must read:


http://adrugwarcarol.info/ADWC.php


^

Quote :

"or hadn't lost their scholarship due to dirty pee"

Quote :

"It is a shame that past violent criminal offenders can get financial aid but someone caught smoking a joint behind the dugout in 11th grade can not. We sure taught them a lesson. NO EDUCATION FOR YOU!"

exactly

this war is a fucking shame -- it's gone way too far


oh yeah, and if that weren't enough

in one hand,

authorities take away your scholarship, kick you off the sports team, and fire you from your job

then in the other hand,

they spread anti-drug propaganda saying, "see? look at him? he was smart and athletic, but omg drugs fucked up his life!"

people actually fall for that shit, not clearly seeing that drug prohibition fucked up his life, not drugs (which may never have)



[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:18 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2008 4:07:03 PM

i think he is referring to someone that was already in school on scholarship, knew the rules, then broke them by smoking weed. that is clearly on the individual and another point towards personal accountability....like the guy bitching in Chit Chat about losing his job after being drug tested.

5/8/2008 4:07:12 PM

yeah this has gone too far...since when do the feds arrest people for breaking the law??

5/8/2008 4:12:22 PM

392 the person knowingly breaking the law fucked up the life. regardless of the fairness of the law. as long as it is in place, you can be fucked for breaking it. pretty simple.

PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY - remember?

5/8/2008 4:19:23 PM

Have to mostly agree with DaBird on that one. Even though I fully support drug legislation reform, you have to accept that if you rebel against those laws now, you may face consequences.

5/8/2008 4:21:51 PM

Quote :

"yeah this has gone too far...since when do the feds arrest people for breaking the law??"

learn to read in context

that was in reference to anti-drug propaganda and prevention policies

(read, comprehend, then post. got it?)


^
come on, think about what you're saying

you might have to "accept it", but that has no effect on how fair or just it is



^^
yeah,

except lex malla, lex nulla

it takes a special kind of douchebag to look at a kid who knowingly breaks the law by smoking a joint or two

who then tests positive and has their sports, and/or academic scholarships taken away, and or fired from their job

and glibly say, "he knew what he was doing, he knew the potential consequences, etc."

with no acknowledgment that the [draconian zero-tolerance] policies aimed at preventing drug use

did far, far more harm than would have ever likely been done from smoking a couple doobies


i guess, you sir, are that special kind of douchebag

gg



[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:26 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2008 4:25:19 PM

I completely agree that the laws do more harm than good, and that is why I COMPLETELY advocate reform of the law. But I can't advocate that we should just ignore those that are breaking the law now just because the law is unjust. There are a lot of unjust laws, but I don't expect to go around breaking them without consequence.

5/8/2008 4:27:46 PM

392

say it with me...

PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY

you said...

Quote :

"well, I'm inclined to say that anyone [an adult of sound mind] that wants to put a plastic bag over their head should go for it "

and

Quote :

"or we simply let them fail -- (watching others fail is a good incentive to be responsible yourself)"

who feels like johnny douchebag now? do I need to expand upon the similarities of the circumstances?

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:42 PM. Reason : . ]

5/8/2008 4:31:54 PM

just learn the laws and adapt

complaining isnt going to get you out of a ticket or a court date

5/8/2008 4:38:05 PM

Quote :

"since when do the feds arrest people for breaking the law??"

5/8/2008 4:39:39 PM

^
I already addressed that -- please read (you were responding out of context anyway, moron)

Quote :

"say it with me... PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY"

do you not see the difference between natural consequences and artificial imposed ones?

clearly you don't

clearly you're a douchebag

smoking a joint only has the potential consequence of having law enforcement/propaganda harm you

because of unnecessary, unjust, and unnatural impositions

putting a plastic bag on your head has generally the same consequence regardless of the failings of society around you

you are truly pathetic if your appeal to the "rule of law" extends to unjust and unnecessary laws

you truly suck

truly

(you fucking monster)

Quote :

"complaining isnt going to get you out of a ticket or a court date"

it has for me, at least once

Quote :

"But I can't advocate that we should just ignore those that are breaking the law now just because the law is unjust."

you should read more mlk:

Quote :

"How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."

that's simply a philosophical distinction -- one on which we'll have to agree to disagree

5/8/2008 4:46:04 PM

Quote :

"who then tests positive and has their sports, and/or academic scholarships taken away, and or fired from their job"

And just for this example, I see NOTHING wrong with a scholarship being taken away for smoking pot. Scholarships are a privilege, not a right, and they come with stipulations. Even when pot becomes legal, if NCSU wants to make it so no scholarship students can smoke pot, and must submit to drug tests, I see nothing wrong with that. They are providing you with a service, you have to play by their rules.

5/8/2008 4:46:13 PM

I do not think 392 is trying to discount accountability. We merely are trying to show the harms of current policy and illustrate why it should be reformed. Yes he fucked up and now has to face the consequences. This does not mean we can not at the same time question the policy and desire to change the law.

Americans made a big stink when that woman in Saudi Arabia was sentenced to multiple lashings and jailed after being raped. A pundit could argue that she broke the law of leaving her home w/o a male escort therefore she must face the consequences. However, we can at the same time protest the law as unjust and appeal to have it changed.

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:50 PM. Reason : a]

5/8/2008 4:46:56 PM

ok nvm

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:52 PM. Reason : hurs post above was actually pretty decent]

5/8/2008 4:51:20 PM

Quote :

"I see NOTHING wrong with a scholarship being taken away for smoking pot. "

I do not have a problem with this. But i do have a problem of taking away qualification for stafford loans and need based grants. Meanwhile Johnny Wife Beater can still partake in his share of financial aid money. Yes its the law and if you are caught doing drugs then it sucks for you. I still argue against the policy in the first place.

5/8/2008 4:51:58 PM

Quote :

"you should read more mlk: Quote : "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." that's simply a philosophical distinction -- one on which we'll have to agree to disagree"

COMPLETELY agree with MLK here. However, when breaking these unjust rules you have to look at what you have to lose in doing so. I can break those unjust laws and face the consequences where I will may be put in a position to not be able to fight to change the law. Or I can acknowledge that said laws are unjust, and fight to change them so that everyone can benefit.

5/8/2008 4:53:46 PM

^^, & ^^^^
well said


^
right

it's sorta of personal choice, I guess



[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2008 4:56:26 PM

Quote :

"do you not see the difference between natural consequences and artificial imposed ones? clearly you don't clearly you're a douchebag smoking a joint only has the potential consequence of having law enforcement/propaganda harm you because of unnecessary, unjust, and unnatural impositions putting a plastic bag on your head has generally the same consequence regardless of the failings of society around you you are truly pathetic if your appeal to the "rule of law" extends to unjust and unnecessary laws you truly suck truly (you fucking monster) "

might be the funniest thing I have ever read on here. I picture you weeping and lightly pounding your desk saying "you monster" in between tears.

natural consequences are the ones that are in place.

5/8/2008 4:56:28 PM

Technically our founding fathers were breaking the law when they rebelled against england. If caught they would have been imprisoned if not executed. Does this mean our founding fathers were wrong for participating in an activity they believed in?

5/8/2008 4:56:54 PM

The MLK quote is timely, and I like your position on it. Unfortunately there are those in the legalization crowd who will try to equate King's civil disobedience to their going out on the back porch and smoking a bowl.

5/8/2008 4:57:03 PM

Quote :

"I picture you weeping and lightly pounding your desk saying "you monster" in between tears. "

haha ftw

5/8/2008 4:57:58 PM

^^^
another good post


^^
damn

Quote :

"natural consequences are the ones that are in place"

I'm gonna let you think about that one

you're clearly missing (or disregarding,) the distinction

5/8/2008 4:59:34 PM

the courts dont care about the distinction

when you want to smoke weed, just do it at your place or a friends place or somewhere on the down low

i dunno, maybe i just think in practical terms instead of idealistic terms

cause people in the 60s and 70s thought it would be legalized too, and obviously its not

5/8/2008 5:00:58 PM

Quote :

"the courts dont care about the distinction"

yeah, that was kinda my point

the system is fucked

5/8/2008 5:03:00 PM

and my advice is adapt to the system

5/8/2008 5:03:34 PM

i've never had a problem with the court system

5/8/2008 5:03:45 PM

Quote :

"Technically our founding fathers were breaking the law when they rebelled against england. If caught they would have been imprisoned if not executed. Does this mean our founding fathers were wrong for participating in an activity they believed in?"

I'm not saying breaking unjust laws is wrong at all, I haven't made any sort of indication of judgment, just that you should know what you stand to gain/lose by breaking said law. If I break the law doing drugs I stand to lose a lot and very little social change, if any, would come of it.

5/8/2008 5:04:42 PM

Quote :

"Technically our founding fathers were breaking the law when they rebelled against england. If caught they would have been imprisoned if not executed. Does this mean our founding fathers were wrong for participating in an activity they believed in?"

no, not wrong. but fucked if they were caught.

WHICH IS THE POINT.

5/8/2008 5:07:16 PM

Quote :

"and my advice is adapt to the system"

and that certainly qualifies as decent advice

(I just hope you understand why I may not follow it, and that the reason isn't simply recklessness or disrespect for law)



[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:08 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2008 5:07:49 PM

^^^ I agree; what i am arguing though is that laws are not always right.

Hell i don't even smoke pot. My company hair drug tests and its not worth the risk. Even if it were legal i doubt i would smoke but only occasionally as on my free time i'd rather go out to the bars or do other upbeat social activitie instead of sitting on my couch, smoking up, and watching Grateful Dead dvds


[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:09 PM. Reason : a]

5/8/2008 5:08:33 PM

so 392 you are not advocating that drugs be legal, just that the punishment fits the crime?

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:10 PM. Reason : i guess i agree with that...def. shouldnt be legal, but def should fit the crime]

5/8/2008 5:09:32 PM

^^
you could always sit on your couch, smoke up, then go out to the bars and do upbeat social activities

I do

Quote :

"so 392 you are not advocating that drugs be legal, just that the punishment fits the crime?"

I'm advocating that drugs should be legal, and/or that the punishments should fit the crime

no contradictions there

5/8/2008 5:13:09 PM

Quote :

"I just hope you understand why I may not follow it, and that the reason isn't simply recklessness or disrespect for law"

i do, but i'm trying to save you a lot of time and frustration and headaches

just smoke your shit on the down low

besides i dont ever see weed getting legalized...most people who smoke now do it illegally and just make arrangemets, ie try not to get caught, smoke in privacy of their own home, etc

the people who are activists for legalization will, imo, always get laughed out of their argument at any significant government level

shit, i cant even make a post in TSB without somebody saying everything is completely invalid since my screen name (which i created SEVEN YEARS AGO) implies that i smoke weed

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:16 PM. Reason : .]

5/8/2008 5:13:46 PM

^^well theres got to be some kind of punishment for it....i mean i guess i feel it should be legal in your home but not at like crabtree valley mall

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:14 PM. Reason : .]

5/8/2008 5:14:13 PM

Quote :

"^^^ I agree; what i am arguing though is that laws are not always right."

I think we agree actually, I just think that even though the laws are wrong and unjust, which they clearly are, you have to work to change them instead of just ignoring them.

5/8/2008 5:14:58 PM

Quote :

"you could always sit on your couch, smoke up, then go out to the bars and do upbeat social activities"

haha yeah its funny how people are so differently effected by smoking. I have a friend who can not even go out without smoking first. On the otherhand when i used to; i lost complete motivation to go out and would rather just do something laid back. Then on the other extreme i know a guy who acts all crazy and does some really weird shit whenever he smokes

5/8/2008 5:16:40 PM

^
true

Quote :

"well theres got to be some kind of punishment for it....i mean i guess i feel it should be legal in your home but not at like crabtree valley mall"

well, yeah

there likely wouldn't be public smoking at all, or at the most, in designated bars or "coffee shops"

[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 5:21 PM. Reason : and that's (obviously) just for weed -- no one should shoot up in public ]

5/8/2008 5:19:25 PM

the people who are activists for legalization people who are rational about anything will, imo, always get laughed out of their argument at any significant government level

5/8/2008 5:21:00 PM

^^so what happened to those students was correct then right?

5/8/2008 5:26:00 PM

do you mean philosophically correct or common sense correct

5/8/2008 5:27:01 PM

which students?

what are you saying?

5/8/2008 5:28:54 PM

the students this thread is about?

5/8/2008 5:31:51 PM

On one hand they were foolish and thus i feel its their own damn fault for fucking up. On the other hand i believe the drug war in and of itself is wrong.

5/8/2008 5:33:42 PM

^^
what do they have to do with my post that you're responding to:

Quote :

"there likely wouldn't be public smoking at all, or at the most, in designated bars or 'coffee shops', and that's (obviously) just for weed -- no one should shoot up in public"

5/8/2008 5:37:27 PM

Who owns your body? Who makes the decisions about what you can put into your own body?

If the state owns your body, then the drug laws are just fine.

If you own your body and are responsible for the consequences of what you put in it, then the drug laws are way wrong.

5/8/2008 8:39:07 PM

"If the state owns your body"

yikes

I think many liberals actually have that, (or a slightly similar,) perspective on things


to me,

that idea is somewhat synonymous with having no concept of the individual

5/8/2008 8:46:04 PM

"I wonder how many rapes are being committed, how many cars are getting stolen, how many little kids are being molested while cops are busy busting down someone's door looking for drugs."

Another War on Drugs outrage:
http://reason.com/blog/show/126284.html?redux

5/8/2008 9:22:45 PM

^ or while stopping those menacing under aged kids from drinking underage at a kegger in brent road.......

oh wait last weekend two guys were mugged right in front of bragaw.

5/8/2008 9:29:40 PM

Quote :

"besides i dont ever see weed getting legalized...most people who smoke now do it illegally and just make arrangemets, ie try not to get caught, smoke in privacy of their own home, etc"

seems to me that if people have no problem doing it in the privacy of their own homes, then why not simply legalize it?

I believe the soon-to-be, (if not current,) silent majority will successfully work to effect its legalization

it used to be primarily minorities and the poor that got caught up with drugs (the war was, and still is, a largely racist one)

now, rich white children of yuppies are getting busted for weed, and their lives turned upside down by the legal consequences

mommy and daddy mcgoldypants never wanted that for their kids, so they're re-thinking this whole marijuana prohibition thing

for the times, they are a-changin'



[Edited on May 8, 2008 at 10:09 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2008 10:01:52 PM