Rise Of Anti-Marijuana Fascism:

[MikeK]

The reason for the politically dramatic title of this thread is, in a word, truth.

When government enforces the will of an emerging corporatocracy, as it did in 1930s Italy, according to Benito Mussolini such a system is known as fascism (Il Fascisti). And there should be no doubt that the motivation behind the vigorous enforcement of marijuana laws is the effect marijuana legalization would have on the bottom lines of the booze and pharmaceutical industries, along with the law-enforcement business. So we have federal power accommodating corporate interests, which is the basic definition of fascism. And the behavior of the goddam cops who conduct these raids more than adequately supports the designation.

The following link will access the website of a reputable news organization which is featuring a long list of recent "pot raids," some of which are so incredibly disproportional to the circumstances they leave little room for doubt that the U.S. is perched on the doorstep of a full-blown police state.

Recent Pot Bust Stories | abc7news.com

Whether or not one is opposed to marijuana prohibition the fact remains that such inordinately aggressive police state tactics used in enforcing the extremely redundant laws against this relatively benign natural tranquilizer are out of keeping with accepted concepts of Liberty in America. And the general relevance of this topic occurs as a warning that if government can get away with such tactics over something as comparatively harmless as marijuana growing it will serve as public acceptance of what may be called an emerging American gestapo.

A critical email to President "Change," whose 2007 campaign rhetoric strongly implied an end to such oppressive nonsense as marijuana prohibition is very much in order. And it must be kept in mind that these police raids and their consequent outcomes are extremely costly!

So let's tell the bullshit artist in the White House what we think of marijuana prohibition.

 

[Unkotare]

Shut the hell up, pothead.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What about "every-other-drug fascism" as well?

 

[ABikerSailor]

I got news for you Mike. It didn't start under Obama, it started back in 1939 with an FBI agent named Anslinger who used marijuana as a way to lock up all the black and brown people, because they were the main consumers.

Combine that with the propaganda film he had Hollywood make? You've got pretty much the same fascist tactics that Hitler used.

 

[eflatminor]

If we don't have freedom of our own bodies, what freedoms do we really have?

 

[MikeK]

I got news for you Mike. It didn't start under Obama, it started back in 1939 with an FBI agent named Anslinger who used marijuana as a way to lock up all the black and brown people, because they were the main consumers.

Combine that with the propaganda film he had Hollywood make? You've got pretty much the same fascist tactics that Hitler used.

Right. So please include all that in your email to Obama, who is the President and can do something about the federal pot laws. (It's too late to complain to Anslinger.)

 

[MikeK]

What about "every-other-drug fascism" as well?

One step at a time.

Trying to do more than that is a self-defeating concept. The public must be shown that legalization of a substance they've been conditioned to believe is dangerous truly is not. That will have the effect of opening minds. But it must be done in gradual steps.

 

[ABikerSailor]

What about "every-other-drug fascism" as well?

One step at a time.

Trying to do more than that is a self-defeating concept. The public must be shown that legalization of a substance they've been conditioned to believe is dangerous truly is not. That will have the effect of opening minds. But it must be done in gradual steps.

Actually, my belief is that if the substance is natural and not processed, it should be legal. That includes pot, hash (it's processed about as much as kernel corn is), mushrooms, catcus, cocoa leaves, etc.

However...............if it's processed (like cocoa leaves are for cocaine), only under a doctors supervision and guidance. Chewing whole leaves is no worse for a person than having a cup of coffee, and if you're working at altitude, it helps you with your oxygen uptake. Process it into cocaine and you've got something that will stop your heart.

As far as heroin and meth? Keep them illegal, there is no medicinal value, and those substances are very damaging to the human body.

Plants aren't.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What about "every-other-drug fascism" as well?

One step at a time.

Trying to do more than that is a self-defeating concept. The public must be shown that legalization of a substance they've been conditioned to believe is dangerous truly is not. That will have the effect of opening minds. But it must be done in gradual steps.

I agree that that's how it will happen, but that's not how it should happen.

"Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend." - William Lloyd Garrison

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What about "every-other-drug fascism" as well?

One step at a time.

Trying to do more than that is a self-defeating concept. The public must be shown that legalization of a substance they've been conditioned to believe is dangerous truly is not. That will have the effect of opening minds. But it must be done in gradual steps.

Actually, my belief is that if the substance is natural and not processed, it should be legal. That includes pot, hash (it's processed about as much as kernel corn is), mushrooms, catcus, cocoa leaves, etc.

However...............if it's processed (like cocoa leaves are for cocaine), only under a doctors supervision and guidance. Chewing whole leaves is no worse for a person than having a cup of coffee, and if you're working at altitude, it helps you with your oxygen uptake. Process it into cocaine and you've got something that will stop your heart.

As far as heroin and meth? Keep them illegal, there is no medicinal value, and those substances are very damaging to the human body.

Plants aren't.

Yes, but it comes down to who owns your body, and if you believe in self-ownership then you know that you have no right to tell people what they can do with their own bodies regardless of whether it's harmful or not.

 

[ABikerSailor]

One step at a time.

Trying to do more than that is a self-defeating concept. The public must be shown that legalization of a substance they've been conditioned to believe is dangerous truly is not. That will have the effect of opening minds. But it must be done in gradual steps.

Actually, my belief is that if the substance is natural and not processed, it should be legal. That includes pot, hash (it's processed about as much as kernel corn is), mushrooms, catcus, cocoa leaves, etc.

However...............if it's processed (like cocoa leaves are for cocaine), only under a doctors supervision and guidance. Chewing whole leaves is no worse for a person than having a cup of coffee, and if you're working at altitude, it helps you with your oxygen uptake. Process it into cocaine and you've got something that will stop your heart.

As far as heroin and meth? Keep them illegal, there is no medicinal value, and those substances are very damaging to the human body.

Plants aren't.

Yes, but it comes down to who owns your body, and if you believe in self-ownership then you know that you have no right to tell people what they can do with their own bodies regardless of whether it's harmful or not.

Never said anything about body ownership, nor do I believe in telling people what they can and can't do with their bodies. I just said keep drugs like heroin and meth illegal.

As a free willed person, you still have the right to go to a dealer and buy some.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Actually, my belief is that if the substance is natural and not processed, it should be legal. That includes pot, hash (it's processed about as much as kernel corn is), mushrooms, catcus, cocoa leaves, etc.

However...............if it's processed (like cocoa leaves are for cocaine), only under a doctors supervision and guidance. Chewing whole leaves is no worse for a person than having a cup of coffee, and if you're working at altitude, it helps you with your oxygen uptake. Process it into cocaine and you've got something that will stop your heart.

As far as heroin and meth? Keep them illegal, there is no medicinal value, and those substances are very damaging to the human body.

Plants aren't.

Yes, but it comes down to who owns your body, and if you believe in self-ownership then you know that you have no right to tell people what they can do with their own bodies regardless of whether it's harmful or not.

Never said anything about body ownership, nor do I believe in telling people what they can and can't do with their bodies. I just said keep drugs like heroin and meth illegal.

As a free willed person, you still have the right to go to a dealer and buy some.

If it's illegal then that's the government restricting your right.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I don't really see it that way Kevin.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't really see it that way Kevin.

I don't mean to be rude, but I just can't imagine how you can't see it that way.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I don't really see it that way Kevin.

I don't mean to be rude, but I just can't imagine how you can't see it that way.

Well...........my Harley was able to whip down the road at around 130 mph, but I (usually) obeyed the speed limit. Is that a limit on my freedom because I can't keep my scooter at 100 whenever I want?

Actually, it's a way to help me (and others) stay a bit safer, because the roads weren't built to accomodate those speeds.

The human body isn't really able to process meth or heroin in a safe way. However, when it comes to cannabis, there are very few problems, with actually quite a few benefits. Same thing with other plant substances. Matter of fact, mushrooms have been researched as of late, and they are finding actual medical benefits for those as well, with very few negative side effects.

And..................I base this opinion on my experience as a Navy Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor (DAPA) for the last 8 years of my career.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't really see it that way Kevin.

I don't mean to be rude, but I just can't imagine how you can't see it that way.

Well...........my Harley was able to whip down the road at around 130 mph, but I (usually) obeyed the speed limit. Is that a limit on my freedom because I can't keep my scooter at 100 whenever I want?

Actually, it's a way to help me (and others) stay a bit safer, because the roads weren't built to accomodate those speeds.

The human body isn't really able to process meth or heroin in a safe way. However, when it comes to cannabis, there are very few problems, with actually quite a few benefits. Same thing with other plant substances. Matter of fact, mushrooms have been researched as of late, and they are finding actual medical benefits for those as well, with very few negative side effects.

And..................I base this opinion on my experience as a Navy Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor (DAPA) for the last 8 years of my career.

Yes, that is a limit on your freedom, but it's also not as clear cut as the drug issue. The argument could be made, and I don't agree with it but it could be made, that the roads are a public good, or that the government owns them, in other words. Therefore they have the right to set whatever speed limit they'd like. With your own body, however, you are the sole owner, therefore nobody has the right to fine you or imprison you if you use heroin or some other such drug. By making it illegal the government is saying that it can fine or imprison you for using this substance, and that is a restriction on your rights.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I don't mean to be rude, but I just can't imagine how you can't see it that way.

Well...........my Harley was able to whip down the road at around 130 mph, but I (usually) obeyed the speed limit. Is that a limit on my freedom because I can't keep my scooter at 100 whenever I want?

Actually, it's a way to help me (and others) stay a bit safer, because the roads weren't built to accomodate those speeds.

The human body isn't really able to process meth or heroin in a safe way. However, when it comes to cannabis, there are very few problems, with actually quite a few benefits. Same thing with other plant substances. Matter of fact, mushrooms have been researched as of late, and they are finding actual medical benefits for those as well, with very few negative side effects.

And..................I base this opinion on my experience as a Navy Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor (DAPA) for the last 8 years of my career.

Yes, that is a limit on your freedom, but it's also not as clear cut as the drug issue. The argument could be made, and I don't agree with it but it could be made, that the roads are a public good, or that the government owns them, in other words. Therefore they have the right to set whatever speed limit they'd like. With your own body, however, you are the sole owner, therefore nobody has the right to fine you or imprison you if you use heroin or some other such drug. By making it illegal the government is saying that it can fine or imprison you for using this substance, and that is a restriction on your rights.

Agreed. You ARE the sole owner of your body and can do with it as you wish, but I'd also consider meth use to be a public issue (bath salts as well) because while on those substances, it's been PROVEN that those people are a hazard to others as well as themselves.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well...........my Harley was able to whip down the road at around 130 mph, but I (usually) obeyed the speed limit. Is that a limit on my freedom because I can't keep my scooter at 100 whenever I want?

Actually, it's a way to help me (and others) stay a bit safer, because the roads weren't built to accomodate those speeds.

The human body isn't really able to process meth or heroin in a safe way. However, when it comes to cannabis, there are very few problems, with actually quite a few benefits. Same thing with other plant substances. Matter of fact, mushrooms have been researched as of late, and they are finding actual medical benefits for those as well, with very few negative side effects.

And..................I base this opinion on my experience as a Navy Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor (DAPA) for the last 8 years of my career.

Yes, that is a limit on your freedom, but it's also not as clear cut as the drug issue. The argument could be made, and I don't agree with it but it could be made, that the roads are a public good, or that the government owns them, in other words. Therefore they have the right to set whatever speed limit they'd like. With your own body, however, you are the sole owner, therefore nobody has the right to fine you or imprison you if you use heroin or some other such drug. By making it illegal the government is saying that it can fine or imprison you for using this substance, and that is a restriction on your rights.

Agreed. You ARE the sole owner of your body and can do with it as you wish, but I'd also consider meth use to be a public issue (bath salts as well) because while on those substances, it's been PROVEN that those people are a hazard to others as well as themselves.

Yes, but using that logic alcohol should be illegal as well, and we know how that worked out. It's the crimes themselves that should be punished, not the drug use. If I attack somebody I can be charged with assault, and it shouldn't matter whether I'm high on bath salts or not.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Yes, that is a limit on your freedom, but it's also not as clear cut as the drug issue. The argument could be made, and I don't agree with it but it could be made, that the roads are a public good, or that the government owns them, in other words. Therefore they have the right to set whatever speed limit they'd like. With your own body, however, you are the sole owner, therefore nobody has the right to fine you or imprison you if you use heroin or some other such drug. By making it illegal the government is saying that it can fine or imprison you for using this substance, and that is a restriction on your rights.

Agreed. You ARE the sole owner of your body and can do with it as you wish, but I'd also consider meth use to be a public issue (bath salts as well) because while on those substances, it's been PROVEN that those people are a hazard to others as well as themselves.

Yes, but using that logic alcohol should be illegal as well, and we know how that worked out. It's the crimes themselves that should be punished, not the drug use. If I attack somebody I can be charged with assault, and it shouldn't matter whether I'm high on bath salts or not.

Nope.............sorry............meth and bath salts are much more dangerous than alcohol.

However............on the legalization of plants issue? I DO believe that if legalized, the legal age to have or consume those substances should be 21.

Why? Because the brain isn't fully developed until you're around 18.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Agreed. You ARE the sole owner of your body and can do with it as you wish, but I'd also consider meth use to be a public issue (bath salts as well) because while on those substances, it's been PROVEN that those people are a hazard to others as well as themselves.

Yes, but using that logic alcohol should be illegal as well, and we know how that worked out. It's the crimes themselves that should be punished, not the drug use. If I attack somebody I can be charged with assault, and it shouldn't matter whether I'm high on bath salts or not.

Nope.............sorry............meth and bath salts are much more dangerous than alcohol.

However............on the legalization of plants issue? I DO believe that if legalized, the legal age to have or consume those substances should be 21.

Why? Because the brain isn't fully developed until you're around 18.

I've been to bars, and I've seen the violence and property destruction that can occur when people get drunk. If the argument is that meth and bath salts lead to violence and property destruction, and should therefore be illegal, then the same logic applies to alcohol regardless of whether it leads to more or less. The point is that it does lead to violence and property destruction. So it should be illegal.