Hello experts:

I don't know.

I BELIEVE righty's when they talk about small government... That's why I don't understand how THEY don't understand, why the DEA is a prime example of BIG GOVERNMENT.

Righty's mouth the words about government interference in your life, but believe they have the RIGHT to tell you what to do with your own body, and believe they have the RIGHT to hire police forces with guns to enforce it.

I truly don't understand the disconnect. Ordinarily, righty's seem to be like you and me. You can't tell 'em apart by looking... But, utter a few choice words in their presence, and they'll stick out like sore thumbs. Yup, like preprogrammed zombies, when they hear words like Gitmo or marijuana, they actually lose their minds.

Point of fact, Senator Charles Grassley, (R) of Iowa, a long-time proponent of small government, does not object to the crass interference into the lives of American citizens perpetrated for more than 40 years by the so called War on Drugs. Are states' rights and personal liberty only catch phrases for Grassley and his cohorts, or is true application of these principles too threatening to contemplate?

Apparently so, for Grassley recently criticized Eric Holder and the Obama administration for the decision to no longer target medical cannabis dispensaries which comply with state law.

Since I've been posting stuff about marijuana, our local righty's have ALL said that they believe pot should be legal, and they don't engage me... But, I want to know if they've DONE anything about it, instead of just mouthing words. It is, after all, THEIR party who is blocking the way.

By the way, the trouble on our southern border would END in a moment, if we ENDED the drug war.

excon

Other than agree with you here (to an extent anyway), naaa... too busy trying to head off socialism. :D

Well, there is the key. Legalize it, tax it like cigarettes. Everyone gets high and happy. People start buying more snacks, more TV's.
Millions of non-violent marijuana offenders are released freeing untold billions or dollars from the prison system.

Hey- the founders grew pot, and whiskey too!
200 years later, we find ourself back under own own little version of British rule.

Amazing how things come full circle.

Ummm---am I wrong in thinking that MaryJane isn't the ONLY drug coming North from Mexico?

I for one have never proposed making it legal. I think penalties should be reduced and if it is determined by extensive clinical trials to have pharmaceutical benefit (I don't buy for one second the argument put forth that marijuana has absolutely no negative effects and can cure or relieve a wide range of illnesses) ;to regulate it as a perscription with the caveat that there should be strict laws against driving under the influence ;and operation of heavy equipment . Employers should have the disgression to discipline stoned employees on the job.
My opinion is not based on Constitutional issues but a basic surrender . I consider the DEA important for national security reasons . By not emphasizing Marjuana it would free up resources to combat the availability of more dangerous illegal drugs.But I recognize that unless you are willing to legalize all drugs then you have just moved the line in the sand and you are now a hypocrite to the next user down the line. That is why the counter argument about alcohol and tobacco is so effective .

The "war on drugs" is very winnable if resources and priorities were shifted... or do you think the government has no business regulating what comes into the country... legal and illegal commerce and human traffic ? Making all drugs legal will have as much an impact on eliminating the cartels as reversing prohibition and legalizing gambling had on eliminating the Mafia.

Now about the Constitutional question...
Tenth Amendment arguments fail when they collide with the precedents broadly interpreting the Necessary and Proper Clause ,and the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Even if SCOTUS ruled in favor of things like the state Medical Marijuana laws ,the Congress would just rewrite prohibitions into the national law. Your best course of action would to try to convince Congress to pass national laws in favor of your position .

This is not a question of Federalism. Federalism does not mean that states get to override federal law, when that law is Constitutional. Could I counterfeit currency in NY if NY had a law that allowed it or had no law against it ? Of course not !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The "war on drugs" is very winnable if resources and priorities were shifted .....or do you think the government has no business regulating what comes into the country ....legal and illegal commerce and human traffic ? Making all drugs legal will have as much an impact on eliminating the cartels as reversing prohibition and legalizing gambling had on eliminating the Mafia.

---

Hello tom:

I don't know tom. For 40 years your side has been saying the same thing. We can win if we only "crack down". That argument is wearing thin. It flies in the face of history and logic. I can't still believe that you're parading it out again... But, maybe when you've LOST YOUR MIND, up is down, and down is up.

If you weren't so blinded by your anti drug rhetoric, the evidence is CLEAR that we're losing. The more we crack down, the more we lose...

I KNOW there's a lesson there, and I KNOW you're never going to get it... Specially since you don't think the end of prohibition did much.

excon

Not much to debate when the counter to my argument is that I've lost my mind.

I guess the answer to "losing " is to give up . I get that .That is the easy answer when things are tough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I guess the answer to "losing " is to give up . I get that .That is the easy answer when things are tough.

---

Hello again, tom:

Yes, when what you're doing ISN'T producing the desired result, giving it up, IS the thing to do.

I'm sorry you don't like my charachterization... But, you've solidified it above with more of the NONSENSICAL right wing crazy crap, by suggesting that if you're LOSING - DO MORE OF WHAT CAUSED YOU TO LOSE.

That's nuts. It really is. Really!

excon

Quote:

---

The "war on drugs" is very winnable if resources and priorities were shifted

---

Does that sound like doing more of the same ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

does that sound like doing more of the same ?

---

Hello again, tom:

It does, given that it's been said, and acted upon countless times in the past...

Now, I know that what you mean is REALLY cracking down, and not pu$$yfooting around like we have before...

I also know that you haven't given that much thought beyond it being a right wing talking point... Because if you did, (and you're a smart man), you'd see that the only way to WIN the drug war with force, is to have ONE cop for EVERY CITIZEN.

That may be your vision for the future, but it isn't mine.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

I also know that you haven't given that much thought beyond it being a right wing talking point... Because if you did, (and you're a smart man), you'd see that the only way to WIN the drug war with force, is to have ONE cop for EVERY CITIZEN.

That may be your vision for the future, but it isn't mine.

excon

---

Nope! Get more people acquainted with Jesus Christ and to that extent you have WON the war on drugs.

(I didn't think you would agree):D

Gal if God made everything on earth then God Made pot. So you are telling me God didn't put it here for us to use?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

Nope! Get more people acquainted with Jesus Christ and to that extent you have WON the war on drugs.

---

Seems a lot of people are acquainted with Jesus Christ and that has not stop them from adultery, pedophilia, murder, cussing, substance abuse, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Seems a lot of people are acquainted with Jesus Christ and that has not stop them from adultery, pedophilia, murder, cussing, substance abuse, etc.

---

Well, now that response was a surprise. :rolleyes:

I don't know any Christians that claim to be perfect, but I know an awful lot that have been changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I don't know any Christians that claim to be perfect, but I know an awful lot that have been changed.

---

Agreed but it's not the cure-all Gal purports it to be.

Excon,

First of all, as I have said before, I agree with your stance vis-à-vis marajuana.

And I agree that the DEA is just another bloated, ineffective part of a bloated, ineffective government.

However, I disagree with your last statement, that the troubles on the southern border would just end if we legalized marajuana.

There are a lot harder drugs coming in over the southern border than marajuana. Cocaine, heroine, opiates of various types, etc. all come in from the south. Legalizing marajuana won't stop drug crimes. Nor would shutting down the DEA.

We might be able to legalize marajuana. There is a lot of popular support for that. But I don't think there are very many people who think that we should legalize heroine, cocaine etc. And as long as there is SOMETHING illegal in this country that someone wants, there will be fights among the criminals who are willing to supply it.

Furthermore, the problems on the border are bigger and more complicated than just the illegal drug trade. There are robberies, rapes and murders taking place every day by thugs coming over the border. There are human trafficking rings (both for cheap labor and for sex). There are knockoff products (including knockoffs of legal drugs and vitamins) that are smuggled in and are of poor quality and in many cases downright dangerous. There's the "standard" illegal immigration. There's the threat of terrorists coming in from the southern border.

NONE of those issues are solved by legalizing marajuana or getting rid of the DEA.

Sorry, but your solution is oversimplified.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

Yes, when what you're doing ISN'T producing the desired result, giving it up, IS the thing to do.

I'm sorry you don't like my charachterization.... But, you've solidified it above with more of the NONSENSICAL right wing crazy crap, by suggesting that if you're LOSING - DO MORE OF WHAT CAUSED YOU TO LOSE.

That's nuts. It really is. Really!

---

No it isn't.

Here's an example. If you have a running faucet, and you turn the knob only part of the way, the water will continue to run. Do you stop trying to turn off the water because "you've already tried it and it didn't work"? HAVE you really tried it at all if you didn't put in a serious effort and really try turning the knob all the way?

Tom is simply suggesting that we turn the faucet all the way off and see whether the water stops running before giving up on the idea of using the knobs. You are already saying the knobs don't work and we need to get a whole new sink.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

However, I disagree with your last statement, that the troubles on the southern border would just end if we legalized marajuana.

There are a lot harder drugs coming in over the southern border than marijuana. Cocaine, heroine, opiates of various types, etc. all come in from the south. Legalizing marajuana won't stop drug crimes. Nor would shutting down the DEA.

We might be able to legalize marajuana. There is a lot of popular support for that. But I don't think there are very many people who think that we should legalize heroine, cocaine etc. And as long as there is SOMETHING illegal in this country that someone wants, there will be fights among the criminals who are willing to supply it.

---

Hello El:

I said the problems on the border would end with the DRUG WAR, not just the legalization of pot.

Your last paragraph is a GREAT argument for ending the ENTIRE drug war - not just marijuana. As a matter of fact, domestic consumption of pot is now supplied domestically. The cartels ONLY have their power because of the harder drugs.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello El:

I said the problems on the border would end with the DRUG WAR, not just the legalization of pot.

Your last paragraph is a GREAT argument for ending the ENTIRE drug war - not just marijuana. As a matter of fact, domestic consumption of pot is now supplied domestically. The cartels ONLY have their power because of the harder drugs.

excon

---

So you're arguing in favor of legalization of ALL drugs. That's a bit further than you have gone in our other conversations on this subject. I don't agree with that stance. MJ is one thing. Heroine is quite another.

And as a matter of curiosity, apropo of nothing, if you are talking about all drugs, why does the header of your OP reference marijuana?

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Seems a lot of people are acquainted with Jesus Christ and that has not stop them from adultery, pedophilia, murder, cussing, substance abuse, etc.

---

I have been around for a lot of years and I have never known a Christian who was guilty of these things.

Please note again, I said Christian, not church member. There is sometimes a difference.

I think all drugs should be legal. Here are a three reasons:

1.) gang violence or cartel violence (what ever affects you) would be gone in a short amount of time.

2.) It would make it much harder for kids to get their hands on. I know when I was in high school you could get any drug you wanted just walking the halls. The only thing you could get was alcohol.

3.) TAX THE HELL OUT OF IT!! People are going to do drugs regardless if they are legal or not so why not tax it.

Spit
1. as I mentioned already ;legalizing alcohol and state gambling did not get rid of the mafia.

2. Not sure about that kids have no trouble obtaining tobacco . And as I recall I never had too much trouble getting alcohol .

3. Taxing the hell out of tobacco has resulted in black market and smuggling gangland operations . The jihadists are being funded with the European smuggling operations.
It has not resulted in the reduction in tobacco usage .

Nor has government gambling made it safer for the addict . In fact the legalizing of gambling has made it easier for the gambler to indulge . The net effect is that there is government profiting with a heavy moral hazard overlooked .

Ex not sure of the latest data but in the past domestically grown marijuana was about 12% of total consumption with the rest of it smuggled into the country.A recent foreign policy magazine article says the cartels make 60% of their profits from marijuana .

Now part of the cost to the consumer is that it is illegal and restricted . Lets assume that we make it legal and a domestic cash crop. The cost of consuming it would go down ;not up ,despite efforts to tax it to death . And what would happen if the tax made it more expensive to the consumer ? Well then that black market illegal smuggling racket comes back into play. You now have a drug that is readily available to consumers ,where usage would most likely increase as sales ads and marketing now encourage it... and you still have not eliminated the criminal aspects of the drug. You would still have cartels fighting to distribute the unregulated untaxed product into the market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Ex not sure of the latest data but in the past domestically grown marijuana was about 12% of total consumption with the rest of it smuggled into the country.A recent foreign policy magazine article says the cartels make 60% of their profits from marijuana .

---

Hello again, tom:

You should believe me - not them. Nobody smokes that schwag any more.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spitvenom

I think all drugs should be legal. Here are a three reasons:

1.) gang violence or cartel violence (what ever affects you) would be gone in a short amount of time.

---

Back in the 20s, when they legalized alcohol, it didn't stop gang violence. The Mafia and other gangsters continued to operate and commit acts of violence. Whether its numbers, or protection rackets, or anything else they can do to make money, they will enforce their money-making activities with violent acts. Legalizing drugs won't change that. Gangs are gangs and they don't become less violent when you legalize stuff, just as terrorists don't become less violent if you try to appease them.

Quote:

---

2.) It would make it much harder for kids to get their hands on. I know when I was in high school you could get any drug you wanted just walking the halls. The only thing you could get was alcohol.

---

I assume you mean that the only thing you couldn't get your hands on was alcohol. And I hate to break it to you, but there's nothing stopping kids from drinking today. In fact, the government has been so ineffective at regulating alcohol, grass-roots groups have been founded to do the job for them: groups like MADD, SADD and any other anti-drunk-driving group out there. The very existence of these groups is a testament to how poorly the "authorities" are doing in regulating the dangerous items they have made legal.

Quote:

---

3.) TAX THE HELL OUT OF IT!! People are going to do drugs regardless if they are legal or not so why not tax it.

---

THAT is a sensible argument. I have no problem with that.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Back in the 20s, when they legalized alchohol, it didn't stop gang violence.

---

Hello again, El:

No, it didn't stop the mafia from OTHER gang stuff. It DID stop the violence in the alcohol trade... You aren't saying, are you, that alcohol causes violence and therefore drugs cause violence??

Alcohol does NOT cause violence. PROHIBITION causes violence. If you don't believe me, take 10 minutes out of your day and stand in the alcohol aisle in your grocery store.

To answer your anticipated question, ending the drug war won't end crime in America.

excon

Well California is trying to legalize it so they can tax it. Maybe that will solve California's state deficit. Only one problem I see with that is most of California is unemployed and homeless or almost homeless so who is going to buy the government taxed pot? The tourists? Or is California going to take all that pot tax money and pay for more illegal aliens health care and welfare payments? Gee, it going to be a tough choice for Arnold if he gets this bill passed. California does grow some good product though so it should not be too hard to get farmers to switch to a cash crop (if they haven't already that is). Maybe Iceberg lettuce will be replaced some day by California grown pot in the grocery store's produce section in say Iowa or New Jersey.

What's your thoughts on this Excon? Do you think California can solve their insolvency with a tax on pot sales? Do you think it will do any good?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Do you think California can solve their insolvency with a tax on pot sales? Do you think it will do any good?

---

Hello twinkie:

By itself, no. As part of an overall plan, including letting all the non violent drug offenders out of jail, sure

excon

Elliot see my comments about spit's point # 3
Cigarette taxes (the most relevant comparison ) disproportionately hurt lower income groups and they never raise the expected revenues.They increase black market sales of cigarettes. They promote the very gangland activity they are designed to eliminate .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, El:

No, it didn't stop the mafia from OTHER gang stuff. It DID stop the violence in the alcohol trade.... You aren't saying, are you, that alcohol causes violence and therefore drugs cause violence??????

Alcohol does NOT cause violence. PROHIBITION causes violence. If you don't believe me, take 10 minutes out of your day and stand in the alcohol aisle in your grocery store.

To answer your anticipated question, ending the drug war won't end crime in America.

excon

---

Then don't make the argument that it will end gang violence. Or rather Skell shouldn't make that argument. All it will do is move the violence from one sector to another. That's not a solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Do you think California can solve their insolvency with a tax on pot sales? Do you think it will do any good?

---

With the number of Californians who must be high on something, chances are they'll make up their deficits in the first year with a pot consumption tax.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Elliot see my comments about spit's point # 3
Cigarette taxes (the most relevent comparison ) disproportionately hurt lower income groups and they never raise the expected revenues.They increase black market sales of cigarettes. They promote the very gangland activity they are designed to eliminate .

---

I hear the argument. I am still undecided on this specific point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

All it will do is move the violence from one sector to another. That's not a solution.

---

Hello again, El:

Dude! It's NOT a solution to say that you can't end the drug war because those people will find some OTHER law to break. It did give me a laugh, however.

You're reaching for straws... I guess that's all you got left.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Elliot see my comments about spit's point # 3
Cigarette taxes (the most relevent comparison ) disproportionately hurt lower income groups and they never raise the expected revenues.They increase black market sales of cigarettes. They promote the very gangland activity they are designed to eliminate .

---

Kind of like wage controls and raising taxes on the rich leads to "creative" ways to make more and pay less in taxes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, El:

Dude! It's NOT a solution to say that you can't end the drug war because those people will find some OTHER law to break. It did give me a laugh, however.

You're reaching for straws.... I guess that's all you got left.

excon

---

Not really.

Drugs kill. Heroin is dangerous stuff. Cocain is dangerous stuff. Their PRODUCTION is a dangerous process. They are highly addictive, and the addiction itself makes violence in order to obtain the drugs almost impossible to avoid. Trying some of them once can result in immediate addiction, thus creating the violent tendencies that come with addiction. Hard drugs should remain illegal.

The question is "what about soft drugs"? And I am of the opinion that marijuana should be legalized. Not because of some stupid argument that it is somehow going to end crime and is a miracle drug that will cure cancer and AIDS and bulemia. Simply because it is relatively harmless, about on par with alcohol and smoking, and should be about as regulated as alcohol and smoking.

Ending a war on MJ is very different from ending a war on all drugs. I am in favor of legalizing MJ. I am NOT in favor if legalizing heroin.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Drugs kill. Heroin is dangerous stuff. Cocaine is dangerous stuff. Their PRODUCTION is a dangerous process. They are highly addictive, and the addiction itself makes violence in order to obtain the drugs almost impossible to avoid.

---

Hello again, El:

You keep making my point... The violence stemming from the procurement of drugs is because the business of drugs is ILLEGAL... It's PROHIBITION that causes violence...

Please, if you don't believe me, go into your local 7/Eleven. Watch them sell cigarettes. If you spent 10 minutes there, you'd be convinced that tobacco doesn't cause violence.

But, if you made tobacco ILLEGAL, there would be PLENTY of violence in the cigarette trade. Would that cause you to change your mind about tobacco causing violence?? The same can be said for alcohol. Alcohol ITSELF doesn't cause violence...

Here's some more news. Shooting heroine doesn't make you want to steal either.

I know you get this. You just don't like it.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, El:

You keep making my point... The violence stemming from the procurement of drugs is because the business of drugs is ILLEGAL... It's PROHIBITION that causes violence...

Please, if you don't believe me, go into your local 7/Eleven. Watch them sell cigarettes. If you spent 10 minutes there, you'd be convinced that tobacco doesn't cause violence.

But, if you made tobacco ILLEGAL, there would be PLENTY of violence in the cigarette trade. Would that cause you to change your mind about tobacco causing violence?? The same can be said for alcohol. Alcohol ITSELF doesn't cause violence...

---

Hate to tell you this, Excon, but tobacco DOES cause violence. There are quite a few tobacco bootleggers out there, and it is a very lucrative business. Tobacco is LEGAL, but it is taxed, and the taxation leads to criminal enterprise, which in turn leads to violence to protect that criminal enterprise. There's a reason that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms exists. All three are run illegally, and all three result in massive gang violence.

Quote:

---

Here's some more news. Shooting heroine doesn't make you want to steal either.

---

True to a point. Shooting heroine doesn't cause violence or make you want to steal. But shooting heroine until you are hooked and then being unable to afford more heroine because you blew it all on heroine leads to the addictive behaviors that include theft, violence and any other means necessary to getting enough money to get a fix.

I know you get this. You've been inside and seen what addicts do when they get desperate enough.

You just don't like the idea that you aren't free to do anything you want. You are only free to do what you want that doesn't break the law or hurt anyone else. Hard drugs don't qualify.

Elliot

Excon has helped to convince me that there are people that can use MJ and still be productive members of society. I think the criminalization of the drug causes more problems than it cures. However, as long as it is illegal I can't approve of anyone using it.

I watched both my sisters suffer with having a pothead as a husband. Having to scrape by because the rent money is going up in smoke is no way to live. One co-worker spent 2 years in Club Fed in WV and her kid bounced from foster home to foster home because of her dealing. Another co-worker's son stole his grandmother's terminal cancer pain pills to trade for his dealer.

The folks I know that are users are either miserable or making other people that way. These examples are why I just can't see this drug as harmless.

That being said, I don't care if you use it as long as I don't have to support you via the justice system, welfare, food stamps or subsidized housing. If you can support yourself and have enough left over to light up, knock yourself out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, El:

Alcohol ITSELF doesn't cause violence...


excon

---

Log In Problems

Quote:

---

The Occurrence of Partner Physical Aggression on Days of Alcohol Consumption: A Longitudinal Diary Study
Fals-Stewart W
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003 ;71:41-52

The likelihood of partner physical aggression on days of male partners' alcohol consumption, during a 5-month period, was examined for men entering a domestic violence treatment program (n = 137) and domestically violent men entering an alcoholism treatment program (n = 135). For men entering the domestic violence treatment program (alcoholism treatment program odds in parentheses), the odds of any male-to-female physical aggression were more than 8 times (11 times) higher on days when men drank than on days of no alcohol consumption. The odds of severe male-to-female physical aggression were more than 11 times (11 times) higher on days of men's drinking than on days of no drinking. These findings support the proximal effect model of alcohol use and partner violence.

---

While not proving causality, alcohol does play a major role in domestic violence, dui, suicides, liver disease among other things.


Ever wonder why fights break out at bars and not at the library?



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do agree that marijuana should be made legal, regulated , taxed.
Criminal activity, such as dui, related to marijuana use should be prosecuted.

Medically speaking, alcohol, tobacco, valium and its derivatives, opiates and its derivatives, are more dangerous than marijuana. Heck guns are more dangerous and that is a 2nd amendment right.

Illegal marijuana on the street maybe laced or mixed with other illegal addictive substances, like cocaine. I would like to think that store bought marijuana is the pure stuff :)

It would be good for local economy as a cash crop, and the national economy as an export.

I don't think it would help the Mexican border problems because of other drugs, like crystal meth, and because the Mexican economy is bad.

Right now marijuana is illegal and a completely free market / capitalistic enterprise.
If you have the money and know the right people, aanyone can get marijuana.

I think if the government got involved in marijuana production, and sales, just like anything else the governemnt does, it would make marijuana harder to get . :);)

I can imagine getting government marijuana would be as enjoyable as the post office or the DMV, or going to the PVA office. ;)

Maybe instead of waterboarding, we just give them joints and chips :)







G&P

I have to disagree with you IN about if the Gov stepped in about it being harder to get. I base this off San Fran. I have a friend who lives out there. The MJ is easy to get with a card. It is the BEST quality and it is cheap I mean dirt cheap. And it is 100% Organic.

Hello again:

You drug warriors don't have to worry. You have a friend in the White House.

Yesterday, Obama was asked whether marijuana should be legalized to help the economy.

He snickered. His audience snickered, and he flippantly said NO.

Impeach Obama!

excon