40 years, a trillion dollars, zero results.

[JakeStarkey]

Rabbi just described himself in the post above, and has not refuted how to solve the drug problem.

He wants to regulate progressively the problem. He claims to be a conservative, but everything he writes reveals that he is not. He is farther to the right than that.

 

[tommywho70x]

Traitors? Who? You are the decider on this? Marijuana decriminalization has been advancing over the years. Blacks and whites can intermarry. We let sillies like Rabbi speak freely. Decriminalization, taxation, and regulation will happen. As it did for ending prohibition.

you want lists? should we start from dwight eisenhower's farewell address and work forward or shall we start with barak obama's inside group and work back

i've been on the front lines of the secret civil war for 47 years this november 22. when clinton and gore were bus storming around the country, they took a group of leading marijuana activists aside in wisconsin and begged them to support them for a first term and they would address the marijuana prohibition in their second term. it didn't happen.

and i reiterate, it's not going to so long as so much money is being made the way things are now.

OK, you are one of the John Birch freaks along with a couple of others here. I understand.

john birch freak? muahahahahaha! if there were any real john birchers here, they'd have your ass for even suggesting that somebody like me was one of theirs.


i'm an old beatnik from a chicago democratic machine family who was taught by a 5th grade public school teacher that lee oswald was just a patsy and it was a group that put the whole thing together.

 

[JWBooth]

john birch freak? muahahahahaha! if there were any real john birchers here, they'd have your ass for even suggesting that somebody like me was one of theirs.


i'm an old beatnik from a chicago democratic machine family who was taught by a 5th grade public school teacher that lee oswald was just a patsy and it was a group that put the whole thing together.

LBJ was behind it all

 

[tommywho70x]

john birch freak? muahahahahaha! if there were any real john birchers here, they'd have your ass for even suggesting that somebody like me was one of theirs.


i'm an old beatnik from a chicago democratic machine family who was taught by a 5th grade public school teacher that lee oswald was just a patsy and it was a group that put the whole thing together.

LBJ was behind it all

there is a popular rumor that says the first radio transmission to him aboard air force one was "it was a lone wolf, lyndon. got it?" they also say that johnson was using the hole in jfk's neck with his pecker while lady bird forced jackie to give her head, thus creating the term "**** you in the neck"

 

[The Rabbi]

john birch freak? muahahahahaha! if there were any real john birchers here, they'd have your ass for even suggesting that somebody like me was one of theirs.


i'm an old beatnik from a chicago democratic machine family who was taught by a 5th grade public school teacher that lee oswald was just a patsy and it was a group that put the whole thing together.

LBJ was behind it all

there is a popular rumor that says the first radio transmission to him aboard air force one was "it was a lone wolf, lyndon. got it?" they also say that johnson was using the hole in jfk's neck with his pecker while lady bird forced jackie to give her head, thus creating the term "**** you in the neck"

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

 

[tommywho70x]

LBJ was behind it all

there is a popular rumor that says the first radio transmission to him aboard air force one was "it was a lone wolf, lyndon. got it?" they also say that johnson was using the hole in jfk's neck with his pecker while lady bird forced jackie to give her head, thus creating the term "**** you in the neck"

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

 

[The Rabbi]

there is a popular rumor that says the first radio transmission to him aboard air force one was "it was a lone wolf, lyndon. got it?" they also say that johnson was using the hole in jfk's neck with his pecker while lady bird forced jackie to give her head, thus creating the term "**** you in the neck"

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

 

[tommywho70x]

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

use your spell checker more and it makes your arguments stronger.

the supply-demand argument looks good on its face. as i am no economist, i won't even try to refute it. i'll see what shakes out of the document archives on the subject first.

 

[JakeStarkey]

LBJ was behind it all

there is a popular rumor that says the first radio transmission to him aboard air force one was "it was a lone wolf, lyndon. got it?" they also say that johnson was using the hole in jfk's neck with his pecker while lady bird forced jackie to give her head, thus creating the term "**** you in the neck"

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

One, not everyone is using them: hasty generalization.

Two, legalizing drugs is not going to stop folks from using them: contradiction in premise.

However, legalizing drugs will allow society to create a system in which it can be managed rationally, taxed, and stop the blood and terror.

Obviously, nothing else has worked.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

Less terror and blood, plus economic programs to try and mitigate those who are addictive.

Nothing you have offered has worked, Rabbi, so something has to be tried.

 

[The Rabbi]

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

Less terror and blood, plus economic programs to try and mitigate those who are addictive.

Nothing you have offered has worked, Rabbi, so something has to be tried.

Geesz are you stupid, Jake. The program in China after the revolution worked. No one has said it hasn't. People might have other objections, but everyone agrees it reduced and practically eliminated drug use. So it did work.

 

[sweetie]

THE BABBI DRONES ON: "But you're just too darn stupid and foul mouthed to engage in serious debate."



...maybe..but in my defense, it's tough 'debating' an apparent stooooooooopid republicrat **** whose 'ideas'/hallucinations about (individual) liberty/freedom/justice/etc. don't include the 'freedom/liberty' to put into ONE'S OWN BODY WHAT ONE WANTS..or the 'freedom/liberty' to grow god's seedbearing plants ON ONE'S 'PROPERTY'..etc..

..and bear with me, i'm always trying to find better ways to penetrate your thick republicrat skull..

..the rest of you, have a good day!..

..

 

[Founder]

Death Penalty For Drug Users Would Be Nice

For most all of world history there has been no drug problem. For most of American history there has been no drug problem. In the 50s we had no drug problem, AND WHY?

The reason is ultra simple, Very Harsh PUNISHMENT and ZERO TOLERATION is the answer. In the 1950s, if anyone was caught by the police, (and they for sure were) with even one joint in their pocket or on their person, FIRST OFFENSE, they got 5 years of hard brutal labor in prison, and many years of probation after that, and social ostracism on a massive scale for the rest of their lives.

Under those circumstances no one, and I mean no one, in their right mind, or out of it, would touch drugs. It was a sure path to a felony conviction and many years in jail.

Then in the disgusting 60s the nation turned into a nation of sissies, where Mommies and Daddies were whining about their little darlings, and courts were corrupted by these whining mommies crying for their little darlings, and that was the end of America. This nation is now doomed and destroyed by mommies running wild. The chances of us recovering and restoring this nation are near zero, not zero, just near zero.

When any culture losses the nerve to PUNISH first offenders of ANY age very harshly, that nation is doomed and on a slippery slope to the end, and the crack up will not be pretty.

We have a consumption problem here, not an import problem. It is our disgusting degenerate sickly dependence on Drugs, and our tolerance of the same, that is the problem.

Drug dealers are NOT the problem, Drug smugglers are NOT the problem. It is Drug users that are the entire problem.

Mommies little babies want to suck on drugs, and suck on everything else, I might add, and mommy doesn't want the little darlings punished for anything whatsoever. Scratch one nation.

 

[sweetie]

...yeah, and we never had a problem back then with darkies mouthing off in public..alas, for the good ol' boys daze..

...stfu, flounder..YOU wouldn't dare to confront someone on their property for 'doing drugs'...you'll get a stinking ******* drug war agent to do your dirty work for you..

...******* idiot..*****..

...the rest of you, have a good day!..

 

[JakeStarkey]

We, and the world, have always had drugs. We have had a drug "problem" because certain drugs have been criminalized in the last century. Some of you are very, very ignorant on this subject.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

Less terror and blood, plus economic programs to try and mitigate those who are addictive.

Nothing you have offered has worked, Rabbi, so something has to be tried.

Geesz are you stupid, Jake. The program in China after the revolution worked. No one has said it hasn't. People might have other objections, but everyone agrees it reduced and practically eliminated drug use. So it did work.

Now you are proving that you truly are a leftist. You want to regulate drugs like any progressive socialist would. And now you talking wanting to be like a Red Chinese communist!

Wow!

 

[sweetie]

...i sense babbi and flounder caught their first true loves sucking on more than the hippie's bong!..

 

[The Rabbi]

Less terror and blood, plus economic programs to try and mitigate those who are addictive.

Nothing you have offered has worked, Rabbi, so something has to be tried.

Geesz are you stupid, Jake. The program in China after the revolution worked. No one has said it hasn't. People might have other objections, but everyone agrees it reduced and practically eliminated drug use. So it did work.

Now you are proving that you truly are a leftist. You want to regulate drugs like any progressive socialist would. And now you talking wanting to be like a Red Chinese communist!

Wow!

Making more unfounded assertions, Jake? How about proving that nothing I've suggested has worked? Like, keeping it on topic for a change?

 

[Oddball]

That's as credible as anything posted here. Heck, more credible than the idea that if we legalize all drugs everyone will quit using them.

i don't think i've ever seen anybody claim that everybody would quit using drugs if they were legalized. the claim is that the addiction rate would be reduced (as opposed to eliminated).

Sure. Because we all know if you reduce the price and increase availibility of a commodity then there will be fewer buyers of it. Right?
Where do they teach this stuff???

You turn the trade over to legit businessmen and you'll end up with cleaner and less potent substances (beer and wine sales comprise the largest volume of sales in liquor stores) and you'll also eliminate the associated gang violence.

BTW, are the drug laws the only thing stopping you from stuffing coke up your nose?

 

[JWBooth]

Geesz are you stupid, Jake. The program in China after the revolution worked. No one has said it hasn't. People might have other objections, but everyone agrees it reduced and practically eliminated drug use. So it did work.

Totalitarian Chinese Communism succeeds because peasant serfs work best when denied opium under promise of death. Gotcha.