Legalize marijuana and end the senseless "War on Drugs'

The people of this country want marijuana decriminalization. The 'War on Drugs' is ineffective. Millions of our citizens have been incarcerated for nonviolent drug offences.


Submitted by

Stage: Active

Feedback Score

413 votes
Voting Disabled

Idea Details

Vote Activity (latest 20 votes)

  1. Downvoted
  2. Upvoted
  3. Upvoted
  4. Upvoted
  5. Downvoted
  6. Upvoted
  7. Downvoted
  8. Upvoted
  9. Upvoted
  10. Upvoted
  11. Upvoted
  12. Upvoted
  13. Upvoted
  14. Upvoted
  15. Upvoted
  16. Upvoted
  17. Upvoted
  18. Upvoted
  19. Upvoted
  20. Upvoted
(latest 20 votes)

Similar Ideas [ 5 ]


  1. Comment

    I definitely think we should give all drug addicts who commit crimes treatment rather than incarceration for non-violent offenses. Incarceration helps no one and is more expensive than treatment. Treatment should also be available to anyone who wants it and mandatory in prisons.

  2. Comment

    I have spent 16 years serving this country; served in two conflicts and now I am a proud disabled veteran. I believe in freedom, I believe in the constitution. And I also believe that most Americans feel like I do. When has prohibition ever worked? And why do prohibitionists keep spouting lies to persuade the rest of us to believe like they do?

    Legalize it, tax it, keep it out of drug dealers hands and be done with it. Quit using our children as an excuse for bad policies. Let the people decide!

  3. Comment

    In the spirit of Transparency and governance by the will of the people it is quite apparent that this issue should be taken seriously by the administration. Similar laws that enforce the drug alcohol would be applied. I agree that the people are the ones who should decide. All the efforts maintaining the war on drugs would be amplified by taking marijuana out the war and treating it like alcohol.

  4. Comment

    imo, most effective and realistic vote: "Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act"

    No one can try to defend cannabis being a schedule I substance without looking like a shmuck. The Obama administration (and in turn, the media) has to have their feet held to the fire and made to explain why they think cannabis has no medical value and is highly addictive.

  5. Comment

    It's quite clear that prohibition is a direct, multi-billion dollar subsidy of organized crime and the law enforcement community where taxpayer dollars are used to make an unregulated, untaxed commodity as valuable as possible. Until we stop this government welfare program for the black market, we can only expect a greater variety of said commodities available on the market. If one wants to regulate the commercial sales of a commodity, one must actually take control of the market and not leave it to organized crime businesses.

  6. Comment

    The only legalize entry I considered voting against was the one calling for discussion.

    There's no need. Just decriminalize all of it.

  7. Comment
    felkakarp ( Idea Submitter )

    At least discussing it would be a start. If you ask President Obama about anything else he'll give you a well thought out answer lasting 2-5 minutes. Ask him about marijuana and all you get is a joke and a flat NO. PERIOD.

    But you're right. There's no rational argument for prohibition, no upside whatsoever to the war on drugs, no argument for it that doesn't begin with "I believe" and end without stating one genuine fact. You're right. It's ridiculous and pathetic that we practically have to beg to have a serious discussion about ending what should have never been started.

  8. Comment

    I could go on for hours about why this is not a good idea. People who want so use marijuana are already doing so.

  9. Comment
    William Capps

    Dam sell the weed and put a 10 tax on we will be out of dept in a week. I don't smoke it, but heck , alot of people do.

  10. Comment

    At least 40 people a day are dying from the use of illegal drugs. This does not include those that are killed as the result of wars between drug gangs or people who fall victim to violent criminals supporting their habit. This adds up to about 15,000 a year.

    So much money is flowing into the coffers of the drug cartels that they are now powerful enough to actually do battle with the Mexican Government. The drug problem is a disease that is eating away at our society and it will only get worse if we don’t put a stop to it.

    What I propose is a law that will give LEA (Law Enforcement Agencies) the kind of weapon they need to put the drug dealers out of business. It is a law that would provide harsh penalties for those who would refuse to cooperate with LEA after they are arrested. The threat of these penalties must be real or they will not work.

    Part 1. Growing, manufacturing, processing, packaging, transportation, distribution, selling of any type of illicit drug product, as well as accepting any kind of payoff, gift or favor in return for protection, would all come under the heading of Felony Drug Dealing.

    Part 2. FDD (Felony Drug Dealing) is a single ongoing felony with numerous unwitting participants, all of whom are jointly responsible for all of the consequences of this crime.

    (Re: “unwitting participants.” Since I am not an attorney, I am not certain this is worded exactly as it should be. Even though people who live in different areas of the country may not know each other and may not be purposely cooperating with one another, they are still all participating the same crime. They are all part of the same problem and they are all jointly responsible for all of the consequences of this crime.)

    Part 3. Any person arrested for FDD could be charged with up to 10 counts of First Degree Murder.

    (Any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is considered to be First Degree Murder (FDM). Since FDD would be defined as a single ongoing felony, this would mean that any individual could be charged with literally thousands of counts of First Degree Murder. This would certainly not be practical or necessary. The option to charge any individual with 10 counts FDM is intended to give LEA sufficient leverage to convince the individual who has been arrested that they should cooperate to whatever extent they are able. Someone arrested on the street for dealing would then be encouraged to help LEA obtain evidence against the street dealer’s supplier. Those who are arrested as the result of this evidence would then be put into the same position. Give up your supplier of face multiple counts of FDM when you go to court. In other words, every arrest has the potential to lead to other arrests with LEA working their way up the supply chain.)

    We cannot afford to allow this problem to continue eating away at our society. How many times must we hear about a parent who came home to find their son or daughter dead with a crack pipe in their hand before we say enough is enough. It is time to get serious and put these vermin out of business permanently!

  11. Comment
    felkakarp ( Idea Submitter )

    Nobody has ever died from the use of marijuana. Researchers have concluded that it's physically impossible no matter how much you use and nobody has ever produced any evidence that suggests otherwise. Not only has "The War On Drugs" never done anything to prevent drug related violence, it is in fact the cause of it. By criminalizing drugs we create the drug business for criminals. By preventing addicts from seeking treatment for fear of prosecution it cripples our ability as a society to do anything to deal with the problem in a real way. The only answer is obvious to anyone who has bothered to educate themselves on the problem. Legalize marijuana and end the senseless "War On Drugs"

  12. Comment
    yeti descendant

    "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."

    Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President.

    Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives

  13. Comment

    As to:

    Executive branch commanding the legislative branch...

    That is the argument used to disregard the popular demand for ending the war on drugs.

    It is diversionary. Health care is also in the hands of the legislature, the administration has no problem involving itself there.

    So was the bailout. Administration made demand after demand on legislature.

    When it is a policy the administration wants, it is called leadership.

    When it is a policy the administration does not want to touch it is called legislative territory.

    We do not have to accept and be bound by the parameters of that game.

  14. Comment


    We are talking about marijuana here, a plant, not man-manufactured dope (crack, heroin, cocaine, meth, etc). Please think about what you say before you get yourself into something you know nothing about.

  15. Comment

    Perhaps it's time for the majorty of people to rely less on opinions based on long-diseminated propaganda and wilfully ignorant beliefs.

    To this end, I offer the following links to sites with VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE.

    JackHerer.com - General information

    Hemp = Cannabis = The truth behind the "illegality"

    NORML.org or NORML.ca

    ^=- The National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws

    PhoenixTearsMovie.com - FREE DOWNLOAD DVD

    PhoenixTears.ca - Cure for cancer = cannabis!

    There are a great many TRUTHFUL and INFORMATIVE sites out there, so the anti-legalization folk have obviously not understood the truth, and I invite them all to view factual information, as opposed to hearsay and propaganda.

    Only when you understand the truth, can you make a truly informed decision...something which our politicians OBVIOULY do not subscribe to.

  16. Comment

    Thats like saying the war on terrorism is a losing battle, so we should let them destroy our country. Quit smoking dope, and do something with your life.

  17. Comment

    The war on terrorism is a losing battle. Hatred and its expression in violence have been with us and will be with us. It is a product of our being human.

    The war on terrorism, as it is conceived, is a license for military action at the whims of those in power.

    It does not follow that if we abandon the war on terrorism, we cannot take directed, goal-based military action, or defend ourselves.

    Don't worry about what he's doing with his life.

    It isn't your business.

  18. Comment

    Sobi - Your pessimistic attitude speaks volumes..... If there truly is no hope, it is because of folks like you. I'm guessing you never had the balls to be in the military, or really do anything for your country.... a true liberal.

  19. Comment

    My attitude is fine. In fact, it is fair to say it is closer to reality than any belief that we can alter human nature at the business end of a gun.

    You would understand me better if you stopped spinning what I say into what you want to argue against.

  20. Comment

    So what is your solution? Besides total legalization, which would clear out the prisons.... but not fix the problem. Addiction is part of human nature as well.... what would life be like if hard drug use (not marijuana) was mainstreamed?

  21. Comment

    Yes, addition is part of human nature. Estimates are, according to some study I can no longer cite since it was too long ago, about 60% will partake socially, about 20% of any given population will use heavily, about 10% will demonstrate problems with addition.

    This true regardless of substance or legality.

    Curing human nature is not the objective of government, nor should neighbors be running neighbors lives.

    Right now, the majority of problems are from prohibition, not addiction.

    Unlike arrogant legislation, I don't propose to cure humanity of what it means to be human. It is beyond our means and doomed to fail.

    To each their own.

  22. Comment

    Any way you slice it, it just makes sense...

  23. Comment

    As a personal note, my grandfather died before I was born. One night he decided to park his car against a tree. Unfortunately, he did not think to avail himself of the vehicle's braking system before doing so. He was an alcoholic. Alcohol is legal.

    The biggest problem today is that we KNOW that prohibition doesn't work, and we're doing nothing to counteract the insanity which puts hundreds of thousands of people in prison for nothing more than "posession or plant matter" which is both non-toxic, and a cure for many diseases that have no other known cures or even mitigating agents which can make people's lives at least a little more tolerable.

    Alcohol is legal, and it is known to cause tens of thousands of deaths each and every year through various means. Alcohol poisoning is a real, documented, and regular occurrance. We all know about alcohol-related diseases, so I won't even bother wasting your time with the list.

    Cannabis is illegal. Cannabis is a natural product you can grow at home if you have a desire or a need for it. CANNABIS CAN NOT BE PATENTED. Not being able to patent a natural plant, large pharmaceutical companies can not command billions of dollars in profits for it, and once people are widely informed and see global cancer rates decreasing, they will finally understand that there is a reason that more people are living off cancer than are living with cancer.

    The best thing to do TODAY is to simply wipe the slate clean of all cannabis laws and allow it to become as legal as any other plant. As legal as it was before 1937.

    Once it is legal, then there can begin a process of recreating all of the older markets which once existed for the products possible with this plant, and then expanded with modern technologies into many other markets. Farmers would be able to keep their farms without wasting money on fertilizers and pesticides, and that is good for farmers and for the environment. It would also mean that the land itself would be cleaned of toxins, as it is well know that cannabis plants can provide environmental remediation by removing toxins from the soil.

    The plain and simple truth is that there are literally tens of thousands of reasons that cannabis should be relegalized, and only short-sighted, unthinking, propagandist reasons for keeping it illegal. Anyone who has taken the time to investigate the truth of the matter can never telll you "OK, it's a cure for cancer, but you don't deserve it." or "OK, so it's 100% safe, but we don't like it, so you can't touch it." or "I've never tried it in my life and I have no intention to try it...so that means that YOU should be restricted from access to it too!"

    The ignorant arguments are simply no longer cutting it. The truth IS coming out, and it's coming out fast! As more and more people are made aware of the truth about the cannabis plant, and the real reasons for it's initial illegality in the 1930's, people will quickly see what the detrimental effects have been and still are today.

    The push for antiprohibition is growing. Get on board, or get out of the way.

  24. Comment

    Legalize it. Treat it like alcohol plain and simple. End black market and violence.

    I’m so sick of the Gateway Drug Argument. Alcohol is the ULTIMATE GATEWAY DRUG. It’s probably 90% of people’s first buzz. And if they like it, the want more. None of my successful friends that smoke got into heavy drugs like coke.

    It's a shame that the people who get addicted and kill themselves with crack & cocaine get wrapped in the same category as an adult that want to smoke a joint on a Friday night..... What a weird world.

    Once it’s legal it will be exciting for the first 3 months. After that, the people who smoke now, will probably smoke the same amount. And the people who won’t, simply won’t. Not much will change.

    And if treated like alcohol. Kids will have as much access to it as a 6 pack of beer. In otherwords, if regulated, kids can’t get it.

    So legalize it. And to the folks that say NO and that have never done it, what right do they have to judge it?

  25. Comment




    4MMML .

    MMMMM. xf

    . "M6MMM .MM-

    Mh.. +MM5MMM .MMMM



    3MMMMx. 'MMM3MMf xnMMMMMM"






    .. *MMMMx MMM" dMMMM" .nnMMMMM*

    "MMn... 'MMMMr 'MM MMM" .nMMMMMMM*"

    "4MMMMnn.. *MMM MM MMP" .dMMMMMMM""

    ^MMMMMMMMx. *ML "M .M* .MMMMMM**"

    *PMMMMMMhn. *x > M .MMMM**""

    ""**MMMMhx/.h/ .=*"


    [nosig] nP" "*MMnx

    repost if you clicked yes!

  26. Comment
    felkakarp ( Idea Submitter )

    That came out better in the email. they lose all the spaces here.

  27. Comment

    Comments like the last by hodrokin do no good for anyone pro or con on this issue. Go get on the stage and do stand-up. It's easy to make up jokes about stoners because, as the government has drilled in to your head, we're all lazy, incompetent, and have no ambition. I lost my father for a total of six years because he was in possession of a relatively small amount of marijuana. We went without a lot of things most people take for granted, like: school clothes, haircuts, food, etc...The only thing he did was possess a plant that in most Midwestern states can be found growing in the ditches. (Which, by the way, were remnants of the hemp plantations that once populated those areas.) My father smoked marijuana around us from the time we were born. Not once did I have any idea that it made you feel good, get high etc. Not once did I even think about smoking weed. UNTIL, I got into junior high and the say no to drugs campaign came rolling into town and burned a pound of pot on the table to show us what to stay away from. If my father hadn't had the good sense to tell me and my brothers that we shouldn't speak about it, I would have stood up and told the teacher that the officer was full of it. My father never got belligerent, lazy, stupid or start using other drugs(that I new of) like the officer as telling us it would. What they did teach me was that MJ got you high! Don't ever let anyone tell you that you can't get a contact high. After sitting in a decent sized classroom with about a pound of MJ smoldering on the table for thirty minutes you definitely can. My mother called the school cause when I got off the bus I reeked of weed and my eyes were demolished with veins. The school claimed that the MJ had been treated with something and didn't get you high. After living with a MJ user for 15 years I think she had a pretty good idea if I was stoned. The upshot is that my father missed my graduation, his first grandchild's birth and his freedom. For what?

    Who did his actions hurt directly? Who was the victim his crime was perpetrated against? The answer: no one.

    Six Years. That's also how long I was an active duty Marine, since that seems to matter to some people here.

  28. Comment

    There has always been statements such as "legalize it, treat is alcohol and that's that", and we see one such statement above.

    The problem with treating something that can br grown in your own backyard garden as something which required brewing or distillation apparratus is obvious. It is NOT dangerous to grow a plant, while if you don't know what yu're doing when distilling, you can blow up the house, or the neighbourhood, depending on the size of your still.

    Obviously, if distilling was absolutely safe, everyone WOULD be distilling their own, but they're not, and they won't.

    That said, there are also many people who wouldn't grow their own cannabis, either, as they prefer to just pick up what they want whenever they feel they want or need it. These people are far more likely to prefer to go to a regulated commercial dispensary of some sort, and they should eventually have that option.

    Once again, the first thing we need to do is to simple relegalize cannabis, and the easiest method of doing this is to simply nullify all existing cannabis-related legislation which says "you grew a natural plant from seed, or were in posession of a part of a natural plant, and therefore, you are deemed a criminal."

    People simply don't seem to understand that this is a war against a plant that could easily and quickly restore economies around the world, and this is the main thing that needs to be looked at, but it can not be looked at until such time as the plant itself is no longer illegal.

    The very idea of an "illegal plant" is ludicrous anyway, when you step back and look at it!

  29. Comment

    Hate to be the one to bring this up, but...

    There is nothing new about this idea at all. It's just another soapbox for the same old discussion that has gone on for 40 years.

  30. Comment

    I live in fear of my local police - and I am a 59 year old woman who has never even had a speeding ticket!

    I am harassed daily because I am suspected of using pot - I have a friend that does and was caught.

    The police in my small town use these ridiculous laws to intimidate, terrorize and shame citizens. My friend was arrested, strip searched and jailed overnight for a small amount of herb. She had picked it up for her husband, not herself. The police are out of control in this town.

    They should be ashamed of themselves, but as long as the law of the land allows this travesty, they will be self righteous bullies.

  31. Comment

    what state do you live in rocknroll? What they are doing can be illegal. Police are NOT allowed to stop you for any reason whatsoever unless you are participating in something illegal that they can see you doing. What they are doing is harassment and can get them suspended. Look up all these things. You should learn all these laws. You have many rights that you might not even know of. As for me, I have gained power the local police force so they can't harass me. They know who I am and my knowledge of the law. I haven't got pulled over or even talked to in around 5 years

  32. Comment

    From my understanding "probable cause" is in many ways, up to the officer to decide. It is part of their job, and their training. They are trained to understand suspicious behavior, and determine at that time the proper course of action.

    Although arguments for legalization can go either way, the fact of the matter is that chances are possessing marijuana in your state is illegal, and i can't blame the officer for enforcing the laws they have sworn to protect. At some point in your life you will be in a situation where you will be glad we have the laws we do when it is your personal security or property that is in danger. I admit some officers abuse their privilege to enforce the law. If your local police are harassing you, i suggest you purchase a different vehicle, or remain law abiding at all times, and you won't have much to worry about. As for your friend who purchased marijuana for her husband or whatever, it is still illegal to posses. Upon her arrest, if you are a known accomplice, then the scrutiny you are receiving in my eyes is justified. Although marijuana is not crack, or heroin, it is still illegal, and the police officer's are apparently doing their job. Hey, at least you can't say it is strictly racial profiling or something similar, in that case, i might feel sorry for you.

    My sister happens to be a police officer, and if you had to deal with the scum of this country on a daily basis like she does (not saying anyone here is scum) then you might look at the situation a little different. Remember, police are not an emotionless robots... but rather people like me and you who have bills to pay, and a job to perform.

  33. Comment

    The war on drugs has turned into a war on people. Both are improper.

    Illegal and immoral are distinct. The regulations on drugs are both illegal and immoral. If anyone considers it their duty to apply these regulations to me, it is my duty to resist, not be complicit in an act against my own self-interest.

    Police lose perspective. It is an affect of their job. I do not consider them professionals capable of making judgments, I consider them armed thugs and an enemy for collaborating in the war on people.

    Probably cause can be contrived on a whim and usually is.

    Tell your sister to get a job that people can respect her for if she wants respect, others, deal with it. She's made her call.

  34. Comment

    War on people? Thats absurd. So you would prefer a country where no police exist? Anarchy? Looks good on paper, but doesn't really work out. The law is the law. I didn't write it. Neither did the police. You should try doing their job sometime instead of ranting from your computer in your home that is only still your home and your computer because we have police to protect it.

    Tell me, when have the police oppressed you in some way, or are you just sore because you can't smoke a joint on the corner of main street?

  35. Comment

    Maybe if people like Sobi had the balls to hold a job where his/her life was put on the line daily for a bunch of people who don't appreciate your sacrifice, you might feel a little different.

    My sister became a police officer after she was a social worker, and saw the atrocities people bestow on their children, and wanted to be the person who did something about it, instead of reporting it.

    She was reprimanded because she called a man a piece of Sh!t after he beat his wife to the point of hospitalization with a broken whiskey bottle. Is that fair? Is it fair to have cowards like you who would never chase down someone who robbed a store with a gun because you know the police will do it for you? You should walk a mile in their shoes, and i bet you would think a little differently, but we all know that will never happen, right?

    You should be ashamed of stating generalities about people in a profession who you believe are all a bunch of thugs. In fact, maybe you should go live in a lawless 3rd world country for a while, and maybe you would be a little more appreciative of the freedoms we do enjoy in our country, instead of bashing the very people who give their lives daily so folks like you can get on their computer, and criticize them for fulfilling their obligation to do so.

  36. Comment

    Hodmokrin is absolutely right; we should respect law enforcement because even though there are a lot of bad ones there are a lot of good ones too. This is human nature. We need law enforcement just like we need the military.

    It is unfortunate that positions of power often attract people with a desire to abuse that power. Law enforcement has to deal with scumbags like hodmokrin's sister had to everyday and this often colors their perception in very cynical ways.

    With that said, people who smoke marijuana are not necessarily those types of scumbags just like all law enforcement aren't abusive and corrupt. Both are unfair stereotypes and we will never resolve our differences while we continue to perpetuate the lies. The range of individuals who smoke marijuana stretch from successful professionals to those who work in low level jobs like the fast food industry. Some are productive, successful members of society while others are "lay-abouts" as Bill O'Reilly would describe them.

    My point is that you can't use one aspect of a person's life to accurately characterize them. Being in law enforcement doesn't make you a ruthless thug and smoking marijuana doesn't make you lazy; a drain on society. Let's set aside our differences, open our minds and look to what we have in common, not to our differences.

  37. Comment

    Michael. No.

    In my core, I understand that human beings are human beings. This has nothing to do with individual worth, personal character, or values. This is a political stance.

    Those who object to the drug war are label, ostracized, disenfranchised, forbidden employment, arrested, imprisoned, lose their rights as citizens, and held in contempt by public officials who use the fear mongering to grandstand for votes.

    My intention is to return the favor, to suggest to all who oppose the war on people to contribute to the stigma of those who provide the muscle behind the war on people.

    It is only fair, equitable, and possible somewhat effective.

    They are thugs because they chose to seek and take a job whose primary function is to arm the war on people.

    They are ethically and righteously called upon that platform.

    I am being entirely reasonable.

  38. Comment

    More succinctly,

    It ain't personal, its just business.

  39. Comment

    "hodmokrin 11 hours ago

    War on people? Thats absurd. So you would prefer a country where no police exist? Anarchy? Looks good on paper, but doesn't really work out. The law is the law. I didn't write it. Neither did the police. You should try doing their job sometime instead of ranting from your computer in your home that is only still your home and your computer because we have police to protect it.

    Tell me, when have the police oppressed you in some way, or are you just sore because you can't smoke a joint on the corner of main street?"

    I think that the point that was being made is that the police no longer take an oath to serve and protect, as they once did. They are no longer required to protect the public who pay for their "services", and their "services" are now only to charge, fine, and imprison those who disobey corporate law, which has usurped the position formerly taken by "natural law" and "common law"...which actually DO apply to citizens...but those arguments are laughed out of modern courtrooms because, unlike the people trying to protect themselves, the court, the police, and the lawyers are all well aware that corporate law is being enforced. (Look up UCC, or "Uniform Commercial Code" for more information.)

    That said, not all cops are crooked, and not all cops are otherwise bad, but almost all of them are under the impression that the "laws" they "enforce" upon "the people" actually apply to the human beings they are prosecuting, when in fact, they do not...and those who do understand what they're really doing are certainly not going to tell "the people" that it's all a sham, or the vast majority of them will quickly find themselves out of a job!

    Fact is--at least for "the crimes of cannabis"--if noone is harmed, by common law, there is no crime, and nothing to be "enforced."

    If noone suffers a loss, again, there is no crime, nothing to be "enforced" and no "compensation" to be paid to the "victim" as it is easily understood that there is no victim without a loss, and therefore, a crime.

    Taking all of the above into account, you have "victimless crimes" enforced by corporate "Law Enforcement Officers", prosecuted by a deliberately crooked court system, with the end result being either financial gain via fines, lawyer's fees, court costs, appearance fees, filing charges...or profit by incarceration of the "heinous criminals" who were prosecuted for not hurting anyone, or causing anyone else any loss whatsoever.

    I'm thinking of starting my own police force and court system, actually...there are TRILLIONS of dollars in that racket, and it's all 100% legal!!!

    Too bad one of the cures for cancer isn't...

  40. Comment

    Believe me Sobi, I get your point. My wife and I were thrown on the floor naked with m-16's to our heads in the middle of the night while the cops laughed at us for what amounted to little more than a bag of seed and stems.

    But I have also have had encounters with law enforcement who openly admitted to me that they disagreed with the marijuana laws but they still had to enforce them.

    We can't condemn the entire system because one aspect of it is broken. Reform is needed on many levels including the monetary incentives that police departments have to bust marijuana users and the prison systems that breed serious criminals from nonviolent offenders. Yes, the politics are aimed at encouraging this type of harassment.

    "Police lose perspective. It is an affect of their job. I do not consider them professionals capable of making judgments, I consider them armed thugs and an enemy for collaborating in the war on people."

    This type of broad generalization points an accusatory finger at every member of a group. You can't expect people to accept your views as credible when you engage them in such a manner and you certainly aren't going to persuade members of that group to adopt your views by attacking them. And let me tell you, we need law enforcement on our side in this matter if we ever expect to see change.

    Here is an example of law enforcement taking a political stance for legalization and against "thug" behavior:


  41. Comment


    Yes, it is a broad generalization that points an accusatory finger at every member of a group. I am aware of that. In fact, it is by intent.

    I do not seek to persuade law officials to behave reasonably. I seek to provide example for others who would like to see correction.

    We do not need law enforcement on our side, we need them to feel shame.

    And they should.

  42. Comment

    michael.l.bradford1 makes a valid point that not all parts of a group can be categorized with any single definition...but there is a minor flaw in his argument.

    Throughout North America, cannabis users ARE ALL GROUPED TOGETHER IN THE EYES OF THE LAW.

    Quite simply, there are VAST differenced between the casual "at home" user, the medicinal user, and the criminal Mexican Cartel Chiieftain...but if any one of them is caught, they are all treated as criminals. They are all forced to pay fines. They are all subject to any facet of any legislation that has ever been written with respect to cannabis.

    What makes honest cops--there are still good ones out there, despite the volcanic explosion of abuses becoming ever more apparent--go along with this sham? This is the real question that needs to be answered.

    Sobi is also correct, as for those cops who believe that "the law is the law and that's that" are simply above common sense, and can not be swayed unless some piece of paper enters their view and tells them that right is right, and wrong is wrong. They are simply incapable of discerning the truth for what it is, because they have been brainwashed into believing that bad laws are good laws, regardless of who they hurt, as long as they get their paycheque at the end of the week.

    Anyone with any degree of common sense will understand my thinking on this:

    A good law is one which protects the people. A bad law is one which harms the people. Good laws need to be supported, or enacted, as appropriate. Bad laws need to be eliminated, or revised into laws which protect the people. All laws which do not protect the people are corporate statutes and should never be used agaist the people.

    As evidence that this sort of sheer idiocy has gone on for far too long now, I offer this quote:

    “All laws which can be violated without doing anyone any injury are laughed at.”

    -- Spinoza, (circa 1660)

  43. Comment

    Marijuana users should be given the same rights tobacco users are given. Treatment centers are just another form of incarceration!

  44. Comment

    Marijuana users have the same rights, and those rights, not granted by any government, are being infringed.

    Government should stop violating marijuana users rights.