Bush admin vows major assault on medical marijuana, regardless of California laws - GoFuckYourself.com

Mr.Fiction · 06-25-2005, 10:57 PM

"We're empathetic to the ill and to the sick, however we cannot disregard federal law," said Drug Enforcement Administration Agent Javier Pena. "We have the power to enforce federal drug laws even in areas where it might not be popular."

Twenty people were indicted on federal drug charges in court documents unsealed Thursday, and an arrest warrant has been issued for another. Two others face state drug charges, and more arrests are pending, Ryan said.

http://ap.indystar.com/dynamic/stori...06-23-20-24-48

More proof that Bush voters are against freedom.

No more pot for cancer patients, even in states where it is legal. Great work supporting state rights and less government.

Webby · 06-25-2005, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

"We're empathetic to the ill and to the sick, however we cannot disregard federal law," said Drug Enforcement Administration Agent Javier Pena. "We have the power to enforce federal drug laws even in areas where it might not be popular."

Twenty people were indicted on federal drug charges in court documents unsealed Thursday, and an arrest warrant has been issued for another. Two others face state drug charges, and more arrests are pending, Ryan said.

http://ap.indystar.com/dynamic/stori...06-23-20-24-48

More proof that Bush voters are against freedom.

No more pot for cancer patients, even in states where it is legal. Great work supporting state rights and less government.

Sheesh... Why don't he shut the fuck up and pay some attention to real problems? Yea.. OK, he's inept.

Mako · 06-25-2005, 11:05 PM

We spend $18B per year, PER YEAR, of our tax dollars to combat the influx of narcotics into the United States.

Which makes you wonder how much of those same tax dollars went to funding cancer research, which 1 out of 3 of you reading this right now will contract sometime during the next 20 years (except for you scientologists, you're protected by aliens in your colon).

What a joke. $18B per year.

Mr.Fiction · 06-25-2005, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Sheesh... Why don't he shut the fuck up and pay some attention to real problems? Yea.. OK, he's inept.

The Republicans are trying to punish people who live in California because Californians will never vote for a Bush.

chadglni · 06-25-2005, 11:06 PM

Out of all the shit the Bush admin does this is probably the least of my worries. They are breaking federal law, fuck them if they think CA can give em a get out of jail free card.

JJ Gold · 06-25-2005, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mako

We spend $18B per year, PER YEAR, of our tax dollars to combat the influx of narcotics into the United States.

Which makes you wonder how much of those same tax dollars went to funding cancer research, which 1 out of 3 of you reading this right now will contract sometime during the next 20 years (except for you scientologists, you're protected by aliens in your colon).

What a joke. $18B per year.

$18 Billion a year in nothing in terms of cancer research. Not even a drop in the well.

But, I get your point.

SuckOnThis · 06-25-2005, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadglni

Out of all the shit the Bush admin does this is probably the least of my worries. They are breaking federal law, fuck them if they think CA can give em a get out of jail free card.

You're in Canada you stupid dumb motherfucker, stfu.

chadglni · 06-25-2005, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

You're in Canada you stupid dumb motherfucker, stfu.

No shit Sherlock however did you decide that? The point is the federal law isn't new, of course they can and will put your ass in jail for breaking it.

Pothead.

Mako · 06-25-2005, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold

$18 Billion a year in nothing in terms of cancer research. Not even a drop in the well.

But, I get your point.

You're right, but we've been pursuing this level of wasteful spending for how many years now? 25? And the bill is up to what.....$150B? $250B?

I don't care what drop in the bucket $18B is, you throw $250B at a problem and it goes away. Fast.

bringer · 06-25-2005, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

The Republicans are trying to punish people who live in California because Californians will never vote for a Bush.

or maybe they're annoyed that california doesnt enforce any policies, even ones they create. i can buy a medical marijuana card for $100 and im not a cancer patient. is that ok? go collect cans for the aclu and stop spreading propaganda.

pr0 · 06-25-2005, 11:13 PM

"We have the power to enforce federal drug laws even in areas where it might not be popular."

Considering almost 70% of americans now believe medical marijuana's a good idea & its passing in most states where it hits the ballot.

I'd say thats alot of unpopular enforcement mr javier

DWB · 06-25-2005, 11:13 PM

Yea... weed is killing us all. Better put an end to that shit.

TheGoldenChild · 06-25-2005, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

The Republicans are trying to punish people who live in California because Californians will never vote for a Bush.

I hate Republicans
However- In California it's all about the CHEESE.
Homeowners in CA just got 10 yrs worth of equity on their homes in three years-

What most in California don't realize is that is blood money-
and for the next 7 yrs they won't make a dime.

Either sell your home now, make your money and get out of dodge

Or hold on to your home for ten more years-

California is land of nouveau riche and as long as they make money they don't care-
Everyone smokes pot here either way-

As much as I am an advocate for pot smoking, I wouldn't want to see it legalized, and see the copius tax dollars that would be misspent by this administration on this war in Iraq- as well as everything else they are eradicating.

nofx · 06-25-2005, 11:20 PM

pass to the left because the right is wrong

Mr. Pat · 06-25-2005, 11:20 PM

just more reFUCKlican crap we have to swallow.

rickholio · 06-25-2005, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

You're in Canada you stupid dumb motherfucker, stfu.

He's just pissy because the only pot they get in PEI is whatever dirtweed twigs and seeds get smuggled across the bridge by vacationeering peeps.

smack · 06-26-2005, 12:06 AM

does he even realize what republicans are supposed to stand for?

budz · 06-26-2005, 12:12 AM

freedom, lol.

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 06-26-2005, 12:13 AM

Bush declaring war on Everyone...

Even Fellow Americans...

TheDoc · 06-26-2005, 12:33 AM

Sucks for people with Cancer, but then again, it's just as easy to buy your own damn bud..

The Truth Hurts · 06-26-2005, 12:38 AM

GOOD..

i've never met a pot smoker worth an ounce of spit anyway.

VeriSexy · 06-26-2005, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlienQ

Bush declaring war on Everyone...

Even Fellow Americans...

The Truth Hurts · 06-26-2005, 01:56 AM

and for those of you with short term memory problems (from all the pot smoking)

Despite criticism that President Clinton is "soft" on drugs, annual data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Report demonstrate that Clinton administration officials are waging a more intensive war on marijuana smokers than any other presidency in history. Law enforcement arrested approximately 1.5 million Americans on marijuana charges during the first three years of Clinton's administration -- 84 percent of them for simple possession. The average number of yearly marijuana arrests under Clinton (483,548) is 30 percent higher than under the Bush administration (338,998), and last year's total alone is more than double the 1991 total (287,850).

Mr.Fiction · 06-26-2005, 03:15 AM

This article says the opposite - there were less drug busts under Clinton than Bush Sr.:

Fewer Federal Drug Prosecutions, More Convictions Under Clinton Administration

David Burnham and Susan Long, co-directors of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University, analyzed drug prosecutions in 90 Federal judicial districts across the U.S. using records kept by the Justice Department and the federal court system. Their analysis shows that the number of defendants in federal drug cases more than doubled from 8,775 in 1981 to 19,038 in 1988 during the Reagan Administration. Federal drug prosecutions continued to increase under President Bush, reaching a high of 28,585 defendants in the 1992 election year and averaging 25,990 defendants a year. Federal drug defendants averaged 25,672 in the first three years of the Clinton Administration.

http://www.ndsn.org/dec96/fedcases.html

The Truth Hurts · 06-26-2005, 03:28 AM

here's another one from two weeks ago contradicting the original topic:
Feds unlikely to target medical marijuana use
Despite Supreme Court ruling that patients can be charged, legal experts say such action is unlikely.

WASHINGTON -- Anyone who lights up a joint for medicinal purposes isn't likely to be pursued by federal authorities, despite a Supreme Court ruling that these marijuana users could face federal charges, people on both sides of the issue say.

While the justices expressed sympathy for two seriously ill California women who brought the case, the majority agreed that federal agents may arrest even sick people who use the drug as well as the people who grow pot for them.

The ruling could be an early test of the compassion Attorney General Alberto Gonzales promised to bring to the Justice Department following the tenure of John Ashcroft.

Gonzales and his aides were silent on the ruling, but several Bush administration officials said individual users have little reason to worry. "We have never targeted the sick and dying, but rather criminals engaged in drug trafficking," said Drug Enforcement Administration spokesman Bill Grant.

Yet Ashcroft's Justice Department moved aggressively after the Supreme Court's first decision against medical marijuana in 2001, seizing individuals' marijuana and raiding their suppliers.

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Monday that "people shouldn't panic ... there aren't going to be many changes."

Local and state officers handle nearly all marijuana prosecutions and must follow state laws that protect patients.

It was unclear whether any medical marijuana users ever have been arrested by federal agents. They typically are involved only when the quantities are substantial. Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House drug policy office, said federal prisoners convicted of marijuana possession had on average more than 100 pounds.

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, which favors legalization of marijuana, said the benchmark for federal intervention has been 50 plants.

But he said the larger point is that the ruling could stymie efforts in other states to pass laws allowing for the use of medical marijuana.

The Bush administration, like the Clinton White House before it, has taken a hard stand against state medical marijuana laws, arguing that such statutes could undermine the fight against illegal drugs.

------------------

Personally... though I despise pot smokers in general, I think that if terminally ill people want to smoke pot (or pretty much anything else they want), they should be allowed to.

SmokeyTheBear · 06-26-2005, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth Hurts

GOOD..

i've never met a pot smoker worth an ounce of spit anyway.

An ounce of spit ?? I should hope nobody would "want" to be worth an ounce of spit

Besides i have dry mouth and can't spit.

The simple fact is you dont know if the people you meet are "potheads" unless you are telepathic.

Almost every president/actor/singer has been a "pothead" although i'm sure you dont know any of them. Infact , the fact you dont know any "worthy: potheads , might speak alot about the people you know..

There's a heart surgeon who lives near me, who's got a spine disease , and he takes marijuana daily to ease the pain. But i'm sure he is just a hippy "pothead" right ? not worthy of meeting you i suppose..

I suppose you probably dont do any drugs right ? and neither do your friends right ? Never had any alcohol ? milk ? vitamins ? So out of MILLIONS of drugs out there you picked ONE drug to make a blanket statement about the people who use it?

Regarding the law though.. The california law was stupid anyways, you can't make a controversial law that goes blatantly against federal laws, if you do your asking for trouble.. i.e. gay marriage

Lets get down to the REAL issue here. Drug companies are shitting their pants.

Imagine if you could grow a years supply of VIAGRA in your basement ? Or a years supply of INSULIN. The drug companies make 0$ off you growing your own meds. The problem is you cant grow viagra or insulin in your basement but you can grow weed.

The Truth Hurts · 06-26-2005, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

So out of MILLIONS of drugs out there you picked ONE drug to make a blanket statement about the people who use it?

the thread is about pot.
keeping it on topic.

SmokeyTheBear · 06-26-2005, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth Hurts

the thread is about pot.
keeping it on topic.

ok sir.

just pointing out the hypocrisy in the thread thats all.

I never met a guy who has never met a pothead who was worth a spit that was worth a spit anyways..

SmokeyTheBear · 06-26-2005, 11:21 AM

or we could go with the hypothetical , you say you have never met a pot smoker who was worth an ounce of spit..

Lets says lensman was an occasional potsmoker and you met him at a convention, would you say he is "not worth an ounce of spit" ?. or would you have met 1 person who was worth an ounce of spit ? or would be be worth more than an ounce of spit..

BTW whats a n ounce of spit go for these days

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 06-26-2005, 11:22 AM

mardigras · 06-26-2005, 11:29 AM

It is unpatriotic to smoke marijuana for medical purposes when the government needs you to pay 8 bucks a pill to keep the system running.

mardigras · 06-26-2005, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth Hurts

Personally... though I despise pot smokers in general, I think that if terminally ill people want to smoke pot (or pretty much anything else they want), they should be allowed to.

Why terminally ill and not chronically ill? Glaucoma and crippling authritis aren't terminal conditions, but many benefit from marijuana more than any other treatment.

SmokeyTheBear · 06-26-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras

Why terminally ill and not chronically ill? Glaucoma and crippling authritis aren't terminal conditions, but many benefit from marijuana more than any other treatment.

Why not for personal enjoyment. Do i tell you how much salt to eat or beef to eat or alcohol to drink or gas to buy for your car.. All those things are bad in any quantity.

Dont get me wrong im not disagreeing with you , but theres no point in arguing an obvious point with someone who is stupid enough to say " i despise pot smokers in general " It would be like saying " i despise salt eaters in general" just because you dont happen to eat salt . People who think like this are using an isolated case or cases and extrapolating it to cover everyone.

cool1 · 06-26-2005, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

Lets get down to the REAL issue here. Drug companies are shitting their pants.

Imagine if you could grow a years supply of VIAGRA in your basement ? Or a years supply of INSULIN. The drug companies make 0$ off you growing your own meds. The problem is you cant grow viagra or insulin in your basement but you can grow weed.

This so on the money

colpanic · 06-26-2005, 12:03 PM

I don't understand why these people don't just buy their pot on the street like every other redblooded american. Lazy bastards!

mardigras · 06-26-2005, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

Why not for personal enjoyment. Do i tell you how much salt to eat or beef to eat or alcohol to drink or gas to buy for your car.. All those things are bad in any quantity.

Dont get me wrong im not disagreeing with you , but theres no point in arguing an obvious point with someone who is stupid enough to say " i despise pot smokers in general " It would be like saying " i despise salt eaters in general" just because you dont happen to eat salt . People who think like this are using an isolated case or cases and extrapolating it to cover everyone.

I hear ya. I can't think of one reason why alcohol and cigarettes should be legal while marijuana should not... especially alchohol. How many lives has alcohol fucked up?... not to mention directly and indirectly affecting others around the abusers.

mardigras · 06-26-2005, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colpanic

I don't understand why these people don't just buy their pot on the street like every other redblooded american. Lazy bastards!

Exsqueeze me? It is the American way to want your goods at the lowest possible prices... Not only should the government be taxing marijuana at a similar rate as alcohol they should be outsourcing it's production

MetaMan · 06-26-2005, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth Hurts

GOOD..

i've never met a pot smoker worth an ounce of spit anyway.

the truth hurts and you are a fool.

i really cant understand it, i mean people are dying who the hell cares if they want to get high? sometimes i am really glad i decided to stay in canada.

i mean just the mere fact that you can drive down the street and spark one up with no one even caring.

the land of freedom is changing, i hate to see what is only in store.

Mr.Fiction · 06-26-2005, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth Hurts

here's another one from two weeks ago contradicting the original topic:
Feds unlikely to target medical marijuana use
Despite Supreme Court ruling that patients can be charged, legal experts say such action is unlikely.

After your article was published, the Bush admin launched a series of raids on medical marijuana facilities in California.

Federal Agents Crack Down on Medical Marijuana Providers

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...home-headlines

SykkBoy · 06-26-2005, 01:30 PM

Bush isn't going to go to war with potsmokers...he's going to liberate them...

pornguy · 06-26-2005, 01:33 PM

Pray that one of Bish's relatives ends up needing it.

jimmyf · 06-26-2005, 01:46 PM

I've got a friend over in the Bay Area, not a thing wrong with him and he's got a card 2 get pot...

Probono · 06-26-2005, 03:57 PM

I can tell you from anecdotal experience Marijuana is a wonder drug for some people. The drug law is wrong at least to the extent that doctors can prescribe morphine, cocaine derivatives, speed etc; why not marijuana? Is Marijuana any more dangerous than those drug or alcohol? Ask an emergency room doctor how many marijauna related cases they see vs alcohol related?

it is illegal because the current Nixon era drug laws made it illegal not for any reason other than political. When Leary had the orginal drugs laws declared unconstitutional in the 70's this new Federal law was past. Since then we have spent untold billions trying to enforce laws people break on a daily basis. Enforcement is selective at best and has helped build the US prison population to the highest per capita in the world.

A true conservative would adopt the libertarian concept of ending drug laws entirely and then watch the criminal economy based on drugs disappear overnight.

Mr.Fiction · 06-26-2005, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probono

A true conservative would adopt the libertarian concept of ending drug laws entirely and then watch the criminal economy based on drugs disappear overnight.

When the word "conservative" is used in U.S. politics today it usually means "fundamentalist sheep".

reynold · 06-26-2005, 08:20 PM

Laws pertaining to this drug should be cleared and settled as early as now to avoid more conflicts and misunderstanding among states and the central government..

broke · 06-26-2005, 08:23 PM

While pot heads are complaining about "draconian" drug laws...

They miss the fact that their property rights have been stripped by the highest court in the land. Carry on.

I'm wearing a bike helmet · 06-26-2005, 08:24 PM

put all drug users in federal prison. Period.

TurboTrucker · 06-26-2005, 08:25 PM

It's not legal on a Federal level. The only way to change that is to vote Libertarian, which I doubt most of you complainers did.

broke · 06-26-2005, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurboTrucker

It's not legal on a Federal level. The only way to change that is to vote Libertarian, which I doubt most of you complainers did.

I voted for Badnarik.

TurboTrucker · 06-26-2005, 08:27 PM

Me too

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

I voted for Badnarik.

06-25-2005, 10:57 PM	#1
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	Bush admin vows major assault on medical marijuana, regardless of California laws "We're empathetic to the ill and to the sick, however we cannot disregard federal law," said Drug Enforcement Administration Agent Javier Pena. "We have the power to enforce federal drug laws even in areas where it might not be popular." Twenty people were indicted on federal drug charges in court documents unsealed Thursday, and an arrest warrant has been issued for another. Two others face state drug charges, and more arrests are pending, Ryan said. http://ap.indystar.com/dynamic/stori...06-23-20-24-48 More proof that Bush voters are against freedom. No more pot for cancer patients, even in states where it is legal. Great work supporting state rights and less government. __________________ Don't be lazy, protect free speech: ACLU \| Free Speech Coalition \| EFF \| IMPA

06-25-2005, 11:05 PM	#3
Mako Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The OC baby! Posts: 1,986	We spend $18B per year, PER YEAR, of our tax dollars to combat the influx of narcotics into the United States. Which makes you wonder how much of those same tax dollars went to funding cancer research, which 1 out of 3 of you reading this right now will contract sometime during the next 20 years (except for you scientologists, you're protected by aliens in your colon). What a joke. $18B per year. __________________

06-25-2005, 11:06 PM	#5
chadglni Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: PEI, Canada Posts: 6,924	Out of all the shit the Bush admin does this is probably the least of my worries. They are breaking federal law, fuck them if they think CA can give em a get out of jail free card. __________________ Sign up here - Dating Site affiliate program

06-25-2005, 11:13 PM	#11
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	"We have the power to enforce federal drug laws even in areas where it might not be popular." Considering almost 70% of americans now believe medical marijuana's a good idea & its passing in most states where it hits the ballot. I'd say thats alot of unpopular enforcement mr javier __________________ __________ Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

06-25-2005, 11:20 PM	#14
nofx Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Virgin Mary's womb Posts: 16,826	pass to the left because the right is wrong __________________ Often times I wonder why There's love and hate, theres live or die. When sickness comes I must decide: When feelings go, theres suicide.

06-25-2005, 11:13 PM	#12
DWB Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Encrypted. Access denied. Posts: 31,779	Yea... weed is killing us all. Better put an end to that shit.

06-25-2005, 11:20 PM	#15
Mr. Pat Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: seattle Posts: 547	just more reFUCKlican crap we have to swallow. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Let me repeat... A 120 x 60 button and no more that 3 lines of DEFAULT SIZE AND COLOR text.

06-26-2005, 12:06 AM	#17
smack Push Porn Like Weight. Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Inside .NET Posts: 10,652	does he even realize what republicans are supposed to stand for? __________________ Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.

06-26-2005, 12:12 AM	#18
budz Disruptive Innovator Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Vegas Posts: 4,230	freedom, lol. __________________ C:\Code\ C:\Code\Run\

06-26-2005, 12:13 AM	#19
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	Bush declaring war on Everyone... Even Fellow Americans... __________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

06-26-2005, 12:33 AM	#20
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	Sucks for people with Cancer, but then again, it's just as easy to buy your own damn bud.. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation

06-26-2005, 12:38 AM	#21
The Truth Hurts Zph7YXfjMhg Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In Your Skull Posts: 15,532	GOOD.. i've never met a pot smoker worth an ounce of spit anyway.

06-26-2005, 01:56 AM	#23
The Truth Hurts Zph7YXfjMhg Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In Your Skull Posts: 15,532	and for those of you with short term memory problems (from all the pot smoking) Despite criticism that President Clinton is "soft" on drugs, annual data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Report demonstrate that Clinton administration officials are waging a more intensive war on marijuana smokers than any other presidency in history. Law enforcement arrested approximately 1.5 million Americans on marijuana charges during the first three years of Clinton's administration -- 84 percent of them for simple possession. The average number of yearly marijuana arrests under Clinton (483,548) is 30 percent higher than under the Bush administration (338,998), and last year's total alone is more than double the 1991 total (287,850).

06-26-2005, 03:15 AM	#24
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	This article says the opposite - there were less drug busts under Clinton than Bush Sr.: Fewer Federal Drug Prosecutions, More Convictions Under Clinton Administration David Burnham and Susan Long, co-directors of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University, analyzed drug prosecutions in 90 Federal judicial districts across the U.S. using records kept by the Justice Department and the federal court system. Their analysis shows that the number of defendants in federal drug cases more than doubled from 8,775 in 1981 to 19,038 in 1988 during the Reagan Administration. Federal drug prosecutions continued to increase under President Bush, reaching a high of 28,585 defendants in the 1992 election year and averaging 25,990 defendants a year. Federal drug defendants averaged 25,672 in the first three years of the Clinton Administration. http://www.ndsn.org/dec96/fedcases.html __________________ Don't be lazy, protect free speech: ACLU \| Free Speech Coalition \| EFF \| IMPA

06-26-2005, 03:28 AM	#25
The Truth Hurts Zph7YXfjMhg Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In Your Skull Posts: 15,532	here's another one from two weeks ago contradicting the original topic: Feds unlikely to target medical marijuana use Despite Supreme Court ruling that patients can be charged, legal experts say such action is unlikely. WASHINGTON -- Anyone who lights up a joint for medicinal purposes isn't likely to be pursued by federal authorities, despite a Supreme Court ruling that these marijuana users could face federal charges, people on both sides of the issue say. While the justices expressed sympathy for two seriously ill California women who brought the case, the majority agreed that federal agents may arrest even sick people who use the drug as well as the people who grow pot for them. The ruling could be an early test of the compassion Attorney General Alberto Gonzales promised to bring to the Justice Department following the tenure of John Ashcroft. Gonzales and his aides were silent on the ruling, but several Bush administration officials said individual users have little reason to worry. "We have never targeted the sick and dying, but rather criminals engaged in drug trafficking," said Drug Enforcement Administration spokesman Bill Grant. Yet Ashcroft's Justice Department moved aggressively after the Supreme Court's first decision against medical marijuana in 2001, seizing individuals' marijuana and raiding their suppliers. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Monday that "people shouldn't panic ... there aren't going to be many changes." Local and state officers handle nearly all marijuana prosecutions and must follow state laws that protect patients. It was unclear whether any medical marijuana users ever have been arrested by federal agents. They typically are involved only when the quantities are substantial. Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House drug policy office, said federal prisoners convicted of marijuana possession had on average more than 100 pounds. Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, which favors legalization of marijuana, said the benchmark for federal intervention has been 50 plants. But he said the larger point is that the ruling could stymie efforts in other states to pass laws allowing for the use of medical marijuana. The Bush administration, like the Clinton White House before it, has taken a hard stand against state medical marijuana laws, arguing that such statutes could undermine the fight against illegal drugs. ------------------ Personally... though I despise pot smokers in general, I think that if terminally ill people want to smoke pot (or pretty much anything else they want), they should be allowed to.

06-26-2005, 11:21 AM	#29
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	or we could go with the hypothetical , you say you have never met a pot smoker who was worth an ounce of spit.. Lets says lensman was an occasional potsmoker and you met him at a convention, would you say he is "not worth an ounce of spit" ?. or would you have met 1 person who was worth an ounce of spit ? or would be be worth more than an ounce of spit.. BTW whats a n ounce of spit go for these days __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

06-26-2005, 11:22 AM	#30
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	__________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

06-26-2005, 11:29 AM	#31
mardigras Bon temps! Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: down yonder Posts: 14,194	It is unpatriotic to smoke marijuana for medical purposes when the government needs you to pay 8 bucks a pill to keep the system running. __________________ .

06-26-2005, 12:03 PM	#35
colpanic Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 1,007	I don't understand why these people don't just buy their pot on the street like every other redblooded american. Lazy bastards! __________________ I like ducks.

06-26-2005, 01:30 PM	#40
SykkBoy Jesus loves bacon Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Sin City, Motherfucker Posts: 19,969	Bush isn't going to go to war with potsmokers...he's going to liberate them... __________________ Support my new movie “The Second Coming”

06-26-2005, 01:33 PM	#41
pornguy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Homeless Posts: 62,911	Pray that one of Bish's relatives ends up needing it. __________________ PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online! TChicks.com \| Angeles Cid \| Mariana Cordoba \| MAILERS WELCOME!

06-26-2005, 01:46 PM	#42
jimmyf OU812 Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: California Posts: 12,651	I've got a friend over in the Bay Area, not a thing wrong with him and he's got a card 2 get pot... __________________ Epic CashEpic Cash works for me Solar Cash Paysite Plugin Gallery of the day freesites,POTD,Gallery generator with free hosting

06-26-2005, 03:57 PM	#43
Probono Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Under the Rainbow Posts: 2,731	I can tell you from anecdotal experience Marijuana is a wonder drug for some people. The drug law is wrong at least to the extent that doctors can prescribe morphine, cocaine derivatives, speed etc; why not marijuana? Is Marijuana any more dangerous than those drug or alcohol? Ask an emergency room doctor how many marijauna related cases they see vs alcohol related? it is illegal because the current Nixon era drug laws made it illegal not for any reason other than political. When Leary had the orginal drugs laws declared unconstitutional in the 70's this new Federal law was past. Since then we have spent untold billions trying to enforce laws people break on a daily basis. Enforcement is selective at best and has helped build the US prison population to the highest per capita in the world. A true conservative would adopt the libertarian concept of ending drug laws entirely and then watch the criminal economy based on drugs disappear overnight.

06-26-2005, 08:20 PM	#45
reynold Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Global Traveler Posts: 51,271	Laws pertaining to this drug should be cleared and settled as early as now to avoid more conflicts and misunderstanding among states and the central government.. Last edited by reynold; 06-26-2005 at 08:22 PM..

06-26-2005, 08:23 PM	#46
broke Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Someplace Windy Posts: 4,501	While pot heads are complaining about "draconian" drug laws... They miss the fact that their property rights have been stripped by the highest court in the land. Carry on. __________________ Perfect Gonzo

06-26-2005, 08:24 PM	#47
I'm wearing a bike helmet So Fucking Banned Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 52	put all drug users in federal prison. Period.

06-26-2005, 08:25 PM	#48
TurboTrucker Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Phoenix Arizona Posts: 2,363	It's not legal on a Federal level. The only way to change that is to vote Libertarian, which I doubt most of you complainers did. __________________