The Official "I Agree 90% with Ron Paul But.." Series-Clarification #2:Drug "Legalization"

[A_Silent_Majority_Member]

We have all heard the propaganda... "Ron Paul wants to legalize all drugs and kids will buy heroin at the local drug store.. ahhh ooooh no Mr. Bill!" This seems to be the greatest concern of most people so lets address it now shall we?

Here is it is folks... Ron Paul as President is no more for legalizing drugs than he is for legalizing murder. His stance on drugs is simply this... DECRIMINALIZATION at the FEDERAL LEVEL.

So what does this mean for we the american people?

In most cases this would not effect you or I so much in any negative way what so ever. This is because many, If not all the drugs currently deemed illegal at the federal level would still be considered illegal at the state level. However.. Some states for example may choose to legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes.. to which under a Ron Paul presidency, said states would now be free to do so without any disruption from washington. If anything this would benifit us greatly as it will bring a nice chunk of federal government waste to an end from all the hard earned tax payers dollars not being spent by washington on such matters.

I hope this has helped anyone who may have had some confusion or perhaps has suffered the MSM and talking head propaganda. Likewise... If I have missed something or perhaps havent said something clearly enough... Well lets work together to clerify and spread this info far and wide!

See also in this series:
Clarification #1: Foreign Policy (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?371687-The-Official-quot-I-Agree-90-with-Ron-Paul-But..-quot-Series.-Clarification-1-Foreign-Policy)

[Natural Citizen]

The discussion exists because it's acceptable to call certain natural herbs and minerals "drugs". Problem, reaction, solution.

As long as the opposing terms of controversy are obliged you'll never win the discussion.

I've posted this before but i'll share again.

http://newfrontier.com/asheville/mj-conspiracy.htm (http://newfrontier.com/asheville/mj-conspiracy.htm)

The truth is if marijuana was utilized for its vast array of commercial products, it would create an industrial atomic bomb! Entrepreneurs have not been educated on the product potential of pot. The super rich have conspired to spread misinformation about an extremely versatile plant that, if used properly, would ruin their companies.

Where did the word ’marijuana’ come from? In the mid 1930s, the M-word was created to tarnish the good image and phenomenal history of the hemp plant...as you will read. The facts cited here, with references, are generally verifiable in the Encyclopedia Britannica which was printed on hemp paper for 150 years: * All schoolbooks were made from hemp or flax paper until the 1880s; Hemp Paper Reconsidered, Jack Frazier, 1974.

* It was LEGAL TO PAY TAXES WITH HEMP in America from 1631 until the early 1800s; LA Times, Aug. 12, 1981.

* REFUSING TO GROW HEMP in America during the 17th and 18th Centuries WAS AGAINST THE LAW! You could be jailed in Virginia for refusing to grow hemp from 1763 to 1769; Hemp in Colonial Virginia, G. M. Herdon.

* George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers GREW HEMP; Washington and Jefferson Diaries. Jefferson smuggled hemp seeds from China to France then to America.

* Benjamin Franklin owned one of the first paper mills in America and it processed hemp. Also, the War of 1812 was fought over hemp. Napoleon wanted to cut off Moscow’s export to England-- Emperor Wears No Clothes, Jack Herer.

* For thousands of years, 90% of all ships’ sails and rope were made from hemp. The word ’canvas’ is Dutch for cannabis -- Webster’s New World Dictionary.

* 80% of all textiles, fabrics, clothes, linen, drapes, bed sheets, etc. were made from hemp until the 1820s with the introduction of the cotton gin.

* The first Bibles, maps, charts, Betsy Ross’s flag, the first drafts of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were made from hemp; U.S. Government Archives.

* The first crop grown in many states was hemp. 1850 was a peak year for Kentucky producing 40,000 tons. Hemp was the largest cash crop until the 20th Century; State Archives.
* Oldest known records of hemp farming go back 5000 years in China, although hemp industrialization probably goes back to ancient Egypt.
* Rembrants, Gainsboroughs, Van Goghs as well as most early canvas paintings were principally painted on hemp linen.

* In 1916, the U.S. Government predicted that by the 1940s all paper would come from hemp and that no more trees need to be cut down. Government studies report that 1 acre of hemp equals 4.1 acres of trees. Plans were in the works to implement such programs; Department of Agriculture

* Quality paints and varnishes were made from hemp seed oil until 1937. 58,000 tons of hemp seeds were used in America for paint products in 1935; Sherman Williams Paint Co. testimony before Congress against the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act.

* Henry Ford’s first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, ’grown from the soil,’ had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel; Popular Mechanics, 1941.

* Hemp called ’Billion Dollar Crop.’ It was the first time a cash crop had a business potential to exceed a billion dollars; Popular Mechanics, Feb., 1938.

* Mechanical Engineering Magazine (Feb. 1938) published an article entitled ’The Most Profitable and Desirable Crop that Can be Grown.’ It stated that if hemp was cultivated using 20th Century technology, it would be the single largest agricultural crop in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

The following information comes directly from the United States Department of Agriculture’s 1942 14-minute film encouraging and instructing ’patriotic American farmers’ to grow 350,000 acres of hemp each year for the war effort:

’...(When) Grecian temples were new, hemp was already old in the service of mankind. For thousands of years, even then, this plant had been grown for cordage and cloth in China and elsewhere in the East. For centuries prior to about 1850, all the ships that sailed the western seas were rigged with hempen rope and sails. For the sailor, no less than the hangman, hemp was indispensable...
...Now with Philippine and East Indian sources of hemp in the hands of the Japanese...American hemp must meet the needs of our Army and Navy as well as of our industries...
...the Navy’s rapidly dwindling reserves. When that is gone, American hemp will go on duty again; hemp for mooring ships; hemp for tow lines; hemp for tackle and gear; hemp for countless naval uses both on ship and shore. Just as in the days when Old Ironsides sailed the seas victorious with her hempen shrouds and hempen sails. Hemp for victory!’
Certified proof from the Library of Congress; found by the research of Jack Herer, refuting claims of other government agencies that the 1942 USDA film ’Hemp for Victory’ did not exist.

Hemp cultivation and production do not harm the environment. The USDA Bulletin #404 concluded that hemp produces 4 times as much pulp with at least 4 to 7 times less pollution. From Popular Mechanics, Feb. 1938:

’It has a short growing season...It can be grown in any state...The long roots penetrate and break the soil to leave it in perfect condition for the next year’s crop. The dense shock of leaves, 8 to 12 feet above the ground, chokes out weeds. ...hemp, this new crop can add immeasurably to American agriculture and industry.’

In the 1930s, innovations in farm machinery would have caused an industrial revolution when applied to hemp. This single resource could have created millions of new jobs generating thousands of quality products. Hemp, if not made illegal, would have brought America out of the Great Depression.

William Randolph Hearst (Citizen Kane) and the Hearst Paper Manufacturing Division of Kimberly Clark owned vast acreage of timberlands. The Hearst Company supplied most paper products. Patty Hearst’s grandfather, a destroyer of nature for his own personal profit, stood to lose billions because of hemp.
In 1937, DuPont patented the processes to make plastics from oil and coal. Dupont’s Annual Report urged stockholders to invest in its new petrochemical division. Synthetics such as plastics, cellophane, celluloid, methanol, nylon, rayon, Dacron, etc., could now be made from oil. Natural hemp industrialization would have ruined over 80% of DuPont's business.

THE CONSPIRACY

Andrew Mellon became Hoover’s Secretary of the Treasury and DuPont's primary investor. He appointed his future nephew-in-law, Harry J. Anslinger, to head the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs.

Secret meetings were held by these financial tycoons. Hemp was declared dangerous and a threat to their billion dollar enterprises. For their dynasties to remain intact, hemp had to go. These men took an obscure Mexican slang word: ’marihuana’ and pushed it into the consciousness of America.

MEDIA MANIPULATION

A media blitz of ’yellow journalism’ raged in the late 1920s and 1930s. Hearst’s newspapers ran stories emphasizing the horrors of marihuana. The menace of marihuana made headlines. Readers learned that it was responsible for everything from car accidents to loose morality. Films like Reefer Madness (1936), Marihuana: Assassin of Youth (1935) and Marihuana:The Devil’s Weed (1936) were propaganda designed by these industrialists to create an enemy. Their purpose was to gain public support so that anti-marihuana laws could be passed. Examine the following quotes from The Burning Question aka REEFER MADNESS:



* a violent narcotic.
* acts of shocking violence.
* incurable insanity.
* soul-destroying effects.
* under the influence of reefer he killed his entire family with an ax.
* more vicious, more deadly even than soul-destroying drugs like heroin or cocaine is the menace of marijuana!



Reefer Madness did not end with the usual ’the end.’ The film concluded with these words plastered on the screen: TELL YOUR CHILDREN.
In the 1930s, people were very naive; even to the point of ignorance. The masses were like sheep waiting to be led by the few in power. They did not challenge authority. If the news was in print or on the radio, they believed it had to be true. They told their children and their children grew up to be the parents of the baby-boomers.

On April 14, 1937, the prohibitive Marihuana Tax Law or the bill that outlawed hemp was directly brought to the House Ways and Means Committee. This committee is the only one that can introduce a bill to the House floor without it being debated by other committees. The Chairman of the US Senate, Ways and Means Committee, at the time, Robert Doughton, was a DuPont supporter. He insured that the bill would pass Congress.

Dr. James Woodward, a physician and attorney, testified too late on behalf of the American Medical Association. He told the committee that the reason the AMA had not denounced the Marihuana Tax Law sooner was that the Association had just discovered that marihuana was hemp.

Few people, at the time, realized that the deadly menace they had been reading about on Hearst’s front pages was in fact passive hemp. The AMA understood cannabis to be a MEDICINE found in numerous healing products sold over the last hundred years.

In September of 1937, hemp became illegal. The most useful crop known became a drug and our planet has been suffering ever since.

Congress banned hemp because it was said to be the most violence-causing drug known. Harry Anslinger, head of the Drug Commission for 31 years, promoted the idea that marihuana made users act extremely violent. In the 1950s, under the Communist threat of McCarthyism, Anslinger then said the exact opposite. Marijuana will pacify you so much that soldiers would not want to fight.

Today, our planet is in desperate trouble. Earth is suffocating as large tracts of rain forests disappear. Pollution, poisons and chemicals are killing people. These great problems could be reversed if we industrialized hemp. Natural biomass could provide all of the planet’s energy needs that are currently supplied by fossil fuels. We have consumed 80% of our oil and gas reserves. We need a renewable resource. Hemp could be the solution to soaring gas prices.

THE WONDER PLANT

Hemp has a higher quality fiber than wood fiber. Far fewer caustic chemicals are required to make paper from hemp than from trees. Hemp paper does not turn yellow and is very durable. The plant grows quickly to maturity in a season where trees take a lifetime.

ALL PLASTIC PRODUCTS SHOULD BE MADE FROM HEMP SEED OIL. Hempen plastics are biodegradable! Over time, they would break down and not harm the environment. Oil-based plastics, the ones we are very familiar with, help ruin nature; they do not break down and will do great harm in the future. The process to produce the vast array of natural (hempen) plastics will not ruin the rivers as DuPont and other petrochemical companies have done. Ecology does not fit in with the plans of the Oil Industry and the political machine. Hemp products are safe and natural.

MEDICINES SHOULD BE MADE FROM HEMP. We should go back to the days when the AMA supported cannabis cures. ’Medical Marijuana’ is given out legally to only a handful of people while the rest of us are forced into a system that relies on chemicals. Pot is only healthy for the human body.

WORLD HUNGER COULD END. A large variety of food products can be generated from hemp. The seeds contain one of the highest sources of protein in nature. ALSO: They have two essential fatty acids that clean your body of cholesterol. These essential fatty acids are not found anywhere else in nature! Consuming pot seeds is the best thing you could do for your body. Eat uncooked hemp seeds.

CLOTHES SHOULD BE MADE FROM HEMP. Hemp clothing is extremely strong and durable over time. You could hand clothing, made from pot, down to your grandchildren. Today, there are American companies that make hemp clothing; usually 50% hemp. Hemp fabrics should be everywhere. Instead, they are almost underground. Superior hemp products are not allowed to advertise on fascist television. Kentucky, once the top hemp producing state, made it ILLEGAL TO WEAR hemp clothing! Can you imagine being thrown into jail for wearing quality jeans?

The world is crazy...but that does not mean you have to join the insanity. Get together. Spread the news. Tell people, and that includes your children, the truth. Use hemp products. Eliminate the word ’marijuana.’ Realize the history that created it. Make it politically incorrect to say or print the M-word. Fight against the propaganda (designed to favor the agenda of the super rich) and the bullshit. Hemp must be utilized in the future. We need a clean energy source to save our planet. INDUSTRIALIZE HEMP!

The liquor, tobacco and oil companies fund more than a million dollars a day to Partnership for a Drug-Free America and other similar agencies. We have all seen their commercials. Now, their motto is: ‘It’s more dangerous than we thought.’ Lies from the powerful corporations, that began with Hearst, are still alive and well today.

The brainwashing continues. Now, the commercials say: If you buy a joint, you contribute to murders and gang wars. The latest anti-pot commercials say: If you buy a joint...you are promoting TERRORISM! The new enemy (terrorism) has paved the road to brainwash you any way THEY see fit.

There is only one enemy; the friendly people you pay your taxes to; the war-makers and nature destroyers. With your funding, they are killing the world right in front of your eyes. HALF A MILLION DEATHS EACH YEAR ARE CAUSED BY TOBACCO. HALF A MILLION DEATHS EACH YEAR ARE CAUSED BY ALCOHOL. NO ONE HAS EVER, EVER DIED FROM SMOKING POT!! In the entire history of the human race, not one death can be attributed to cannabis. Our society has outlawed grass but condones the use of the KILLERS: TOBACCO and ALCOHOL. Hemp should be declassified and placed in DRUG stores to relieve stress. Hardening and constriction of the arteries are bad; but hemp usage actually enlarges the arteries...which is a healthy condition. We have been so conditioned to think that: Smoking is harmful. That is NOT the case for passive pot.

Ingesting THC, hemp’s active agent, has a positive effect; relieving asthma and glaucoma. A joint tends to alleviate the nausea caused by chemotherapy. You are able to eat on hemp. This is a healthy state of being.

{One personal note: During the pregnancy of my wife, she was having some difficulty gaining weight. We were in the hospital. A nurse called us to one side and said: ‘Off the record, if you smoke pot...you’d get something called the munchies and you’ll gain weight.’ I swear that is a true story}.

The stereotype for a pothead is similar to a drunk, bubble-brain. Yet, the truth is one’s creative abilities can be enhanced under its influence. The perception of time slightly slows and one can become more sensitive. You can more appreciate all arts; be closer to nature and generally FEEL more under the influence of cannabis. It is, in fact, the exact opposite state of mind and body as the drunken state. You can be more aware with pot.

The pot plant is an ALIEN plant. There is physical evidence that cannabis is not like any other plant on this planet. One could conclude that it was brought here for the benefit of humanity. Hemp is the ONLY plant where the males appear one way and the females appear very different, physically! No one ever speaks of males and females in regard to the plant kingdom because plants do not show their sexes; except for cannabis. To determine what sex a certain, normal, Earthly plant is: You have to look internally, at its DNA. A male blade of grass (physically) looks exactly like a female blade of grass. The hemp plant has an intense sexuality. Growers know to kill the males before they fertilize the females. Yes, folks...the most potent pot comes from ’horny females.’

[kuckfeynes]

Well, the hope would be that as states successfully decriminalize, other states would recognize the success of the pioneer states and want to emulate it. This domino effect had already started with marijuana before Obama's handlers forced him to break a major campaign promise and re-assert federal authority and start conducting raids.

But if we were ever truly successful in getting the federal government totally out of drug policy (which would necessarily entail bringing down Big Pharma... not sure even President Paul could do this without a huge influx of libertarian congressmen), then undoubtedly some forward-thinking states would start to experiment with decriminalizing other substances, and probably seeing success with that too, which would lead to another domino effect as other states seek to emulate that success.

Granted, not every state would change right away, but the more that do will put greater fiscal and social pressure on those that resist. So I don't think it's accurate to say nothing would change. People just don't understand the fiscal and economic benefits of NOT having a huge prison-industrial complex. If one state ends it, and their economy booms because of it, the popular stigma will take care of itself.

[craezie]

Yes, I agree with RP's stance on decriminalization at the FEDERAL level. I do not agree with the legalization of most drugs. I'm not sure how I feel about complete legalization of marijuana (I agree that hemp should be legalized, period, and medical uses allowed). I used to support legalizing MJ, but things look a little different when you are a mother. I have also personally seen MJ destroy the lives of two family members. I realize that recreational users find it harmless, creatively enhancing, or whatever but that is not everyone's experience.

[coastie]

Well, the hope would be that as states successfully decriminalize, other states would recognize the success of the pioneer states and want to emulate it. This domino effect had already started with marijuana before Obama's handlers forced him to break a major campaign promise and re-assert federal authority and start conducting raids.

But if we were ever truly successful in getting the federal government totally out of drug policy (which would necessarily entail bringing down Big Pharma... not sure even President Paul could do this without a huge influx of libertarian congressmen), then undoubtedly some forward-thinking states would start to experiment with decriminalizing other substances, and probably seeing success with that too, which would lead to another domino effect as other states seek to emulate that success.

Granted, not every state would change right away, but the more that do will put greater fiscal and social pressure on those that resist. So I don't think it's accurate to say nothing would change. People just don't understand the fiscal and economic benefits of NOT having a huge prison-industrial complex. If one state ends it, and their economy booms because of it, the popular stigma will take care of itself.


+10000

Ron Paul argues that this should be handled as locally as possible, no federal tax money...and once people see what it really costs to have a "county" or "city"(read Federal tax dollar subsidized) SWAT team, helicopters with FLIR, armored personnel carriers,drones(eventually armed), anti-personnel mines etc...then -hopefully- they'll finally say, "Oh wow,I gotta pay how much in taxes to pay for these cool toys?...for a plant?:eek:"

[alucard13mmfmj]

Want's to treate drug addicts medically, not criminally. Also, how come movie stars like Lindsey Lohan gets off with a slap on the wrist almost every time? While a black man will get the max punishment?

Although, how would drug dealers be dealt with?

[coastie]

Yes, I agree with RP's stance on decriminalization at the FEDERAL level. I do not agree with the legalization of most drugs. I'm not sure how I feel about complete legalization of marijuana (I agree that hemp should be legalized, period, and medical uses allowed). I used to support legalizing MJ, but things look a little different when you are a mother. I have also personally seen MJ destroy the lives of two family members. I realize that recreational users find it harmless, creatively enhancing, or whatever but that is not everyone's experience.

Destroyed? By the pot, or the system the individuals were introduced to as a result of its legal status, of which, in many states, can seriously screw your life up?

I've been around people over the last almost 30 years that smoke/tried, whatever, and have yet to wonder upon someone whose life was destroyed by "it".

Now, have I seen lives destroyed by their lack of self control and poor decision making skills, on top of the stress of dealing with these laws(police harassment, unfounded family shunning, etc),the threat of/ actually being incarcerated/parole/probation(thereby ripping the family apart), acquiring "friends" with much more violent and/or drug use tenancies all along your ride through the system.... yep, seen it all too many times.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I support full legalization of all drugs but federal decrim. is a big step forward. I don't care if a person wants to smoke cigarettes, drink beer, or use cocaine. As long as they aren't harming me I could care less. Drugs are still flowing through our country at a cheaper price and a higher potency and the War on Drugs shows no sign of stopping despite it's clear failure.

[brand0n]

Marijuana doesn't destroy lives. A plant doesn't force people to consume it. Poor decision making is to blame, not the plant.

[Butchie]

"DECRIMINALIZATION at the FEDERAL LEVEL."

He needs to emphasize this more tho. Instead he says "let people do what they want with their bodies" BIG no no, conservatives associate that with abortion and face it drugs just conjure up a negative image in people's mind's, and that's not going to go away anytime soon, Ron doesn't have to lie, but he does need to choose his words more carefully.

[craezie]

I will rephrase that I have family members who had poor self-control and decision making, and used marijuana as a tool to destroy their lives. :( I am not 100% convinced that the MJ doesn't destroy lives in some respect though. I do believe that heavy MJ use over a period of time may cause brain damage, much as heavy alcohol use causes liver damage. In the case of the family members mentioned, there is certainly mental illness affecting them that was not apparent prior to smoking MJ every day for several years.

There is a problem with libertarian philosophy that denies morality or social structure, or the value of either. I think that is part of the problem of why the movement has attracted so few women and Christians, which are key demographics to winning a Republican primary. I do affirm the right of individuals to live their lives as they see fit so long as they are not harming others. However, people who become unable to work or sustain familial relationships and parental responsibilities are a drain on society. In theory, legalizing things like drugs or prostitution should be ok because it is consenting adults doing what they want to do. In practice, there are huge ramifications to society and I do not want my children growing up in a societal environment where doing drugs and selling your body to pay for those drugs is viewed as ok. I don't know where the balance lies. The fact is that in places where legalization has been tried (such as the Netherlands), participation has increased up to 3x and most people would not view that as a positive thing. I guess the best thing would be to allow local governments to regulate as they see fit.

Again, I am 100% against the federal war on drugs, hemp ban, and federal prison sentences. Personally in my area I would like to see a policy similar to Argentina, where personal cultivation for private in-home use and possession of small amounts is legal, but selling is not. I think that something along these lines would provide the greatest protection for children and young people, but still allow for some freedom.

[Butchie]

I will rephrase that I have family members who had poor self-control and decision making, and used marijuana as a tool to destroy their lives. :( I am not 100% convinced that the MJ doesn't destroy lives in some respect though. I do believe that heavy MJ use over a period of time may cause brain damage, much as heavy alcohol use causes liver damage. In the case of the family members mentioned, there is certainly mental illness affecting them that was not apparent prior to smoking MJ every day for several years.

There is a problem with libertarian philosophy that denies morality or social structure, or the value of either. I think that is part of the problem of why the movement has attracted so few women and Christians, which are key demographics to winning a Republican primary. I do affirm the right of individuals to live their lives as they see fit so long as they are not harming others. However, people who become unable to work or sustain familial relationships and parental responsibilities are a drain on society. In theory, legalizing things like drugs or prostitution should be ok because it is consenting adults doing what they want to do. In practice, there are huge ramifications to society and I do not want my children growing up in a societal environment where doing drugs and selling your body to pay for those drugs is viewed as ok. I don't know where the balance lies. The fact is that in places where legalization has been tried (such as the Netherlands), participation has increased up to 3x and most people would not view that as a positive thing. I guess the best thing would be to allow local governments to regulate as they see fit.

Again, I am 100% against the federal war on drugs, hemp ban, and federal prison sentences. Personally in my area I would like to see a policy similar to Argentina, where personal cultivation for private in-home use and possession of small amounts is legal, but selling is not. I think that something along these lines would provide the greatest protection for children and young people, but still allow for some freedom.

This is a very good post. I think it illustrates how there are basically two camps in the movement, some are libertarians and some are more lapsed conservatives. I like alot of libertarianism but think it takes things a little to far sometimes, just as you I'm not sure either what the best "middle-ground" would be but the thought of people being able to buy heroin in the store doesn't sit to well with me, pot I don't have much of a problem with as I've seen far worse from alcohol and that's legal, but certainly some drugs are much worse than others.

[rideurlightning]

Yes, I agree with RP's stance on decriminalization at the FEDERAL level. I do not agree with the legalization of most drugs. I'm not sure how I feel about complete legalization of marijuana (I agree that hemp should be legalized, period, and medical uses allowed). I used to support legalizing MJ, but things look a little different when you are a mother. I have also personally seen MJ destroy the lives of two family members. I realize that recreational users find it harmless, creatively enhancing, or whatever but that is not everyone's experience.

Snorting Windex is also very dangerous; perhaps we should make it illegal?

[rideurlightning]

Marijuana doesn't destroy lives. A plant doesn't force people to consume it. Poor decision making is to blame, not the plant.

Well said.

[driller80545]

Preaching to the choir!

[Seth]

I will rephrase that I have family members who had poor self-control and decision making, and used marijuana as a tool to destroy their lives. :( I am not 100% convinced that the MJ doesn't destroy lives in some respect though. I do believe that heavy MJ use over a period of time may cause brain damage, much as heavy alcohol use causes liver damage. In the case of the family members mentioned, there is certainly mental illness affecting them that was not apparent prior to smoking MJ every day for several years.

There is a problem with libertarian philosophy that denies morality or social structure, or the value of either. I think that is part of the problem of why the movement has attracted so few women and Christians, which are key demographics to winning a Republican primary. I do affirm the right of individuals to live their lives as they see fit so long as they are not harming others. However, people who become unable to work or sustain familial relationships and parental responsibilities are a drain on society. In theory, legalizing things like drugs or prostitution should be ok because it is consenting adults doing what they want to do. In practice, there are huge ramifications to society and I do not want my children growing up in a societal environment where doing drugs and selling your body to pay for those drugs is viewed as ok. I don't know where the balance lies. The fact is that in places where legalization has been tried (such as the Netherlands), participation has increased up to 3x and most people would not view that as a positive thing. I guess the best thing would be to allow local governments to regulate as they see fit.

Again, I am 100% against the federal war on drugs, hemp ban, and federal prison sentences. Personally in my area I would like to see a policy similar to Argentina, where personal cultivation for private in-home use and possession of small amounts is legal, but selling is not. I think that something along these lines would provide the greatest protection for children and young people, but still allow for some freedom.

Do you have a source for your claim that drug usage tripled in Netherlands? Decriminalization in Portugal actually caused drug use to go down and it is now the lowest in Europe. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

Prohibition does not work. All you are doing is creating a black market and making kids more likely to try something because it is taboo.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I will rephrase that I have family members who had poor self-control and decision making, and used marijuana as a tool to destroy their lives. :( I am not 100% convinced that the MJ doesn't destroy lives in some respect though. I do believe that heavy MJ use over a period of time may cause brain damage, much as heavy alcohol use causes liver damage. In the case of the family members mentioned, there is certainly mental illness affecting them that was not apparent prior to smoking MJ every day for several years.

There is a problem with libertarian philosophy that denies morality or social structure, or the value of either. I think that is part of the problem of why the movement has attracted so few women and Christians, which are key demographics to winning a Republican primary. I do affirm the right of individuals to live their lives as they see fit so long as they are not harming others. However, people who become unable to work or sustain familial relationships and parental responsibilities are a drain on society. In theory, legalizing things like drugs or prostitution should be ok because it is consenting adults doing what they want to do. In practice, there are huge ramifications to society and I do not want my children growing up in a societal environment where doing drugs and selling your body to pay for those drugs is viewed as ok. I don't know where the balance lies. The fact is that in places where legalization has been tried (such as the Netherlands), participation has increased up to 3x and most people would not view that as a positive thing. I guess the best thing would be to allow local governments to regulate as they see fit.

Again, I am 100% against the federal war on drugs, hemp ban, and federal prison sentences. Personally in my area I would like to see a policy similar to Argentina, where personal cultivation for private in-home use and possession of small amounts is legal, but selling is not. I think that something along these lines would provide the greatest protection for children and young people, but still allow for some freedom.

http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/searchresults?action=list&type=PUBLICATIONS&SERIES_PUB=w36


In the Netherlands 9.5% of young adults (aged 15–34) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level of Finland (8%), Latvia (9.7%) and Norway (9.6%) and less than in the UK (13.8%), Germany (11.9%), Czech Republic (19,3%), Denmark (13.3%), Spain (18.8%), France (16.7%), Slovakia (14.7%) and Italy (20.9%) but higher than in Bulgaria (4.4%), Sweden (4.8%), Poland (5.3%) or Greece (3.2%). The monthly prevalence of drugs other than cannabis among young people (15-24) was 4% in 2004, that was above the average (3%) of 15 compared countries in EU. However, seemingly few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.30%), well below the average (0.52%) of the same compared countries

Your statement isn't entirely true about the Netherlands. Use has gone down across the board. Both adult and teen use has decreased and they have less hard drug users and problem drug users than the US and UK. They even have less soft drug use than we do. It seems to me that in places where what they consider soft drugs (Cannabis, Psilocybin mushrooms, etc) are illegal the percentage of people who use those drugs is much higher.

The Argentina idea may sound good at first but you'll just end up creating a criminal market again and you'll have the exact same scenario you have now.

[Havax]

The easiest way to explain this to people who are scared off by this position is simply: "Ron Paul wants to let the states decide since it's unconstitutional for the federal government to make a one-size-fits-all policy on the matter. There is virtually no chance any states will legalize hard drugs like heroin or cocaine anyway so you've got nothing to worry about."

[Brett85]

Legalizing things like drug use and prostitution make me uneasy, but I still support legalizing those things theoretically, not just at the federal level. I simply don't believe that it's ok for the government to throw people in jail for committing crimes in which there is no victim. I would say that IF there has to be state laws against some of the harder drugs, the penalty shouldn't be anything more harsh than paying a fine and performing some community service.

[tbone717]

Legalizing things like drug use and prostitution make me uneasy, but I still support legalizing those things theoretically, not just at the federal level. I simply don't believe that it's ok for the government to throw people in jail for committing crimes in which there is no victim. I would say that IF there has to be state laws against some of the harder drugs, the penalty shouldn't be anything more harsh than paying a fine and performing some community service.

I'm with you on this. As far as the issue in general, I think this is an area where the opposition can "trip up" Paul (and for that matter other ideological libertarians) and make them look like they are out of touch with the mainstream in America.

[The Free Hornet]

I do affirm the right of individuals to live their lives as they see fit so long as they are not harming others.

No you don't. As you state:


I guess the best thing would be to allow local governments to regulate as they see fit.

Trading a local tyrant for DC is not what the liberty movement is about. It is likley preferable to fight these issues locally where policies can be more nuanced, are paid for by those who implement them, and tend to not be as heavy handed. Freedom guaranteed would be best (to the extent possible) but tyranny guaranteed is the worst. Restoring these questions to the local level generates a hope that some correct answers will be found and rewarded. If you are in jail doing 15-20, it matters little if the law was state or federal.

Ron Paul is a defender of liberty, the platform is a seperate issue.