What is Digg?84 Comments
- Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -6/+69Druggys, as you called them, are for the most part imaginary enemies made up for the benefit of the drug war and to get sheep like you to vote a certain way. As you sit with you smug sense of moral superiority the government arrests almost 2 million of your fellow Americans for using "ilicit drugs" that are illicit for no other reason then a set of laws enacted under the pretense of protecting white women from minorities.
Go drink a glass of white wine, take your ambien, celebrex, naproxin, and tylenol and rest easy with the thought that at least YOU aren't a druggy.
Rest easy knowing that people laughing at your ignorant posturing while policies you support are sacrificing the future of millions of peoples lives on the altar of the Drug War. - Anarchrist, on 10/12/2007, -7/+48 "Laboratory tests revealed the plants were of low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content. THC is the ingredient that makes cannabis potent as a drug.
"The court accepted the cannabis had no value as a drug.
"After a six-day trial in March, Katelaris was found guilty by a jury of growing the crop without a licence."
That's just pathetic. Even if the war on drugs was valid & moral this arrest would still be immoral. - marccato, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26dshPis,
In the America in the 18 and 19 centuries, the majority of the people in America consider Blacks as less than human and only fit for slavery. In the 1930s in Germany, the majority of the people consider Jews the enemy and didn't object when the government exterminated them. Government are formed to protect people's rights, often this involves protecting the minority against the majority. In the United States, the War on Drugs increases the price of drugs, causing a black market where criminals can make vast profits. They defend their turf violently, often killing innocent people. In America, nonviolent drug offenders sometimes go to prison, taking up the space which should house murderers, rapists, and child molestors who are released early. Do a little research and see how much the War on Drugs costs, how effective it is, and what it other results it has. Because of the War on Drugs, it's not just the druggys who are hurt. It's the innocent people, the non-druggies like me and my family. - lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23"but if something's illegal, then its illegal."
Tell that to Rosa Parks or MLK.
Your logic is flawless. :/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21If the plants were shown to have low THC counts, and hold no value as a drug why are you calling this man a "druggy"? This is just further proof of the "war on drugs" being a way for the gov't to make money. Here's a link to a story that had been dug previously on the rate of arrests, 1 every 40 seconds. That is freakin' lunacy!
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7040 - tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21if i didn't allow myself to be friends with pot smokers, i wouldn't have many friends.
- Kellan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19dshPls, they tried that once. With prohibition in the early 1900s. and it opened an underground of crime and violence. Exactly what marccato is saying. The difference between cannabis and nicotine or alcohol is that cannabis has a few very legit medicinal purposes. It has been know to reduce nausea in chemotherapy patients, and it less likely to casue some type of lung cancer. The fact that some drugs are legal and others aren't certainly IS an argument. How often do you drink coffee? Or have a drink with your friends? The fact is, nearly all people in America have used recreational drugs at some point in their life. It's absurd to say someone can’t use cannabis while caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol are accepted drugs. Especially when Alcohol is arguably far more harmful than cannabis.
- marccato, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Most people who do not take drugs do so not because they are illegal, but because of their beliefs and other factors. Drugs are everywhere, even in the sterile environment of prison. The government cannot stop the drug flow; people choose not to take them.
The herion user teaching my child would probably lose his job due to ineffeciency. The acid dropping bus driver would be arrested not for drug use, but for child endangerment and, worse case, vehicular homicide, the machinist runs the risk of life and limb. The dentist wouldn't have much of a practice when people found out he was snorting coke; I don't know of anyone who would go to him. By the way, some of this stuff already happens despite the War on Drugs.
The only person that should be hurt by drugs is the person taking them. What happens when a crackhead breaks into my house because his next hit will cost him 100 times what it should? Is he the only one hurt by his habit? He wouldn't break in if his hit only cost $1. Because of the War on Drugs, I am hurt. You say we should control cigs and beer. What about spinach? E-coli; spinach can be dangerous. So is beef. So are eggs. NYC and Chicago want to ban transfats. Why stop there? The more control you give government, the more it wants.
I hate drugs and am certainly not embracing them. I have known people who have died from drug use. That sucks. The War on Drugs didn't stop their deaths, but it causes many others. Currently, your future children are more likely to be killed in a drive-by, or molested by someone release from prison eary so a non-violent pothead could take his place, than they probably would by hurt in any of the situations you talked about if the War on Drugs were ended. You have the best of intentions, but, before reacting so emotionally, do some research and find our what the War on Drugs is really doing to our country and the world. - flipside3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17@dshPls
"I really do hope you see the problem with a herion user as your childs teacher, or an acid user operating buses, machines ect."
In my world they already have rules against being under the influence of even legal substances. A teacher would get in trouble for being drunk in class and so would a bus driver. As a matter of fact, folks abusing cold medicine get in trouble too sometimes. I have more of a problem with people wishing harm on others, but let's not go there... - TheDragonTony, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16@tuxidomasx
Yes if it is illegal it is illegal, but if a law is immoral and unjust (like our drug laws) it is the responsibility of moral citizens to oppose the law. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Drugs are part of human history, always have been, always will be.
And as far as you know you already have a dentist who does coke, and a bus driver on acid (although dealing with kids while tripping sound horrible) the thing is, contrary to the propaganda you have been fed, you wouldn't be able to tell. Alcohol shuts down your brain and yet it's legal, it inhibits you worse then most drugs.
Essentially you have been made totally irrellivant by suggesting we should try universal prohabition. You are completely delusional if you think that would EVER be realistic, go live in Saudi Arabia if you want stringently enforced universal prohabition. - ringo380, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18I've heard this "law is law" argument so many times in the past couple weeks, and it's horribly frustrating. Doesn't anyone realize how little sense that makes? The laws are there because we PUT them there. They are not etched in stone, and they are not commanded by any god.
Laws do not justify their own existence. - coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14So if you call people who smoke and grow marijuana "Druggys", what do you call people who smoke Cigarettes or drink Alcohol? Is it just the arbitrary government label that makes you think the way you do?
I don't smoke pot, but finding out stuff like this pisses me off. The fact that medical marijuana is legal to give out in some places in America, but federal law prohibits the growing of the stuff just pisses me off. I saw a show about the whole situation and small clinics are forced to grow marijuana in secret locations just to be able to give it out to patients (and a lot of them are in bad shape...a large portion are chemo patients that need something to cut the bad side effects). We need some sort of reform, because it's obvious this stuff has a large amount of medical value - a hell of a lot more than alcohol and tobacco. - mikedpirone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15You need to grow up and realize that marijuana is not only for people who enjoy its effects but it has many other uses ranging from industrial to medical. Brain washed fool.
- gamerage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@dshPls
Please try and make even more ridiculous comparisons? Driving / Dentistry under the influence is still a crime. Are these people all drunk now because booze is legal?
Wake up. - joemommasfat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Most people don't want alcoholics around either.
- F4d3d, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Wake up people, this is about INDUSTRIAL HEMP. A product that if supported and used more widely, could eliminate many inferior products and lead to a decrease in pollution caused by processing chemicals. Cotton is a classic example - hemp is superior in nearly every way, but because it is called "hemp" it is made illegal by a government that has no foresight. Sadly, the world will suffer because of this ignorance.
- beckerist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@thedragontony
That brings a quote to mind:
"Prohibition cannot be enforced for the simple reason that the majority of American people do not want it enforced and are resisting its enforcement. That being so, the orderly thing to do under our form of government is to abolish a law which cannot be enforced ..."
– Fiorello La Guardia, 1944 (the then Mayor of NYC) - rassoodock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@Labthug:
1) Irregardless is not a word.
2) Your argument is moot. I'm sure the guy was aware of the laws that he was breaking, but he was clearly willing to take that risk in order to prove a point about industrial hemp. Also, people get found "guilty" by courts of law who don't feel like they did anything morally wrong and don't deserve punishment. Obviously this guy falls into that boat. Sometimes they have a valid case, and sometimes they don't, but if that was the case for me, I think I would make a big deal out of it. You're not going to be able to reverse the injustices in society by just shutting up and keeping your head down. - mikedpirone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It was most likely the webpage to the group called NORML. It is a group thats purpose is to reform marijuana laws.
- Feanor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Imagine all the trees in the rainforests of the world that have been cut down, pulped and turned into paper....no imagine if all that could be done easily by growing low-THC marijuana in a field.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7what website was it?
- kevinmotel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10he should just mellow out dude.
- sundancekid503, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@ LabThug
"Rosa Parks and MLK were successful in changing laws because they convinced enought people in the *legislative* branch to do so. They also did this is a calm manner."
Rosa Parks started a movement by breaking what was then a law, not by lobbying and legislative branches. Which I think was the poster's point: breaking immoral laws is not always a bad thing. Openly accepting something like segregation just because "it's law" is the wrong thing to do. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7A lot of what you are stating as fact is fallatious but I don't blame you, the propaganda spread since the beginning of prohabition is so completely accepted as truth it has become ubiquitous.
Education and an end to the lies would have likely saved your friends who "died from drug use" illicit drugs dont have interaction warnings or reccomended and maximum doses.
1997, the latest year for which death certificate data are published, there were 15,973 illicit drug-induced deaths in America while Tobacco caused 435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths and Alcohol consumption caused 85,000 deaths.
Amusingly enough firearm accidents caused 29,000 deaths that year - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I bet you are "on drugs" right now, just not the illegal kind.
- SirFoxx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I've never understood why taking a substance to make ones self feel good is supposed to be wrong. As long as no one else is injured or their rights infringed upon why shouldn't a person be allowed to make themselves feel pleasure through chemistry. You're only here for 70 years, give or take a few, if you're lucky. Make the most of it and enjoy.
- gyrfalcon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@LabThug
Read about being an "Informed Jurist" before you spout off about "breaking a law, is breaking the law"
edit: Woops, this is austrailia...they don't have informed jurists. - andrewrchambers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5a dentist snorting cocaine is just asking to be caught - if anyone is gonna see white powder up your nose its someone sitting in a dentist chair while you're performing a checkup
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Because reality has a known liberal drug using bias.
- Raesear, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@ noodlez
The court was referring to his plants having low THC percentage. Meaning, his plants won't get you high. That's why he's not facing serious drug charges and instead is facing growing without a license. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@ Lakawak
read the article I linked to.
"'"Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers between $10 billion and $12 billion annually " - asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Smoking pot or being against prohibition has nothing to do with hippies. The War on Drugs effects every single one of you, whether you use drugs or not. It's a waste of YOUR MONEY. It's a waste of our police resources which in turn can put YOUR LIFE in danger. It can ruin YOUR FAMILY or YOUR CHILDREN's lives.
Prohibition has to end. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's your argument, honestly? All of this reading has brought you to the conclusion that hippies are not to be listened to? Do you even have a relevent point to make?
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Government are formed to protect people's rights"
No they aren't. This American one was. (Key word, _WAS_), but almost all aren't. - Krispy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4dshPls
are you the little disciple on YouTube from that JesusCamp doc? - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Doing something because it feels good is bad, just ask the evangelicals.
- lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I don't know why lakawak is being burried, he is stating a well known fact proven by several studies. Alcohol, used regularly in moderation, is beneficial for your health.
- narduk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"After a six-day trial in March, Katelaris was found guilty by a jury of growing the crop without a licence."
Why didn't he just get a license? And why do Australians spell license with 2 c's? - Feanor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5How many of those firearm deaths are drug related??
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Artifewz and Kellen...You may want to not bluff next time. Alcohol has been proven to be VERY beneficial medically in moderation.
- asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Almost all drug deaths would NEVER have occured if drugs were legal. Most deaths are never the result of ingesting the pure substance. During Alcohol prohibition people died from bathtub made Moonshine. This is what's happening today.
Remember heroin laced with Fentanyl? Heroin laced with Quinine? These cause almost all heroin overdoses. The rest of the ODs are attributed to the user not having any knowledge of the drug, which is again, a result of the War on Drugs.
Hell. In Pakistan people go blind or die on a DAILY basis from drinking tub made Alcohol. This goes on TODAY because Alcohol is illegal in that country. - lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I do agree that the war on drugs isn't make the government any money. The only way that would happen (since fines don't quite cover the costs of the war) would be if they resold the drugs or traded them for guns or something in other countries, but that would never happen...
- mikedpirone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Even if EVERY single death from a firearm was drug related it would still be alot lower than how many deaths are caused by tobacco or alcohol.
- fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm not sure on this, but I think the way they first outlawed pot in America was by passing a law requiring a license to grow and distribute it, then they stopped issuing licenses.
- lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4WTF?
1950? Really? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think it's funny how the rationalists (who somehow think they belong here at digg!) always come at these marijuana posts with the big word "drug". Why do you guys keep calling it a drug? To me a drug is something bad, something that impairs your abilities to function, something that tears families apart. If you went to a serious rehab meeting and said you were addicted to marijuana, the other patients would laugh at you. They were sucking dick for their next rock!
So answer me this. Who here is suggesting we legalize all drugs? Probably many of the same pro-marijuana posters here have done LSD, Mushrooms, Ketamine, Ecstasy, Cocaine, maybe even crystal meth. I know I've done all of the above. Hell pick three I probably did them at the same time. Yet we're not "stupid" as you think we are, or "stupid enough" to suggest we legalize the above DRUGS. We can make sense of it, because we know what they FEEL like.. You guys don't! Or maybe you have, but you're old enough now that your sensibilities have changed and they're not right for YOU anymore. Does that mean it should stop ME from smoking a joint? How does that affect you? I am not your child.
I'm 25 years old, on my 4th successful business venture as the President, and have smoked weed most every day since I was maybe 15. I see a doctor maybe once every 3 years (in Canada where it's free if I wanted it) and don't take any other medications. I have severe attention problems that I've always had. (working, working, oh look a pretty bug!) And sometimes I even think the weed contributes to that. But when I stop I get other problems, anxiousness, fidgetting, etc. If I'm honest with myself though, when I was in grade 2 they put me on the bus 15 minutes before any of the other kids, because it took me 3x as long to put my snowsuit on as the other kids, playing with my shoe or something.
It's easy to blame something for being lazy, but really it's a choice to be productive, high or not. It's a lot harder to blame yourself. Being honest with myself, everything I ever did was done at some stage of being high, and I guarantee I've done way more than 95% of people at my age, and I hardly got through high school.
Stop being so high on yourselves you non smokers, you are not better or more intelligent than us, your advantage is 0. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with you. There's more to life than ambition and drive. There is room for relaxation and enjoyment. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Propaganda from our, oh so trustworthy, goverment drug agencies who need to set up an enemy in order to justify their existence.
- crabchips, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The US government spends $35 billion a year on the "war on drugs" -- mostly on the arrest and imprisonment of domestic pot farmers. Do Americans really want this? Absurd!
- berfmurret, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5HAHAHA!!! acid user operating a bus? why would anyone drive a bus on acid? do you even know what acid IS? its doubful someone could even START a bus with a good dose. even if they did they would be so scared to move it wouldnt matter they got it started.
if the heroin user were qualified to teach my children and performed her job and somehow managed not to hender her performance well i see no problem with it. otherwise i would reckon a heroin user wouldnt bother to be a teacher in the first place. she would probably either have a husband for a dealer or suck lots of ***** on the street. -
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is