Well since its against the law im not sure how you can stop it. So stop whining and push congress to change the law, im sure they would like to tax that to death too.

if police were not mercenary thugs they would not enforce cruel and unjust laws against their fellow citizens. when did Americans become the enemy? police break laws constantly to protect each other. why do innocent people not enjoy equal protection under the law? congress are just people who are overstepping their constitutional bounds just like cops. we arent hurting anyone! were you MEN this bad during the crusades too? burning witches to save their souls and save society from The Devil WHO IS ALSO MALE BYT THE WAY
fuck congress they wont listen to us anymore we the people spoke 200 years ago but congress wont listen, we the people spoke in 1996 but congress wont listen, why should we listen to them? to you? leave us alone or else!

"if police were not mercenary thugs they would not enforce cruel and unjust laws against their fellow citizens. when did Americans become the enemy?"

Awesome disconnect from reality, dude! State and federal laws contradict... It's a very confusing situation - for example, after the DEA raided the WAMM facility the San Jose Police Department actually limited it's cooperation with the agency - and while painting a simplified view of the situation make it easier to think about the situation it's not entirely accurate...

In the long run, laws are probably going to lead towards national de-criminalization of pot... but then again, moral turpitude laws are not in general unconstitutional.

"moral turpitude"? What horseshit. I guess "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" are not part of reality now. Why are you even in America when you can't be happy here. May I recommend you move to Communist China where you can sit on a Moral Turpitude Committee and play guardian of the public morality all day and night. Or form your own religion, if you want to dictate morality to people. America is not for you. Nor is it for the San Jose Police. Did they end their assault on innocent people who were guilty of breaking only victimless morality laws after the WAMM raid? We all know they did not. Alcohol prohibition, non-copyrighted drug prohibition (Prozac is okay but pot is way too dangerous?! What a load of crap!), tobacco prohibition, sex trade prohibition, porno prohibition, not to mention endless taxes, licenses, and fees on people just trying to live their lives and go about their rightful business. Every thug in San Jose PD should be thrown in their own jail. Maybe 24 hours in a cell with Bubba the Jailhouse Rapist would change their minds; they're fond of subjecting prisoners to that torture, let's see how they like it for themselves.

I don't have a problem with live and let live - I'm merely informing you that in the United States it is perfectly acceptable to base laws off of morality - standards of public decency, for example. Generally it's kept to a local/regional level...

...Though considering the barely coherent rant (I'm being police) that you embarked upon, it would seem you don't quite grasp what I have to say.

No, it's not perfectly acceptable but thank you for "disconnecting from reality" yourself.

Ever hear of the supreme law of the land? I shouldn't have to deconstruct this phrase for you. Why is this so hard to grasp? The United States Constitution says you can't do it, so if you want to call yourself a law-abiding citizen then knock the "moral turpitude" enforcement shit off, yo. I don't care how many bible-thumping booze-fearing wife-beating old Pentacostal whackjobs your puppet stacks the Supreme Court deck with to tell us that black is white and up is down. "That all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

READ IT. IT'S THE LAW. OBEY THE LAW.

It doesn't take a PhD from Harvard Law School to make sense of this, and if such a PhD tells you black is white then have the common sense to know when you're being lied to. Oh, except when you're in a line of work that pays you to crack skulls when anyone violates the black-is-white edict. But that's not even morality anymore, that's hired thuggery.

The only thing barely coherent here, is your understanding of the US Constitution. Another product of our excellent educational system, eh? No wonder America is going to shit. You don't by chance have a PhD from Harvard Law School?

Actually, nobody has a PhD from Harvard Law School because they don't confer that degree. They confer the JD, LLM, and the SJD. It's pretty much the same way that a medical doctor gets an MD, not a PhD.

Wanting a PhD from Harvard Law School is a little like wanting an MFA from Harvard Business School... they just don't DO that.

"Ever hear of the supreme law of the land? I shouldn't have to deconstruct this phrase for you. Why is this so hard to grasp? The United States Constitution says you can't do it, so if you want to call yourself a law-abiding citizen then knock the "moral turpitude" enforcement shit off, yo. I don't care how many bible-thumping booze-fearing wife-beating old Pentacostal whackjobs your puppet stacks the Supreme Court deck with to tell us that black is white and up is down. "That all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

And off he gooooooes... Can't say it was ever a pleasure, but I hate to break the news to you that just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.

"just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's unconstitutional."

Huh?

You just turned this entire argument inside out. Nice try, but it won't work.

This isn't about what I like or dislike. This is about what the US Constitution, being the supreme law of the land of America, authorizes and forbids.

That law authorizes me and everyone else to a blanket enjoyment of our LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. It means that I am completely within my LEGAL RIGHT to smoke pot. Period. End of sentence. Step the fuck off.

The problem here is that YOU don't like it. But just because you don't like something, does not mean you have the right to declare it a crime and punish people for it. When are you going to learn that people have rights to live differently from you?

Hate pot all you want. Rant, rave, demonize, misinform, present research, draw cartoons, do whatever you like but stay out of OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. Keep your hands off of my LIBERTY. Keep your cops and your guns out of my PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Until I violate these same rights for someone else, anything you or anyone else does to directly and forcibly interfere in my LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS is a VIOLATION OF MY LEGAL RIGHTS for which you should be CONVICTED and PUNISHED.

You'd really be much happier in China, North Korea, or some other totalitarian regime obssessed with dictating personal choices to people and "guarding the public morality". Please leave. Now. You do not belong in America, if you can't respectfully co-exist with others.

You probably belong in jail - not for anyting you think or say, but because of the harm you cause to innocent people for merely enjoying their constitutional rights.

"That law authorizes me and everyone else to a blanket enjoyment of our LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. It means that I am completely within my LEGAL RIGHT to smoke pot. Period. End of sentence. Step the fuck off."

Despite your general lack of intelligence, I will bite and respond to your insipid spittle, child.

1. I think pot should be legal, I think the war on drugs is a failure...

...However, I have the mental cognizance to understand the law, and rights afforded, and I hate to break it to you, but yes, society in general can legislate laws that limits your freedom if it is percieved to endanger the public.

...And that is why a law against lewd behavior in public is constitutional, why you can't walk nude, why you can't smoke pot... Why you can't smoke in certain places.

You or I may not agree with a law, but that does not mean it is unconstitutional - your inability to grap this basic concept reveals the blatant and inate hypocrisy of what you write.

There once was a time when pre-marital sex was widely admonished by society, and illegal in most places - as times changed so did the laws, and odds are pot'll become legal fairly soon, but if you think our system was designed to move quickly and efficiantly, you will be perpetually disapointed.

Through violence and the threat of violence, any person or group "can" enforce their own laws upon the rest of society. That doesn't make it right. Laws against pre-marital sex were struck down because they were declared UNCONSTITIUTIONAL. Same as should be done right now with your modern prohibitionist drug laws today.
Right and wrong are not fuzzy and relative. These laws are wrong by the absolute black-and-white standard called inalienable human rights as acknowledged already by the supreme law of the land. These laws are themselves the real crimes (being a continued violation of our constitutional rights). Every one who enforces them, or has enforced them, has committed crimes against his fellow citizens and deserves punishment for his or her crimes. That is what you get when you choose a side and choose wrong. Hurting people for smoking pot is wrong. It is evil. It is not merely illegal today and legal tomorrow. It is WRONG, always was and always will be. The constitution even says so, making self-proclaimed "law enforcement" guilty of violating both our human rights and the constitution which they have sworn to uphold.
The Nuremburg Trials brought justice to those who were only "following orders" and "enforcing the law" too. We need a Nuremburg Trial now to punish the footsoldiers of this treacherous war on Americans that our tax-payed police call their war on Drugs. We have been betrayed by our own public servants who have through force and violence made themselves our masters.
I am a law-abiding citizen. I obey the US Constitution. Too bad police see themselves above THE LAW.

Wow there, cop-like dude. Can you not think for yourself? Would gravity cease to pull, or the speed of light become just a guideline, if someone declared it so in some book entitled Current Law?

Where is your moral compass, n5667?

"Hey let's go swing some niggahs from the bridge!"

"Isn't that illegal?"

"Used ta be, but they changed the law."

"Well alright then, get a rope!"

Man does not make laws. Man can only make guidelines for other men to follow, and back up those guidelines with threats of attack if those guidelines are not followed. You call these "laws" and believe them imbued with magical powers of righteousness from the numerology called democracy.

An angry mob is not enobled at the 51% mark. Do you understand that, n5667?

You must be some kind of brainwashed soldier child who bows down at the sight of a shiny tin badge. It is a pity your father never taught you the real meaning of authority. Tragic that you can't make up your own mind about right and wrong, nor allow others the same privilege. You prefer to sacrifice your own independence in worshipping at the altar of the State, and sacrifice all of us with it.

Please return to your room. When you're ready to behave like an adult, we'll call for you.

Imagine people like you voting. That scares me.

RO out

A delightful argument you put forth Ralpho-0.

But your complete and utter inability to grasp the concept I'm stating is really quite pathetic when coupled with your pithy attempts at insult.

I have never touched upon the subject of right and wrong. I never even spoken of the law in the general since; therefore your delightfully braindead analogy regarding the lynching of blacks is completely irrelevent...

Please post a comment when you actually understand the topic - as it stands now you come across only as a stupid twit...

I believe in a great deal of personal freedom, that is my opinion - but alas, that is not the way our government works, and I'm afraid, my dear man, that the laws dictating what the people have the right to legislate are quite unfortunately murky.

But noting the propensity for partipents on this website to spew libel and insults at every turn, I can see that attempting to engage in any meaningful conversation is probably fruitless - Who knows, behind the vitriol and stupidity, I bet there might almost be a valid argument! Too bad you're the one trying to make it, and failing miserably in the process.

>to spew libel and insults at every turn

Well now, there may be a fair amount of insults thrown around, but no libel has occurred against you.

Why? Because you're an anonymous (actually, pseudonymous) poster. Since your detractors and other readers don't know who you are, then you can't really be libelled.

And even if folks did know who you were, it would still not be libel, since no claims of "fact" are being made against you, but merely insulting opinions.

Thanks for sharing. =)