Ron Paul’s new effort to legalize marijuana

[Drdeee]

Four decades of the so-called “War on Drugs” has led only to the suffering of millions of innocents, the crowding of our prisons with non-violent citizens, the utter waste of billions of dollars on law enforcement and the (in)justice system, and the enriching of underground drug gangs who thrive on violence. The outlawing of marijuana in America has been a disastrous political policy and an insane medical policy. It has labeled biochemical addicts “criminals” and thrown them in prisons to be treated like dogs.

http://www.infowars.com/four-decade...-ron-paul’s-new-effort-to-legalize-marijuana/







May I remind you that Ron Paul is going to run for president in 2012. Also, Ron Paul did run for president in 2008 - but his name wasn't on ballots in some states.

For me, I think marijuana should be legal, along with cocaine. People should get a license in order to buy it, and grow it. One of the basic premises for getting a license should be, you should have a job, a business, work for yourself and produce proper income. In other words, if you're a bum, it should be illegal for you to smoke weed and sniff cocaine. If you were caught driving while high, it should be illegal for you to get high for life. If you're a criminal, it should be illegal for you to get high for life. But if you do it responsibly, please, go a head and get high.

Cocaine I think should be legal too. It's like coffee, it's useful when used right. If you get a dime, a gram, and use pen cap to sniff just a little bit, that could help you stay up. Can be used when fishing for example.

Decriminalizing cocaine I think will be much more effective than controlling it. With one move you eliminate all the drug cartels, and a lot of criminal element at home, murder rate will drop, children will go to college instead of joining gangs, etc.

 

[Drdeee]

Oh, it was Chuck Baldwin not Ron Paul. Baldwin was next best guy to Ron Paul.

 

[Bible_Belt]

The plan is to let the states decide on legalization or medicinal permits.

As it stands now, the Feds are frequently raiding dispensaries, not so much to arrest people, but usually just to flash guns, rob them of their cash, and run away like thieves. That's how the DEA has become the only self-supporting Federal agency. They seize more wealth than what they get in funding from the government.

For all the talk of how much money that ending the drug war will save, keep in mind that money is at the state level, not Federal. The state has to house most drug prisoners, pay for their healthcare, and it is also the state who gets the tax money from legal mj. Legalization would be great for the bankrupt state governments, but it would result in a huge dismantling of powerful organizations at the Federal level, which is why it is so slow to happen.

 

[Sparky]

Considering the real reasons behind marijuana prohibition lie in racism (against Mexicans) it will be a very hard thing to reverse IMHO. And how I do love to have a smoke.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

When Larry Kudlow announced this last week, I was at first surprised.

But when you think about it, you see that Ron Paul is putting the philosophy of the Tea Party into action. Our definition of individual freedom is, very succintly, "the ability to make choices and the responsibility to live with the consequences." Taken into the context of the drug war, this axiom is represented by legalizing all drugs and ending all taxpayer-subsidized rehab clinics. He needed an easy lead-in, so pot was the perfect choice.

What we have now-spending billions of dollars sending criminals to prison-is wrong and unsustainable in both a philosophical and a practical sense. In the philosophical context of what constitutes a free society, I ask the question, "Why do I want to pay for your drug use? Why should I put a roof over your head and feed you because you are a worthless dreg? Why am I responsible for your choices?" In the practical context, we simply spend way way wayyyyyy too much money "fighting" an unwinnable and unjust war.

Now look at Portugal, the polar opposite. They decriminalized all drugs, but then instituted a massive "social support" infrastructure to counsel and treat drug addicts, which begs the same question as the drug war in America: "Why am I financially, or in any way, liable for the decisions of others?"

There is only one just solution to the drug question: "legalize and let live." Morally, you should be able to put whatever substance you want into your body, because your body and your life belong to you, not society. And by that same moral standard, someone else should not have to pay for your stupidity, because his life belongs to him and he is in no way obligated to you.

This is the only possible form of brotherhood and mutual respect possible between men: to say to each other, "I have no claim over you and you have no claim over me."

 

[Dust 2 Dust]

I'm skeptical it would happen. Pot heads don't vote so the politicians don't give a **** about them.

 

[Rogue]

Here is a brief interview with Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, who explains things.

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/53884/new-marijuana-laws/

But as NORML is careful to point out:

Almost as if on cue from a movie director, the head of the Judiciary Committee in the US House of Representatives, ‘conservative’ Republican from Texas Lamar Smith, has provided both cannabis law reformers and the general public a typical up-close view of why the US Congress—the creator of Cannabis Prohibition laws in 1937 and later the Controlled Substances Act of 1970—rarely seems to work the way it was intended. One person, either ignorant or uninformed, can block consideration of a controversial political issue if he or she wishes to do so. And the ability to do this only increases with time, as the legislator gains seniority and become a committee or subcommittee chairperson.

Rep. Smith, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, responded to press inquiries yesterday about the new federal legalization bill, that will be referred to his committee, saying he had no intention of considering the bill, or even giving it a public hearing. Unfortunately, under current Congressional rules, a committee chairman is given great discretion regarding what bills to consider, and which to ignore, and it is only when another member or members of that committee, or the general public, make a big deal out of it that sometimes one can overcome the stiff opposition of a committee chair.

One promising fact is that the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. John Conyers, JR, is a co-sponsor of HB 2306, and should serve as a counter-balance to the opposition of the chairman.

I have to admit that I was totally against marijuana up until I was in college, studied criminal justice, researched the subject, and it wasn't until two years after college that I began. It's the exact opposite trajectory of most stoners, who start young and then quit during college. The amazing thing is public support for the issue has skyrocketed during the past five years and, if polling trends continue, will be legalized somewhere in these United States by 2016 (possibly 2012).

 

[DJ Logic]

I'm no republican, but Ron Paul would have my vote in a heartbeat.

- anti drug war
- anti foreign occupation
- anti federal reserve
- warned us of economic collapse and how to avoid it in 2005 while people on Fox News laughed at him
- lower taxes on middle class, higher taxes on uber-wealthy (40 years of Reaganomics has shown trickle-down theory is BULLSHYT)
- endorses civilian resistance to unfair taxes
- voted against Patriot Act
- consistently defends the Constitution
- not afraid of industrial lobbyists when defending the environment
- decriminalize prostitution

Seriously, where the fukk do I sign??

I also like his stance on delegating legislation for key issues (marijuana legalization, abortion, gay marriage) to the states and the fed keeping their nose out of it. Seems like what conservatives SHOULD be standing for - a smaller, less invasive government, instead of this NeoCon, war-mongering elitist crap.

Overall I have tremendous respect for this man - one of the few politicians left with real integrity (and a voting record to support it) My only fear is that he will get himself killed because he's made some truly powerful enemies. Just call him Ron Balls, cause dude's got a brass set.