Legalize It!!!!!!!

[bododie]

Shaman feels entitled to spew on this board because he surely wouldn't have the courage to say it in person to oh, a "redneck". Cowards are that way.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dana Rohrabacher's on-board??!!!!!!!!!!

​

"The question of whether marijuana should be legalized has been triggered as result of the violence on the border associated with the lucrative, cross-border drug trade -- estimated at $10 billion annually.

The lawmakers also claimed that the war on drugs has failed.

“I think that there has been an honest, very honest, sincere attempt to win the drug war, and that it is not a winnable war,” Rohrabacher said. “I don’t think there is anything more they can do to try to make the drug war work.”

No legislation seeking to legalize marijuana has been introduced in the 111th Congress. Rohrabacher said politicians are concerned about the potential political fallout if they spoke out in favor of legalization.

“There are a lot of people who understand that [the current war on drugs has been a failure], but they are afraid to politically say so," Rohrabacher said. "If it was a vote – a blind vote where nobody knew who was voting – you would have overwhelming support for legalizing marijuana out there, but they will never vote for it because they are afraid of taking on a controversial issue.”​

 

[PLC1]

DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dana Rohrabacher's on-board??!!!!!!!!!!

​

Your picture doesn't go with your post at all.

Nevertheless, take our all of the silly colors and smilies, and you have a good point, or, I should say, whoever wrote what you cut and pasted has a good point. The war on drugs is a failure.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Your picture doesn't go with your post at all.

Gee......ya' noticed that, did you?

How perceptive, of you.



That WAS my point.....but, you're (quite) obviously unaware of Rohrabacher's past-record....on numerous-issues.

Maybe you should try-out some Teen-Chat-site, somewhere......where your limited point-of-reference is more-fitting.​

 

[PLC1]

Gee......ya' noticed that, did you?

How perceptive, of you.



That WAS my point.....but, you're (quite) obviously unaware of Rohrabacher's past-record....on numerous-issues.

Maybe you should try-out some Teen-Chat-site, somewhere......where your limited point-of-reference is more-fitting.​

Oh, so that's where you're getting the crap you keep posting. Teeny bopper sites. That makes a lot of sense...


Either that, or you're an extreme conservative who posts left wing nonsense to make the other side look bad.

Which is it, Shaman? Are you really to the right of Andy, but trying to make the left wing look ridiculous?

 

[Andy]

Oh, so that's where you're getting the crap you keep posting. Teeny bopper sites. That makes a lot of sense...


Either that, or you're an extreme conservative who posts left wing nonsense to make the other side look bad.

Which is it, Shaman? Are you really to the right of Andy, but trying to make the left wing look ridiculous?

LOL That would be the most successful conservative infiltration of the left ever. Absolutely no one makes the left look more ridiculous, as Shaman does.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Oh, so that's where you're getting the crap you keep posting. Teeny bopper sites.

Yeah....sure.....that's where I get it.

​

 

[PLC1]

Yeah....sure.....that's where I get it.

​

Just as I expected.

Now, can you confirm my second hypothesis?

 

[Mr.Dysfunctional]

So 'common sense' in your world, is that you can't live life without a drug induced stupor? Sounds pretty pathetic, even for the least reliable source of information on this forum.

I fail to see how this pretains to anything at all... we are talking about a persons "right" to the prosuit of happiness... If someone entends to be happy in a drug enduced stupor ... hasn't already been proven that nothing short of god will prevent that (( other then our over reaching government ))

The fact still remains that Marijuana use can be compared to known legal drugs (( achohol )) only to see that its effects weigh less on society then the latter.

While our morals do conflict with this idea considering know one here was alive or remebers when pot was offical made illegal to consumption without a tax stamp, we should note that it is by far causing more havoc on social decay then if made legal.


BTW Andy.. I have posted a few times in regards to your supposed "influences"that gave you the impression pot was a moral and social destroying drug... Sorry bud but I can assure you those types were already prone to addicition in the first place... I would love to go into more detail into my exact reasoning behind my conjecture but I promise you that if you don't " sit in a persons shoes" you will never truly understand them.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

While our morals do conflict with this idea considering know one here was alive or remebers when pot was offical made illegal to consumption without a tax stamp......

Actually, concerns were more-corporate, in-nature.

***

> Go To VIDEO.....and, pay close-attention to the ever-expanding co$t$ of Prohibition.​

 

[BigRob]

I fail to see how this pretains to anything at all... we are talking about a persons "right" to the prosuit of happiness... If someone entends to be happy in a drug enduced stupor ... hasn't already been proven that nothing short of god will prevent that (( other then our over reaching government ))

The "right" to pursuit of happiness? According to what legal document?

 

[PLC1]

The "right" to pursuit of happiness? According to what legal document?

I suppose it must be this one:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

 

[BigRob]

I suppose it must be this one:

A "Declaration" is not a legally binding document... and the Declaration of Independence will not stand in a serious court matter as your "right" to do anything.

 

[PLC1]

A "Declaration" is not a legally binding document... and the Declaration of Independence will not stand in a serious court matter as your "right" to do anything.

Oh. So we don't have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Those rights are not legally binding, even though we were "endowed by our creator" with them?

Was the Declaration of Independence, then, just another case of political hyperbola?

 

[BigRob]

Oh. So we don't have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Those rights are not legally binding, even though we were "endowed by our creator" with them?

Was the Declaration of Independence, then, just another case of political hyperbola?

Well you will find the right to life elsewhere in the law, as well as the liberties you do have codified in actual law. So no, those "rights" in the Declaration of Independence are not legally binding, regardless, according to the US system of law. I challenge you to find any Supreme Court case where the DOI was the deciding factor. There are zero.

In my opinion, the DOI was a great commentary to the King, and laid a foundation for what was to come, but it was not and is not the law of the land.