There is... never was... never going to be... a true war on drugs. The so called "war on drugs" was merely window dressing to provide cover for the biggest drug dealers on the planet... and guess who they are.
Let us not forget that people can get high from glue, paint and other legal everyday household items. Does this mean we should ban paint and glue? People educate your children that drugs, sniffing glue, and fatty food should be avoided not because you will get throw in prison but because they are harmful to your health. You simply cant make everything bad for people illegal.
RON PAUL IS GOING TO BE PROSECUTED BY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO CALL AMERICAN PEOPLE INVADERS AND INITIATERS OF WARS.
RON PAUL SAID THE USA INVADES COUNTRIES AND STARTS WARS, WHICH GIVES USA A BAD REPUTATION AROUND THE WORLD , THEREFORE IT IS CONSIDERED A CRIME . A US CITIZEN WHO
WAS BORN IN USA CANT GO AGAINST GOVERNMENT POLICIES WHICH MIGHT TREATEN THE FUTURE
america, it's up to you to show the world that there is another way! I'm confident that ron paul will stand by his word! He's been paying the same thing for 30 years! Imagine being involved in one of the greatest societal revolutions in the history of the world! It can happen! It's not a dream! It's right there on a plate for you! Vote ron paul!
there is no sense whatsoever with the war on drugs! It is just control and bully tactics, it's stripping the very core of your rights away! The right to do whatever you please with your own body! How on earth have we got to the point where someone tells us what to do with our own bodies? It's sickening that the police would smash your door off, leave your property unsafe, scare everyone inside... just to stop you putting something into your body! It's madness!
The reason marijuana is said to raise crime rates is because possession is illegal. Also, the prohibition has caused gangs to sell weed, rather than people growing it or buying it from a store.
ron paul is the only true and passionate politician i ever seen in the usa... he breeds and lives his countrys laws and is obsessed in good way, too bad nobody takes him seriously, because most dont have the historical and inside knowledge he has... i think he wont sell out like obama, never liked him i think he is a total sell out
As long as drugs are illegal there's a profit for criminals. The Mexican cartel can be a prime example for instance. Marijuana their biggest cash crop is practically next to being harmless. You stop that and the major violence along our borders, border states and in Mexico stops immediatley. In other countries I know it's in Canada and in the Netherlands, their drug users are helped not prosecuted. Our prison population would decrease dramatically and people would get the help they need.
As long as drugs are illegal there's a profit for criminals. The Mexican cartel can be a prime example for instance. Marijuana their biggest cash crop is practically next to being harmless. You stop that and the major violence along our borders, border states and in Mexico stops immediatley. In other countries I know it's in Canada and in the Netherlands, their drug users are helped not prosecuted. Our prison population would decrease dramatically and people would get the help they need.
it sure would save a lot of jail space and maybe even close down a few prisons. less young people using it to rebel against the system. how much is spent on the war on drugs? one less failed government policy
Our judicial system is so archaic it's unreal. In Virginia they have carried out no knock warrants, set up cameras to catch people selling TWO OUNCES OF WEED (no lie) while our fire department's BEST firefighters are being forced to live in quarters with MOLD and unsafe living conditions. That money could go to where it is supposed to go, to HELP
THEY ARE MAKING WAY TO MUCH CORRUPT MONEY WITH THE WAR ON DRUGS!! UNDER THE TABLE AND ON THE BOOKS!! THEY WONT STOP THIS MONEY LAUNDERING INTILL ITS ALL OVER..........CIVIL WAR SOON!
a bit of common sense from a repug. unfortunately, people in places of power have too much money to make if the war is carried on (tobacco and alcohol tycoons).
No one ever talks about Portugal. All drugs have been decriminalized there since 2001, and drug use has since plummeted. Why? Because their drug addicts can now seek help instead of hiding fearfully in the shadows.
There is empirical proof out there and no one`s acknowledging it.
The only way to gain control of the huge drug problem in America is to do exactly what Ron Paul says and that is to decriminalize ALL drug use. You cannot police something that is unenforceable its simple supply and demand , demand is high in America and supply is consistent but low , tell me what happens if a drug bust is made and the supply drops ? even though the government really cant stop the supply by much demand SOURS. Not to mention drug use is more of debilitation or mental issue .
Paul would use limited resources to actually solve US problems, not manufacture criminals or subsidize poor choices! Police do great job, but have better things to do with their time! (Draconian punishment is disproportionate, unjust and immoral! For example... would you: gouge eyeballs out for petty offenses?! NO!)
US has HIGHEST documented incarceration rate IN THE WORLD! Paul makes complete sense, open your eyes
Paul is right. Punishment is disproportionate to crime, Paul knows we have more efficient more effective uses for US resources, that would be better for the American people.
Ron Paul should be president, not the lying marijuana smoking Obama! Ron Paul never smoked marijuana, but can see our unconstitutional 'war' on drugs is an inefficient/ineffective waste of resources that are being miss-allocated! Drugs are their own punishment, Ron Paul is for sound economics and constitutional government!
but what about the corrupt police,attorneys, judges, politicians who will loose their source of income. American Gangster, Godfather, etc. etc. Duh!!!! Why kill a perfectly viable multibillion dollar business? Watch out Ron Paul, they won't like this kind of talk. Hopefully they only just try to smear your reputation.
Big Pharma, the world's biggest drug dealer EVER!
This is why the US government through it's hired thugs aka the police state, are funded in the 'war on drugs'. It's as plain as the nose on your face, even plainer actually.
I hate drug dealers and drug lords. They are a grave threat to our future. Bomb all drug lords and make their lifes a living hell. Use Daisy cutters on their habitats. Stamp em out and have fun while doing it!
@MiKikaIwaShizaru no, oxycontin is not really just heroin, but with the current laws and the way they are enforced, the people who do use heroin do get the Oxycontin, and those of us who suffer every day in pain get nothing! It is backwards. The biggest problem nowadays is SSI anti-depressants. They are the top sellers and cause complete lapses in judgment. If you notice someone has no common sense anymore, just look what their taking... it's probably zoloft, paxil, cimbalta, etc... bad stuff
@jmurphy914, SSRI (I think that's what you meant) can apparently cause a lot worse than "lapses in judgment." They are statistically WAY overrepresented among known perpetrators of school shooting sprees starting in 1996, and in the earlier rash of postal worker violence that added the two-word idiom "going postal" to our language.
We have NO known counter-example of someone who perpetrated a multi-target school shooting spree who is known NOT to have been on SSRIs at or before the incidents.
I know it. The frigging things have ruined so many lives its unable to count. I didn't want to get into detail, but now that you mention it, go to ssristoriesdotcom The damage these have done to my family and the whole country is amazing! They are prescribed for everything under the sun, are completely ineffective for 99% of the uses it is given for, and missing a single dose can cause homicidal rage!
@jmurphy914, the really sad thing is, if your doctor tells you that a certain pharmaceutical can help you, you can research it and find out the side-effects, and decide for yourself if the benefits outweigh the risks, and choose whether or not to take it.
But what choice did the students of Columbine, Virginia Tech., etc. have? Neither they nor their parents were told about the risks of deadly side-effects of merely attending the same school as someone ELSE who was taking SSRIs!
@COMALiteJ I agree fully. These were innocent kids whose lives were ruined because they were forced to take a drug that took and ruined so many lives! You cannot trust the doctor any more. we have the means to research ourselves and not just be told what the pharma rep. told doc. Big Pharma is out of control and the real reason for the cost of helthcare! That, and of course for profit hospitals, which have to make profit off your sickness for their shareholders. Profit and Medicine don't mix!
When the fuck are more people in this country going to wake the fuck up and realize that big government is bad? This generation sucks. Kids today are all uneducated followers, they know nothing but what the media tells them... and generally that is "You can't do it, but it's okay, the government knows what's best for you!"
The inability to form an opinion for yourself without the approval of others needs to be added to the DSM as a personality disorder.
Though I abhor drugs, as a constitutionalist I am in 100% agreement with Ron Paul that the War on Drugs is a senseless waste of taxpayer money.
This, like so many other things the Federal Government decides upon unilaterally, is a STATE ISSUE, because all powers not specifically granted to the President or Congress are reserved for the American people, fullstop.
There is no Amendment granting government control over what you smoke or drink.
@veradinx, actually, all Powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government NOR FORBIDDEN TO THE STATES are reserved to the States OR the People, respectively.
That said, ONLY PEOPLE (individually as Persons, or collectively as "The People") have, or CAN have, RIGHTS. The Tenth Amendment is talking about POWERS, which is NOT the same thing. Powers ≠ Rights. Powers are granted and can be revoked by the granting agency. Rights are INHERENT and IRREVOCABLE.
@veradinx THIS president has more power than all of congress and the entire government! When have you heard the President is suing a state? The President take over of GM? The President's healthcare plan was approved at gunpoint by the rest. They were threatened into it, even though they will now be voted OUT and they know it. WHY did Americans allow this? I certainly didn't but the rest of us who did deserve everything they get by the Left! 87 Member off Cong. are card carrying membrs of D.S.A.
the funny thing is that my sociology professor looks like ron paul and he is the same way too. a fair guy. too bad if he runs for president he will get shot.
I haven't heard a man speak with truth since J.F.K's speeches to the american public. This guy needs to get his voice out there on levels that all can hear. I vote RP 2012.
@Intranetusa I agree with the exception of being 'left'. Which part of Ron Paul is 'left'? He is so far opposite of big government it is unbelievable. If you mean 'left' as in against the drug war and against the war, I don't consider those positions 'left'. The 'left' has supported the war on drugs and the war on terror. He is a true libertarian conservative. Nothing 'left' about it.
Libertarian by nature is a blend of modern day conservative economic views with modern day liberal social views.
If anti-war and against the war on drugs are not leftist, then fiscal responsibility and small government technically aren't rightist either - there are plenty of people on the left who believe in those things, and those views were originally the foundations of classical liberalism.
So a modern libertarian by definition is a mix of conservatism and liberalism.
A populist is the opposite of a libertarian. A modern populists are neo-liberal in economics and neo-conservative in social policies. A modern libertarian is neo-liberal in social policies, and neo conservative in economic policies.
They are neither neo-lib nor neo-conservative all around...otherwise they wouldn't be libertarian or populist.
@fubarnett Left is pure government dictatorship, and right is Anarchy. We are supposed to be ALMOST anarchy, with a tiny government. Govt. ALWAYS abuses power. Throughout the entire history of this planet! America was a successful experiment in freedom, and the left came from overseas and destroyed us while we watched and allowed it piece by piece!
REPUBLICANS ARE SO STUPID, BUSH WAS AN ALCHOHOLIC, FALLING DOWN , EMBARASSING THE WHOLE NATION, SO TWIN TOWERS COLAPSED, ECONOMY COLAPSED! THEY PUT LINDSAY LOHAN IN JAIL, WHY THEY DIDNT PUT BUSH IN JAIL I COULD STILL SEE TWIN TOWERS TODAY?
Jokes aside, I agree with Paul, people should be allowed to use drugs as they long as they behave non-violent and correct publicly as well know the consequences about the drug they are taking.
End the War on Drugs and the drug problem will stop overnight. Then regulate these drugs with Dr's and hospitals and start helping people help themselves and put them back into society instead of a prison.
@MrRiceowlex Not only do we need to stop the injustice of imprisoning addicts, we need to eliminate the addict stigma. People use drugs for a reason and they shouldn't be condemned for feeling so rotten that they turn to drugs just to function and feel a scrap of goodness. Others use drugs to treat agonizing physical pain. Even they are condmened with the addict stigma. We have far too much condemnation and "justice" in our society anyway. What kind of world would it be without compassion?
@MyGrassIsGreenest Well said. It has also turned into a war on doctors and pain relief which is absolutely tragic. I watched my mother spend her final two years in chronic pain that was inadequately treated because of the addict stigma and the legal and civil pressure doctors now practice under.
In a modern society free well beyond the age of fear and superstition you'd think we would consider relieving suffering as heroic. Now we imprison those saints as if they were witches.
Do you believe that ALL laws should be obeyed, no matter HOW they came about or WHY?
Then you'd've happily turned in your Jewish neighbor had you lived in Nazi Germany, right?
You'd've turned in any fugitive slaves, and/or anyone aiding and abetting their fleeing to freedom (even your best friends or family), had you lived anywhere in the USA (including the North) prior to the Civil War, right?
@COMALiteJ You are not seriously going to compare smoking pot to the Holocaust or slavery are you? If you don't like the law, then work to change it through the proper channels. It is not an unjust law. If you choose to do the crime, then don't about doing the time.
It is a flaw comparison that he makes. Comparing bathtub gin to crack cocaine is just plain stupid. The problem is with the way the justice system works and the insane way we have given rights to prisoners.
It is this kind of thinking as well as many other of his stated policies why RP probably won't win reelection let alone be the next President. There are too many things he's openly stated that he would change and people like the status quo. The very fact he's against Israel rules him out as a viable candidate for the Presidency. Ya'll can back him but you'll be throwing your votes away. He's truly a man before his time. But he'll never get the number of votes needed with such variety of stances
If people who WANT to do drugs could get drugs from a source that is not terrorizing the country, like the mexican mafia, Bike Gangs, Street Gangs, etc, then the crime rate would drop 95% !!
@CommonSenseJoe As much as I'd love to execute Mexican drug gangs, I think the easier route is to just legalize drugs... Too bad the drug cartels aren't deathly afraid of pigs like our other "enemies", that'd be even easier.
@CommonSenseJoe, the cost to society of legalizing drugs would be great? Well, only in the sense that the poor, poor prison-industrial complex would lose out on a lot of revenue.
Do you honestly think that the usage of drugs would go up a lot? No. Nearly everyone who would use drugs if they were legalized is ALREADY USING them NOW! The law is NOT deterring hardly ANYONE. This has been shown through statistical surveys. Less than 2% who aren't using now would use them if they became legal.
@COMALiteJ Look at the cost to our society for having legalized alcohol. I am not advocating prohibition, but the costs are tremendous in terms of social destruction, loss of productivity, and the cost of treatment.
If you legalizes drugs, you would have the same effects but 10 times worse. To say only 2% more would use drugs is simply not true. The high cost of the drugs and the penalties involved keep people from using them.
@CommonSenseJoe, BAD example! Alcohol was legal. We made it illegal through a Constitutional Amendment, the ONLY ONE IN HISTORY that was ratified that REMOVED a Right previously held by the people.
What happened? People still drank alcohol. A lot. The overall usage in the nation went down by WAY less than the statistical margin of error (which means it may actually have gone UP a bit). But the brief period of Prohibition ITSELF caused MASSIVE societal damage, FAR worse than the alcohol itself.
@CommonSenseJoe (cont), organized crime got its foothold in the USA during, and specifically BECAUSE OF, Prohibition. THOUSANDS of people died BECAUSE OF Prohibition (the equivalent of several 9/11s combined — in a time when the overall population of the USA was much less than it is now, making that proportionally an even larger death toll).
Prohibition was ALSO the ONLY Constitutional Amendment EVER to be REPEALED, the only way an Amendment CAN be: by another Amendment!
@CommonSenseJoe (cont), yes, alcohol is bad. Very bad. Much worse than marijuana, or even many of the other currently illegal drugs (marijuana isn't even a DRUG, BY DEFINITION! It's an HERB!).
But, Prohibition did NOT stop people from using it. Very, VERY few, if ANY, people who previously drank stopped drinking. Prohibition ITSELF caused even WORSE damage. So it was repealed.
It's simple, really: Probibition. Does. Not. Work. Not then, not now, not EVER.
@COMALiteJ Legalizing drugs will NOT make use go down. It is will go up and far more than 2%. It is foolish to believe otherwise. There is no benefit to making crack legal. NONE.
@CommonSenseJoe There's no benefit in making Alcohol and tobacco legal either. But they are. This is a philosophical and moral issue commonsense joe. You can't regulate that. Or you have a dictatorship. Duh. If you use common sense you would think logically and say either all drugs are legal, or all drugs are illegal. Why pick and choose? Why is marijuana illegal yet Nicotine is known and reported by most scientists to be the biggest killer of them all? That's common sense. Right?
@subbylol You are using flawed logic. Just because tobacco and alcohol are now legal, through regulated, does NOT mean we should allow everything that can harm us to be legal as well. There is NO upside to crack cocaine. If you could use it and guarantee me that your use would not affect my life, I would agree. The problem is that, legal or not, YOUR use would affect me eventually. You would end of stealing to pay for your habit. Your family would be destroyed. I would have to pay.
@CommonSenseJoe Only illegal or highly taxed drugs are so expensive the user has to steal in order to obtain the funds for it. Crack cocaine would be cheap if unregulated.
@richrdroma True, it would be cheaper but no less addictive. More people would become addicted and demand would rise. Some people will steal to buy cigarettes. Imagine what they would do for crack.
@CommonSenseJoe My logic isn't flawed at all. It's fair. You can't have one drug legal and than another illegal. What you don't understand is that alcohol kills thousands every year from accidents, cigarettes kill many more from cancer. Those drugs affect you way more than crack does buddy. You can drive while on crack. You can drive while coked up. You can drive while smoking marijuana. Your argument has no validity because your evidence goes against drugs which are legal and regulated.
@CommonSenseJoe Through regulation you also create the black market, Which leads to drugs cartels and the mob. So you create more violence , you create an unsafe source. The point is common sense. Regulation and regulating things is all good in thought. But in action it doesn't work. This is why our drug war is failing. We lose more lives in the process of regulating these drugs than we would if we were to make them legal. Not to mention the billions of dollars we waste in money. drug war = fail
@CommonSenseJoe Even if we do execute people we still create criminals and we create the black market. You don't have enough people to enforce these draconian laws and if you did you wouldn't have the money. This is why all wars are wars on humanity. It simply isn't right , it doesn't work. Bottom line. Executing drug users is not the solution. Rehabilitation is. I' m pretty sure 90 percent of the public agrees with me and i don't know why you would even bring up execution. What a joke.
@subbylol I never said execute drug users. I am said we need to start exceuting these gangs and big time dealers. I am all for rehabilitation for users. Execution is not a joke. We need to have more crimes punishable by death, and we need to speed up the process. We waste millions of dollars putting people to prison when they have proven that they are beyond rehabilitation of any kind. Society should not be punished by providing for these criminals.
@CommonSenseJoe - no, we need to stop supporting them by keeping their black market thriving by unconstitutionally making drugs illegal. if drugs were legal, there would be no big-time dealers...
@CommonSenseJoe - Does that mean anything? I was trying to make a point, can you counter it? There would be less addicts if we treated addiction as a social and medical issue, not a crime.
@CommonSenseJoe - Why would you have to take them over? Newsflash, our own government deals the drugs, and collects the tax money to "fight" the war on drugs.. Your common sense is actually pretty stupid.
@bedtime4bonzo If I even believe you for a second, how does that change the nature of making them legal? Making them legal would make more addicts who are less likely to seek treatment.
Yes, you did. You said "We could win it if we start executing people for drug offensives [sic]."
Mere possession, let alone usage, is currently a drug offense. Therefore, one who is in possesion of, let alone uses, an illegal drug is committing a drug "offensive," and by what you said, they should be executed.
@CommonSenseJoe hey let's execute all our alcohol and tobacco users! Would you support that common sense? Or else your not being fair cmon now! lets do what's right cause your all about protecting me remember?
Here's something for you to look up on Google/Wiki: "second-hand smoke." Get back to us on that, mkay?
"Crack is vastly different, than Alcohol. Few people rob to feed the beer habit."
Oh, yes they do. Alcohol and crack are both physically addictive, but extreme alcohol addiction (alcoholism) can have *FATAL* *WITHDRAWAL* symptoms (extreme D.T.s). Yes, STOPPING drinking suddenly, if you're addicted, can KILL YOU, in and of itself!
@CommonSenseJoe: "We could win it if we start executing people for drug offensives."
Nope. That's been tried. Not here n the USA, but it has been tried in other nations. It doesn't work. Sure you stop that particular person (dead people don't go on to use more drugs), but you don't stop others.
If you execute everyone who commits any wrongdoing, you wipe out the entire human species. Are you willing to go that far? Because that's the ONLY way to stop drugs entirely.
@COMALiteJ You know that is not what I said. I did not say execute everyone. Execute the big time dealers and sellers and you will see a change. We are trying to fight a war without actually killing people. If we know who cartel leaders are, we take them out.
@CommonSenseJoe - We are the cartel, Joe! Since we have been in Afghanistan, opium production has more than doubled. Our own CIA has officially admitted that after the Iran Contra scandal, we traded all our excess weapons for cocaine, which fueled the cocaine/crack explosion of the early '80's. It's business, buddy, not morality. The moral choice would be to let people be responsible for their own lives, and as soon as they infringe on someone else's life or property, then let em have it.
@CommonSenseJoe, I cannot read your mind. I can only go on what you actually say, and what you actually said was execute people for drug "offensives." You didn't specify WHICH "offensives." Use and possession are "offensives" at this time.
Furthermore, what would REALLY happen if you made drug dealing (or any other non-murder crime) a capital offense is that a lot of people would be murdered because they witnessed such a crime. Why not? The criminal has NOTHING TO LOSE, and EVERYTHING TO GAIN!
@CommonSenseJoe, analogy: I really, REALLY hate child molesters. Would I love to see them wiped out? You betcha.
But, in the cold light of reason, I cannot justify making child molestation, as horrible a crime as it is, a capital offense. If we did, then the molesters have NO reason to let their victims live. They're WITNESSES AGAINST THEM. If they're convicted of the molestation, they fry. So why NOT murder the kids? Nothing worse could happen to them even if convicted of the murders!
@COMALiteJ Hatred has nothing to do with it. Practicality is the key. For example, the average rapist has been CONVICTED FIVE TIMES. He should have been executed after the third conviction. The cost of keeping him locked up punishes society because we treat them better than they deserve to be treated.
@CommonSenseJoe, now extend that to making drug dealing a capital offense. I know you specified "big time," but you'd have to define that. Where do we draw the line?
Anyway, suppose your kid walks home from school, and on the way sees a drug deal going down. As it stands now, even if the dealers see that your kid saw them, they have some reason to refrain from murdering your kid. If arrested for drug dealing, they spend some time in prison. Murder a kid? Life, or execution.
@COMALiteJ OR the kid walks home from school, buys some legal, cheap crack, gets hooked, and ends up dead from his addiction. IF is a child's game. Your logic is that we go easy on the dealers so they don't kill innocents. I say catch them and execute them. This will make others realize that they need another line of crime.
@CommonSenseJoe, if your kid would buy crack from the dealer, you didn't raise him well, or he has some other serious underlying psychological problem.
But in my scenario, it doesn't matter how you raised him, or anything at all about your kid other than he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. BANG! He's dead. Prepare the funeral. Call the family together. Cancel all plans you had for him. He's gone forever. All because YOU wanted drug-dealing to be a capital offense.
@COMALiteJ You are blaming the wrong person. The drug dealer killed him, not me. I did not say my kid would use drugs, but I know a lot of dumb kids who would simply because they were legal, cheap, and available.
@CommonSenseJoe, "Legalizing drugs will NOT make use go down. It is will go up and far more than 2%. It is foolish to believe otherwise."
This is not belief. This is backed up by studies, surveys, statistical analysis, etc., not to mention the actual history of Prohibition.
You're simply wrong on this, and your repeated but unsupported assertions to the contrary do not make it any more true than people telling Copernicus that he was wrong made the Sun go around the Earth.
@COMALiteJ Do you honestly believe making drugs legal will ONLY increase the number of people who use them 2%? Come on, you cannot be that native or think I am. Common sense tells you that there is NO WAY predict this by ANY MEANS. You would have to believe that ONLY 2% of the people obey the law instead of using drugs. As I said before, YOU CANNOT make comparisons between alcohol during Prohibition with CRACK today. It is a flawed comparison.
@CommonSenseJoe, okay, you want common sense? Then answer these questions HONESTLY, Yes or No:
If marijuana were legalized tomorrow, would YOU PERSONALLY start using it?
Is the law, the threat of criminal punishment, the ONE AND ONLY THING keeping you from doing so, the ONLY REASON you do not, the SOLE CRITERION that enters into the equation leading to your current decision not to use it?
"Let your answer be Yea, Yea, or Nay, Nay, for more than this cometh of evil."
@COMALiteJ Do not start quoting Scripture to me. What does my personal situation have to do with it at all. I would not use pot, alcohol, or cocaine regardless of whether they were legal or not. However, I know how young people think. I know how addictive drugs are. Cheap, legal crack would result in MORE addicts. You would have to be an idiot to believe otherwise.
@CommonSenseJoe, the only reason I quoted scripture there was simply to emphasize that I asked you a Yes or No question. That was the only answer you needed to give: Yes, or No.
I ask it again: if pot or other drugs were legalized tomorrow, would YOU PERSONALLY start using them? Yes, or no?
@CommonSenseJoe: "I did answer it. I would not use them because I don't use them now. But unfortunately, everyone is not me."
BINGO!! That's the SAME attitude that was revealed in the surveys to which I referred earlier. That very same question was asked, along with one other.
Question 1: "If drugs were legalized tomorrow, would YOU start using them?" Only 2% said "Yes." (This was anonymous, so no risk.)
Question 2: "Do you believe lots of other people would?" About 90% said "Yes."
@CommonSenseJoe, in short, most everyone IS you. The VAST majority of people who do not currently use drugs would not use them EVEN IF they became legal, because they CHOOSE not to use them for reasons other than the law.
That includes ME, by the way. As I said, I don't even use CAFFEINE, let alone pot! I don't use mind-altering substances because I like my mind the way it is — I don't consider it NEEDING any "altering."
Legalization WOULD NOT cause a significant increase in usage. Period.
@CommonSenseJoe: "The problem [with Prohibition] was something that was legal was made illegal. Drugs have always been illegal and a problem."
Marijuana didn't become illegal in any part of the USA until well into the 20th Century in Utah. The first nationwide law against marijuana didn't make it illegal outright, but required "tax stamps" to distribute it (which Anslinger would of course refuse to issue). That was in 1937.
Many people are still of sound mind and memory who were ADULTS then.
@COMALiteJ I have my doubts about the soundness of anyone's mind who uses pot. Again, the point I made is still valid. Far more people have been drinking before Prohibition than were using pot. However, we are not just talking pot.
@CommonSenseJoe: "I have my doubts about the soundness of anyone's mind who uses pot."
Was that aimed at me? If so, you should know that not only do I NOT use pot (nor have I ever), I don't smoke (nor have I ever), nor use alcohol (nor have I ever), nor even CAFFEINE (I did as a kid). I don't use ANY mind-altering substances, LEGAL OR ILLEGAL, and I can honestly say that the law simply DOES NOT enter the equation for me.
@CommonSenseJoe, my point about the "Many people are still of sound mind and memory who were ADULTS then." had nothing to do with they themselves using pot.
I was simply saying that 1937, when the Marihuana (original spelling) Tax Act was passed, was recent enough that there are still people who are alive and well, and with sound memories, right now, that you can actually go and talk to for yourself, who PERSONALLY REMEMBER when it was LEGAL.
@CommonSenseJoe, I already told you, I don't use pot, nor would I if it became legal. The only reason I ever would would be if I came down with glaucoma or some other condition for which medical THC is the best viable treatment.
I support Civil Rights for minorities, even though I'm white. I support equal rights for women, even though I have Y chromosomes. I support same-sex marriage, even though I'm straight.
I actually support rights for OTHERS, even if I PERSONALLY wouldn't benefit.
@COMALiteJ Compared to WHAT? Are you adding the CONTINUED cost to Society every year since prohibition ended? I am not using Prohibition as the example, just the cost of alcohol use now.
@CommonSenseJoe: "Compared to WHAT? Are you adding the CONTINUED cost to Society every year since prohibition ended? I am not using Prohibition as the example, just the cost of alcohol use now."
Compared to the CONTINUED costs of dealing with issues such as organized crime introduced into this nation BECAUSE OF Prohibition, that did NOT go away just because we repealed it (mainly because they moved on to drugs — keeping them illegal continues organized crime's funding), among MANY others.
@CommonSenseJoe, no, organized crime may not have been INVENTED by Prohibition, but it got its foothold IN OUR AMERICAN SOCIETY because of it. This is plain historical facts, and your assertions to the contrary have as much bearing on reality as a kid stamping his feet and insisting that the sky is green with purple polka-dots has on the actual color of the actual sky.
@CommonSenseJoe, ranting? You say that because of the UPPERCASE, right? I'll stop using UPPERCASE the day that YouTube™ lets us use italics and boldface in posts. I much prefer using those to indicate emphasis, but I can't here. It's either UPPERCASE or wasting precious characters (we only get 500 per post) on such things as *asterisks* or _underscores_ or /slashes/ or —dashes— or •bullets• or whatever.
@CommonSenseJoe, as for the cost to society of keeping drugs illegal, in addition to perpetuating organized crime, funding the Mexican cartels, etc., there have been many INNOCENT AMERICAN CITIZENS who have been KILLED *BECAUSE OF* the ILLEGALITY of marijuana (NOT the marijuana ITSELF, which THEY NEVER USED, let alone possessed, sold, etc.)!
Examples include Baptist missionary Veronica "Roni" Bowers and her then seven-MONTH-old baby daughter Charity, killed on DEA orders in Peru.
@CommonSenseJoe - Yes it is, especially when the law is what promotes the crime. If drugs were decriminalized, you wouldn't have big-time drug-related violence. You will say "crack heads steal to buy crack"... so what? People steal for lots of reasons, sometimes it might be to feed their family. Let the robbery be the crime, not the motive. Your argument that drugs can only be abused instead of used is feeble.
@CommonSenseJoe "Innocents get killed everyday enforcing the law. That is no reason to stop enforcing the law."
If you really believe that, then post a Video Response here of you, personally, telling Roni's now-widower husband Jim Bowers, and their then-six-year-old son Chad Bowers, that, to their faces. They were in the Cessna, too, that the Drug Warriors shot down, and thanks to the heroism of the pilot who landed it in a river despite anti-aircraft bullets in his leg, managed to survive.
@COMALiteJ First, MORON, I don't post video responses at your command. Second, facing them or not, the fact remains people die everyday as innocent bystanders. That is life.
@CommonSenseJoe, oh, don't know where they live? Can't travel there? Okay, then tell me approximately where you live (in a Private Message if you want, and just the general area would do [e.g. "NW Iowa"]), and I'll find you the surviving family members and other loved ones of the Drug War innocent victim nearest you.
You MUST post a Video Response of you going to their house and telling them TO THEIR FACES that the death of their loved one was WORTH IT.
@COMALiteJ Courage of my convictions? I deal with the consequences of drugs in people's lives EVERYDAY. If the war on drugs stopped tomorrow, do you think people would not die from crack or meth use? There are lots of innocent victims enforcing ALL of our laws. There would be lots more if we had no laws.
@CommonSenseJoe: "If the war on drugs stopped tomorrow, do you think people would not die from crack or meth use?"
Yes, people would still die from those, JUST LIKE THEY ARE NOW. No, it would not go UP drastically. This has been proven statistically, and from history. Repeatedly. All you have to back up your claim that usage would skyrocket is your gut feelings and "common sense."
"Common sense" is often wrong. "Common sense" told our ancestors that the Earth is flat, for instance.
@CommonSenseJoe, also, would you STILL believe that it was worth it if it had been YOUR wife and YOUR baby daughter who were shot down out of the sky over Peru, where y'all'd gone to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, all because our Drug Warriors thought that your Cessna LOOKED like a drug smuggling plane?
Would you STILL believe it if it'd been YOUR elderly mother who died of a heart attack in the middle of the night when the DEA burst into her home with flash grenades? (Wrong address.)
Ron Paul would make a terrible president
because he would actually get shit done.
Outlawzand1 2 months ago
"Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced."
Albert Einstein
PharmahuascA 3 months ago
There is... never was... never going to be... a true war on drugs. The so called "war on drugs" was merely window dressing to provide cover for the biggest drug dealers on the planet... and guess who they are.
BourneAccident 4 months ago
@BourneAccident the biggest drug dealers are the pharmaceutical companies, right?
marketanarchist2011 4 weeks ago
@marketanarchist2011 - I am not sure what my original comment was, but I would have to agree with you 100%.
BourneAccident 4 weeks ago
Let us not forget that people can get high from glue, paint and other legal everyday household items. Does this mean we should ban paint and glue? People educate your children that drugs, sniffing glue, and fatty food should be avoided not because you will get throw in prison but because they are harmful to your health. You simply cant make everything bad for people illegal.
JohnnyBoyCali 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL IS GOING TO BE PROSECUTED BY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO CALL AMERICAN PEOPLE INVADERS AND INITIATERS OF WARS.
RON PAUL SAID THE USA INVADES COUNTRIES AND STARTS WARS, WHICH GIVES USA A BAD REPUTATION AROUND THE WORLD , THEREFORE IT IS CONSIDERED A CRIME . A US CITIZEN WHO
WAS BORN IN USA CANT GO AGAINST GOVERNMENT POLICIES WHICH MIGHT TREATEN THE FUTURE
OF THE COUNTRYS SECURITY .
RON PAUL WILL BE PROSECUTED BY US GOVERNMENT!
democratsaresmart 7 months ago
america, it's up to you to show the world that there is another way! I'm confident that ron paul will stand by his word! He's been paying the same thing for 30 years! Imagine being involved in one of the greatest societal revolutions in the history of the world! It can happen! It's not a dream! It's right there on a plate for you! Vote ron paul!
snaz27 8 months ago
there is no sense whatsoever with the war on drugs! It is just control and bully tactics, it's stripping the very core of your rights away! The right to do whatever you please with your own body! How on earth have we got to the point where someone tells us what to do with our own bodies? It's sickening that the police would smash your door off, leave your property unsafe, scare everyone inside... just to stop you putting something into your body! It's madness!
snaz27 8 months ago
The reason marijuana is said to raise crime rates is because possession is illegal. Also, the prohibition has caused gangs to sell weed, rather than people growing it or buying it from a store.
lifetimeskater877 8 months ago
Ron Paul's Debate Day Money Bomb!!!! May 5, 2011!! Google + LibertyPAC
MIDWEST507REPIN 9 months ago
ron paul is the only true and passionate politician i ever seen in the usa... he breeds and lives his countrys laws and is obsessed in good way, too bad nobody takes him seriously, because most dont have the historical and inside knowledge he has... i think he wont sell out like obama, never liked him i think he is a total sell out
badsign1980 10 months ago 2
As long as drugs are illegal there's a profit for criminals. The Mexican cartel can be a prime example for instance. Marijuana their biggest cash crop is practically next to being harmless. You stop that and the major violence along our borders, border states and in Mexico stops immediatley. In other countries I know it's in Canada and in the Netherlands, their drug users are helped not prosecuted. Our prison population would decrease dramatically and people would get the help they need.
jess1up 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As long as drugs are illegal there's a profit for criminals. The Mexican cartel can be a prime example for instance. Marijuana their biggest cash crop is practically next to being harmless. You stop that and the major violence along our borders, border states and in Mexico stops immediatley. In other countries I know it's in Canada and in the Netherlands, their drug users are helped not prosecuted. Our prison population would decrease dramatically and people would get the help they need.
jess1up 1 year ago
Comment removed
jess1up 1 year ago
Prohabition is the Statists war on Americans aka HIGH TREASON!
yakyakyak69 1 year ago
It's simple psychology. People want what they can't have. Prohibition entices new users.
BlindMaphisto 1 year ago 2
it sure would save a lot of jail space and maybe even close down a few prisons. less young people using it to rebel against the system. how much is spent on the war on drugs? one less failed government policy
bluesmann8 1 year ago 4
Our judicial system is so archaic it's unreal. In Virginia they have carried out no knock warrants, set up cameras to catch people selling TWO OUNCES OF WEED (no lie) while our fire department's BEST firefighters are being forced to live in quarters with MOLD and unsafe living conditions. That money could go to where it is supposed to go, to HELP
DOCTORDANification 1 year ago 4
THEY ARE MAKING WAY TO MUCH CORRUPT MONEY WITH THE WAR ON DRUGS!! UNDER THE TABLE AND ON THE BOOKS!! THEY WONT STOP THIS MONEY LAUNDERING INTILL ITS ALL OVER..........CIVIL WAR SOON!
MADE4FETTI 1 year ago
why the fuck are all the Anti-Ron Paul trolls jews
jaycedace 1 year ago
how is this motherfucker not already president
PeopleR2sensitive 1 year ago 5
End prohibition! Ron Paul 2012.
atchisrj1 1 year ago 31
2012
scott04la 1 year ago
"we need to repeal the war on drugs."
a bit of common sense from a repug. unfortunately, people in places of power have too much money to make if the war is carried on (tobacco and alcohol tycoons).
fourbabies1 1 year ago
Too much BAMF in one video. Ron Paul 2012
bishopbutter 1 year ago
No one ever talks about Portugal. All drugs have been decriminalized there since 2001, and drug use has since plummeted. Why? Because their drug addicts can now seek help instead of hiding fearfully in the shadows.
There is empirical proof out there and no one`s acknowledging it.
DoctorRandomercam 1 year ago 56
@DoctorRandomercam good information.
sniped101 1 year ago
@DoctorRandomercam There's a lot of money in drugs. And the government wants in on it.
TheStig000 6 months ago
RON FTW 4SHO
oeufgwoieu 1 year ago
The only way to gain control of the huge drug problem in America is to do exactly what Ron Paul says and that is to decriminalize ALL drug use. You cannot police something that is unenforceable its simple supply and demand , demand is high in America and supply is consistent but low , tell me what happens if a drug bust is made and the supply drops ? even though the government really cant stop the supply by much demand SOURS. Not to mention drug use is more of debilitation or mental issue .
702dirtrider 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't tread on me, bitches
subbylol 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't tread on me , Bitches.
subbylol 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Paul would use limited resources to actually solve US problems, not manufacture criminals or subsidize poor choices! Police do great job, but have better things to do with their time! (Draconian punishment is disproportionate, unjust and immoral! For example... would you: gouge eyeballs out for petty offenses?! NO!)
US has HIGHEST documented incarceration rate IN THE WORLD! Paul makes complete sense, open your eyes
Machine2063 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
Machine2063 1 year ago
Comment removed
Machine2063 1 year ago
Paul is right. Punishment is disproportionate to crime, Paul knows we have more efficient more effective uses for US resources, that would be better for the American people.
Ron Paul should be president, not the lying marijuana smoking Obama! Ron Paul never smoked marijuana, but can see our unconstitutional 'war' on drugs is an inefficient/ineffective waste of resources that are being miss-allocated! Drugs are their own punishment, Ron Paul is for sound economics and constitutional government!
ElectricSparks2425 1 year ago 5
Its time to legalize Freedom. Ron Paul 2012 Peace and Liberty !!!
PikSokolit 1 year ago 3
Love the end
hermbilliamherm18 1 year ago
I feel lucky to be able to learn from this man.
Lonnie12345 1 year ago
"..melevoleha- malevolence.."
hippz420 1 year ago
Legalize all Drugs. Tax em. Whatever.........Govt has NO right to dictate what people can and can't do with their God Given Bodies.............z
zardiw 1 year ago 2
word
JC593 1 year ago
but what about the corrupt police,attorneys, judges, politicians who will loose their source of income. American Gangster, Godfather, etc. etc. Duh!!!! Why kill a perfectly viable multibillion dollar business? Watch out Ron Paul, they won't like this kind of talk. Hopefully they only just try to smear your reputation.
gilfishdad 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Big Pharma, the world's biggest drug dealer EVER!
This is why the US government through it's hired thugs aka the police state, are funded in the 'war on drugs'. It's as plain as the nose on your face, even plainer actually.
cnmmnc8852 1 year ago
I hate drug dealers and drug lords. They are a grave threat to our future. Bomb all drug lords and make their lifes a living hell. Use Daisy cutters on their habitats. Stamp em out and have fun while doing it!
Gassebol 1 year ago 3
If drugs like pot were freely available, guess who would lose money? (because you could ease pain by growing your own CHEAP medicine)
Big Pharma, the world's biggest drug dealer EVER!
I've never used pot, and I would bet that too much rots your brain, but so does alcohol!
And isn't oxycontin really just Heroin?
MiKikaIwaShizaru 1 year ago 3
@MiKikaIwaShizaru no, oxycontin is not really just heroin, but with the current laws and the way they are enforced, the people who do use heroin do get the Oxycontin, and those of us who suffer every day in pain get nothing! It is backwards. The biggest problem nowadays is SSI anti-depressants. They are the top sellers and cause complete lapses in judgment. If you notice someone has no common sense anymore, just look what their taking... it's probably zoloft, paxil, cimbalta, etc... bad stuff
jmurphy914 1 year ago
@jmurphy914, SSRI (I think that's what you meant) can apparently cause a lot worse than "lapses in judgment." They are statistically WAY overrepresented among known perpetrators of school shooting sprees starting in 1996, and in the earlier rash of postal worker violence that added the two-word idiom "going postal" to our language.
We have NO known counter-example of someone who perpetrated a multi-target school shooting spree who is known NOT to have been on SSRIs at or before the incidents.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ
I know it. The frigging things have ruined so many lives its unable to count. I didn't want to get into detail, but now that you mention it, go to ssristoriesdotcom The damage these have done to my family and the whole country is amazing! They are prescribed for everything under the sun, are completely ineffective for 99% of the uses it is given for, and missing a single dose can cause homicidal rage!
jmurphy914 1 year ago
@jmurphy914, the really sad thing is, if your doctor tells you that a certain pharmaceutical can help you, you can research it and find out the side-effects, and decide for yourself if the benefits outweigh the risks, and choose whether or not to take it.
But what choice did the students of Columbine, Virginia Tech., etc. have? Neither they nor their parents were told about the risks of deadly side-effects of merely attending the same school as someone ELSE who was taking SSRIs!
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ I agree fully. These were innocent kids whose lives were ruined because they were forced to take a drug that took and ruined so many lives! You cannot trust the doctor any more. we have the means to research ourselves and not just be told what the pharma rep. told doc. Big Pharma is out of control and the real reason for the cost of helthcare! That, and of course for profit hospitals, which have to make profit off your sickness for their shareholders. Profit and Medicine don't mix!
jmurphy914 1 year ago
When the fuck are more people in this country going to wake the fuck up and realize that big government is bad? This generation sucks. Kids today are all uneducated followers, they know nothing but what the media tells them... and generally that is "You can't do it, but it's okay, the government knows what's best for you!"
The inability to form an opinion for yourself without the approval of others needs to be added to the DSM as a personality disorder.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago 3
Though I abhor drugs, as a constitutionalist I am in 100% agreement with Ron Paul that the War on Drugs is a senseless waste of taxpayer money.
This, like so many other things the Federal Government decides upon unilaterally, is a STATE ISSUE, because all powers not specifically granted to the President or Congress are reserved for the American people, fullstop.
There is no Amendment granting government control over what you smoke or drink.
veradinx 1 year ago
@veradinx, actually, all Powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government NOR FORBIDDEN TO THE STATES are reserved to the States OR the People, respectively.
That said, ONLY PEOPLE (individually as Persons, or collectively as "The People") have, or CAN have, RIGHTS. The Tenth Amendment is talking about POWERS, which is NOT the same thing. Powers ≠ Rights. Powers are granted and can be revoked by the granting agency. Rights are INHERENT and IRREVOCABLE.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@veradinx THIS president has more power than all of congress and the entire government! When have you heard the President is suing a state? The President take over of GM? The President's healthcare plan was approved at gunpoint by the rest. They were threatened into it, even though they will now be voted OUT and they know it. WHY did Americans allow this? I certainly didn't but the rest of us who did deserve everything they get by the Left! 87 Member off Cong. are card carrying membrs of D.S.A.
jmurphy914 1 year ago
the funny thing is that my sociology professor looks like ron paul and he is the same way too. a fair guy. too bad if he runs for president he will get shot.
Gus589 1 year ago
I haven't heard a man speak with truth since J.F.K's speeches to the american public. This guy needs to get his voice out there on levels that all can hear. I vote RP 2012.
hobbi1123 1 year ago 2
He is the perfect mix of Republican, Tea Party, Libertarian... that will surely get him elected in 2012. God bless Ron Paul.
fubarnett 1 year ago
@fubarnett
He is the perfect blend of left and right, a great moderate libertarian.
Intranetusa 1 year ago
@Intranetusa I agree with the exception of being 'left'. Which part of Ron Paul is 'left'? He is so far opposite of big government it is unbelievable. If you mean 'left' as in against the drug war and against the war, I don't consider those positions 'left'. The 'left' has supported the war on drugs and the war on terror. He is a true libertarian conservative. Nothing 'left' about it.
fubarnett 1 year ago
@fubarnett
Libertarian by nature is a blend of modern day conservative economic views with modern day liberal social views.
If anti-war and against the war on drugs are not leftist, then fiscal responsibility and small government technically aren't rightist either - there are plenty of people on the left who believe in those things, and those views were originally the foundations of classical liberalism.
So a modern libertarian by definition is a mix of conservatism and liberalism.
Intranetusa 1 year ago
A populist is the opposite of a libertarian. A modern populists are neo-liberal in economics and neo-conservative in social policies. A modern libertarian is neo-liberal in social policies, and neo conservative in economic policies.
They are neither neo-lib nor neo-conservative all around...otherwise they wouldn't be libertarian or populist.
Intranetusa 1 year ago
@fubarnett Left is pure government dictatorship, and right is Anarchy. We are supposed to be ALMOST anarchy, with a tiny government. Govt. ALWAYS abuses power. Throughout the entire history of this planet! America was a successful experiment in freedom, and the left came from overseas and destroyed us while we watched and allowed it piece by piece!
jmurphy914 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this beautiful country is being destroyed by politicians. they tax every hard working american and give themselves high pay.
i am angry but i have hope. My entire family have donated to 3 honest Americans
RON PAUL
PETER SCHIFF
RAND PAUL
END THE FED
END THE INCOME TAX
hyylo 1 year ago
Why not simply close the border to Mexico and fight the drug dealers at sea and inte air?
Mine the gulf!
Gassebol 1 year ago
REPUBLICANS ARE SO STUPID, BUSH WAS AN ALCHOHOLIC, FALLING DOWN , EMBARASSING THE WHOLE NATION, SO TWIN TOWERS COLAPSED, ECONOMY COLAPSED! THEY PUT LINDSAY LOHAN IN JAIL, WHY THEY DIDNT PUT BUSH IN JAIL I COULD STILL SEE TWIN TOWERS TODAY?
democratsaresmart 1 year ago
@democratsaresmart Republicans put Lindsay in jail? They say that people who type in CAPS have low IQ's ....
jeremy8080 1 year ago
@democratsaresmart You are the stupid one. Only an idiot would blame 911 on President Bush.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
Is this the "grass movement"?
Jokes aside, I agree with Paul, people should be allowed to use drugs as they long as they behave non-violent and correct publicly as well know the consequences about the drug they are taking.
serNevh 1 year ago
@serNevh well put, I agree completely though I don't use any drugs willingly
9thDilla 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL 2012
BlackTerrorClan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ron paul is an idiot
jenn1ifer 1 year ago
Amen! End the war on drugs!
SparkyLevenspliffs 1 year ago
End the War on Drugs and the drug problem will stop overnight. Then regulate these drugs with Dr's and hospitals and start helping people help themselves and put them back into society instead of a prison.
MrRiceowlex 1 year ago
@MrRiceowlex Not only do we need to stop the injustice of imprisoning addicts, we need to eliminate the addict stigma. People use drugs for a reason and they shouldn't be condemned for feeling so rotten that they turn to drugs just to function and feel a scrap of goodness. Others use drugs to treat agonizing physical pain. Even they are condmened with the addict stigma. We have far too much condemnation and "justice" in our society anyway. What kind of world would it be without compassion?
mongoose704 1 year ago
The war on drugs is a war on the people!
MyGrassIsGreenest 1 year ago
Comment removed
mongoose704 1 year ago
@MyGrassIsGreenest Well said. It has also turned into a war on doctors and pain relief which is absolutely tragic. I watched my mother spend her final two years in chronic pain that was inadequately treated because of the addict stigma and the legal and civil pressure doctors now practice under.
In a modern society free well beyond the age of fear and superstition you'd think we would consider relieving suffering as heroic. Now we imprison those saints as if they were witches.
mongoose704 1 year ago
@MyGrassIsGreenest No, it is a war on LAW BREAKERS!
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, a war on breakers of an UNJUST LAW.
Do you believe that ALL laws should be obeyed, no matter HOW they came about or WHY?
Then you'd've happily turned in your Jewish neighbor had you lived in Nazi Germany, right?
You'd've turned in any fugitive slaves, and/or anyone aiding and abetting their fleeing to freedom (even your best friends or family), had you lived anywhere in the USA (including the North) prior to the Civil War, right?
Laws THEMSELVES can be BAD.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ You are not seriously going to compare smoking pot to the Holocaust or slavery are you? If you don't like the law, then work to change it through the proper channels. It is not an unjust law. If you choose to do the crime, then don't about doing the time.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
Ron Paul- Step out of the way. This country need a revamp.
Not some modicum of reform
PantsThatDontFit 1 year ago
It is a flaw comparison that he makes. Comparing bathtub gin to crack cocaine is just plain stupid. The problem is with the way the justice system works and the insane way we have given rights to prisoners.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe Do you know how many people died or went blind from moonshine during prohibition?
willyswear 1 year ago 2
It is this kind of thinking as well as many other of his stated policies why RP probably won't win reelection let alone be the next President. There are too many things he's openly stated that he would change and people like the status quo. The very fact he's against Israel rules him out as a viable candidate for the Presidency. Ya'll can back him but you'll be throwing your votes away. He's truly a man before his time. But he'll never get the number of votes needed with such variety of stances
hobo59 1 year ago
If people who WANT to do drugs could get drugs from a source that is not terrorizing the country, like the mexican mafia, Bike Gangs, Street Gangs, etc, then the crime rate would drop 95% !!
jmurphy914 1 year ago 34
@jmurphy914 If you started executing the Mexican Mafia, Bike and street gang members who sell drugs, the rate would drop as well.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe As much as I'd love to execute Mexican drug gangs, I think the easier route is to just legalize drugs... Too bad the drug cartels aren't deathly afraid of pigs like our other "enemies", that'd be even easier.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago
@hotfudgemoney The cost to society would be FAR greater and consequence devastating.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, the cost to society of legalizing drugs would be great? Well, only in the sense that the poor, poor prison-industrial complex would lose out on a lot of revenue.
Do you honestly think that the usage of drugs would go up a lot? No. Nearly everyone who would use drugs if they were legalized is ALREADY USING them NOW! The law is NOT deterring hardly ANYONE. This has been shown through statistical surveys. Less than 2% who aren't using now would use them if they became legal.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Look at the cost to our society for having legalized alcohol. I am not advocating prohibition, but the costs are tremendous in terms of social destruction, loss of productivity, and the cost of treatment.
If you legalizes drugs, you would have the same effects but 10 times worse. To say only 2% more would use drugs is simply not true. The high cost of the drugs and the penalties involved keep people from using them.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, BAD example! Alcohol was legal. We made it illegal through a Constitutional Amendment, the ONLY ONE IN HISTORY that was ratified that REMOVED a Right previously held by the people.
What happened? People still drank alcohol. A lot. The overall usage in the nation went down by WAY less than the statistical margin of error (which means it may actually have gone UP a bit). But the brief period of Prohibition ITSELF caused MASSIVE societal damage, FAR worse than the alcohol itself.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago 2
@CommonSenseJoe (cont), organized crime got its foothold in the USA during, and specifically BECAUSE OF, Prohibition. THOUSANDS of people died BECAUSE OF Prohibition (the equivalent of several 9/11s combined — in a time when the overall population of the USA was much less than it is now, making that proportionally an even larger death toll).
Prohibition was ALSO the ONLY Constitutional Amendment EVER to be REPEALED, the only way an Amendment CAN be: by another Amendment!
Coincidence? No.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago 2
@CommonSenseJoe (cont), yes, alcohol is bad. Very bad. Much worse than marijuana, or even many of the other currently illegal drugs (marijuana isn't even a DRUG, BY DEFINITION! It's an HERB!).
But, Prohibition did NOT stop people from using it. Very, VERY few, if ANY, people who previously drank stopped drinking. Prohibition ITSELF caused even WORSE damage. So it was repealed.
It's simple, really: Probibition. Does. Not. Work. Not then, not now, not EVER.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago 2
@COMALiteJ Legalizing drugs will NOT make use go down. It is will go up and far more than 2%. It is foolish to believe otherwise. There is no benefit to making crack legal. NONE.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe There's no benefit in making Alcohol and tobacco legal either. But they are. This is a philosophical and moral issue commonsense joe. You can't regulate that. Or you have a dictatorship. Duh. If you use common sense you would think logically and say either all drugs are legal, or all drugs are illegal. Why pick and choose? Why is marijuana illegal yet Nicotine is known and reported by most scientists to be the biggest killer of them all? That's common sense. Right?
subbylol 1 year ago 2
@subbylol You are using flawed logic. Just because tobacco and alcohol are now legal, through regulated, does NOT mean we should allow everything that can harm us to be legal as well. There is NO upside to crack cocaine. If you could use it and guarantee me that your use would not affect my life, I would agree. The problem is that, legal or not, YOUR use would affect me eventually. You would end of stealing to pay for your habit. Your family would be destroyed. I would have to pay.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe Only illegal or highly taxed drugs are so expensive the user has to steal in order to obtain the funds for it. Crack cocaine would be cheap if unregulated.
richrdroma 1 year ago
@richrdroma True, it would be cheaper but no less addictive. More people would become addicted and demand would rise. Some people will steal to buy cigarettes. Imagine what they would do for crack.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe My logic isn't flawed at all. It's fair. You can't have one drug legal and than another illegal. What you don't understand is that alcohol kills thousands every year from accidents, cigarettes kill many more from cancer. Those drugs affect you way more than crack does buddy. You can drive while on crack. You can drive while coked up. You can drive while smoking marijuana. Your argument has no validity because your evidence goes against drugs which are legal and regulated.
subbylol 1 year ago
@subbylol You cannot justify one bad thing with another bad thing.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe Through regulation you also create the black market, Which leads to drugs cartels and the mob. So you create more violence , you create an unsafe source. The point is common sense. Regulation and regulating things is all good in thought. But in action it doesn't work. This is why our drug war is failing. We lose more lives in the process of regulating these drugs than we would if we were to make them legal. Not to mention the billions of dollars we waste in money. drug war = fail
subbylol 1 year ago 4
@subbylol We could win it if we start executing people for drug offensives.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe Even if we do execute people we still create criminals and we create the black market. You don't have enough people to enforce these draconian laws and if you did you wouldn't have the money. This is why all wars are wars on humanity. It simply isn't right , it doesn't work. Bottom line. Executing drug users is not the solution. Rehabilitation is. I' m pretty sure 90 percent of the public agrees with me and i don't know why you would even bring up execution. What a joke.
subbylol 1 year ago
@subbylol I never said execute drug users. I am said we need to start exceuting these gangs and big time dealers. I am all for rehabilitation for users. Execution is not a joke. We need to have more crimes punishable by death, and we need to speed up the process. We waste millions of dollars putting people to prison when they have proven that they are beyond rehabilitation of any kind. Society should not be punished by providing for these criminals.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - no, we need to stop supporting them by keeping their black market thriving by unconstitutionally making drugs illegal. if drugs were legal, there would be no big-time dealers...
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@bedtime4bonzo No, just big-time addicts that I will have to take over.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - Does that mean anything? I was trying to make a point, can you counter it? There would be less addicts if we treated addiction as a social and medical issue, not a crime.
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@bedtime4bonzo I am not opposed to treating addicts.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - Why would you have to take them over? Newsflash, our own government deals the drugs, and collects the tax money to "fight" the war on drugs.. Your common sense is actually pretty stupid.
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@bedtime4bonzo If I even believe you for a second, how does that change the nature of making them legal? Making them legal would make more addicts who are less likely to seek treatment.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommonSenseJoe: "I never said execute drug users."
Yes, you did. You said "We could win it if we start executing people for drug offensives [sic]."
Mere possession, let alone usage, is currently a drug offense. Therefore, one who is in possesion of, let alone uses, an illegal drug is committing a drug "offensive," and by what you said, they should be executed.
So don't deny what we all saw you say here.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe hey let's execute all our alcohol and tobacco users! Would you support that common sense? Or else your not being fair cmon now! lets do what's right cause your all about protecting me remember?
subbylol 1 year ago
@subbylol Tobacco is only hazardous to my health. Crack is vastly different, than Alcohol. Few people rob to feed the beer habit.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - Then robbery is the crime, not the drug use. You are a simple-minded type... You don't think people steal to buy liquor?
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@bedtime4bonzo Actually, both are. Again, using liquor for comparison is flawed. Crack is FAR MORE addictive and destructive than alcohol.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommonSenseJoe: "Tobacco is only hazardous to my health."
Here's something for you to look up on Google/Wiki: "second-hand smoke." Get back to us on that, mkay?
"Crack is vastly different, than Alcohol. Few people rob to feed the beer habit."
Oh, yes they do. Alcohol and crack are both physically addictive, but extreme alcohol addiction (alcoholism) can have *FATAL* *WITHDRAWAL* symptoms (extreme D.T.s). Yes, STOPPING drinking suddenly, if you're addicted, can KILL YOU, in and of itself!
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe: "We could win it if we start executing people for drug offensives."
Nope. That's been tried. Not here n the USA, but it has been tried in other nations. It doesn't work. Sure you stop that particular person (dead people don't go on to use more drugs), but you don't stop others.
If you execute everyone who commits any wrongdoing, you wipe out the entire human species. Are you willing to go that far? Because that's the ONLY way to stop drugs entirely.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ You know that is not what I said. I did not say execute everyone. Execute the big time dealers and sellers and you will see a change. We are trying to fight a war without actually killing people. If we know who cartel leaders are, we take them out.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - We are the cartel, Joe! Since we have been in Afghanistan, opium production has more than doubled. Our own CIA has officially admitted that after the Iran Contra scandal, we traded all our excess weapons for cocaine, which fueled the cocaine/crack explosion of the early '80's. It's business, buddy, not morality. The moral choice would be to let people be responsible for their own lives, and as soon as they infringe on someone else's life or property, then let em have it.
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, I cannot read your mind. I can only go on what you actually say, and what you actually said was execute people for drug "offensives." You didn't specify WHICH "offensives." Use and possession are "offensives" at this time.
Furthermore, what would REALLY happen if you made drug dealing (or any other non-murder crime) a capital offense is that a lot of people would be murdered because they witnessed such a crime. Why not? The criminal has NOTHING TO LOSE, and EVERYTHING TO GAIN!
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Your logic is flawed because criminals do not believe they will get caught.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, analogy: I really, REALLY hate child molesters. Would I love to see them wiped out? You betcha.
But, in the cold light of reason, I cannot justify making child molestation, as horrible a crime as it is, a capital offense. If we did, then the molesters have NO reason to let their victims live. They're WITNESSES AGAINST THEM. If they're convicted of the molestation, they fry. So why NOT murder the kids? Nothing worse could happen to them even if convicted of the murders!
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Hatred has nothing to do with it. Practicality is the key. For example, the average rapist has been CONVICTED FIVE TIMES. He should have been executed after the third conviction. The cost of keeping him locked up punishes society because we treat them better than they deserve to be treated.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, now extend that to making drug dealing a capital offense. I know you specified "big time," but you'd have to define that. Where do we draw the line?
Anyway, suppose your kid walks home from school, and on the way sees a drug deal going down. As it stands now, even if the dealers see that your kid saw them, they have some reason to refrain from murdering your kid. If arrested for drug dealing, they spend some time in prison. Murder a kid? Life, or execution.
Not so your way.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ OR the kid walks home from school, buys some legal, cheap crack, gets hooked, and ends up dead from his addiction. IF is a child's game. Your logic is that we go easy on the dealers so they don't kill innocents. I say catch them and execute them. This will make others realize that they need another line of crime.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, if your kid would buy crack from the dealer, you didn't raise him well, or he has some other serious underlying psychological problem.
But in my scenario, it doesn't matter how you raised him, or anything at all about your kid other than he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. BANG! He's dead. Prepare the funeral. Call the family together. Cancel all plans you had for him. He's gone forever. All because YOU wanted drug-dealing to be a capital offense.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ You are blaming the wrong person. The drug dealer killed him, not me. I did not say my kid would use drugs, but I know a lot of dumb kids who would simply because they were legal, cheap, and available.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, "Legalizing drugs will NOT make use go down. It is will go up and far more than 2%. It is foolish to believe otherwise."
This is not belief. This is backed up by studies, surveys, statistical analysis, etc., not to mention the actual history of Prohibition.
You're simply wrong on this, and your repeated but unsupported assertions to the contrary do not make it any more true than people telling Copernicus that he was wrong made the Sun go around the Earth.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Do you honestly believe making drugs legal will ONLY increase the number of people who use them 2%? Come on, you cannot be that native or think I am. Common sense tells you that there is NO WAY predict this by ANY MEANS. You would have to believe that ONLY 2% of the people obey the law instead of using drugs. As I said before, YOU CANNOT make comparisons between alcohol during Prohibition with CRACK today. It is a flawed comparison.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, okay, you want common sense? Then answer these questions HONESTLY, Yes or No:
If marijuana were legalized tomorrow, would YOU PERSONALLY start using it?
Is the law, the threat of criminal punishment, the ONE AND ONLY THING keeping you from doing so, the ONLY REASON you do not, the SOLE CRITERION that enters into the equation leading to your current decision not to use it?
"Let your answer be Yea, Yea, or Nay, Nay, for more than this cometh of evil."
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Do not start quoting Scripture to me. What does my personal situation have to do with it at all. I would not use pot, alcohol, or cocaine regardless of whether they were legal or not. However, I know how young people think. I know how addictive drugs are. Cheap, legal crack would result in MORE addicts. You would have to be an idiot to believe otherwise.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, the only reason I quoted scripture there was simply to emphasize that I asked you a Yes or No question. That was the only answer you needed to give: Yes, or No.
I ask it again: if pot or other drugs were legalized tomorrow, would YOU PERSONALLY start using them? Yes, or no?
It's a really simple question. Answer it.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ I did answer it. I would not use them because I don't use them now. But unfortunately, everyone is not me.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe: "I did answer it. I would not use them because I don't use them now. But unfortunately, everyone is not me."
BINGO!! That's the SAME attitude that was revealed in the surveys to which I referred earlier. That very same question was asked, along with one other.
Question 1: "If drugs were legalized tomorrow, would YOU start using them?" Only 2% said "Yes." (This was anonymous, so no risk.)
Question 2: "Do you believe lots of other people would?" About 90% said "Yes."
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ How many of those were under the age of eighteen?
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, in short, most everyone IS you. The VAST majority of people who do not currently use drugs would not use them EVEN IF they became legal, because they CHOOSE not to use them for reasons other than the law.
That includes ME, by the way. As I said, I don't even use CAFFEINE, let alone pot! I don't use mind-altering substances because I like my mind the way it is — I don't consider it NEEDING any "altering."
Legalization WOULD NOT cause a significant increase in usage. Period.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ It would among young people who are not wise enough to avoid it.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ The problem was something that was legal was made illegal. Drugs have always been illegal and a problem.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe: "The problem [with Prohibition] was something that was legal was made illegal. Drugs have always been illegal and a problem."
Marijuana didn't become illegal in any part of the USA until well into the 20th Century in Utah. The first nationwide law against marijuana didn't make it illegal outright, but required "tax stamps" to distribute it (which Anslinger would of course refuse to issue). That was in 1937.
Many people are still of sound mind and memory who were ADULTS then.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ I have my doubts about the soundness of anyone's mind who uses pot. Again, the point I made is still valid. Far more people have been drinking before Prohibition than were using pot. However, we are not just talking pot.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - Your doubts are not facts
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommonSenseJoe: "I have my doubts about the soundness of anyone's mind who uses pot."
Was that aimed at me? If so, you should know that not only do I NOT use pot (nor have I ever), I don't smoke (nor have I ever), nor use alcohol (nor have I ever), nor even CAFFEINE (I did as a kid). I don't use ANY mind-altering substances, LEGAL OR ILLEGAL, and I can honestly say that the law simply DOES NOT enter the equation for me.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, my point about the "Many people are still of sound mind and memory who were ADULTS then." had nothing to do with they themselves using pot.
I was simply saying that 1937, when the Marihuana (original spelling) Tax Act was passed, was recent enough that there are still people who are alive and well, and with sound memories, right now, that you can actually go and talk to for yourself, who PERSONALLY REMEMBER when it was LEGAL.
So much for your "it was ALWAYS ILLEGAL" claim.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Why is it your argument always revolves around "pot"? Are you that addicted to it that everything comes down to making it legal for you?
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, I already told you, I don't use pot, nor would I if it became legal. The only reason I ever would would be if I came down with glaucoma or some other condition for which medical THC is the best viable treatment.
I support Civil Rights for minorities, even though I'm white. I support equal rights for women, even though I have Y chromosomes. I support same-sex marriage, even though I'm straight.
I actually support rights for OTHERS, even if I PERSONALLY wouldn't benefit.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Compared to WHAT? Are you adding the CONTINUED cost to Society every year since prohibition ended? I am not using Prohibition as the example, just the cost of alcohol use now.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe: "Compared to WHAT? Are you adding the CONTINUED cost to Society every year since prohibition ended? I am not using Prohibition as the example, just the cost of alcohol use now."
Compared to the CONTINUED costs of dealing with issues such as organized crime introduced into this nation BECAUSE OF Prohibition, that did NOT go away just because we repealed it (mainly because they moved on to drugs — keeping them illegal continues organized crime's funding), among MANY others.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Organized crime was not invented by Prohibition or the war on drugs. legalizing either will not make them go away.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, no, organized crime may not have been INVENTED by Prohibition, but it got its foothold IN OUR AMERICAN SOCIETY because of it. This is plain historical facts, and your assertions to the contrary have as much bearing on reality as a kid stamping his feet and insisting that the sky is green with purple polka-dots has on the actual color of the actual sky.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@COMALiteJ Now you are ranting.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, ranting? You say that because of the UPPERCASE, right? I'll stop using UPPERCASE the day that YouTube™ lets us use italics and boldface in posts. I much prefer using those to indicate emphasis, but I can't here. It's either UPPERCASE or wasting precious characters (we only get 500 per post) on such things as *asterisks* or _underscores_ or /slashes/ or —dashes— or •bullets• or whatever.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Ranting is ranting.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, as for the cost to society of keeping drugs illegal, in addition to perpetuating organized crime, funding the Mexican cartels, etc., there have been many INNOCENT AMERICAN CITIZENS who have been KILLED *BECAUSE OF* the ILLEGALITY of marijuana (NOT the marijuana ITSELF, which THEY NEVER USED, let alone possessed, sold, etc.)!
Examples include Baptist missionary Veronica "Roni" Bowers and her then seven-MONTH-old baby daughter Charity, killed on DEA orders in Peru.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Innocents get killed everyday enforcing the law. That is no reason to stop enforcing the law.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe - Yes it is, especially when the law is what promotes the crime. If drugs were decriminalized, you wouldn't have big-time drug-related violence. You will say "crack heads steal to buy crack"... so what? People steal for lots of reasons, sometimes it might be to feed their family. Let the robbery be the crime, not the motive. Your argument that drugs can only be abused instead of used is feeble.
bedtime4bonzo 1 year ago
@bedtime4bonzo There would be less crime if you had no laws? Is your argument that cocaine can be used responsibly? Meth? Crack? Talk about feeble.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe "Innocents get killed everyday enforcing the law. That is no reason to stop enforcing the law."
If you really believe that, then post a Video Response here of you, personally, telling Roni's now-widower husband Jim Bowers, and their then-six-year-old son Chad Bowers, that, to their faces. They were in the Cessna, too, that the Drug Warriors shot down, and thanks to the heroism of the pilot who landed it in a river despite anti-aircraft bullets in his leg, managed to survive.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ It is an unpleasant fact, but it is no less true. It was NOT intentional.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, I asked you if you would be willing to tell the surviving Bowers that TO THEIR FACES.
In short: PUT UP, OR SHUT UP.
Video Response of you doing so goes here.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ First, MORON, I don't post video responses at your command. Second, facing them or not, the fact remains people die everyday as innocent bystanders. That is life.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, so, you have no real courage of your convictions. Thought so. You resort to cheap insults rather than manning up and putting up.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ I don't fall for such nonsense, even if you triple dog dare me!
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, oh, don't know where they live? Can't travel there? Okay, then tell me approximately where you live (in a Private Message if you want, and just the general area would do [e.g. "NW Iowa"]), and I'll find you the surviving family members and other loved ones of the Drug War innocent victim nearest you.
You MUST post a Video Response of you going to their house and telling them TO THEIR FACES that the death of their loved one was WORTH IT.
Or you lack courage of your convictions.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@COMALiteJ Courage of my convictions? I deal with the consequences of drugs in people's lives EVERYDAY. If the war on drugs stopped tomorrow, do you think people would not die from crack or meth use? There are lots of innocent victims enforcing ALL of our laws. There would be lots more if we had no laws.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe: "If the war on drugs stopped tomorrow, do you think people would not die from crack or meth use?"
Yes, people would still die from those, JUST LIKE THEY ARE NOW. No, it would not go UP drastically. This has been proven statistically, and from history. Repeatedly. All you have to back up your claim that usage would skyrocket is your gut feelings and "common sense."
"Common sense" is often wrong. "Common sense" told our ancestors that the Earth is flat, for instance.
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe, also, would you STILL believe that it was worth it if it had been YOUR wife and YOUR baby daughter who were shot down out of the sky over Peru, where y'all'd gone to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, all because our Drug Warriors thought that your Cessna LOOKED like a drug smuggling plane?
Would you STILL believe it if it'd been YOUR elderly mother who died of a heart attack in the middle of the night when the DEA burst into her home with flash grenades? (Wrong address.)
COMALiteJ 1 year ago