CHANGE Is Comin' Hard-And-FAST, "conservatives"!!!

[Mr. Shaman]

 

[Mr. Shaman]

 

[Mr. Shaman]

***

***

 

[Hanno]

On all of the so called "moral issues" the Radical Right pandering to Christian Conservatives make it their game plan to work against the legalization of many things that in reality would be less of a problem if just simply made legal. And you are correct that in many cases even the Left holds up a stance that seems almost equally unenlightened.

But that to a great extent is because they don't want to be bashed by the Right as some kind of immoral monsters.

Do you see what I'm saying... possibly agree to some extent?[/COLOR]

No, not to any extent, but thanks for asking

To my mind, there are no necessary evils in government. If they pick which intrusions to make to posture with the demographics they do it to obtain more power.

Hard drugs, I believe, are a paper tiger, and junkies are a punching bag. Stuff like answering questions to get a gun, curbing emissions, so to speak lest someone be deprived of the existence of polar bears - it's no claim against me, anyone who tries to make it one, even if they get 300 million with me, is an extortionist.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I used to think, team-R wins, we get guns, team-D wins, we get grass - this was upsetting enough to me, since, for one thing, what good is a nice firearm without a doob to smoke and vise-versa, for another, there's a ratcheting effect, it's easier to lose liberty than to gain it, much easier, no one ever gives back power.

Well, here we got team-D running the table, Barry admits he snorted coke, but he won't give the time of day to talk of legalization. Whats worse, they're cracking down on cigarettes, e-cigs, talking about doing it to sugar-drinks.

They'll give back grass when there's no power to go with it - when they can tell us how much salt to eat, but that we're getting big and responsible now so they think we can handle a joint.

"They'll give back grass...."???????????????



WHO'LL give back grass????? So far, you've identified 2 teams. You're gonna have to be a little-more specific.

Typically, there're very-few Changes made, unless they profitable!!!! It's called Capitali$m....and, the reason "conservatives" are at the losing-end o' the argument...until they start showing a lil' common-sense....​

"....over the last year I’ve swung toward liberalization, for three reasons. First, the evidence suggests that any increase in use from liberalization would be minor, if there was one at all. Second, Mexico and Afghanistan have shown how American drug policy empowers foreign cartels/terrorists and destabilizes foreign countries. Third, the tens of billions of dollars spent on the drug war seem a vast misallocation of resources at a time we’re struggling to pay for education and health care.

I don’t know precisely what policy I’m in favor of. Decriminalization to start with, as some European countries have done. But maybe we should look at a legalization model as well, with state liquor stores or pharmacists selling narcotics and raising money through taxes."

June 29, 2004​

"Conservatives pride themselves on resisting change, which is as it should be. But intelligent deference to tradition and stability can evolve into intellectual sloth and moral fanaticism, as when conservatives simply decline to look up from dogma because the effort to raise their heads and reconsider is too great. The laws aren't exactly indefensible, because practically nothing is, and the thunderers who tell us to stay the course can always find one man or woman who, having taken marijuana, moved on to severe mental disorder. But that argument, to quote myself, is on the order of saying that every rapist began by masturbating. General rules based on individual victims are unwise. And although there is a perfectly respectable case against using marijuana, the penalties imposed on those who reject that case, or who give way to weakness of resolution, are very difficult to defend.

Still, there is the danger of arrest (as 700,000 people a year will tell you), of possible imprisonment, of blemish on one's record. The obverse of this is increased cynicism about the law.

We're not going to find someone running for president who advocates reform of those laws. What is required is a genuine republican groundswell. It is happening, but ever so gradually. Two of every five Americans, according to a 2003 Zogby poll cited by Dr. Nadelmann, believe "the government should treat marijuana more or less the same way it treats alcohol: It should regulate it, control it, tax it, and make it illegal only for children."

Such reforms would hugely increase the use of the drug? Why? It is de facto legal in the Netherlands, and the percentage of users there is the same as here. The Dutch do odd things, but here they teach us a lesson."