Definitely another drug thread.

[GIThruster]

Lets see how your side loves the war on drugs when your beloved authoritarian gov starts taking peoples stuff in mass.

You keep making this same crazy argument. Lets all agree that forfeiture can and has been abused, but that is a completely different issue. The fact a law and legal structure can be abused is not an argument against it. All people can be incarcerated unjustly. That is not a reason to end incarceration. Your argument makes no sense.

And just to note to you, in the last couple weeks, I have been threatened by Simon, and now Diogenes has been threatened by you. Both times publicly.

You better both hope nothing bad happens to either one of us, or any of those forming the voice of reason against these pro-drug rants, or you'll be answering to the FBI. If someone calls down a swat on one of us, you guys making these threats will be the very first people the feds come see.

[Diogenes]

God...I hope those asset forfeiture law enforcement folks find their way to you and your families house and possessions. After all jackboots, body armor and those reflecto-sunglasses cost money. White families have 20X the assets to take than black/hispanic families. No sacrifice is too great to keep those chest of opium from arriving.

F*ck you up your @ss you little p*ssy faggot! I have repeatedly said that I am against the forfeiture laws, but you haven't been involved in this conversation long enough to be aware that I have said this. I have constantly told Simon this is the only aspect of his argument where he has a valid point.

Are you even aware that the discussion is NOT about marijuana? It's about a total legalization of all drugs. Crack, Meth, Heroin, Opium, Cocaine.

You either have no experience with people who have used this stuff (as have I.) or you didn't learn anything from such experience.

Again, GROW UP!!!!! Stop being a little child!

Any limp-dick old man can say that to someone on the internet love to see you say that to my face..your a real billy-badass as long as the other man is far far away.

Ibid.

I am aware of your "disapproval" about asset forfeiture, but as far as I am concerned bring it on. Lets see how your side loves the war on drugs when your beloved authoritarian gov starts taking peoples stuff in mass.

You mean like the Obama administration? Not so much, but then, he's on your side, isn't he? Part of the old Choom Gang. That alone ought to be a lesson for what kind of F*cked up thinking occurs when drugs drive your life.

I am of the impression that you are making implied threats against me and my family. Simon, I would suggest you urge some caution on the part of your little attack chihuahua. I have twice had people attempt to set my place on fire. I will not take threats lightly.

[williatw]

You don't have an answer to my argument other than wishing ill on me and mine? F*ck You! You've run out of arguments and so to make up for your lack of ability to reason, you want something bad to happen to me and mine? And you accuse MY side of supporting the jackbooted thugs?

Given your attitude, I have little doubt that you would attempt to put into practice your veiled threat did you but know where to point your attack. Brent Kimberlin has been phoning police and telling them his political enemies had killed their families and were armed and dangerous.

His efforts were to get them killed, or at least threatened into silence. How much further is it for you from the thinking to the doing much the same?

I think you should consider more carefully before wishing threats on someone in the future.

I made no threats I am not in charge of where jack-booted gov thugs go next. You resorted to juvenile insults, I merely pointed out how easy it is when your target is safely far away. Where I grew up you want to say something like that to someone you either say it to his face like a man or you don't say it at all. You think any sacrifice is worth it as long as the people being jailed lives destroyed rights trampled and treasure taken is far removed from you and people you care about. But you won't be far enough away because the gov knows where you are and what you have, and thieves are always hungry. Forfeiture of assets is a completely logical progression of the war on drug so beloved by authoritarians like you.

[Diogenes]

You don't have an answer to my argument other than wishing ill on me and mine? F*ck You! You've run out of arguments and so to make up for your lack of ability to reason, you want something bad to happen to me and mine? And you accuse MY side of supporting the jackbooted thugs?

Given your attitude, I have little doubt that you would attempt to put into practice your veiled threat did you but know where to point your attack. Brent Kimberlin has been phoning police and telling them his political enemies had killed their families and were armed and dangerous.

His efforts were to get them killed, or at least threatened into silence. How much further is it for you from the thinking to the doing much the same?

I think you should consider more carefully before wishing threats on someone in the future.

I made no threats I am not in charge of where jack-booted gov thugs go next. You resorted to juvenile insults, I merely pointed out how easy it is when your target is safely far away. Where I grew up you want to say something like that to someone you either say it to his face like a man or you don't say it at all.

You behave more as a little boy who can't have a toy he wants. A man knows better than to wish evil on someone just because they disagree.

You think any sacrifice is worth it as long as the people being jailed lives destroyed rights trampled and treasure taken is far removed from you and people you care about.

I care that those people who break the laws that protect other people in society are prevented from continuing to break them. This has the side effect of protecting MY family as well.

Most of the people that I know who went to prison on drug charges (And I know a lot of them. I would post pictures of them in their Prison uniforms but I still consider them to be friends, and don't wish to publicly embarrass them. ) had done far worse than just substance abuse. They were driven to commit other crimes because they needed money to buy drugs. The problem wasn't the supply, it was that they had no money because they didn't WORK. They spent all their time getting high, and that is all they wanted to do. It wouldn't matter how cheap was the cost of drugs, they couldn't afford it because they couldn't keep an income!

But you won't be far enough away because the gov knows where you are and what you have, and thieves are always hungry. Forfeiture of assets is a completely logical progression of the war on drug so beloved by authoritarians like you.

It is also the completely logical progression of Democrat polices now in effect for 80 some odd years. You fault the mote when the beam is Socialist Democrats policies.

Drugs are tolerable in society now because the usage is kept down in the 1-2 % range. Let it get to the 5-10% range, and you will figure out what is wrong with making them legal. Too late though.

You are a victim of "The Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" theory of life. You should count your blessings that you don't have to find out what pervasive drug usage is like first hand. If you ever get over on that side of the fence i'll wager that you wished you had kept a good thing.

[williatw]

And just to note to you, in the last couple weeks, I have been threatened by Simon, and now Diogenes has been threatened by you. Both times publicly.

You better both hope nothing bad happens to either one of us, or any of those forming the voice of reason against these pro-drug rants, or you'll be answering to the FBI. If someone calls down a swat on one of us, you guys making these threats will be the very first people the feds come see.

I made no threats don't try to put words in my mouth don't know or care your name or address. If the gov kicks your door down it has naught to do with me or anyone else here.

[Diogenes]

And just to note to you, in the last couple weeks, I have been threatened by Simon, and now Diogenes has been threatened by you. Both times publicly.

You better both hope nothing bad happens to either one of us, or any of those forming the voice of reason against these pro-drug rants, or you'll be answering to the FBI. If someone calls down a swat on one of us, you guys making these threats will be the very first people the feds come see.

I made no threats don't try to put words in my mouth don't know or care your name or address. If the gov kicks your door down it has naught to do with me or anyone else here.

And did it not occur to you that to suggest such a thing was a bad idea? Kimberin has not been accused of doing it himself. Someone else did it for him. He inspired others to do it.

There are people on this website who do know my name and address. I don't find it funny at all to suggest that such a thing would be a good response to my arguments. If such a thing should happen now, you would appear to have culpability before the law.

[williatw]

And just to note to you, in the last couple weeks, I have been threatened by Simon, and now Diogenes has been threatened by you. Both times publicly.

You better both hope nothing bad happens to either one of us, or any of those forming the voice of reason against these pro-drug rants, or you'll be answering to the FBI. If someone calls down a swat on one of us, you guys making these threats will be the very first people the feds come see.

I made no threats don't try to put words in my mouth don't know or care your name or address. If the gov kicks your door down it has naught to do with me or anyone else here.

And did it not occur to you that to suggest such a thing was a bad idea? Kimberin has not been accused of doing it himself. Someone else did it for him. He inspired others to do it.

There are people on this website who do know my name and address. I don't find it funny at all to suggest that such a thing would be a good response to my arguments. If such a thing should happen now, you would appear to have culpability before the law.

One more time I made no threats, I didn't suggest myself or anyone "call anything down" on anybody. You made the abusive borderline threatening comments in a private message not me.

F*ck you up your @ss you little p*ssy faggot!

I seem to recall you threatening Skipjack with bodily harm some months ago.
I said forfeiture of assets is a logical progression of the war on drugs and as such the targets will be increasingly the more affluent, those with assets worth taking.

[GIThruster]

As moderator, Simon has access to everyone's email address, which can be used to track someone down. Also note that several times Simon has referred to and explained "swatting" which is to make a fraudulent claim to the police that someone is breaking the law in order to get the local swat team to kick down their door.

So william, when you write that you want to see this sort of thing happen to someone who argues against your position concerning drugs, you are walking the line of what is actionable, both civilly and criminally.

[GIThruster]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you who are continually arguing for repeal of drug prohibition, are drug users?

TDPerk, williatw, Skippy, randomencounter, AcesHigh and of course Simon and anyone else who wants to be included on that list: please tell us all:

a) are you a user?
b) have you ever been to "skid row" where you can expect to find the people who's lives have been the most drastically affected by drugs?
c) have you ever been close friends or family with a drug user and if so, what can you note about their behavior?

Just asking because really, for me this whole issue boils down to recognition of what a powerful force for evil drugs are. If you meet with and talk to the people who's lives have been utterly ruined, you can't help but accept that drugs should be illegal. You might then go on to argue that rehab is better than incarceration, and I'll own its certainly cheaper; but you can't say you think people ought to have access to illegal drugs; and just because we haven't been able to cut all access doesn't mean we can't or won't in the future.

So really I want to know, all you who are advocating for the end of drug prohibition, what do you really know about the effects of drugs on people? Have you ever talked with a prostitute or a homeless person or is it all just theory to you?

[williatw]

So william, when you write that you want to see this sort of thing happen to someone who argues against your position concerning drugs, you are walking the line of what is actionable, both civilly and criminally.

I thought the "hypothetical" example I gave to you was a neighbor of yours losing their house to asset forfeiture. I suggested this was a natural progression of said asset forfeiture. I made no threats veiled or otherwise to you or anyone else. I don't know your name(or care) or your address and I suggested nothing to MSimon or anyone else about what they should or shouldn't do to you or anyone else here.

[GIThruster]

God...I hope those asset forfeiture law enforcement folks find their way to you and your families house and possessions.

Best you drop it before you dig your hole deeper.

[MSimon]

Yep. Total legalization of all drugs. i.e. a return to a condition the nation prospered under for nearly a hundred and fifty years. Why? Because outlawing the substances puts control of the nation in the hands of criminals. At least that is what happened with alcohol prohibition. But of course this time it is different.


"The Latin American drug cartels have stretched their tentacles much deeper into our lives than most people believe. It's possible they are calling the shots at all levels of government." - William Colby, former CIA Director, 1995

===

For those of you following along here is how it works.

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men.

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.

Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted -- and you create a nation of law-breakers -- and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

Ayn Rand - Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum - refugee from the Soviet System

The only way to beat such a system - until it destroys itself - is to have no guilt. Dangerous to be sure. It leads to this if you are not careful.

When you make vice a crime, crime becomes merely a vice.


Prohibition is an awful flop.
We like it.
It can't stop what it's meant to stop.
We like it.
It's left a trail of graft and slime,
It won't prohibit worth a dime,
It's filled our land with vice and crime.
Nevertheless, we're for it.

Franklin P. Adams, 1931

[Skipjack]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you who are continually arguing for repeal of drug prohibition, are drug users?

TDPerk, williatw, Skippy, randomencounter, AcesHigh and of course Simon and anyone else who wants to be included on that list: please tell us all:

a) are you a user?
b) have you ever been to "skid row" where you can expect to find the people who's lives have been the most drastically affected by drugs?
c) have you ever been close friends or family with a drug user and if so, what can you note about their behavior?

Two things:
1. If you check my post history, you will see that I used to be very much against drug legalization (with lots of arguments and banging of heads between us), but have recently changed my mind towards a limited and _very_ controled legalization of marijuana as I described in an earlier post. It could be done and could possibly answer a lot of questions about the issue, if it is done right.

a) I am NOT a user. Even if I wanted to, I would be insane to use. It would kill me very quickly due to my health issues.
b) I have seen many people, even people I personally knew get ruined by drugs (mostly heroin), which is why I am generally against legalization. Marijuana is a bit different. I still think that prolonged frequent use makes people "soft in the pear", but it is not addictive so one could always more or less easily reverse a legalization, should we find that it is indeed harmful.
c) Marijuana users become a little indifferent towards... well pretty much everything. Too mellow for my taste. Some got slightly paranoid though.
They got careless, handling their pot use as if it was legal, just because they thought it should be. I found that highly disturbing.
I also noticed some of these people getting into the whole esoteric thing...
Now heroin users are much worse. Most of them are basically zombies. They get slow, getting shakies. All of those that did not successfully manage withdrawal would eventually die of an overdose.

[MSimon]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you who are continually arguing for repeal of drug prohibition, are drug users?

TDPerk, williatw, Skippy, randomencounter, AcesHigh and of course Simon and anyone else who wants to be included on that list: please tell us all:

a) are you a user?
b) have you ever been to "skid row" where you can expect to find the people who's lives have been the most drastically affected by drugs?
c) have you ever been close friends or family with a drug user and if so, what can you note about their behavior?

Two things:
1. If you check my post history, you will see that I used to be very much against drug legalization (with lots of arguments and banging of heads between us), but have recently changed my mind towards a limited and _very_ controled legalization of marijuana as I described in an earlier post. It could be done and could possibly answer a lot of questions about the issue, if it is done right.

a) I am NOT a user. Even if I wanted to, I would be insane to use. It would kill me very quickly due to my health issues.
b) I have seen many people, even people I personally knew get ruined by drugs (mostly heroin), which is why I am generally against legalization. Marijuana is a bit different. I still think that prolonged frequent use makes people "soft in the pear", but it is not addictive so one could always more or less easily reverse a legalization, should we find that it is indeed harmful.
c) Marijuana users become a little indifferent towards... well pretty much everything. Too mellow for my taste. Some got slightly paranoid though.
They got careless, handling their pot use as if it was legal, just because they thought it should be. I found that highly disturbing.
I also noticed some of these people getting into the whole esoteric thing...
Now heroin users are much worse. Most of them are basically zombies. They get slow, getting shakies. All of those that did not successfully manage withdrawal would eventually die of an overdose.

I use two mind altering drugs on a regular basis. Tobacco every 30 minutes or so (a puff or two) when awake and a beer once a week.

My understanding of the subject comes from a deep read of the literature. i.e. I put the same effort into it that I did when coming up to speed on Polywell. Funny that only one of my opponents in 40+ years has ever put in such an effort. And their ignorance shows.

BTW your view of heroin users is contradicted by the work of Dr. Marks in England. He showed that with regular supplies at least 50% of users can hold down jobs and crimes (esp theft) dropped 67% in the area where he did his experiments.

The DEA shut him down. (funny how they can reach England that way - definitely NWO stuff) Obviously such results are a danger to their iron rice bowls.

Most of the problems with Drugs comes from Prohibition. And since the era before Prohibition is now lost in the mists of time the general (uneducated) public is easily led astray.

If you want to learn about that era this talk by a history prof to a group of judges is good.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

[MSimon]

Let us do some calculations. You know - run the numbers.

Hot house tomato prices:

http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/617497

Alaska $3 to $5 a lb similar all over the country and to some extent dependent on season. $5 for winter tomatoes.

Let us say that high end pot would cost 10X high end retail tomatoes. $50 an lb. Average use of the high grade stuff is about 1/2 oz a month. That assumes every day use but not to the point of incapacity. That is 6 oz a year. 6/16 * 50 = $18.75 a year at retail. A little over a nickle a day for use rates similar to a six pack a day beer habit - just on the edge of debilitation. A penny a day for a beer a day (casual use - like wine with a meal).

Go up to 3X that for heavy users (drunks). About 15 cents a day.

Now let us look at heroin which in the day - a bottle sold for the same price as a bottle of aspirin (same company Bayer). What does a bottle of aspirin cost? At Amazon a bottle of 1000 (5 grain tablets) is $6.14 - a very heavy user with a whole lot of tolerance might (and the might is very big) use 150 grains a day. (150/ (1000 * 5) ) *6.14 = about 18 cents a day. Roughly the same as heavy pot use.

Now why do all people not become drunks given the addicting power of alcohol? Because the vast majority can balance - work during the day, relax a bit at night. That is true for all drug use in America legal or illegal. Only about 10% of the population is addicted to alcohol and if you look up polydrug use you will find that for the most part it is the same people who have problems with other drugs. In fact pure heroin is easier on an "addicts" system than an equally intoxicating amount of alcohol. Same for pot. In fact back when it was in the pharmacopeia pot was prescribed to alcoholics as a safer alternative.

Now compare my learned discourse with the usual rantings of the prohibitionists.

Government’s Greatest Trick - Making you a slave to your fears.