We did it!!!

[verklingen]

if your posts are edited it always says by whom in at the bottom, in italics

if the thread was posted a while ago it may have been lost in the recent cataclysm of lost posts

[Debaser]

good god some people are never happy about anything. did any of you ever in your wildest dreams consider that THE ACTING HEAD OF US DRUG CONTROL POLICY would ever say anything along lines such as these? small though the step is for practical purposes it's evel knievel leaping across the grand canyon in terms of what's gone on in our past. really now, some perspective is warranted. the guy's hardly been in office a week and he's already stirring the pot more than it's ever been stirred my entire life.

There's a good reason some people aren't jumping for joy over this news...because it WON'T CHANGE ANYTHING. It's not a small step, it's not even a shuffling of the feet. All this guy wants to do is change the name of the "war on drugs" to something else, all the same problems will still be there. It's nothing more than verbal and psychological sleight-of-hand. Sure, some people would prefer treatment over jail time, but when "treatment" is just as bad (or worse in some cases) than jail, what's the difference? It's just more smoke and mirrors to shut-up the legalization lobby.

The REAL problem isn't that the laws need to be changed...before that can happen they need to change the definitions. Currently all drug use is considered abuse, and by that same token, if you use drugs, you are an addict. That needs to change, especially among pot smokers. The vast majority of poeple smoke pot because they enjoy it, not because they are slaves to an addiction, or have no self control. Forcing people into treatment for pot offences is basically the government ignoring that fact, and saying "we don't care if it's something you like, we're going to make you stop."

"Treatment" is for hard-core addicts and people that genuinely need help, not the guys and gals who like to unwind with a joint at the end of the day.

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

palmspringsbum,

It depends on who you are , and what you say...and to whom.
Yes some posts are edited. You can always ask why, or complain after the fact.

I suggest Grasscity forums if you want truely (nearly) free speech.
Your posts will be seen by literally thousands more folks every week, with a truely international audience.
It is the most heavily monitored/moderated site on the net. You'll get a reply to your post or a PM from a Moderator before any action is taken...
except for flaming will get you an insta-ban...2/3 times gets you a perma-insta-ban.
((They've decided to take action against groups of rude people monopolizing their board recently))

[Guest]

^



then why is a former police chief continuing a call for decriminalization he started while acting as police chief?

Because you're mixing apples with oranges?

He was opposed to decriminalization, but from all accounts I've read he did not ignore the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box and enacted into law as most law enforcement have.

I have some hope that his appointment does signal a sea-change and that (possibly before I die) this witch-hunt will be over.

I've just lived to long and been through too much to take anything at face value. The devil is always in the details. Treatment is just prohibition with better hair.

[verklingen]

i'm not jumping for joy either, i guess i'm just optomistic. i consider it a sign of changing times. who expects change overnight? first comes a shift from criminal to non-criminal, opening the way for a shift from all use being abuse to simple, responsible use being seen as harmless.

[Guest]

Regarding the 'apples and oranges' bit, I see I didn't make myself very clear why I said that.

Let me put it this way, my comment was a generalization about law enforcement.

You replied with a comment about an individual, a very specific individual, Gil Kerlikowske.

That is mixing apples with oranges.

I do believe Gil 'suffers' from the malady that defines all law enforcement, an obsession to CONTROL and the desire to act out brutal sadistic fantasies.

[verklingen]

but he does represent law enforcement, yes? in fact come to think of it there are entire organizations of law enforcement officials who oppose the drug war. ii'm speaking of exceptions, perhaps, but not apples and oranges.

[Guest]

but he does represent law enforcement, yes? in fact come to think of it there are entire organizations of law enforcement officials who oppose the drug war. ii'm speaking of exceptions, perhaps, but not apples and oranges.

You don't rise that high in any sphere without embodying the archetype that defines the sphere.

People who find themselves in law-enforcement have a very well-defined and recognized 'personality profile'. Those who rise through the ranks exemplify that profile, they would not rise through the ranks if they did not.

Yes there are factions in any organization, and may god bless LEAP.

[Guest]

The REAL problem isn't that the laws need to be changed...before that can happen they need to change the definitions. Currently all drug use is considered abuse, and by that same token, if you use drugs, you are an addict. That needs to change, especially among pot smokers. The vast majority of poeple smoke pot because they enjoy it, not because they are slaves to an addiction, or have no self control. Forcing people into treatment for pot offences is basically the government ignoring that fact, and saying "we don't care if it's something you like, we're going to make you stop."

I'm so glad to see someone else saying this. I've been saying it for years and I've felt like a voice in the wilderness most of that time.

Take a look at this so-called test for alcoholism: Are You An Alcoholic?

If you have a glass of wine with dinner 4 times or more a week and some busy body has said "You shouldn't do that" you have 7 points - and if you have 3 or more drinks once a month on top of that you're an "alcoholic".

Has a relative, friend, doctor or health worker been concerned about your drinking or suggested you cut down?

If some blue-stockinged busy-body spinster aunt is 'concerned' about your marijuana smoking and said something about it in the past year you get 3 points...

...the one that's missing from that 'test' is the question about "have you ever been arrested or convicted..." A yes answer to that one is worth 8 points...

Here's another one:

ARE YOU AN ADDICT?

Ask yourself the following questions. Answer as honestly as possible.

1. Do you lose time from work due to drinking/using?

2. Is drinking/using making your home life unhappy?

3. Do you drink/use because you are shy?

4. Is drinking/using affecting your reputation?

5. Have you ever felt guilt/remorse after drinking/using?

6. Have you ever had any financial problems due to drinking/using?

7. Have you ever been arrested due to drinking/using?

8. Does your drinking/using make you careless of your families welfare?

9. Has your ambition decreased since drinking/using?

10. Have you ever lost friends due to drinking/using?

11. Do you drink/drug before noon fairly often?

12. Does drinking/using cause you to have difficulty sleeping?

13. Has your efficiency decreased since drinking/using?

14. Is drinking/using jeopardizing your job/business?

15. Do you drink/use to escape worries/troubles?

16. Do you drink/use alone?

17. Have you ever had a loss of memory due to drinking?

18. Do you drink/use to build your self confidence?

19. Have you ever gone to anyone for help about your drinking/using?

20. Has anyone ever complained or gone for help due to your drinking/using?


If you answered YES to any one of these questions, this can be a warning to the possibility that you
may be alcoholic/addict..

If you answered YES to two questions, there are strong chances you are an alcoholic/addict.

If you answered YES to three or more questions,
there is a high probability of alcoholism/addiction.

Rehab at Santa Fe Recovery Center: Help with Drugs, Help with Alcohol, Holistic Rehab

1. Do you lose time from work due to drinking/using?

Yeah, getting busted does take time away from work.

2. Is drinking/using making your home life unhappy?

Yeah, getting raided made me pretty unhappy.

4. Is drinking/using affecting your reputation?

Yeah, people like the ones that wrote this test think I'm stupid, unmotivated, and deplorable because I'm a medical marijuana patient.

6. Have you ever had any financial problems due to drinking/using?

Yeah, the government took everything I had (directly or indirectly) because I smoke marijuana.

7. Have you ever been arrested due to drinking/using?

I've lost count of the times.

11. Do you drink/drug before noon fairly often?

The first thing I do every morning is smoke a joint. I also currently have a 3-year recommendation from my doctor. (For those of you that don't know, especially in light of California Health and Safety Code 11362.7-11362.83, it is very rare for a doctor to write a recommendation for more than one year.)

14. Is drinking/using jeopardizing your job/business?

Yeah, most employers require drug-testing and fire people who smoke marijuana.

15. Do you drink/use to escape worries/troubles?

Yeah, all this judgemental crap really makes me want to smoke a joint.

16. Do you drink/use alone?

Yeah.

I also take a dump alone.

20. Has anyone ever complained or gone for help due to your drinking/using?

Has anyone EVER complained ... ?

EVER? ANYONE? You mean like when some bum threatens to call the police if I don't give them some of my stash?

If you answered YES to any one of these questions, this can be a warning to the possibility that you
may be alcoholic/addict..

If you answered YES to two questions, there are strong chances you are an alcoholic/addict.

If you answered YES to three or more questions,
there is a high probability of alcoholism/addiction.

Speaking of CONTROL...

[Guest]

i'm not jumping for joy either, i guess i'm just optomistic. i consider it a sign of changing times. who expects change overnight? first comes a shift from criminal to non-criminal, opening the way for a shift from all use being abuse to simple, responsible use being seen as harmless.

When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s it was common knowledge that marijuana was a 'harmless recreational drug'.

This was common knowledge because our government had spent 50 years on a disinformation campaign to convince the public it was not medicine, or useful, but merely a "harmless recreational drug".

In the almost 50 years since that time I have seen the government shift it's propaganda to "a dangerous gateway drug".

And now the new rallying cry is "treatment not jail".

You've come a long way baby - from "harmless recreational drug" to "treatment not jail".

[verklingen]

given the ferocity of the drug war, yes, i believe we have.

look at what's going on in california, district attourneys are refusing to pursue drug charges (Calif. County Prosecutions Halt May Spread). the drug czar's words are the tip of the iceberg. our whole country is shifting its perspective on drug use, slowly but surely. don't think the temporary upsurge in ridiculous drug policy promulgated by the likes of nixon and reagan are permanent. most noticeably, it's becoming ever more apparent that drug lord violence is a direct result of the drug war and drug prohibition in general. we're being forced to make strides to correct this inequity.

[zerodown]

P.S. - I was raised to believe the job of law enforcement was To Serve and Protect.

I didn't know it was CONTROL.

They do serve and protect, they serve the rich and their rules by protecting them from us.

Make the test, call 911 and tell the police that a bunch of people is going to bomb your house and take not on how long does it take for them to get there and how many get there, then call 911 again and say you will bomb a bank, you will not only see how faster they get there and how many of them there are, but you will also be hearing a knock on your door, followed by the words "FBI"

So don't go saying police don't do their job, they do their job pretty well...

Now really, the police aren't that bad, they just follow orders from above, if the orders are to bust non-violent tokers then thats what they'll do, don't blame the police blame the ones who give them orders, which ironically are the ones you people voted for to rule you.

[Linkey]

though it may be manipulative, calling for an end to the phrase indicates that it is unpopular. even if this doesn't result in progress towards legalization, it still indicates that we are making progress.

[Debaser]

though it may be manipulative, calling for an end to the phrase indicates that it is unpopular. even if this doesn't result in progress towards legalization, it still indicates that we are making progress.

I guess it depends on how one looks at it..the way I see it, he is not caaling for an end to the phrase because its unpopular, he's calling for and end to the phrase because it's not working for them. In the end it all boils down to the same thing, being forced to give up something you letigitimately enjoy (and is no more or less harmful than many currently socially accepted activities) because someone else think it's bad, and you shouldn't be doing it.

It's Pharmacultural Eugenics (I'm officially coining the term!)

[verklingen]

^ dude cut that out please. this them shit. it's not working for US, and whether you think it's too little to late or whatever WE are finally realizing it on a scale so large that our leaders are recognizing it and talking about it in public fora. treating drug use criminally is being seen as the ridiculous notion it is and WE, as a society which elects officials to represent us, are part and parcel of this changing paradigm. they are and always have been reflective of the kind of leadership we allow ourselves to have. separate yourself from government and it can't help but act separately, or you can't help but perceive it separately. the result is the same either way. views are changing in our society on a massive scale and like i said this particular instance is a drop in the bucket.

but don't worry i know things will only accelerate once you guys finally come around

[AlteredStateGrl]

Make the test, call 911 and tell the police that a bunch of people is going to bomb your house and take not on how long does it take for them to get there and how many get there, then call 911 again and say you will bomb a bank, you will not only see how faster they get there and how many of them there are, but you will also be hearing a knock on your door, followed by the words "FBI"

OMFUCKINGGOD, never, call 911 for bullshit.

[MiSaNtHrOpE]

Pharmacultural Eugenics

somehow that almost sounds nice...

[Canuck Wisdom]

OMFUCKINGGOD, never, call 911 for bullshit.

Hes got a a point though.

[AlteredStateGrl]

Hes got a a point though.

So do I.

[verklingen]

to be fair i think that test can be done pretty effortlessly as a mental exercise