Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Boomsick- usually I find myself agreeing with with you on most topics but I disagree with you here. In a number of towns around me, drug busts are nonexistent ( except for an occasional pot bust at a traffic stop. )


I wholeheartedly agree with pooling. Legalize pot and tax the fuck out if it. The taxes can pay for the rehab programs. Jails less full. Cartels (moderately) neutered. More than a few benefits. I never did pot but I had more than a few friends who did. I'd rather deal with them then most drunks.


Correct me if I'm wrong please, but wasn't coke legal in prohibition?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im pretty sure the harrison act made cocaine illegal in 1914, prohibition was from 1919-1933.  So it was pretty close, who knows how much enforcement took place in the early years, as it probably took a few years to catch up.


Busts where I live are pretty much nonexistant, to my knowledge, but my town is pretty tame.  I never been a druggie either, but a few of my friends fell into that hole.  A couple of those friends went to prison and were never normal again.  One had a family car seized in a stop where they found some pot, it turned the already poor family into a welfare case, since mom and dad couldnt get to work.  There were a few more cases where the punishment did not equal the crime and it ruined real people, with real lives, to the benefit of the state.


The worst part is the inequality of the system.  My dad has terrible back problems.  Hes tried different treatments, surgery, and nothing works.  His doctor prescribed him morphine, as its the only thing that works.  Now, hes addicted.  A slave to his legal prescription.  If he were addicted to heroin (which is the same thing chemically) he would be a criminal, worthy of imprisonment.  Hes on the right side of the law, but many are not.  Do you even realize how many addicted people get dropped by their doctors and become common criminals, for a major problem that a legal act created?


What im saying is, the punishments and modes of enforcement do not fit the crimes.  Peoples incomes depend upon keeping these restrictions in place and the public has been so brainwashed by many years of 'the moral war on drugs', there is very little outcry for change.  Yes, people are sick of these no knock raids and police militarization, but most miss the big picture: many of these crimes hurt only the individual involved, who would be allowed to hurt themselves with booze, cigarettes, fast cars, and doctor prescribed drugs. 


How can our system be in our best interest when they force violence toward non violent people, for non violent offenses, and defend its merits above personal freedom?  Free to do this, but not that.  You can buy a car the goes 150 and risk many lives, but cant do coke on the weekend.  


You only need be suspected to have men breaking down your door.  Typically, if you or your family gets hurt or dead when this happens, the killer walks.  Because the means are obviously worth the ends where victimless crimes are concerned.


Thats my reasoning Fatty.  Am I completely off base?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
  • Create New...