destroying park land regular Americans are too lazy to

[HForrest]

What are the legitimate constructive purposes of crack cocaine?

Recreation?

[Guest]

Simpler fix.

Chinese justice.

Execute growers, sellers, dealers, and users.

An even simpler fix to initiate would be to simply excecute all law enforcement personel in this country. Solves the same problem and we already have a handy list with their names on it. Keep the great ideas coming man.

[Guest]

"The King has no clothes!" "The King has no clothes!"    (prohibition does not work. never has,never will)
  Ask yourself this question-  Is it any more difficult to obtain illegal drugs now, than it was 30 years ago?  
  We have spent billions militarizing our police, corrupting our officials, enriching narcoterrorists and destroying our civil rights for exactly what gain?  A sense of moral superiority?  
  I say buy the dope, hand it out for free to whoever wants to burn thier brain out and let darwins law take the hindmost.  
  And yes, lest you think I have no personal experiance with the heartache of drugs, let me assure you I have. I have lost family members and friends.

[Shalako]

It seems assinine that foreign entities are getting rich off selling Americans a simple weed, grown on our own American soil.

Shouldn't America grow its own weed? And shouldn't it be the best weed in the whole world because the rest of the countries don't have the good ol American know-how, spirit, or determination to be the best like we do (did)?

What ever happened to the America that was better than everyone else at everything? Now we are so fat and lazy that we import undocumented illegal alliens to grow a freely growing weed on our finest public land and pay the exorbitant prices to line the pockets of heinous evil drug lords from a third world sh_thole.

Since the demand is obviously there, we should tax it like everything else and lead the free world in our capacity to produce it and sell it to any idiot that wants it or is too daft to grow it themself.

[Creeping Incrementalism]

And for the guy who said the Feds should sell National Forests because the Constitution doesn't authorize them to hold land, I say hey, where else can people who aren't great land owners go out and practice shooting in a more realistic environment than a controlled range?

...and where is it written that the FedGov is to SUPPLY you with such a place?  You SURE your handle is "Creeping IncrementalisM?  You get the irony?

In case you didn't catch my tone, It was a joke.  I'll use a smily next time.

[MicroBalrog]

Simpler fix - eliminate "National" parks and forests.  They are unconstitutional anyway - the FedGov is only allowed to own land for the National Capital, "necessary" military bases, and foreign embassies.  No other express permission to own land is granted - so it is therefore "reserved to the States...or the people thereof".  This is part of hte reason Oklahoma had a land rush - the Fed had to "get rid" of ownership of the land.

I remind you that this is possibly even less politically feasible then ending the WoD.

Shouldn't America grow its own weed? And shouldn't it be the best weed in the whole world because the rest of the countries don't have the good ol American know-how, spirit, or determination to be the best like we do (did)?

I second this motion.

[wingnutx]

Third

[Car Knocker]

I should see if the internet has any news similar for the Chico/Redding/Shasta area - pot farms used to be big there.

And Humboldt County, and Sierra County, and Placer County, and Eldorado County, and.......

Sometimes I think the influx of cash for the pot crop is the only thing keeping CA afloat financially.

[Perd Hapley]

(prohibition does not work. never has,never will)

For which crimes or other behaviors is this statement true, and why?

No point to make here, I'm undecided on the issue.

[wingnutx]

I can't think of another crime that is really analogous. Mugger/killers/rapists seek out their victims and violate them against their will. Drug/alcohol dealers are actively sought out by the 'victims' who then reward them for their nefarious deed.

Banning murder/rape/robbery doesn't create a vast black market due to masses wanting to be on the recieving end of those crimes, bringing titanic financial incentive for additional crime and official corruption.

I suppose that prostitution can be comparable.

[MicroBalrog]

OK, so there are legitimate constructive uses for these products, and reasonably the clerk/salesman can assume they are going to be used for those purposes, as they are about 99.9% of the time.
What are the legitimate constructive purposes of crack cocaine?

"I want some" is legitimate enough.

[American By Blood]

What are the legitimate constructive purposes of crack cocaine?

Gittin' effed-up.

Some people like to.  Their choice.  I don't do it.  I find it offensive.  Were I to organize an intentional community of willing members we'd definitely exclude crack smokers.

However, laws will not make men moral.  It doesn't matter how draconian they are.  I'll grant that it's comforting to believe they will because free association is illegal, but we're stuck with what we've got.  Like someone's sig over on THR says, "What do you expect?  It's the Kali Yuga."

[Perd Hapley]

What the devil's a kali yuga?

(prohibition does not work. never has,never will)

For which crimes or other behaviors is this statement true, and why?

Would it apply to "victimless crimes"?

[Stand_watie]

...I suppose that prostitution can be comparable.

Gambling might be.

[The Rabbi]

...I suppose that prostitution can be comparable.

Gambling might be.

Posessing automatic weapons.
The penalties are so lenient and so rarely enforced they are sold everywhere.  I can't go anywhere in this town without seeing seedy-looking guys hanging out on street corners pitching full-auto AKs and Uzis.  The Israeli cartels are smuggling crateloads of full auto weapons in, getting rich on illegal trade.  Meanwhile a dealer caught with a full auto is rarely charged and very seldom gets even a minimal sentence, much less the maximum.  Usuallly they are out dealing weapons within 24 hours.

[Guest]

Surely you all remember the great experiment in the '20's?   No booze?  When there is sufficent demand , there will be a supply.
   
 This is a quibble, however.   The main point is this - Is it any more difficult to buy drugs now, than it was 30 years ago?  

  If it is not, then the "War on Drugs " has been a failure for society.
   It has not been a "failure" for the drug lords, (billions of $ in income- profit) ,   for the police, (billions of $ in income- Fed money, asset forfieture, new toys) or for the crooked politicians- bribes, campaign contibutions).  
  And it has not helped junkies either.
 
  So to reiterate - can anyone tell me with a straight face ,that drugs are less available now, than before the "war on drugs?"

[Third_Rail]

I can tell you that they're more available, but that's not what you wanted to hear.


Rabbi - the penalties for dealing drugs are VERY severe, as are dealing with non-registered NFA items. I don't believe either should carry any fine whatsoever. Prohibition of any item just because that item is seen as evil is laughable. It didn't work with alcohol (considered the reason for crime, at the time), didn't work with automatic weapons (considered the reason for mobsters/crime, at the time), didn't work with switchblades (considered the reason for gangs, at the time), and it's certainly not working with the War On (some) Drugs (considered evil, currently).

Unfortunately, only one of these prohibitions has been lifted, yet all of them have been quite profitable for the wrongdoers themselves. Go figure.

[Perd Hapley]

 Prohibition of any item just because that item is seen as evil is laughable.

Would that include child porn, or should that be banned for the sake of the children used to make the porn?  Or should it be treated merely as evidence of child molestation?  What about pamphlets from NAMBLA that encourage sex with children?

[Third_Rail]

There are laws in place to jail/punish child molestors/rapists - the photos I'd say should be illegal, in that there's no way to be making them without hurting someone directly. To compare to another type of photo I think is disgusting... photos of murders, etc. - but those can be made without hurting someone directly, as in crime scene photos, press photos, etc.

As for the pamphlets - legal. Horrible, but legal. I can encourage you to become a Nazi and kill all Jews, and it's legal. Doesn't mean you should, though.

Prohibition of any item just because that item is seen as evil is laughable.

Note that I don't say prohibition of any item is laughable. I said specifically that items that do no harm as they are, that were not directly harming another as they were made, should not be prohibited. Don't twist my words.

[Perd Hapley]

Calm down, now.  I was just asking.  I haven't made up my mind on the drug issue, so I'm just examining people's positions.  I didn't twist your words, I just asked what you meant by them.

[Third_Rail]

My mistake, I do apologize; I simply get defensive when the same arguments (here, there, and everywhere) keep popping up. Again, apologies.

[Perd Hapley]

OK.  By the way, if you'd like to know more about NAMBLA, just send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to:

Of course I'm kidding.

[Third_Rail]

[MicroBalrog]

can't go anywhere in this town without seeing seedy-looking guys hanging out on street corners pitching full-auto AKs and Uzis.

According to the ATF, there's at least 4 million illegal automatic guns in America today. Make of it what you will.

[MicroBalrog]

What about pamphlets from NAMBLA that encourage sex with children?

There are also 'scientists' today who claim their research backs up some of the NAMBLA assertions - are you going to ban publishing this research in scientific magazines?