Opponents of Marijuana Reform Constantly Contradict Themselves
This article on a marijuana decriminalization effort in New Hampshire provides a useful case study in the utter confusion and desperation of the anti-pot peanut gallery:
…Exeter Police Chief Richard Kane, among others, is adamantly opposed. "If we reduce the penalty for small amounts of marijuana, it will eventually lead to legalization and I think that's heading in the wrong direction," he said last week.Nashua Police Chief Donald Conley also said it would be a mistake to take the sting out of the law. [Boston Globe]
So the Police Chief begins by arguing that we must go around stinging people for possessing pot. But when reform advocates argue that too many young lives are being derailed by harsh punishments for petty offenses, Conley completely changes his tune:
But Conley said it is rare for first-time offenders to get jail time for possession of small amounts of marijuana."As far as someone getting arrested and their lives being ruined, I don't think that's the case," he said. "Employers are more forgiving in this day and age, and police prosecutors frequently reduce marijuana cases down to violations…"
Wait, so should we be stinging people or not? He begins by defending aggressive sanctions and ends by claiming the sanctions aren't aggressive. The contradiction is transparent and embarrassing.
It is, in fact, not at all uncommon to hear defenders of harsh marijuana laws speak approvingly of the fact that most offenders avoid jail time. Thus, it is not necessarily the practice of ruining lives for marijuana which they crave, but rather the discretion to do so should the urge happen to arise. Meanwhile, millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans are branded as criminals so that people like Chief Conley can live out their authoritarian fantasies.
digg
redditContacting Conley
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/28/2008 - 10:46pmIt's me, Anonymous, again.
I just wanted to add that you should consider sending Mr. Conley a copy of this awesome post to get his reaction.
Nashua Police Chief Donald Conley
Comment posted by Giordano on Fri, 02/29/2008 - 1:16amis one slick customer. Note his mercurial ability to suddenly switch from one opposing viewpoint to another by sugar-coating the sting. He’s gaslighting his intended audience by denying the reality of the situation to people who know better. It’s fairly clear from just a few statements how Mr. Conley rose to become a police chief.
Conley also says in the Boston Globe: "I think it sends the wrong message. If we say it's OK to possess a small amount of marijuana, some will think it must be OK to use it and others will think it is OK to sell it."
Wrong message? What does Mr. Conley think goes on in the minds of people whom he considers ignorant enough to believe something so utterly stupid? The message I get from Mr. Conley is, “I think you’re an idiot, and I’m here to whack you because you scare me; screw your future.” Not, “I’m here to protect and serve.”
But the rest of the statement shows he just isn’t clear on what’s happening. Possessing, using, and selling (sharing) are all pretty much the same thing to the drug user. I mean, someone might enjoy viewing weed under a microscope because it’s intricate and it looks cool. But most people buy it to smoke it.
I hope Nashua PC Conley can address these issues in the near future. I would be interested in what he has to say.
Giordano
We wouldn't even be saying it's OK to possess marijuana
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 02/29/2008 - 3:31pmConley also says in the Boston Globe: "I think it sends the wrong message. If we say it's OK to possess a small amount of marijuana, some will think it must be OK to use it and others will think it is OK to sell it."
Even if the bill in NH passes, it would still be illegal to possess small amounts of marijuana, and there would still be a penalty for doing so. All the bill would do is change the law to reflect what everyone says is already happening: People caught with small amounts of marijuana pay a fine and don't go to jail. So, Mr. Conley, why do you oppose this bill again?
California Cannabis Hemp & Health Initiative 2008
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 02/29/2008 - 5:05pmInitiatives
Attorney Gen. File #: 2007-064
California Cannabis Hemp & Health Initiative 2008
Legalization of Marijuana-Related Activities. The initiative provides that no per-son, individual, or corporate entity could be prosecuted for the possession, cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of cannabis hemp, including hemp industrial products, hemp medicinal preparations, hemp nutritional products, and hemp religious or recreational products. All of these products use as an ingredient the hemp plant commonly referred to as cannabis or marijuana. This measure also provides that the manufacture, marketing, distribution, or sale between adults of equipment or accessories associated with the above products shall not be prohibited.
California Hemp Initiative Volunteers is looking for volunteer petition signature collectors
The US/UN drug war is ....
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 03/01/2008 - 10:31am"transparent and embarrassing" itself. Jobs in the law enforcement industry are on the line, so the self "protecting" and self "serving" must do, what they gotta do...best.
dragracedownmain
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 03/01/2008 - 1:10pmThe fact that our current drug laws do not work are self evident. As Americas #1 cash crop it is time to revisit our marijuana policies. Never in history has America grown more marijuana than last year. This year will excede last year despite all drug enforcement efforts. Americans have a taste for good bud and will not stop using it regardless of all law enforcement efforts. Shut one farm down and two will spring up to replace it.
Now more than ever we need to say UNCLE. We need to quit using FEAR, False Evidence that Appears Real, tactics regarding the safest mind altering drug known to man. We incarcerate way too many non-violent criminals. We are the worlds largest incarcerater. #1 per capita, geez the way they talk about North Korea you'd think we would fall short of ruthless dictators. Not one person, 0000000000.00000000 in the 6000+ years of marijuanas history has ever died from overdose. Not one!!
Yet we continue manufacturing pills like candy. And don't think for one minute kids aren't getting their hands on these very dangerous pills. Talk about sending the wrong message to kids!! Don't feel well, here take a pill. Have a headache, here take a pill. Want to protect yourself from pregnancy, here take a pill. Are you depressed, here take a pill. Dad can't get it up any more, here take a pill. The basic message to kids nowadays is that pills are safe, how wrong is that?? The medicinal properties in marijuana are very well documented and yet we fight and fight to even let a dieing cancer patient the least bit of relief. I'm sorry folks but that just makes me sick!! Should I take a pill? Not on your life!! I'll just smoke another and watch my fellow citizens make asses out of themselves over what kind of "message" we want to send.
Americans supported slavery once...
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 03/04/2008 - 6:59pmToday I find it hard to believe, but at one point in American history, slavery was legal. How could the general public support such a terrible thing? What were people thinking back then?
How is illegal cannabis any different? Science knows it is safe, and there are far worse drugs that are legal. How can people be discriminated against because they choose an alternate recreation, over legal tobacco and alcohol? Why is it criminal to be a different race (read: recreation)?
I think most smart people in charge are on the fense about cannabis legalization, so I understand the double talk. Even though they see the potential as just another legal 'alcohol', and the elimination of black market crime, many people are still afraid of change. Cannabis legalization would present a huge redistribution of funds out of government law enforcement -- into wholesale and retail commerce as well as tax collection. I don't think any cop wants to retire as a simple farmer or store clerk.
Today I find it hard to
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 07/09/2008 - 3:30amToday I find it hard to believe, but at one point in American history, slavery was legal. How could the general public support such a terrible thing? What were people thinking back then?
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index.html
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index1.html
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index2.html
How is illegal cannabis any different? Science knows it is safe, and there are far worse drugs that are legal. How can people be discriminated against because they choose an alternate recreation, over legal tobacco and alcohol? Why is it criminal to be a different race (read: recreation)?
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index3.html
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index4.html
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index5.html
I think most smart people in charge are on the fense about cannabis legalization, so I understand the double talk. Even though they see the potential as just another legal 'alcohol', and the elimination of black market crime, many people are still afraid of change. Cannabis legalization would present a huge redistribution of funds out of government law enforcement -- into wholesale and retail commerce as well as tax collection. I don't think any cop wants to retire as a simple farmer or store clerk.
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index6.html
http://adult-videos.undersearch.info/index7.html
Hell yes
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 02/14/2009 - 3:35pmI'm from new hampshire and I don't see why they haven't changed the laws yet, massachusetts just did and every other state that we're bordered by, plus everyone here already smokes pot theres nothing else to do.
Sincere Kudos
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/28/2008 - 10:43pmAwesome post, Mr. Morgan. Very well written.