelt under his administration we saw much damage."i am not a democratic apologist. as i keep saying, both parties escalate the WoSD.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~so thanks for the, um, lively debate, let's call it.it seems to me that the most interesting discussionsoccur here when people *don't* agree 100%.i also find it encouraging that people with diverse political views can agree on the insanity of the WoSD."I doubt our ideas on Marijuana reform are all that different. I'd say, it's our choice of political parties that separate us the most."i agree. i think i'll try to agree to disagree with you about political parties, and focus on our common goals.i hope you can do the same.---------------------------sincerely, jorma nash. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #27 posted by Libertarian on June 06, 2001 at 03:48:27 PT

just me, try decaf
These posts have just confirmed my belief that all Republicans are Nazis. They are all a bunch of Bible-thumping, jackbooted freaks who don't give a damn if they destroy the human race as long as they can profit financially. Hey, just me, if we live in such a great nation, why is it #13 on the U.N. Human Freedom index. Do you know that means 12 other nations have more freedom than the U.S.? Republicans are: Anti-abortion rights, anti-environmental protections, pro-death penalty (regardless of whether innocents might be getting executed), anti-free speech (they don't like "dangerous" pornography and "perverted" writings, shows, etc.), anti-minority, anti-gay rights (because many are in bed w/ the Christian right, they view homosexuality as a sin and fight gay rights legislation).. could go on and on...The problem with Republicans: They won't stay out of my bedroom, they are the "morals" police.The problem with Democrats: They won't stay out of my wallet, they love taxes and pork projects.The problem with the government: A two-party system who's worst ideas get turned into legislation that has taken away *all* personal freedoms.Vote Libertarian, or don't complain about your lack of liberty.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #26 posted by just me on June 06, 2001 at 02:29:03 PT:

one for the road...
Mr. Tuck: I'm not a "Right Winger." I tend to sit just right of center. As I stated in my previous reply, I'm also pro-choice, pro-pot and not that it matters but I'm pro-gay rights and EXTREEMLY anti-racist. While you may have given up your "birthright," I was born and raised here in Southern California. I know, all too well, that "not all of us in the movement are kids or 'potheads'" I didn't call anyone here a "pothead", in fact, I've smoked pot for more years than not. Indeed, this is a forum for those of US who care, when have I said anything different? I guess you should have listened to your mother rather than assuming things about me that you know nothing about. I, too, am a service connected diabled vet but not nearly as damaged as you. I'm also a sport skydiver with only a little over 300 jumps. "I take serious offense with your trivialization of my problems" again you don't know what your talking about. I ****don't**** trivialize your, or others peoples, need for medication. I voted FOR prop 215 and *I* used marijuana for medical reasons, too. Nausea and pain were my justifcation so don't you DARE tell me what *I* support or not. Just because I'm Pro-Bush doesn't make me anti-pot. You see, you're just preaching to the choir here. I've been called a lot of things in my life, but never a "neo-nazi" I'm known as a patriot and a Constitutional scholar by some But genocide and superior race crap is just not what I'm about. I'll excuse your blunder out of respect for a fellow Vet who's obviously on various pain meds but I'll also tell you that you are WRONG. My Family has fought in every war since the Civil War, my Uncles in WWI, Korea, VietNam, my Father in WWII, Cousins in Desert Storm, etc. So get a grip, soldier. I have no idea how many people I've helped but I've personally saved a family of 8 in house fire in Mexico, a man who was shot on the side of the road in California and another stranger who had drowned at the beach. I asked for no reward or recognition, and again, you speak out of your ass. I don't know much about Ky. other than the short time I was stationed at Ft. Knox, in fact, I got my first tattoos in Radcliff but I remember how beautiful it was. "I plan on leaving this Gestapo nation as soon as I can get the hell out of your twisted country." Yes, you sound mighty bitter. You can leave if you choose, it's no skin off my back. As I said, I prefer to stay and fight to correct the problems like a Good American. I love MY Country. It may be somewhat broken, but it's worth fighting liberals to fix. If that sounds harsh to you, oh well. I've explained away enough of your mistakes, you think whatever you want. I know better. I don't drink either, but since you've been wrong on everything else about me, why stop there? When are you going to get a little?
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #25 posted by just me on June 06, 2001 at 01:47:01 PT:

here we go again...
lookinside: I have no idea where you get your "information" but like the other Bush-bashers, you are wrong. I'm currently completely clean. When I do partake it's Marijuana only. Also, if you go back and actually READ for a change you'll see I've already covered what set me off. "And so it should." MDG: You swallow, kid. "It must have been those liberals, huh?" Actually, yes. The liberals are responsible for Welfare, Social Security and Federal Income Tax. Taxes were much lower before liberals decided we needed so many social programs. Have Conservatives raised taxes and enlarged government? Sure they have but not nearly as much as the Democrats. As for your choice of party...while I support your RIGHT to vote any way you so choose, The Libertarian Party hasn't got a chance. Nor does the Green Party or the Independents. While I'd most likely come closer to being a Libertarian myself, I wont waste my vote trying to get one in office because, in my humble opinion, a vote for a Libertarian is like a vote for a gun-grabbing Democrat because it would take a vote away from a Republican who not only has a chance of winning but wont take my guns. I think we'll see black, gay and women (Democrat or Republican, of course) Presidents before we see a Libertarian President. I could be wrong and only time will tell, but I think that's right.lookinside: Did any of those Libertarian's win? If so what race? As for "dubya's theft of the presidency" that's a joke. Mere propaganda started by the liberals who tried to steal the election that Bush WON. The supreme Court ruled that Sore/Loserman's case was unconstitutional and still the liberals whine and lie about how the Supreme Court placed Bush in the White house. HOG WASH! The Supreme Court just interpreted the current law instead of letting Sore/Loserman change the rules in mid-election, therefore, proving that by Florida and Federal Election law that G.W. Bush WON. Vote however you like, though :)jorma nash: As I already stated, at least I include links and helpful information, while you may have had some insight on other threads, in fact I replied to one before re-reading this one, that has nothing to do with this one. I could care less what a search of your name would reveal, from what I've seen. I'm not impressed by a number of posts nor by your Libertarian fantasies. While I agree that we have 2 MAIN parties people have already pointed out that there are others, small as they may be. As I've already pointed out voting for anything other than those 2 parties, at the present time, is a wasted vote in that it takes away a vote from a party that could actually win. AGAIN, I'm not saying you don't have the right to vote as you wish. I would fight, to the death, to protect your right to vote for anyone you choose but my problem with Democrats is, that they would ABOLISH my right to Keep and Bear Arms, if given half a chance. If you want to know who was President when the WoSD (1937 Marijuana Tax Act.) started, it was Franklin D. Roosevelt under his administration we saw much damage. While he ended Alcohol prohibition we know what he did for Marijuana. He also; started social security and started "New Deal" which is essentially the welfare system that's constantly abused by, who? That's right, liberals. Now, for ME to be fair, he also; had to deal with World War II beginning with Hitler's invasion of Poland, beat Hitler's army on a day known as D-Day, revived banking after the big crash, and was re-elected into third and fourth (which is why we have a 2 term limit now) terms. It's hard to see how some people could confuse a Yale grad with an idiot. Yale doesn't have a short yellow bus like the ones you must have rode. "and finally, i respect your right to hold any opinion you wish." And *I*, yours. I doubt our ideas on Marijuana reform are all that different. I'd say, it's our choice of political parties that separate us the most. You hate "republicrats," I hate Democrats and dismiss the other parties as non-viable at this time. I'm pro-gun, pro-choice, pro-constitution, and of course pro-pot. Some will argue, that's nearly a Libertarian but since they cant win, I won't vote for one and risk another Slick Willy. I, most certainly, DO use my knowledge to fight prohibitionists AND gun-grabbers.I hope that clears things up for everyone.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #24 posted by Steven Tuck on June 06, 2001 at 01:30:31 PT:

Right wing WASP thinking that got us Ashcroft
 Just Me, You are a living example why I have given uo my birthright and moved to California. For your information not all of us in the movement are kids or 'potheads' in the way you use the term. This is a forum for people who care, and as rare as that is today how can you denigrate someone for voicing an opinion. That sort of childish behavior is not what these forums are for, and my mother used to tell me to keep my mouth shut and be thought a fool is better than opening it and removing all doubt. Tone was just expressing his God given right to express his opinion which you should have given him the courtousy of at least considering his opinion instead of attacking him to show 'how smart' or how bigoted you are. In case you now say i am a "pinko-commie", I am a service connected disabled vet(honorable w/awards) who had a parachute accident from some dummy sleeping on the pack line. I have had 13 spinal surguries and am paralyzed from the waist down now and now I have spinal cancer from rejection of cadaver implants in my spine. I am in constant severe pain and have a prescription for cannabis(hash really is what my MD recommended) and he is the same MD I see every month to get my morphine and other meds from also and no ringer I hunted down, as a matter of fact all 6 of my MD"s partner signed off on my script to protect my doc. The gov't has fought me and my doc for years to allow me on IND program(I know it's shit but I was trying to prove equal protection clause) even to the point of joining the national class action suit in 95. I take serious offense with your trivialization of my problems and hope you never have to find out how it feels to suffer like this. I also put myself through collage on the GI bill after accident and now I have a BS in Enviro. Sci. and a honors BS in Botany from WKU and a MS through Kings College in London,GB. Your love it or leave it crap has been echoed for years by you neo-nazi's and all the code words were included in your attack. Your 'high and mighty' US gov't has just stolen my phD project and research from me before I could publish and it say's in my court documents that they "donated" it to Umiss gov't pot researcher who was seen in Eureka,Ca. the day I was busted last years warrentless raid in Humboldt County,Ca. where me and my wife ran a cannabis center for 4 years that actually got meds to people who needed them. Just me, how many people have you helped in your life for no reason other than to ease their suffering. I'll bet you I could guess the number. Thanks for reminding me why I left Ky. and I plan on leaving this Gestapo nation as soon as I can get the hell out of your twisted country. Good luck answering to god someday! Next time you have something mean to say drink another beer and go to another site as this is for real people to share ideas not insults. A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #23 posted by jorma nash on June 05, 2001 at 22:17:13 PT

ding! round 3
"What does tones lame little-boy comments do?What do your insults/suggestions do, for that matter?"in back to back sentences, no less.funny how it's ok for you to insult tones,but you act all hurt to be on the recieving end.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"....or do you have something helpful to add?"being new here, i suggest you search for my name, and read the dozens and dozens of comments i haveposted to this forum.after that, you can question my "contribution," newbie.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"How do you vote?"Libertarian, of course. Supports gun ownership rights *and* ending WoSD.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"is "just how the republicrats like it." your attempt at humor or, again, is that supposed to help with Marijuana reform?"actually it's my attempt to say that, in my opinion, while there are minor differences in platforms, both major partiesare bought and sold by the same corporate interests,and could better be described as a single party with two factions.and yes, i think it would help cannabis reform if people realized our current "two" party system wasn't mandated by the constitution.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"I expect such lies from liberals."quit calling anyone who disagrees with you a liberal, as if it was a four-letter word.as stated above, i believe the whole left/right, conservative/liberal paradyne serves to blind people they have more than "two" choices.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"The Bush Administration hasn't been in office all that long so you can't put civil rights problems on their shoulders."not bush the younger specifically, republicans in general.Current Drug War ignited: under Nixon. one of your precious republicans.Drug War explodes: under Reagan. another of your precious republicans.in the interest of fairness, Clinton re-doubled the mess, too.as i said, republicrats. left step, right step, two legs on the same body marching in the same directionit always has.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"While he's also wrong (as you are) about Bush being a fool..."ha! you'll have to excuse me if i misunderestimate his intelligence.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~and finally, i respect your right to hold any opinion you wish.i still hope you take all the energy you devote to arguing with people whose ideas on cannabis reform differ slightly than yours, and use it on the prohibitionists instead.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #22 posted by lookinside on June 05, 2001 at 21:53:06 PT:

i'm a lifelong democrat from at least
5 generations of democrats...after the second clinton election, i decided to vote myconscience...i'll never vote for an incumbent again, fromeither major party...two sides of the sameanti-constitutional coin...i voted for several libertariansduring the last election...with a little luck, dubya's theft of the presidency willdoom the republicans...maybe the libbies and greens willfinish off the demos...we can only hope...
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #21 posted by MDG on June 05, 2001 at 21:26:46 PT:

You suck, no YOU suck, no YOU suck, no YOU suck.
just me wrote: ...in the Netherlands they pay upto 60% in income tax, have NO right to keep and bear arms and are required to support (hence the 60%) nationalized medicine and welfare for the lazy and stupid...In the U.S., 48% of the national income is collected in local, state, and federal taxes. This means that if you and your spouse are both working full time, one of you is working for your family, the other is working for the government. It must have been those liberals, huh? We all know that conservatives never pass legislation that makes the government bigger, more intrusive, or more oppressive, now do they? Hah, now that's funny!I vote Libertarian every single election.
Yes, there IS a party.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #20 posted by lookinside on June 05, 2001 at 21:02:35 PT:

just me?
you might consider changing your drugs of choice...alcoholand methamphetamine will make a person a bit touchy...if, in truth, the comment on dubya set you off, you reallyneed to rethink your lifestyle...you'll need a hearttransplant before the end of THIS 4 year term... 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #19 posted by just me on June 05, 2001 at 20:47:14 PT:

wrong again...
Nope, yer wrong, it was the, "And so it should." To suggest one should give up our rights and move to a liberal country just because of marijuana laws is insane. Why do you think most people want to come here and not the other way around? To suggest people abandon their country for Marijuana reform is silly when they can easily lobby to change existing laws as NORML, etc does. The Bush Administration hasn't been in office all that long so you can't put civil rights problems on their shoulders. As for the B.A.T.F., or "Officer Jack Boot" as you put it. who do you think will over-see legal marijuana once we have reform? While none of us agree that marijuana should be illegal, it still is and therefore people should expect to be arrested if they commit the crime. Do you blame the cop for your speeding ticket too? If you don't like the laws, and *I* don't, don't blame the enforcers for doing their job, blame the people who make the laws and get on their arses to change them. You shouldn't be arrested if it's not illegal. While he's also wrong (as you are) about Bush being a fool, I expect such lies from liberals. You can think me a fool all you like, but what's does any of that have to do with Marijuana reform? I, atleast, supplied a link to proposed changes with a suggestion that we all take up similar reform. What does tones lame little-boy comments do? What do your insults/suggestions do, for that matter? Is "i suggest you use a relaxant of your choice," your contribution to the "War on Drugs" or do you have something helpful to add? How do you vote Mr. Republicrat? Do you even vote? You'll be surprised to know, there is no such party so, is "just how the republicrats like it." your attempt at humor or, again, is that supposed to help with Marijuana reform? Maybe, you'd like to know that in California they just passed SB791 to the Assembly to make possesion of less than 1 oz. an infraction rather than a misdemeanor? See that's usefull information. Maybe you'd like to know that in Mexico The legislature there, despite pressure from the US is working on reform? So, to stay on topic of THIS thread, it IS possible that Canada May legalize before the U.S.A., in fact, if Mexico and Canada were to both legalize it would put added pressure on the USA to follow suit. It wouldn't have to stop with our neighbors, either. The more places that DO legalize/decriminalize the faster we'll see change in our own Country. The web, as was stated at the Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation international conference, will also play a part in bringing about change in drug laws. So help or not, it's upto you, but if your not a part of the solution...
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #18 posted by jorma nash on June 05, 2001 at 19:25:13 PT

republicrats
just me:ah, i wondered what set you off.it was the "bush is a fool" comment."I'd rather have a Republican in office that will defend our Constitution and Bill of Rights"hmmmmm, ashcroft, hutchinson and walters is your idea of the Bill of Rights being defended?i haven't seen either wing of the republicrat party doing much for our civil rights.do you really think Officer Jack Boot crashes through the door any differently, depending on which republicrat is in the white house at the moment?i think Democrats are fools. (Just Me cheers!)i think Republicans are fools. (Just Me burns with ideological anger.)and finally, i think Just Me is a fool for thinking politics can be nothing but either/or, democrat/republican.just how the republicrats like it. You and that chip on your shoulder have a nice day.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #17 posted by Hole-yMan on June 05, 2001 at 18:46:05 PT:

Bush is no fool, but the Democrats are...
http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5795
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #16 posted by just me on June 05, 2001 at 18:41:08 PT:

out of line...not
He said "i reckon, that if the laws dont relax soon, hollands/belgiums population is going to double in size! and so it should." I say it should NOT. If he thinks it SHOULD then he is in favor of moving. I do, however, doubt he'd ever actually go. To suggest giving up ones RIGHTS in order to smoke some dope is pure stupidity. What *I* see is a lame little kid who's a little pissed because Sore/Loserman didn't get to steal an election that he's most likely, not even old enough to vote in. A kid who thinks that life must be better in a liberal country simplely because he might be able to toke up. He can insult the President of the United States if he wishes, but then again, I can insult him for doing so. I will NOT apologise. I'd rather have a Republican in office that will defend our Constitution and Bill of Rights even at the cost of this ludicrous "War on Drugs" than to have some idiot Democrat in office threatening to abolish the 2nd Amendment and take away my RIGHTS. While pot SHOULD be legal, you'll get no arguement from me on that subject, our Right to Keep and Bear Arms is constantly under attack by those (Democrats) who would bash Bush. Guns ARE our Right under The Constitution, The Democrats would rather us give up our rights, I think that's evil. While I do support ending marijuana prohibition, a womans Right to choose and an increase in the minimum wage, you'll NEVER see me voting for a Democrat so I can smoke pot. As for your "suggestion," I'd suggest you shove it where the sun doesn't shine. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #15 posted by jormanash on June 05, 2001 at 16:36:44 PT

you're out of line, Just Me
you're way out of line, Just Me.tones writes:"i reckon, that if the laws dont relax soon, hollands/belgiums population is going to double in size!"nothing about "i'm gonna move there."i see nothing here in a off-hand comment to justifyyour anger or personally insulting attitude,and i think you owe tones an apology.i suggest you use a relaxant of your choice,and that you save your wrath for the prohibitionists.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #14 posted by just me on June 05, 2001 at 15:31:12 PT:

to "tones" re:" Holland...
You should reckon a little less and pull your head out a lot more. I say to you, good ridance, adios, goodbye. Have fun living in Holland. You may want to know that in the Netherlands they pay upto 60% in income tax, have NO right to keep and bear arms and are required to support (hence the 60%) nationalized medicine and welfare for the lazy and stupid. If you'd rather trade your Rights, Freedoms and hard earned (although I doubt you're more than a high school teenager, based on your comments and e-mail (supremebeing15 hotmail.com) address (supreme no, 15 maybe)) money to live in an extreemly liberal Country just so you can get high, then GET OUT. I, on the other hand would rather see the U.S.A. fix the broken and ridiculas "War on drugs" It's going to happen here, it's just a matter of time. Mexico has just introduced legislation to end prohibition as have many Countries lately. I read at Lindesmith that the State of Washington is working on new reform see: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/inits/people01.htm but I still hope you take your liberal self to Holland. Personally, I'd like to see Federal and State reform similar to Initiative 766. Bush is no fool (I'm sure he's better educated than you are), he's just ignorant on the subject of Marijuana. Sore/Loserman on the other hand...well, you can take them with you to Holland.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #13 posted by DdC on June 05, 2001 at 14:38:52 PT

Why Support Cannabis Prohibition... 
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fendingcannabisprohibitionstuff.showMessage?topicID=122.topic
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #11 posted by tones on June 05, 2001 at 13:49:02 PT:

holland
i reckon, that if the laws dont relax soon, hollands population is going to double in size! and so it should. bush is a fool, and u can bet his bottom 1.3 billion dollars that he'll never allow the herb the freedom it deserves. god made weed, man made made beer. which one do you trust?
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #10 posted by Pontifex on June 05, 2001 at 13:31:53 PT

Oh, for a world of instant justice
"I don't think I want pot to be decriminalized [...] It's the only law I break on a regular basis, it makes me feel like I'm doing something taboo. The rest of the time I'm such a good guy."At that instant, twelve armed SWAT soldiers broke down the door and stepped on the speaker's neck as he choked on the irony.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #9 posted by J.R. Bob Dobbs on June 05, 2001 at 13:11:23 PT

Let's not irk the criminals!
>>Let us suppose for one moment that there might be one or two corrupt cops or politicians out there working with the Mafia and the bikers who control the drug trade. And let us just suppose that the Mafia and the bikers might not want pot decriminalized because it would cut into their revenue. That also might cause a little ill will.  That's right - we don't want to annoy the people who are profiting by breaking the law.  Has anybody asked the bikers?
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #8 posted by kaptinemo on June 05, 2001 at 12:50:54 PT:

And where do the antis get these ideas?
More correctly, where do you think they find the legal excuses for their behavior?This is a good place to start:http://www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.htmlThis is a fascinating article on how Constitutional powers get usurped by the unscrupulous. And how this insane Drugwar rolls merrily along.From the article:"The following are excerpts from the Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973, Special Committee On The Termination Of The National Emergency United States Senate. They were going to terminate all emergency powers, but they found out they did not have the power to do this so guess which one stayed in, the Emergency Act of 1933, the Trading with the Enemy Act October 6, 1917 as amended in March 9, 1933. "Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency....Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens." "A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 (now 67) years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency....from, at least the Civil War, in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency." - Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973In other words, government by Presidential fiat. By declaration. Diktaten. Totally unConstitutional. But then, that hasn't stopped the b******s, yet.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #7 posted by kaptinemo on June 05, 2001 at 12:35:00 PT:

Welcome, Damien
Glad to have you with us. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #6 posted by ekim on June 05, 2001 at 12:26:02 PT:

comming to a town near you
US DE: Editorial: Join ForcesURL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n996/a10.htmlNewshawk: SledheadPubdate: Mon, 04 Jun 2001Source: News Journal (DE)Copyright: 2001 The News JournalContact: njletter newsjournal.comWebsite: http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/index.htmlDetails: http://www.mapinc.org/media/822JOIN FORCES New Anti-Crime Team Should Help Relieve Neighborhood Woes Give Wilmington Mayor James Baker credit for backing up his words with actions. It is clear Wednesday when he and U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden announced an anti-crime partnership that included federal agents, State Police and the National Guard, that the mayor already had the next night's anti-drug and anti-gun sweep through the Riverside housing projects on his mind. The new city, state and federal team is made up of representatives from the Wilmington Police Department, Delaware State Police, FBI, federal Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Marshall's Office, U.S. Attorney's Office, Secret Service and U.S. Customs agents. The Delaware National Guard will support this team with computer services to build a drug interdiction database. This consortium sent 65 police officers and agents into Riverside for a five-hour door-to-door dragnet for drugs and guns. Riverside had a drug-related shooting Monday night. Similar sweeps can be expected within 48 hours of shootings anywhere in the city. Mayor Baker campaigned for office last fall pledging to step up police response to drug and gun crime. He said he ultimately wanted to put drug-sniffing dogs on the streets to break up dealing. He has not backed down from that idea, although it may present privacy complications. With a rapid-response team, Mr. Baker has taken the battle into the neighborhoods and domiciles of suspected violators. It is a tough policy that is likely to have positive effects when judiciously applied. The only question is why New Castle County police are not involved in the partnership. County officers have repeatedly assisted city police in the last eight years when the city had a rash of shootings. And if the city sweeps are successful, some criminals in Wilmington neighborhoods will inevitably head for the suburbs of New Castle County. There must be close coordination between city and county police to monitor and counteract such movement. Indeed, the same kind of sweeps should be done in the county in response to similar crime. This is not just a Wilmington problem. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #5 posted by Damien on June 05, 2001 at 11:48:13 PT:

The U.S. drug laws
I am a interested reader from England.Many of the pointsraised are very akin to many,many people in the U.K.I agree that the U.S. is leading the pointless and unwinable war on drugs and has damaged many clutures worldwide by forcing a poorer state to adopt draconion drug laws in return for aid.India,Pakistan,and many South American states have suffered.If legalisation was to happen then the U.S. would have to admit that they have lost the war,and as we all know that isn't there strong point!However now that Belguim and other european member states have relaxed there laws,the British parlament my take notice,letts hope so!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #4 posted by Steven Tuck on June 05, 2001 at 10:07:29 PT:

That sure one smart person, here is the nutshell
I hate to admit it but thats the most logic I have absorbed this early in the morning since I learned how to make hash. She is dead on right, after living in Europe for a couple of years going to school, I noticed on my weekly trips to A-dam that no matter what form of travel we used(bus being the coolest, but watch them french border punks who look like they have watched one to many "Miami Vice" shows in the 80's) we alway's got that,"alright we know your coming from Holland so you might as well hand over the drugs and save us a search" speech no matter were we went. You should actually try to fly to USA from Schipol(A-dam airport) as I was stupid enough to do once, the cops were circling like vultures. i quickly learned to fly to another country and then buy a train ticket with CASH to Holland. All this was my way of saying that I think she is right, without DEAland legalizing the Canadians would be subject to harsh punishment for daring to say the obvious. Now put that same argument in terms of any Latin American nation(esp. Mexico) even thinking about it probably gets whole families killed. We are still talking same BS and same failed policies as when I was in the Army and area in 85, the right wing nuts of this country maybe taking over here but they have been in firm control south of the border for generations because it was far from most citizens line of sight. Makes one want to go out in the yard and scream. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #3 posted by TroutMask on June 05, 2001 at 10:00:07 PT

It will happen
Not only is Canada trending toward decrim, but so is most of Europe, New Zealand, Australia and now Jamaica:http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/20010602/t000046047.htmlRegardless of Canada's potential wavering in light of the US's Big Brother bullying attitude, the entire world isn't going to forever sit waiting to make decrim decisions based upon the horribly useless US War on Some Drugs.Change will come, but the more persistent we are the faster it will happen.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on June 05, 2001 at 09:37:32 PT:

Oh, God, that was a good one!
"I hope I'm wrong and if anyone in office is reading this, please take it as a challenge. Stand up and do something right, you pussy! Come on. Prove me wrong! I dare you."First, I laughed so hard my gut hurt. Because, when you come right down to it, when you remove the genteel academically atmospheric, esoteric writing about the value of medicinal cannabis, it comes down to this.Doing the right thing.Doing the right thing by the sick and dying. Doing the right thing by not afflicting those so desperate with the emotional and physical pain of arrests, trials and jail. Doing the right thing by removing pointless obstacles to objective research.I could go on with a boring litany of everything the antis have done wrong. But suffice to say, it all comes down to that challenge.I dare you to act as if you have a conscience, antis. 
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #1 posted by Doug on June 05, 2001 at 09:27:41 PT

Never say Never
I think it's true that Canada is unlikely to have de jure legalization before the United States does, but de facto legalization is another matter. Look at Holland, where cannabis is still illegal.However, I think it's wrong to say never, even for the United States. History has shown over and over that when someone says an event will never happen, a few years later they are proved wrong. And prohibition in the United States is now reaching absurd heights (or depths). So yes, prohibition may well be around for awhile, but it won't last forever.
[ Post Comment ]








  Post Comment





Name:       Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL: 
Link Title: