Weed Not Good For Music

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by skipclone 1:

Japan is weird-in a similar appeasement no doubt, a roach can send you to prison.

Uhmmm... what DO the Japanese do for jollies, traditionally?

 

Do they just drink sake or do they have some sort of plants, weeds, mushrooms or something like that? I'm thinking of things like Mandrake, Peyote and so on.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by rockincyanblues:

Sasquatch51:

 

Rosa Parks did the right thing to correct a wrong. It may have been orchestrated by the NAACP, or other civil rights groups, or it may have been the defiant act of a solitary woman. Either way it was at the time, and in hindsight, the right thing to do.

 

Civil disobedience is tough. Are the riots in France Civil Disobedience because a group that feels disenfranchised needs drastic measures to draw attention to the cause, or are the riots the criminal acts of hoodlums with a misguided sense of entitlement? I don't know.

 

David Crosy has said about his generation, (and I am paraphrasing here), "We were right about a lot of things in the 60's. We were right about civil rights, we were right about the ERA, we were right about Vietnam, we were wrong about drugs."

 

I think by the time David Crosby figured out he was wrong about drugs it was too deeply entrenched a behaviour for him to get it worked out. He will struggle for the rest of his life because of his drug habits as a younger man.

 

I disagree with this statement of yours:

 

"Part of the system is the power that the people have to elect officials that will enact or repeal laws as the voters see fit. If the majority of people agree, then it is so. If the majority don't agree, then it won't happen."

 

The whole pupose of a Bill of Rights, (or as we have in Canada, The Charter of Rights and Freedoms), is to protect the minority from the will of the majority. The Constitutional Amendment in Texas prohibiting gay marraige is an example of that. On a federal level you have a document guaranteeing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. On a state level you have the power to limit those guarantees. That bothers me.

 

I would much rather have a goverment run by politicians who are Christians, as opposed to Christian Politicians. The Prime Minster of Canada, Paul Martin, was able to separate his religious beliefs, (Gay Marraige is wrong), from his duty as the PM of Canada, and recognize that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to everybody. We now have legal recognition of Gay Marraige in Canada. The opposition parties are in effect saying that The Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply equally to all Canadians, and that they alone have the wisdom to decide who gets what rights, and who doesn't. That terrifies me.

 

Peace,

 

Paul

I guess we just have to agree to disagree. I completely disagree with your interpretation of the Bill of Rights as well as the intent. I don't believe that the bill of rights was intended to protect the rights of the minority from the will of the majority. It was intended to protect the individual from infringement by an unjust government or another individual of certain inalienable or guaranteed rights. Those rights are specifically listed in the Bill of Rights and they do not include "The right to Gay Marriage", or the right to free health care, the right to smoke dope, or even the right to eat. They DO include:

 

1. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press

2. The right to keep and bear arms

3. The right to protect your home from being commandeered by the military except in time of war as prescribed by law.

4. The right to protection from unreasonable search and siezure.

5. The right to due process in criminal proceedings, protection from double jeopardy, and the right to refuse to testify against yourself.

6. The right to a fair and speedy public trial and the right to be informed of the accusations against you and to confront your accusers.

7. The right to a jury trial in civil matters.

8. The right to protection against excessive bail, excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment.

 

 

In reality, the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights are the ONLY rights guaranteed by the constitution, and they can be revoked in cases of Treason, Felony and Insanity or Unsoundness of Mind. For instance, everyone has a right under the constitution to own a gun. If you have been convicted of a felony (and certain violent misdemeanors), or adjudged mentally unsound, that right can be revoked. If you are convicted of a felony, you lose your right to vote.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

8. The right to protection against excessive bail, excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment.

Well, there you go. I'd bet money that a lot of people would consider being busted for smoking a joint to be "cruel and unusual punishment". Unusual insofar as neither smokers nor drinkers are similarly penalized and cruel insofar as it's slowly becoming decriminalized and occasionally legalised world wide.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

8. The right to protection against excessive bail, excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment.

Well, there you go. I'd bet money that a lot of people would consider being busted for smoking a joint to be "cruel and unusual punishment". Unusual insofar as neither smokers nor drinkers are similarly penalized and cruel insofar as it's slowly becoming decriminalized and occasionally legalised world wide.

What "a lot of people" consider cruel and unusual makes no difference at all. By that logic, I could say that I shouldn't be arrested for robbing a store because I consider that cruel and unusual...after all, I needed the money. What matter is what the U.S. Supreme COurt determines is cruel and unusual.

[Corner Pocket]

Sasquatch51:

 

My bad on the intent of the US Bill of Rights. I know I'm correct on the reason and intent of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as it was enacted in my lifetime, and I've heard the PM state for what reason it exists.

 

But I wonder if you could interpret that if the Bill of Rights is meant to protect the people from the Goverment, and that the Goverment is "of the people, by the people and for the people", then perhaps there is an element of protecting the minorities from the majorities? It's a stretch, and the U.S. Constitution is meant to be interpreted narrowly.

 

The Founding Fathers did an amazing job in creating The Constitution. I understand that the U.S. Consititution is the oldest, continuously in force Constitution currently in effect on the planet. That took some careful planning. But there are issues that exist now that the Founding Fathers could not possibly have imagined in their time. Does the right to privace exist in the Constitution? If you support Roe v. Wade the answer is yes. If not, then no.

 

Anyway, I'm very much Libertarian in my views, except when it comes to recreational drug use. The risks far outweigh the benefits, and collateral damage is enevitable and excessive.

 

Man, has this topic "Weed not good for music" cast a wide net.

 

Peace,

 

Paul

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

What "a lot of people" consider cruel and unusual makes no difference at all.

Well, ultimately it does because judges tend to sentence partly (or largely) on the basis of prevailing community standards.

 

 

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

By that logic, I could say that I shouldn't be arrested for robbing a store because I consider that cruel and unusual...after all, I needed the money.

If everybody was doing it, you could have a case. Otherwise, no.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

What "a lot of people" consider cruel and unusual makes no difference at all.

Well, ultimately it does because judges tend to sentence partly (or largely) on the basis of prevailing community standards.

 

 

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

By that logic, I could say that I shouldn't be arrested for robbing a store because I consider that cruel and unusual...after all, I needed the money.

If everybody was doing it, you could have a case. Otherwise, no.

So if "everybody" is doing a thing, that makes it right? By the way, not "everybody" smokes dope. A lot of people do, but it definitely ain't the majority. The people that do it naturally have strong opinions that they should be allowed to do it.

 

I'm not saying the marijuana laws are right or wrong. The fact is they are what they are...laws. And if you break the laws you are taking a chance on going to jail. If that's an acceptable risk, then go for it.

[A String]

Sasquatch51 you stated that you are basing you opinions on experience rather then scientifically gathered information (real or false depending on your point of view).

 

Isn't it possible that your experiences may be blinding you to the truth (or at least making you unwilling to view the other perspective).

 

In your previous explanations, you mentioned harder drugs which are very different from pot.

 

You live in a society that has been saturated with propaganda (correct or incorrect) about drug use. Anyone who is submitted to this type of brain washing is apt to believe it to some degree.

 

You also believe that the "propaganda" of your government is right and the "propaganda" of NORML is wrong. This is a very closed minded point of view. What makes one more right then the other?

 

I suppose it's difficult for me because I used to be a pot smoker. When you put down all pot smokers and recount all the lies you've heard, it's putting me down directly.

 

Again, I'm sorry for what you have been through, but I would think it is more related to hard drugs then pot. Shutting out all drugs because of it isn't right.

[A String]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

A lot of people do, but it definitely ain't the majority.

I'd beg to differ on this point. It may not be a landslide majority, but it is a majority. Stats suggest it's around 52%.

[Corner Pocket]

A String:

 

What hasn't come out at all in this thread is the benefit of recreational drug use, if there is one. There are lots of references to studies that show no harm from recreational marijuana use, and lots of opinions along the lines of "pot is not as bad as (insert substitute here)", but thus far I have seen or read NOTHING that says life is better on drugs than not on drugs.

 

Can you show me that?????

 

Peace,

 

Paul

[A String]

Originally posted by rockincyanblues:

A String:

 

What hasn't come out at all in this thread is the benefit of recreational drug use, if there is one. There are lots of references to studies that show no harm from recreational marijuana use, and lots of opinions along the lines of "pot is not as bad as (insert substitute here)", but thus far I have seen or read NOTHING that says life is better on drugs than not on drugs.

 

Can you show me that?????

 

Peace,

 

Paul

Sure. The same argument that is used for drinking is also appropriate for pot. Recreational use, in moderation, is a great way to relax and unwind from the stresses of your work week.

 

I've already mentioned that I do not drink, smoke or do drugs. I used to, but have found that I don't need it (except for the cigarettes. It's been three and a half rough years, but I'm finally free!). However, I am an exception. Most people require something to help them unwind. That's just the way people are and I've come to accept that.

 

The benefits are a happier, mentally healthier society. (At least according to the millions of folks who drink. )

 

All of this aside, why does their need to be a benefit to society for someone to partake in something they enjoy if it hold no ill effects on them personally or socially?

[A String]

It's tough. I can argue it's right and you can argue it's wrong till the cows come home. Neither of us will change our positions.

 

I will acknowledge your opinions as I hope you acknowledge mine. I was just hoping that you would become aware of some of the deceptions that have been circulating. As with anything, it's up to you to decide on their validity.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by A String:

Sasquatch51 you stated that you are basing you opinions on experience rather then scientifically gathered information (real or false depending on your point of view).

 

Isn't it possible that your experiences may be blinding you to the truth (or at least making you unwilling to view the other perspective).

 

In your previous explanations, you mentioned harder drugs which are very different from pot.

 

You live in a society that has been saturated with propaganda (correct or incorrect) about drug use. Anyone who is submitted to this type of brain washing is apt to believe it to some degree.

 

You also believe that the "propaganda" of your government is right and the "propaganda" of NORML is wrong. This is a very closed minded point of view. What makes one more right then the other?

 

I suppose it's difficult for me because I used to be a pot smoker. When you put down all pot smokers and recount all the lies you've heard, it's putting me down directly.

 

Again, I'm sorry for what you have been through, but I would think it is more related to hard drugs then pot. Shutting out all drugs because of it isn't right.

A string,

I think that you have misinterpreted a whole bunch of what I said.

 

First off, I don't say that I agree with Government propaganda. I understand that soemtimes it is necessary, but that doesn't mean that I agree with it.

 

What is the difference between "scientific data" and what you have seen with your own eyes and experienced for yourself? Are you saying that if someone tells me that based on scientific data shit smells like apples, that I'm supposed to forego what I know from personal experience (shit smells like shit) and believe what the "scientist" is telling me? Scientists base their findings on what they can see and demonstrate and prove for themselves. I know this because I have a bachelor's degree in biology. I'm quite familiar with the scientific method and processes. I do not believe things that people say, just because they say it and insist that it's true. The fact that they keep on insisting that it's true will not sway me until they can prove it to me. Things I can see for myself I don't need to prove. If I see that an object is colored bright red, I don't need to go through a process of proving that to myself and I won't believe someone who tries to convince me that object is blue. That is not narrow-minded, it's just not being naive'. Whether a concept is true or false is not subject to point of view. It is either true or it is false. Emotion is where the grey areas come in.

 

I already stated that I think that marijuana is less harmful than the "hard" drugs and could probably be classified and treated differently. I also stated that I did not think that the world would come to an end or that society would collapse if it were decriminalized or even legalized. I just don't think personally that it would be a smart move.

 

I don't think that I've put anyone down. I have stated that I think that anyone that starts drinking, smoking or using hard drugs in this day and age is stupid. That's not a put-down, just a simple statement of fact as I see it, and I stand by it.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by A String:

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

A lot of people do, but it definitely ain't the majority.

I'd beg to differ on this point. It may not be a landslide majority, but it is a majority. Stats suggest it's around 52%.

What stats? I've never seen anything at all that puts current pot users at 52% of the population. I do not believe those numbers....can you show me something to support that?

[Corner Pocket]

Originally posted by A String:

Sure. The same argument that is used for drinking is also appropriate for pot. Recreational use, in moderation, is a great way to relax and unwind from the stresses of your work week. All of this aside, why does their need to be a benefit to society for someone to partake in something they enjoy if it hold no ill effects on them personally or socially?

Not quite true. There is peer reviewed medical evidence that shows a benefit to moderate Red Wine consumption. There is also some indications that the same benefits may exist in Grape Juice. Studies don't yet exist showing similar, if any benefits, to ANY recreational drug use. Does marijuana have an effect on your state of mind or state of being? Yes. Is that effect good or bad? Users tend to say yes. But none can quantify what that good effect is.

 

I do not hold that recreational drug use has to be a benefit to society. I do believe that it should not be a detriment. So far, my experience is that recreational drug use, and to a greater extent recreational drug ABuse does nothing to make anybodies life better. In short, there may be a short term benefit to the user, but there is no long term benefit to the user, and there is no short or long term benefit to society. Those odds are just not good enough to justify any public policy that treats recreational drug use lightly.

 

I do believe that maijuana has medical benefits, specifically, but not exclusively, in the treatment of glaucoma, MS, AIDS and cancer. This is NOT recreational use. This for for the treatment of symptoms of a real disease. Day to day life is not a disease which requires treatment of symptoms or alleviation of suffering.

 

Peace,

 

Paul

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by A String:

It's tough. I can argue it's right and you can argue it's wrong till the cows come home. Neither of us will change our positions.

 

I will acknowledge your opinions as I hope you acknowledge mine. I was just hoping that you would become aware of some of the deceptions that have been circulating. As with anything, it's up to you to decide on their validity.

No problem. I absolutely have no bad feelings toward you or anyone else in this thread. As far as i'm concerned this has been a GREAT discussion with both sides of an issue being able to voice opinions. I'm not trying to make you change your views, nor would I expect you to. The only thing that will do that is life.

[A String]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

Originally posted by A String:

It's tough. I can argue it's right and you can argue it's wrong till the cows come home. Neither of us will change our positions.

 

I will acknowledge your opinions as I hope you acknowledge mine. I was just hoping that you would become aware of some of the deceptions that have been circulating. As with anything, it's up to you to decide on their validity.

No problem. I absolutely have no bad feelings toward you or anyone else in this thread. As far as i'm concerned this has been a GREAT discussion with both sides of an issue being able to voice opinions. I'm not trying to make you change your views, nor would I expect you to. The only thing that will do that is life.

Yup. I used to get in really heated discussions with my Dad when I was a kid. We would be yelling away at each other about politics or physics or any other myriad of topics. I would suddenly notice that my Mom was really upset and we would have to explain to her that it was ok, it was how we discussed things.

 

I've always enjoyed a good discussion/debate. If we both agreed on the subject matter, there would be no discussion.

 

Cheers!

[skipclone 1]

Part of the problem is that it doesn`t matter whether marijuana or peyote or magic mushrooms have a beneficial effect medically or religiously, or whether they should be allowed to be part of religions that predate antidrug laws. The police action mentality around drug use of ANY sort has shut out all rationality about the issue. Native Americans in the Southwest can`t partake of their sacrament. Medical researchers can`t research. I assert that this is excessive and counterproductive.

[Hound Dog]

I thought that the commercial that used to air a few years ago really nailed it when is said: "If you think nothing will happen to you if you smoke pot, you're right" or something like that.

 

I've seen a lot of people who, while they didn't die or end up in prison, they just never made anything of themselves because they just smoked weed all of the time. I mean a lot of people.

[Gifthorse]

Personally I can't stand when everyone tries to preach to everyone else some sort of 'absolute truth'. I am a grey area guy.

 

When I hear these propaganda stories about pot that is laced with PCP or cocaine I laugh.

 

Who would go through this trouble? How could you make money if you were a drug dealer selling pot laced with cocaine. It is preposterous. You wouldn't make any money because cocaine costs alot more than weed. It is senseless propaganda like this that makes the War on Drugs a joke.

 

PCP, this is a drug I remember hearing about on 'The White Shadow' circa 1979. I have never known even 1 person who ever did this drug which is a supposed horse tranquilizer. The police used to come to our schools and tell everyone that alot of pot is 'laced' with pcp or 'angel dust'. They would also say, "smoke pot, your dick will rot." Both of these claims are silly lies.

 

The government and big business can market anything. Ideas, 'absolute truths'. They can show you a commercial that says if you smoke a joint at a party you are supporting terrorists in central america, then the next commercial promotes beer drinking. Don't we support terrorism everytime we fill up our car? I mean the guys who did 911 were Saudis using oil money.

 

Well, my opinions again.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by flagshipmile:

Personally I can't stand when everyone tries to preach to everyone else some sort of 'absolute truth'. I am a grey area guy.

 

When I hear these propaganda stories about pot that is laced with PCP or cocaine I laugh.

 

Who would go through this trouble? How could you make money if you were a drug dealer selling pot laced with cocaine. It is preposterous. You wouldn't make any money because cocaine costs alot more than weed. It is senseless propaganda like this that makes the War on Drugs a joke.

 

PCP, this is a drug I remember hearing about on 'The White Shadow' circa 1979. I have never known even 1 person who ever did this drug which is a supposed horse tranquilizer. The police used to come to our schools and tell everyone that alot of pot is 'laced' with pcp or 'angel dust'. They would also say, "smoke pot, your dick will rot." Both of these claims are silly lies.

 

The government and big business can market anything. Ideas, 'absolute truths'. They can show you a commercial that says if you smoke a joint at a party you are supporting terrorists in central america, then the next commercial promotes beer drinking. Don't we support terrorism everytime we fill up our car? I mean the guys who did 911 were Saudis using oil money.

 

Well, my opinions again.

You are absolutely right. The wild allegations and claims do nothing but hurt any legitimate educaton attempts.

 

You are also right about the low rate of usage of PCP (Phencyclidine hydrochloride). That's not to say it isn't an abused drug, but it's not nearly as popular now as it was in the 70's and 80's. It was originally developed for use as an intrevenous anesthetic for human surgery, but the use was discontinued in the late 1950's due to phsychotic episodes in patients during recovery. It's use as a veterinary anesthetic continued for several years, especially in primates.

 

The most comman way the PCP is ingested for "recreational" purposes is by smoking, usually mixed with marijuana, sometimes with tobacco, mint leaves, or oregano. There have been several documented cases of people being hospitalized because they smoked marijuana that was mixed with Phencyclidine and were not advised that was the case. They thought they were just smoking marijuana. It wasn't that someone sold the marijuana laced with PCP, but they were generally smoking with other people in a party setting and did not realize they were smoking PCP. PCP overdose can be deadly and it's effects are much more dramatic than marijuana's. I'm sure it's a scary experience when you were only bargaining for a pot high. People ingesting relatively large doses of PCP are usually completely unconscious...after all that's what the drug was designed to do in the first place. If you go to a party and your girlfriend or whoever smokes a little pot and the next thing you know she's completely unconscious and you can't wake her up, you will end up at the emergency room ....guaranteed.

 

I was at a party in the early 70's in Huntsville AL. There were people there doing PCP. In those days, it was still in use as a veterinary anesthetic. What these people had was veterinary grade Phencyclidine (little blue pills that looked like pieces of grease pencil lead). One guy there had a plastic baggie with a bunch of them in it. He and his brother were big dopers and small-time dealers and were always holding something. Anyway, in the front room of this little house were a bunch of black lights and strobe lights (popular at the time). Somebody turned on one of the strobe lights while the guy with the baggie was in the bathroom. It only had one working bulb which happened to be blue. When he came out of the bathroom and saw those blue flashes, he panicked. He thought the police were in the front yard, so he went back into the bathroom and started to flush the PCP down the toilet. For some reason (unknown to anyone) he decided to eat it instead of flushing it (maybe he didn't want to waste it). He ate what he hadn't already thrown in the toilet. It was later estimated that he at somewhere between 30 and 50 doses. I will never forget the look on his face when he came into the liveing room and said "Somebody call my momma or a priest. I think I'm gonna die." We all started laughing because we thought he was joking. When we all started realizing that he was for real, everyone started to panic, especially the ones that were high. Finally we loaded him into an old station wagon and took him to Huntsville Hospital and left him at the Emergency Room entrance. He was completely incoherent and limp as a dishrag by then. Everyone was afraid that they were going to be in trouble. We got about 10 blocks down the road and I made them let me out of the car so I could walk back to the hospital. I wasn't high (there was no way in hell I was doing that crap), so I didn't figure I would be in trouble. When I got back they were working on him and trying to figure out what was wrong with him. I told them that he had taken PCP and their concern level went up about 20 notches. They found one still between his teeth and his cheek. After about 30 minutes, Danny Petty came back to see what was going on (I mentioned him earlier in this thread..he killed his brother over pot). That was about the time that Bobby's heart stopped the first time. During that night, his heart stopped 3 times and the doctors restarted it. They pumped his stomach and kept jump-starting him and he pulled through. He was in the hospital for about a week or 10 days. Now for the kicker. The day before he was supposed to get out of the hospital, his brother Pat brought some MDA (predecessor to today's Ecstacy) to the hospital and they both got high in the hospital room.

 

Want drug stories? I've got a ton of 'em...back when I was coming up the music industry and life in general was all about drugs...all sorts of drugs.

[LPCustom]

Hmmm, opiates occur naturally too in the poppy plant. Heroine is a seriously dangerous drug and will seriously screw you up physically.

 

I would seriously love to have a serious discussion (not an argument) about the drug war. But since that is a political topic this isn't the place to have it.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Sorry..hit the quote botton by mistake...trying to edit.

[A String]

Originally posted by LPCustom:

Hmmm, opiates occur naturally too in the poppy plant. Heroine is a seriously dangerous drug and will seriously screw you up physically.

 

I would seriously love to have a serious discussion (not an argument) about the drug war. But since that is a political topic this isn't the place to have it.

I don't think it's possible to have a proper discussion about this. I won't believe the facts from a government site and those opposed won't believe the facts from a "left wing" site.

 

I can provide as much proof that I'm right as others can, that I'm wrong. I can relate as many stories about how safe it is and how many people I know who have had no problems with it as others can about people who have had it ruin their lives.

 

At this point, it might be best if we all got back to discussing guitars...

[Tone Taster]

Originally posted by A String:

I don't think it's possible to have a proper discussion about this. .

True, but one critical thinking premise:

 

How come we keep pumpin' more money into the "War on Drugs" but MORE Drugs keep entering the Union?

 

Somebody's gotta be lettin' 'em in.

[EmptinesOf Youth]

i love drugs

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

if "everybody" is doing a thing, that makes it right?

It doesn't make it right from an absolute viewpoint, but it sure as hell decreases the penalty. That's why nobody gets executed over a parking ticket.

[S. Yeti Bigfoot, Esq.]

Originally posted by Vince C.:

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

if "everybody" is doing a thing, that makes it right?

It doesn't make it right from an absolute viewpoint, but it sure as hell decreases the penalty. That's why nobody gets executed over a parking ticket.

For the life of me, I can't remember anyone ever being executed over a parking ticket...even before everyone was parking illegally.

 

The thing that keeps the courts from imposing excessive penalties is the 8th Ammendment.

 

If a law is deemed unenforceable or if it is found to be unjust, then it may be rescinded or revised and penalties and sentencing guidelines may be revised. An inordinately large number of arrests for that crime may provide impetus for that. In some cases, the law just may not be enforced and may fall into obscurity....forgotten about and lost in the books.

 

I guess it's also possible that laws fall into obscurity because nobody is ever arrested for violating them. Here's a few that might fall into that category:

 

1. It is illegal to a wake a bear for the purpose of photography in Alaska. (I can't imagine that there was ever a big problem with this one...or anyone to prosecute if it happened)

 

2. In Alabama, it is illegal to wear a fake moustache that causes laughter in a church. (For some reason, to me this actually seems like a good thing to do.)

 

3. Monkeys are forbidden from smoking cigarettes in South Bend, Indiana. (Damned monkeys. They throw their cigarette butts everywhere.)

 

4. In North Carolina, elephants may not be used to plow cotton fields. (Why not? You can plow and fertilize in the same pass.)

 

5. In Kentucky, it is illegal to transport an ice cream cone in your pocket. (????)

 

6. In the state of Washington, it's illegal to catch a fish by throwing a rock at it. (If someone can throw a rock accurately and hard enough to kill a fish, I damned sure wouldn't try to arrest him.)

 

7. In Idaho, the law states all boxes of candy given as romantic gifts must weigh more than 50 pounds. (DAMN!! How big are the women?)

 

8. A law in Oblong, Illinois makes it a crime to make love while fishing or hunting on your wedding day. (If you go fishing or hunting on your wedding day, I think making love just ain't gonna be on the menu anyway.)

 

9. In Texas, it's illegal to put graffiti on someone else's cow. (Kinda takes the fun out of living near cows, doesn't it?)

 

10. In Connorsville, Wisconsin a man is legally prohibited from shooting a gun while his female partner is having an orgasm. (You see, now I actually kind of agree with this one...although I can't see how it ever got popular enough to be banned.)

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

For the life of me, I can't remember anyone ever being executed over a parking ticket...even before everyone was parking illegally.

Precisely. It's such a commonplace occurrence that nobody breaks into a sweat over it. My point is that if lots of people commit an offence, then penalties for that offense decrease. The number of pot smokers that have been busted over the years is quite amazing, if prohibitionism wasn't so stubbornly ingrained in the judiciary the sheer numbers would have led to decriminalization years ago.

 

 

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

The thing that keeps the courts from imposing excessive penalties is the 8th Ammendment.

Well, yeah.

 

But I think "common sense" (whatever that is) plays a big part in there too.

 

Even if they don't have the benefit of the eighth amendment, EU countries don't have the death penalty. So they are in some ways more lenient than the US itself.

 

 

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

If a law is deemed unenforceable or if it is found to be unjust, then it may be rescinded or revised and penalties and sentencing guidelines may be revised. An inordinately large number of arrests for that crime may provide impetus for that.

Yeah, like uhmmm... smoking dope. I think that due to the various advances in chemistry, grass will come to be considered a minor pecadillo, both by the cops and (more worryingly) by "the kids". The focus will shift to other, harder drugs.

 

 

Originally posted by Sasquatch51:

I guess it's also possible that laws fall into obscurity because nobody is ever arrested for violating them. Here's a few that might fall into that category:

I like those! Sounds like they were invented with some specific guy in mind!

[A String]

Originally posted by Caputo:

Originally posted by A String:

I don't think it's possible to have a proper discussion about this. .

True, but one critical thinking premise:

 

How come we keep pumpin' more money into the "War on Drugs" but MORE Drugs keep entering the Union?

 

Somebody's gotta be lettin' 'em in.

Why do they keep pumping money into the war on drugs? Putting the product into the hands of the criminals adds a criminal element to it. No different then when they tried it with alcohol. People are going to buy it no matter what you do. Rather then have to buy it from dealers with guns, why not buy it from a government sanctioned store (Like a liquor store) where the proprietor isn't going to get upset and kill you if he's a little low on cash that day.