Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Police Area Commander has got it all wrong

I am outraged at the sensationalist story on the front page classifying cannabis as evil and in the same category as methamphetamine.

This is exactly the kind of statement that leaves the public unable to differentiate between truly destructive drugs and less harmful substances.

Now, before Mike Clement, Police area commander sends the drug squad round to my place, I would like to make it clear that I do not take drugs, but I DO stand for the individuals right to take them if they wish.

I stand up for the rights of cannabis users to legally partake in a joint just as I am legally allowed to have a glass of whisky or a few beers, and those who believe otherwise are hypocrits!

If all this is done in the name of peoples health and wellbeing, then why is alchohol not illegal?

Alchohol can be linked to more deaths and misery than most illegal substances and it is still legal, yet you would make a criminal of a dope smoker or party-pill taker!

Cannabis is no more evil or destructive than indulging in alchohol. Excessive use of either is a different story, and I don’t deny both have their tales of horror.

It’s a fact that cannabis is illegal, but to mislead the public with such outrageous statements as “a crackdown on evil drugs - P and cannabis” is irresponsible and guilty of the reefer madness scaremongering of the 1920’s.

Cannabis offences rose 27% - so much for the war on drugs eh?

Instead of chasing cannabis users around the country, a FACTUAL drug education programme (as opposed to what we have now, which has dope smokers and party pill takers on the same risk level as Methamphetamine!) clearly explaining the REAL dangers of evil, destructive drugs and the less dangerous alternatives would be far more beneficial.

Maybe a scale of 1-10, 1 being the least harmful and 10 being next to fatal for excessive use or addictiveness.

I understand we must not be seen as taking drugs is OK, but this article does more harm by making such fallacious and infactual statements

ie, cocaine is impossible to get hold of, so those determined to get a bigger buzz have no alternative than locally produced, wildly destructive and expensive P!

This is equivalent to why people drink SPIRITS and not METHS?
They are both legal - we have a choice, but make spirits illegal and see what happens!

We chose the LESS DANGEROUS option because we have the choice, but those wishing to partake in drugs don’t have those options. Because drugs are all made artifically expensive by prohibition, people take what they can get, and opt for the most POTENT and therefore dangerous.

If you could chose between something that would kill you instantly, or something that would kill you over a long period of time what would you chose?
Many drug takers do not have this option, and THIS is what I find truly evil.

Mike Clement needs to read Milton Friedmans books on prohibition, but I guarantee he won’t.

His job is to uphold the law, not do what is sensible!


Anonymous Eric R. Johnson said...

A rating system for alleged danger is what we have now in the controlled substances act, which uses roman numerals.

What we need is a direct acknowledgment from politicians, busy-bodies, temperance nuts and cops that the no one person, group, or assembly of groups has the right to choose the intoxicant for another person., group, or entire nation-state.

Further the 23rd amendment to the US constitution establishes a constitutional right to intoxication.

That along with all the enabling legislation for tobacco that protects it from total banishment establishes via precedent that we citizens also have a right to intoxication via smokable means.

So how can cannabis -ever- have been made illegal?

The answer for you Democrats who support prohibition is: Richard Nixon.

He thought it was the empowering substance of Jews, whom he hated.

Further, the existence of the controlled substances act and its enforcement arm the DEA hangs on a very thin thread to its own constitutionality.

Eric Johnson

Problem is too few people are ready to stand up within their own communities, to identify themselves as pot smokers, and then to demand from the legislators both state and local repeal of these draconian laws.

Eric Johnson, Los Angeles

6:03 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home