The Point: Police can and do seize property without a warrant or court review FIRST. The property owner then must act to recover the property, (very costly) or loose the property. This is truly a sad time in our country.
High Times are Here Agian
by ThiChi 15 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
ofcmad
Thi Chi--
Very interesting points.. my head is just spinning with spin:I must disagree.
Fine. You can disagree all you would like. First, in my statement I was giving personal experience. How you can argue that is beyond me.
Secondly, I did not say that there are more accidents caused by marijuana usage then alcohol. It is obvious that isn't the case. But your statement is misleading when the "old-timer" cop said, "I have never respond to a bad car accident where the people involved were just high on pot. I have with alcohol.” BAD car accidents...Well, that doesn't mean that he hasn't worked car wrecks with people that were under the influence of marijuana. (By the way, I HAVE worked bad car wrecks from people under the influence of marijuana, for clarification marijuana ONLY, and yes, they were impaired because they were high).The per sei limit federally for every state is .08 . This study would need to be reviewed since there has been scientific evidence presented since 1970 to lower the b.a.c. to the current .08 enacted. Obviously the scientific evidence would have to show the affects of alcohol/intoxicants on the human body. In fact, you can be declared "less safe" to drive at .06. Therefore, the studies would need to be adjusted accordingly if they are basing it on a .15 or .10 standard.
Cannabis does not impair driving performance as much as alcohol
I never said it didn't. But it still impairs. That was the point.Obviously, you have clarified the distinction between the two types of forfiture. To break it down to layman's terms.. the criminal forfiture occurs to secure evidence of a crime. Obviously this is governed by the constituion under the fourth. In fact, this is NECCESSARY to protect the citizens in obtaining convictions for public offenders.
You know as well as I do that the fourth amendment covers the qualifications for a warrantless seizure of person or property. Your arguement seems to lie with the US Constitution. Of all the cases you have "quoted" (and I don't doubt you got these quotes from your latest copy of High Times, (only kidding), are governmental agencies that have acted outside of the Constitution guidelines set out by the fourth. I'm sure that punitive actions have been taken against these agencies where the person was wronged. And well deserved.
Never at anytime do I claim this system is fair. But at no point am I going to sit back and listen to the spin spewed forth here that sounds like there are no victims in an individual's choice to use marijuana.
Please post who you copied this from ---
Law enforcement agencies should be required to publish an explanation each time they seize and retain private property.
BTW, we already do.. those are the nice little cars and trucks seized by agencies that say "THIS CAR SEIZED FROM A DRUG DEALER - D.A.R.E."ofcmad
(edited because i screwed up the quote brackets) -
LB
I grew up in the 60's. Pot smoking was a way of life for many. The vast majority of people I've known over the years that smoked pot didn't fare very well in life.
I would encourage anyone smoking pot or considering smoking pot to think differently. Altering your judgement in this manner isn't all that bright.
Oh by the way, my loser brother in law used to beat my sister fairly often after smoking pot. That is just unbelievable to think that pot smokers are too mellow to beat on the wife. Just stupid.
Never Squat With Yer Spurs On -
avengers
Whether anyone disagrees or not here in Holland you have so-called 'koffie-shops'. Anybody over the age of 16 can go in and buy just about any kind of hashish or marijuana. It's not legal but the state allows it as long as no hard drugs like meth, crack, cocaine, heroine are sold. (hash and weed are 'soft'drugs.) For a 'pothead' Holland is a 'paradise'. So come on over.
-
Abaddon
Being a Brit who smokes pot in Holland, I find the British looking at re-classifying cannabis quite funny.
I think I'm right in saying it's been this way in Holland for twenty years.
In research I did at University I found that British teenager were MORE likely to smoke pot on a regular basis than Dutch teenagers. More Dutch teenagers have experimented with pot, but it's not 'cool, illegal, edgey' or whatever; their DAD might smoke it, which is death to ALL conceptions of coolness, so it's just not as popular here.
Also, coffee shops allow a 'sanitised' environment for obtaining drugs. People can make good money running a coffee shop, and few are stupid enough to muck it up by stocking hard drugs.
This means your casual pot smokers don't get hit on by their dealer whose got some 'really nice speed' or whatever in stock, which is a typical method of progression from one drug to another.
Statistics show, for example, that Heroin users as a group in Holland are getting older, i.e. the AVERAGE age of heroin users is rising, as few new users join the ranks. This is probably in part due to the sanitisation of supply.
Now Britain, along with Belgium and Portugal, are joining Holland in NOT a more liberal attitude toward drugs, but a more pragmatic attitude toward drugs. You can't stop it; the USA's dumb War on Drugs (result, more drugs and cheaper drugs; let's hope the War on Terrorism is better fated) is proof of this as is the Prohibition period of the 20's and 30's. Of course, they make it sound lie they're inventing the wheel!!
I smoke pot regulary, have a life, have been promoted a few times in the past year or so. There are many people like me, both here in Holland, the UK, and the USA.
As with any drug, ABUSE (as distinct from USE) is a combination of internal factors and the nature of the drug. Most people abuse drugs because they need to abuse drugs; they already were a 'loser', or a 'wife beater' beforehand, and are using the drugs as pleasure instead of for pleasure. Alcohol is notorious for increasing aggresion, cannabis for inducing relaxation.
Just as a guy can go to the bar and have a few brews each day without ever abusing alcohol, so can a drug user USE their drugs without abusing them.
I've known one guy who got aggressive on pot, and I turn into a big cuddly kitten when I drink a lot of booze, but these individual experiences don't change the 'normal' results of taking certain substances.
Essentailly though, it's human rights. If I'm not harming another, I can do as I will.
-
144thousand_and_one
Thi Chi,
I think I overreacted a bit in that thread, so I'm also sorry.
I agree with your view on asset forfeiture. Here in Cali, we had a case of a landowner in Malibu who had a large ranch (I don't recall size, but around 50 acres of some of the most expensive land in Cali). His last name was Scott. His live in girlfriend was spending $100 bills around town, which allegedly led to suspicion. The park service began running title searches on Mr. Scott's land, salivating at the idea of an asset forfeiture. Law enforcement conducted aerial surveillance, and based on such surveillance, a search warrant was obtained to search for a large marijuana crop Mr. Scott was allegedly growing.
Law enforcement raided Mr. Scott's house, and Mr. Scott, who was drunk at the time, viewed these officers, who were clad in black, as intruders, and armed himself. He was shot dead, and the raid turned up absolutely no marijuana (or any other contraband), not even a seed. The decedent's girlfriend filed a $5M lawsuit against the county, and the case created much controversy due to the absolute lack of contraband and the title searches performed by the park service prior to the raid.
Many in the community viewed Mr. Scott's death as a very unfortunate result of the asset forfeiture laws in this state.