http://abcnews.go.com/US/troy-davis-execution-stay-denied-supreme-court/story?id=14571862

The United States Supreme Court has denied a stay of execution for a Georgia inmate convicted of slaying a police officer in 1989.  

Troy Davis, 42, was sentenced to death for the murder of Officer Mark McPhail, a Savannah, GA, policeman.  He is incarcerated at the George Diagnostic and Classification maximum security prison's death row in Jackson, GA.

All seven witnesses to the crime have since recanted.

He was scheduled for execution by lethal injection at 7:00 PM ET.  

SCOTUS unanimously denied Davis' appeal.  He is scheduled to be executed...any minute now.

Troy Davis was executed at 11:08 PM ET, September 21, 2011.

His was a manufactured cause. While the system was accused of being racist, he was convicted by a jury that included 5 members of his own race.

A court of law was not permitted to consider that his bloodied shorts were found in his mother's house (where he had been hiding out), but common sense says that this, along with the fact that he ran (even before being charged or a known suspect) paint the picture of somebody who was not framed.

And while the anti DP folks came out in droves to protest the very idea of the DP, they were almost invisible at the execution of the Texan who dragged James Byrd to death. Where was Jimmy Carter in that case? Or the Pope? A SINCERE anti DP community woulda protested both with similar vigor.  (By the way, good riddance to the dude in Texas, too bad they could not have dragged him to the gurney).

Not a good showing for the anti DP crowd.

Of course they weren't out protesting to save the punk who killed James Byrd!

Anti death penalty crews would have to work in shifts to protest all the executions in Texas. 
::)

I'm not insisting Troy Davis was innocent.  I am against capital punishment on principle.  I abominate it and I think it should be drummed out of practice in all U.S. jurisdictions. 

Davis was in Georgia, but I'd like to add that Rick Perry is a sadistic sonofabitch who appears to get off on carrying out executions, just like Dubya!
>:(

 
Davis was in Georgia, but I'd like to add that Rick Perry is a sadistic sonofabitch who appears to get off on carrying out executions, just like Dubya!
>:(



It's a Texas thing.  Just read a story today that those rat bastards will no longer offer the condemned a custom 'last meal' either; he'll have to eat the same prison grub as the rest of the inmates.

At least when Ohio executed my distant cousin back in '04 they gave him the courtesy of  BLT with extra mayonnaise, ham and cheese omelet with extra cheese, two hot dogs with mustard, pork and beans, potato salad, vanilla ice cream, chocolate pudding and six Cokes.  :P  You'd think they'd throw in a roll of Tums too.

It's a Texas thing.  Just read a story today that those rat bastards will no longer offer the condemned a custom 'last meal' either; he'll have to eat the same prison grub as the rest of the inmates.

At least when Ohio executed my distant cousin back in '04 they gave him the courtesy of  BLT with extra mayonnaise, ham and cheese omelet with extra cheese, two hot dogs with mustard, pork and beans, potato salad, vanilla ice cream, chocolate pudding and six Cokes.  :P  You'd think they'd throw in a roll of Tums too.




WTF?  The Last Meal is a time honored custom.  How petty can you get?  Next they'll probably charge the condemned man for parts and labor.
::)

WTF?  The Last Meal is a time honored custom.  How petty can you get?  Next they'll probably charge the condemned man for parts and labor.
::)


Well apparently the dude who killed James Byrd ordered a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, a meat-lover's pizza, a big bowl of okra with ketchup, a pound of barbecue, a half a loaf of bread, peanut butter fudge, a pint of ice cream and two chicken-fried steaks.

Then he decided he was not hungry and ate none of it.  I imagine the death chamber attendants had quite a nice snack.

Anyway, Houston state Senator John Whitmire (D), who chairs the Texas Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, wrote a letter to prison officials on Thursday demanding that they end the practice. "Enough is enough," he wrote. "It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege. It's a privilege which the perpetrator did not provide to their victim."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/texas_abolishes_last_meal_requests_for_death_row_i.php

Well apparently the dude who killed James Byrd ordered a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, a meat-lover's pizza, a big bowl of okra with ketchup, a pound of barbecue, a half a loaf of bread, peanut butter fudge, a pint of ice cream and two chicken-fried steaks.

Then he decided he was not hungry and ate none of it.  I imagine the death chamber attendants had quite a nice snack.

Death by cholesterol? 

If I was gonna get the hot shot at midnight I think all I'd want is a fistful of Valiums!

Anyway, Houston state Senator John Whitmire (D), who chairs the Texas Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, wrote a letter to prison officials on Thursday demanding that they end the practice. "Enough is enough," he wrote. "It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege. It's a privilege which the perpetrator did not provide to their victim."


"Okay, biatch, Ima blow your brains out...but first let's order in.  What'ya in the mood for, Chinese?"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/buck.gif

Anti death penalty crews would have to work in shifts to protest all the executions in Texas. 
::)

I'm not insisting Troy Davis was innocent.  I am against capital punishment on principle.  I abominate it and I think it should be drummed out of practice in all U.S. jurisdictions. 


I don't know whether it is right or wrong but I am not against capital punishment in the slightest. I think there are a lot of benefits economically and socially if such a thing is implemented efficiently and with competence. Which leads me on to my next question...

Whether Davis was guilty or not, why did it take the justice system so long to deal with him? He was sentenced to death row in 1991 and they only decided to look into the case first in 2007 and then 2008 when they thought about executing him then. He got executed in 2011 - 20 years later!

I do think death sentence in-mates deserve a last meal. Give them a good send-off.

I remember back when John Wayne Gacy was executed in Illinois back in '94.

They held a small parade in Chicago to celebrate.

I remember back when John Wayne Gacy was executed in Illinois back in '94.


Mr. Gacy makes it hard to be against the death penalty.
::)

Mr. Gacy makes it hard to be against the death penalty.
::)


Make that "made"...

Make that "made"...


After I read about all the twisted sh*t Gacy did, it never quite left the present tense!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/11/confused2.gif


I don't know whether it is right or wrong but I am not against capital punishment in the slightest. I think there are a lot of benefits economically and socially if such a thing is implemented efficiently and with competence. Which leads me on to my next question...

Whether Davis was guilty or not, why did it take the justice system so long to deal with him? He was sentenced to death row in 1991 and they only decided to look into the case first in 2007 and then 2008 when they thought about executing him then. He got executed in 2011 - 20 years later!

I do think death sentence in-mates deserve a last meal. Give them a good send-off.


Well, they haven't hanged anybody in the UK since 1964 and your lot doesn't seem any worse for it.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nixweiss.gif

I'm not sure what the crime rate of the UK is at the moment but we do have a major prison-space problem. Besides, I have this belief that serial killers and paedophiles can't be cured. Why keep them in prison for the rest of their lives? Do them and the tax-payer a favour and end their misery.

I'm not sure what the crime rate of the UK is at the moment but we do have a major prison-space problem. Besides, I have this belief that serial killers and paedophiles can't be cured. Why keep them in prison for the rest of their lives? Do them and the tax-payer a favour and end their misery.


You could kill all the serial killers and paedophiles tomorrow and still have a prison space problem.  You'd have to move on to thieves and drug pushers!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/behead.gif

The death penalty is irrevocable.  No matter how airtight a case might seem, there can still be mistakes. 

Capital punishment engenders blood lust among the more vengeful members of society.  I think it's bad for morale.

You could kill all the serial killers and paedophiles tomorrow and still have a prison space problem.  You'd have to move on to thieves and drug pushers!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/behead.gif


The Chinese whack the drug pushers too.

You could kill all the serial killers and paedophiles tomorrow and still have a prison space problem.  You'd have to move on to thieves and drug pushers!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/behead.gif

The death penalty is irrevocable.  No matter how airtight a case might seem, there can still be mistakes. 

Capital punishment engenders blood lust among the more vengeful members of society.  I think it's bad for morale.


I respect your opinion.  :)

The Chinese whack the drug pushers too.


I'd probably be in favour of giving drug-pushers the chop too, they don't care who's lives they ruin or end. I don't consider myself a political animal (at least I don't think so) but if you support capital punishment are you right-wing?

I'd probably be in favour of giving drug-pushers the chop too, they don't care who's lives they ruin or end.

Well, then you'll have to guillotine Pfizer, Lilly, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Bayer, and Glaxo-Smith-Kline.  They're the worst drug peddlers of all, y'know!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_colors.gif

I don't consider myself a political animal (at least I don't think so) but if you support capital punishment are you right-wing?


Not necessarily.  More Righties than Lefties are in favor of capital punishment, but lots of American liberals approve of the death penalty for the most heinous crimes.  I don't.  It's not because I'm "soft on crime," but for the principles I've stated above.

I'd probably be in favour of giving drug-pushers the chop too, they don't care who's lives they ruin or end.


Have at it with Philip-Morris International, Philip-Mor*cough*Altria (my, what an altruistic branding move!), Vector Group, Star Scientific, Lorrilard, and Schweitzer-Mauduit International, maker of cigarette papers.

And you can do what you want with Anheuser-Busch, but I'll politely warn you to lay off when you get to Brown-Forman, Fortune Brands, Craft Brewers' Alliance, Constellation Brands, Sam Adams and Diageo.

But if you come within a light year of messing with the impoverished third-world plantation slaves whose misery brings me my daily 300mg fix from Coffee Holding Co, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Starbucks, or Peet's Coffee, I will fracking end you.

Hmm.  Y'know, if they ever legalize pot, thereby exempting hundreds of thousands of street-corner pushers from the chop, I might short Corrections Corp. of America and GEO Group, and go long SWM, maker of cigarette papers.  Thanks for the idea!

SRF9DLr6x28

Other than nicotine, alcohol, and caffeine, stay away from drugs, kids!

Well, then you'll have to guillotine Pfizer, Lilly, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Bayer, and Glaxo-Smith-Kline.  They're the worst drug peddlers of all, y'know!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_colors.gif

Aren't they medical drug-pushers, MaxwellSmart? Or am I missing something...

Not necessarily.  More Righties than Lefties are in favor of capital punishment, but lots of American liberals approve of the death penalty for the most heinous crimes.  I don't.  It's not because I'm "soft on crime," but for the principles I've stated above.

I see. It's cool you don't support capital punishment as you have your reasons. I think what I get a little annoyed with is the idea that if a person sees something as black or white they are often lumped into the 'extreme' category just for having a definite view on something.

Have at it with Philip-Morris International, Philip-Mor*cough*Altria (my, what an altruistic branding move!), Vector Group, Star Scientific, Lorrilard, and Schweitzer-Mauduit International, maker of cigarette papers.

And you can do what you want with Anheuser-Busch, but I'll politely warn you to lay off when you get to Brown-Forman, Fortune Brands, Craft Brewers' Alliance, Constellation Brands, Sam Adams and Diageo.

I'm sorry Foo Bar, I am not familar with any of those companies.

But if you come within a light year of messing with the impoverished third-world plantation slaves whose misery brings me my daily 300mg fix from Coffee Holding Co, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Starbucks, or Peet's Coffee, I will fracking end you.

I know you guys are trying to make a point that there are drugs big or small everywhere but I thought my point was clear that criminal drug-pushers who peddle illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin, crystal meth should get the chop in my opinion.

That doesn't include Starbucks or coffee companies so you don't have to 'fracking end me' Foobar.  ;D

Hmm.  Y'know, if they ever legalize pot, thereby exempting hundreds of thousands of street-corner pushers from the chop, I might short Corrections Corp. of America and GEO Group, and go long SWM, maker of cigarette papers.  Thanks for the idea!

SRF9DLr6x28

Other than nicotine, alcohol, and caffeine, stay away from drugs, kids!

Even though there are mental effects associated with pot, I don't see the difference between marijuana and nicotene or alcohol. If it is legal to supply you with something that messes your lungs up and could potentially give cancer like nicotine or something that can affect your mental state, potentially  to the point of violence, as much as alcohol does then I can't see why they can't tax and regulate marijuana for recreational use.

Then some would say; "well...If you are open to ideas about marijuana, you might as well be open to legalising the rest of it". Well I did come up with a solution off the top of my head (clever or not). I say legalise the lot. The government can tax and regulate it all and take the power out of the drug baron's hands. However, if a person becomes addicted to the point that he is useless to society or become a criminal as a result of his addiction then rehabilitate him for 'x' amount of times but if he is a lost case then give him the chop. This gives people the freedom of choice but also the freedom to be accountable for their own actions to themselves and society.

I'm sorry Foo Bar, I am not familar with any of those companies.

I know you guys are trying to make a point that there are drugs big or small everywhere but I thought my point was clear that criminal drug-pushers who peddle illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin, crystal meth should get the chop in my opinion.

That doesn't include Starbucks or coffee companies so you don't have to 'fracking end me' Foobar.  ;D

Even though there are mental effects associated with pot, I don't see the difference between marijuana and nicotene or alcohol. If it is legal to supply you with something that messes your lungs up and could potentially give cancer like nicotine or something that can affect your mental state, potentially  to the point of violence, as much as alcohol does then I can't see why they can't tax and regulate marijuana for recreational use.

Then some would say; "well...If you are open to ideas about marijuana, you might as well be open to legalising the rest of it". Well I did come up with a solution off the top of my head (clever or not). I say legalise the lot. The government can tax and regulate it all and take the power out of the drug baron's hands. However, if a person becomes addicted to the point that he is useless to society or become a criminal as a result of his addiction then rehabilitate him for 'x' amount of times but if he is a lost case then give him the chop. This gives people the freedom of choice but also the freedom to be accountable for their own actions to themselves and society.


The war on drugs is unwinnable because people like to do drugs.  Fear factor as prevention is counterintuitive.  Our former "drug czar" William Bennett recommended the public beheading for drug dealers.  One would think the sight of street corner crack seller's head on a pike at the intersection would scare his fellows out of the trade.  However, in countries such as America, Mexico, and Columbia, drug dealers are regularly murdered, beaten, knifed, shot, and sentenced to decades in prison by the courts.  Another dealer replaces any dealer who leaves a corner no matter who grisly the reasons he left.  The choice for millions is either a life of idle poverty or minimum wage serfdom versus quick cash via the illegal drug trade.  The fact that Jimmy got his head severed means to Tommy a chance to seize a better corner.  Neither Jimmy nor Tommy had much to look forward to in life.

The underground drug economy does not begin or end with the punk on the street corner.  There are distributors, wholesalers, smugglers, financiers, money launderers, and the gentlemen who bribe the cops, the courts, and the politicians at all levels.  There are corrupt police, corrupt courts, corrupt politicians, and corrupt customs agents.  There are the insatiable customers numbering in the millions among the general public.  There are billions of dollars of liquidity in investment banks thanks to cocaine, heroin, and marijuana. 

You can attack a violent culture with a violent scheme but a violent culture such as the illegal drug market is prepared to meet your violence and double it.  There are whole towns in Mexico owned and run by the drug cartels.  The chief of police can either take his bribe and tip his hat or take the fight to the cartel and end up dismembered in a drum by the side of the highway.  The profit margin is wide, the market is unquenchable, and the supply of desperate young men who are willing to make a fast buck at the risk of mortal violence is inexhaustible. 

The execution of drug dealers will mean more dead people but not fewer drug dealers and not fewer drug abusers.

The answer lies in reducing the levels of poverty and hopelessness in society and treating drug addiction like a medical condition, not a crime.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/znaika.gif

The war on drugs is unwinnable because people like to do drugs.  Fear factor as prevention is counterintuitive.  Our former "drug czar" William Bennett recommended the public beheading for drug dealers.  One would think the sight of street corner crack seller's head on a pike at the intersection would scare his fellows out of the trade.  However, in countries such as America, Mexico, and Columbia, drug dealers are regularly murdered, beaten, knifed, shot, and sentenced to decades in prison by the courts.  Another dealer replaces any dealer who leaves a corner no matter who grisly the reasons he left.  The choice for millions is either a life of idle poverty or minimum wage serfdom versus quick cash via the illegal drug trade.  The fact that Jimmy got his head severed means to Tommy a chance to seize a better corner.  Neither Jimmy nor Tommy had much to look forward to in life.

The underground drug economy does not begin or end with the punk on the street corner.  There are distributors, wholesalers, smugglers, financiers, money launderers, and the gentlemen who bribe the cops, the courts, and the politicians at all levels.  There are corrupt police, corrupt courts, corrupt politicians, and corrupt customs agents.  There are the insatiable customers numbering in the millions among the general public.  There are billions of dollars of liquidity in investment banks thanks to cocaine, heroin, and marijuana. 

You can attack a violent culture with a violent scheme but a violent culture such as the illegal drug market is prepared to meet your violence and double it.  There are whole towns in Mexico owned and run by the drug cartels.  The chief of police can either take his bribe and tip his hat or take the fight to the cartel and end up dismembered in a drum by the side of the highway.  The profit margin is wide, the market is unquenchable, and the supply of desperate young men who are willing to make a fast buck at the risk of mortal violence is inexhaustible. 

The execution of drug dealers will mean more dead people but not fewer drug dealers and not fewer drug abusers.

The answer lies in reducing the levels of poverty and hopelessness in society and treating drug addiction like a medical condition, not a crime.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/znaika.gif


I don't think reducing levels of poverty is the answer as celebrities (e.g Charlie Sheen) have used recreational drugs for years. They are not poor or hopeless. Whether drug addiction is a medical condition or not it is self-inflicted and this self-inflicted medical condition often impacts on society as a whole who, like that drug addict, has a choice to take or not take drugs. A person doesn't have to become a drug addict whether they are poor or not. I was living on the bread-line until I was 19 and not once did I take up drugs and I don't consider myself the exception either.

I agree with you that dealing with drugs is like swimming against the tide. I don't think any one man or organisation could deal with it with one simple decisive action. I'm sure it takes co-operation from a multiple of organisations out there who have a hand in creating a solution. The only thing I can think of is the world governments get more out of illegalising drugs than legalising them.

The war on drugs is unwinnable because people like to do drugs.  Fear factor as prevention is counterintuitive.  Our former "drug czar" William Bennett recommended the public beheading for drug dealers.  One would think the sight of street corner crack seller's head on a pike at the intersection would scare his fellows out of the trade.  However, in countries such as America, Mexico, and Columbia, drug dealers are regularly murdered, beaten, knifed, shot, and sentenced to decades in prison by the courts.  Another dealer replaces any dealer who leaves a corner no matter who grisly the reasons he left.  The choice for millions is either a life of idle poverty or minimum wage serfdom versus quick cash via the illegal drug trade. 

What I never could figure is for all the drugs traded in the ghetto, nobody seems to have any money.

Most of the drug dealers end up broke, in jail, or dead.  And as we already know, Dyin' ain't much of a livin'...

What I never could figure is for all the drugs traded in the ghetto, nobody seems to have any money.

Most of the drug dealers end up broke, in jail, or dead.  And as we already know, Dyin' ain't much of a livin'...


This was what I was thinking about when I read Maxwell Smart's post.

Indeed.  The image of the 19-year-old crack dealer with the Rolls-Royce and the wad of hundred dollar bills is a pop culture myth.  Most dealers on the street level make very little money compared to the upper echelons of the illicit drug syndicates.  Now, the street dealers do make more money than they would flipping burgers and if a kid who grew up in a run-down housing project can walk around with $500 in his pocket -- even a couple of times -- he'll feel like a king.  

Drug dealing does NOT open the door to further career opportunities unless you are deft and ruthless enough to climb in the ranks of the criminal underworld.  Most people are not.  It does not take long for your average street hustler to get jailed or killed.  

Did you think I was saying street crime improved neighborhoods or bore the fruits of social progress?
???

Did you think I was saying street crime improved neighborhoods or bore the fruits of social progress?
???


Nope.  Just offering my observation of the presumed "big time money" that drug dealers make and I've always wondered where it goes before they end up dead or in jail.

Even the kingpins don't fare very well.  Think Pablo Escobar, Manuel Noriega, Tony Montana, George Jung, Henry Hill.  :-\\

Nope.  Just offering my observation of the presumed "big time money" that drug dealers make and I've always wondered where it goes before they end up dead or in jail.

Even the kingpins don't fare very well.  Think Pablo Escobar, Manuel Noriega, Tony Montana, George Jung, Henry Hill.  :-\\


There are kingpins who fare quite well thank you...You just don't know their names!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/urcool.gif

I'm sorry Foo Bar, I am not familar with any of those companies.


Allow me to familiarize you with the drug industry.  I'm too lazy to go whole-hog and put a link in for every symbol I've listed, but if you punch in the NYSE tickers in the brackets, you'll get the general idea.

Philip-Morris International (PM), spun off the mothership as a non-US shell against US-based tobacco legislation. Worth $112B.
Kraft (KFT) as in Kraft Dinner, spun off the same mothership for the same reason. A $60B company, but it's the non-tobacco part of the mothership, so it doesn't count.
Altria (MO), the mothership formerly known as Philip-Morris kept its original stock symbol.  It was deemed to the the expendable part of the mothership if the 90s US tobacco lawsuits had gone the wrong way.  It's worth a mere $54B as of today's close.
Star Scientific (CIGX), trying to make the harm-free cigarette.  Didn't work, but still worth $300M.
Vector Group (VGR), manufacturer of Liggett, Grand Prix, Eve, Pyramid cigarettes. $1.4B company.
Lorrilard (LO), 43 brands including Newport, Kent, True, Maverick, Old Gold. $15B company.
Schweitzer-Mauduit International Inc (SWM), maker of cigarette rolling papers, $1B company.

I didn't even complete the list, but that's almost two hundred billion dollars in tobacco companies.

Anheuser-Busch InBev, (BUD), as in Budweiser, worth $85B.
Brown-Forman (BF-A), owner of Jack Daniels whiskey, Korbel champagne, and more - $10B company.
Fortune Brands (FO), Jimmy Beam, Maker's Mark, Laphroaig, and a bunch of hosehold stuff and golf clubs - $9B.
Craft Brewers (HOOK), a few really good microbreweries worth $100M.
Constellation Brands (STZ), Mondavi, Clos du Bois, Jackson-Triggs wines, Black Velvet Whisky, Paul Masson Brandy, and Corona, Negro Modelo and St. Pauli Girl beers.  $4B.
Sam Adams (SAM), Sam Adams beers, $1B
Diageo (DEO), Smirnoff vodka and coolers, Johnny Walker and Crown Royal whiskies, Jose Cuervo tequila,
Guinness stout, are you getting the idea?  $48B.

So if nicotine's not your thing, 150 billion dollars in alcohol.  Be careful on the roads tonight - even if you ignore MADD's neo-prohibitionist agenda, it's likely that drunken jackasses probably around 10,000 people a year.  At least three 9/11s per year, every year, since 9/11.

Gawddamn, but the pusher man is busy.


I know you guys are trying to make a point that there are drugs big or small everywhere but I thought my point was clear that criminal drug-pushers who peddle illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin, crystal meth should get the chop in my opinion.


I'm making that point because it's valid.  I did a random scan of names off the top of my head, not even bothering to look up the complete tobacco and alchol lists, and I found three hundred billion dollars in the market capitalization from legal drug pushers.  And I ignored coffee entirely.  Can you imagine how much those companies would be raking if you couldn't get coffee for "free" at the office, and after having slammed stims from 9 to 5, been able to hit up on depressants for $5 at the local bar in the form of a pint of beer, a glass of wine, or a shot of spirits ?

Caffeine isn't very addictive, and withdrawal symptoms when quitting caffine aren't that painful, and so we'll skip over Starbucks and friends and cut straight to the point.  I'm a user of alcohol.  I'm smart enough not to mix it with driving (cuts my risk of killing someone while driving drunk), and I live alone (which, combained with the fact that I'm a "happy drunk" cuts my risk of ending up on an episode of COPS), so I'm unlikely to harm anyone other than myself (when I'm 80, I'm at higher risk of injury from falls) when I use it.  

In the morning, I consume a legal stimulant from a mug, and in the evening, I consume a legal depressant from a bottle. I choose not to consume a legal stimulant from a cigarette.  But if I cross the line from use to alcohol use to alcohol abuse, and I subsequently cross the line from the occasional binge into outright addiction, I could die from withdrawal.  Dead just like a heroin addict.  Nicotine addicts may suffer from withdrawal, but no smoker has ever died from quitting.  Delerium Tremens isn't just the name of a very nice Belgian Ale, it kills a third of alcoholics who go cold turkey.  When's the last time a pothead died because he couldn't get his fix?


Even though there are mental effects associated with pot, I don't see the difference between marijuana and nicotene or alcohol. If it is legal to supply you with something that messes your lungs up and could potentially give cancer like nicotine or something that can affect your mental state, potentially  to the point of violence, as much as alcohol does then I can't see why they can't tax and regulate marijuana for recreational use.


For the record, we're on the same side here.  Except that (see above), alcohol is vastly more harmful than pot.  Quite arguably more addictive, too. But hey, that's the law; I just follow it, I didn't write it, I can't even take the blame for electing the politicians that support it.


Then some would say; "well...If you are open to ideas about marijuana, you might as well be open to legalising the rest of it". Well I did come up with a solution off the top of my head (clever or not). I say legalise the lot. The government can tax and regulate it all and take the power out of the drug baron's hands. However, if a person becomes addicted to the point that he is useless to society or become a criminal as a result of his addiction then rehabilitate him for 'x' amount of times but if he is a lost case then give him the chop. This gives people the freedom of choice but also the freedom to be accountable for their own actions to themselves and society.


"Give him the chop" involves the state imposing violence.  I'd be willing to argue for the death penalty (with all its faults) for crimes committed, but it's gotta be in proportion to the crimes.  Mugger wants $100 from me for meth?  I pull out my wallet, throw $100 in his general direction, and run away.  

Mugger wants $100 from me for pot?  I've never encountered a violent pothead, but if I did, I'd hand him $100.

Because alcohol is legal, I've never been mugged for beer, but if I were, I'd say "dude, really?  For a $5 beer?  Put the knife away, first round's on me", just for the experience.

The crime in each of these three strawmen isn't the drug, it's the mugging.

I'm OK with full legalization of everything because I think it's Darwin in action: The meth-heads, crackheads, coke-heads will kill themselves off within 2-3 years, and it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper than the present solution.  The problem is that the present "solution" of more cops, more laws, and having to hand over my friggin' driver's license every time I get a friggin' cold... benefits nobody other than the police unions, prison guards' unions, and the operators of private prisons.

Don't make me started on the GEO Group (GEO), $1.2B, Corrections Corp. of America (CXW), worth $2.5B, and the hundreds of billions per year we spend sending our police forces chasing after what are essentially victimless crimes.  (Don't worry about tasing me, 'bro, as Taser (TASR) is worth barely a quarter of a billion dollars :)

To summarize: you and I are probably closer to agreement than we realize.  I advocate legalization because prohibition of alcohol was a failure in the 1920s, and prohibition of other drugs will remain a failure until the 2020s.  Leave the caffeine freaks, smokers, drunks, potheads, cokeheads, crackheads, cokeheads, and speed freaks alone.  Hang the guy who gets so amped up on caffeine/coke/meth that he goes ape*poop* at work and tries to beat down his co-workers.  Hang the guy who gets drunk or stoned and takes out someone on the way home from work.  

But hang them for assault and and criminal negligence respectively, not for their choice in recreational pharmaceuticals, because the drugs weren't the crime.

"Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity."

 - Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love

That's the crime.

So if nicotine's not your thing, 150 billion dollars in alcohol.  Be careful on the roads tonight - even if you ignore MADD's neo-prohibitionist agenda, it's likely that drunken jackasses probably around 10,000 people a year.  At least three 9/11s per year, every year, since 9/11.


"Like alcohol and nicotine, the sweetest lovers there's ever been, we could have had it all..."
--Gary Clail


For the record, we're on the same side here.  Except that (see above), alcohol is vastly more harmful than pot.  Quite arguably more addictive, too. But hey, that's the law; I just follow it, I didn't write it, I can't even take the blame for electing the politicians that support it.

Alcohol is far more harmful than marijuana, but marijuana isn't harmless.  I've had my share and enjoyed it, but I never made like it was good for me. 

Seventy years of marijuana prohibition proved it was a waste of time and resources.  Politicians are scared to  even talk about legalizing pot because of the Hysterical Moms of America!
::)

"Give him the chop" involves the state imposing violence.  I'd be willing to argue for the death penalty (with all its faults) for crimes committed, but it's gotta be in proportion to the crimes.  Mugger wants $100 from me for meth?  I pull out my wallet, throw $100 in his general direction, and run away.  

The better business proposition is to throw meth in his general direction in exchange for the $100 he jacked from the last poor sonofabitch!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/diablotin.gif

Because alcohol is legal, I've never been mugged for beer.

Then why is it a "mug" of beer?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/02/beerchug.gif

The crime in each of these three strawmen isn't the drug, it's the mugging.

As far as the "hard" drugs go, I'm in favor of vigorous education for youth on the dangers of abusing such substances.  If the kids want to be stupid and do these drugs, I am also for giving them every opportunity to get clean.  If they can't or won't get clean, then just give them the drugs.  Sorry.  I know that's going to upset the Hysterical Moms but a stoned junkie is a harmless junkie.  I'd rather see them hurt themselves than hurt me or anybody else because they're all outta dope.  Goes to your Heinlen quote. 

That was a very well thought post, Foo Bar. I am impressed with your knowledge.


But hang them for assault and and criminal negligence respectively, not for their choice in recreational pharmaceuticals, because the drugs weren't the crime.

"Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity."

 - Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love

That's the crime.


I agree.