I've just re-read the Talladega Daily Home article and I keep laughing about Drug Task Force Commander Jason Murray stating emphatically that the gateway theory is a fact. That just kills me. If it were a FACT would it be called a THEORY?
I also get an uncontrollable case of the giggles from this other line from His Brilliance, Mr. Murray.
"These are scientific studies that were conducted by people who are supposed to be a lot smarter than me."
He says that as if he has some serious reservations that a scientist could, in any way, be smarter than him. When, really, how smart do you have to be to kick down doors at 3 a.m. and point big guns at sleep disoriented people?
Another gut buster is DA Steve Giddens claim that people call his office and ask him about legalizing meth and crack cocaine. I can assure you that the last person a crack cocaine or meth user want to converse with is the local DA of the county they live in. I'd wager that what Giddens said has never actually happened.
These two guys are absurd and Mr. Norwood couldn't possibly have picked two better goons for this article.
Your Backyard Squirrels as Carnovours?
6 hours ago
7 comments:
Left a comment & link earlier, after looking at the idea site for Davis I've concluded that it was the original forum. However, it did let me post a new idea.
http://arturdavis2010.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/8838-4426
"Leagalize to advance society" posting on this article has it exactly right.... I'll restate a few of the points..
1)The article was well-written did a good job of giving equal time to both sides of the debate, but please not let your interview subjects get away with claiming that "some study "exists "somewhere" that backs up their points. People are entitled to hold any opinion they like, but when they start referencing studies, they are making verifiable assertions that should be challenged and checked.
2) Law enforcement has a vested financial interest in the drug war regime and therefore cannot be trusted to speak about it objectively or truthfully.
3)"Amsterdam has more addicts living on the street than any other city in Europe or the world. It is a massive draw on their society over there."
That statement is patently false. Like all the other "evidence" offered by the prohibitionists quoted in this story, it is totally devoid of facts, figures and attribution.
4)To believe the gateway "theory" is to lack an elementary understanding of the logical relationship between cause and effect.
5) The rate of hard drug use has remained steady for the last 100 years, a period of time that has seen every approach from full-scale legalization to outright war. Nothing has ever changed the fact that 1.3 percent of the population want to use hard drugs and will continue to do so no matter what.
6)The DEA's own administrative law judge, Francis Young, after listening to extensive testimony on the medical efficacy of marijuana, concluded that marijuana is "one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man" and is "safer than many of the foods we commonly eat."
7)"People call my office, and people call law enforcement, and say they've got dealers down the street, meth labs down the street, and they're scared. We go out, we make arrests, we get them off the street. If these drugs were legalized, there would be nothing we could do. I am totally opposed to that."
The dealers would disappear if we took control of the market by legalizing. There's no need for people to live in fear of illegal dealers and the crime they produce. Drugs per se do not cause crime (with the notable exception of alcohol). Crime is the result of the existence of black markets. If we legalized, our murder and violent crime rate would be cut in HALF!
And finally...
What's more, even if all the prohibitionist arguments presented in this article were true, they would STILL not constitute valid reasons for making pot illegal.
Read the full post at the article page. I was impressed by this poster's arguments.
I saw that posters excellent commentary as well. I'm pretty sure I know who it is because I have seen that very thing before and often use it in arguments myself.
I wonder if the cop or the DA's would be interested in a public debate on this issue? I think I may ask Chris Norwood if the Talladega Daily Home would like to sponsor such an event. Now that the debate is started we should do everything we can to keep it in the spotlight and make it an election issue.
REALLY funny post from "theoldranger" at Daily home site :
"That's all we need!!! Thousands of Pot Heads running amok.I've seen first hand what it does to people , instead of mellowing someone out it makes them crazy as hell, especially after a few beers."
sixstring said...
REALLY funny post from "theoldranger" at Daily home site :
"That's all we need!!! ... instead of mellowing someone out
it makes them crazy as hell, especially after a few beers."
RE:
Sixstring,
theoldranger wouldn't attribute the craziness to "a few beers"?
After all, beer is legal, so it's safer, right...? Uhmm, isn't it...?
Loretta,
thank you for all of the hard work you've been doing.
- The cessation of cannabis-prohibition is LONG OVERDUE.
Time to bring the pot-economy above-board, into the light of day,
for responsible adults, for the AVAILABLE-CHOICE of a 'coffee-equivalent' relaxant.
(which ALCOHOL is NOT!)
- Free growth of cannabis plants
shouldn't be dis-allowed, either; After all, jimson-weed,
(a plant far more dangerous and disorienting than
pot could ever dream of / aspire to be), grows wild all over the U.S.,
yet, the country hasn't turned into a nation of atropinized-zombies, has it?
-- I have a little 'gateway-theory' of my own:
- Cannabis-Prohibition is the gateway to alcohol-use / abuse,
especially for those who know better to CHOOSE CANNABIS,
yet, are apprehensive about its long detection-half-life in drug-tests,
and / or dismayed / disgusted with drawbacks of the underground-market,
(variable / poor product-quality, excessive-prices),
for something that ought to cost much LESS, have better quality-control
in a legal, regulated system.
- Under present circumstances,
alcohol SEEMS to be a halfway-viable alternative to an
artificially overpriced, maligned weed...with one caveat,
it's actually MORE DANGEROUS, behaviorally and MORE socially disruptive
than pot, much easier to O.D. and die from than pot as well.
- As far as a gateway to hard drug-use, (cocaine, for example),
alcohol is much superior in this regard, because it lowers inhibitions
against trying coke, and then, coke allows one to drink more,
by practically erasing pre-existing alcohol-buzz, ad-infinitum...
And NEITHER of these are detectable in urine-tests for more than 3-5 days.
"Another gut buster is
DA Steve Giddens claim that people
call his office and ask him about
legalizing meth and crack cocaine."
Loretta,
- The only instance I can see
where this might ACTUALLY be valid
is if Giddens is being contacted by
members of LEAP.
(LEAP believes that ALL presently-illegal
drugs need to be placed into a legal
and regulated context, to end the hazards
and corruption caused by Prohibition).
Post a Comment