LEAP

[Salvianaut]

I dunno if you guys have seen this yet, but I just stumbled over it.  It doesn't mention Salvia specifically, but it really applies to all drug laws.  It's a youtube video by the organization or Law Enforcement officers Against Prohibition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayaGk0TMDc

[Dominaduro]

I agree with LEAP 100%. I'm glad that this issue doesn't relate to salvia (yet). But yeah, for the states that already do have salvia illegal...it's just a waste of time and money.

[JDogHerman]

Here here. More people need to see this.

BTW something i heard Ron Paul wants to end the war on drugs.


***the one quote about the real end to a "war" in the video Ive been saying the same thing about another war we are in... the war on terror

[guitarplayer]

Great video, I'm glad more and more people are realizing what a waste of money and our police force drug prohibition is. Also, to the comment on Ron Paul's stance, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are both really big on ending drug prohibition, if you want to take a look at the Democratic side of the presidential race so far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38ma-nUmySo
http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/15/drugWarrantEndorsesKucinic.html

[Paradoxic]

Yeah right now I definitely think our country is heading away from prohibition. We are realizing the research potential of these substances and also we are all seeing how ineffective the drug war is.

Take a look at this new testing going on with psilocybin:
http://www.canceranxietystudy.org/

[Salvianaut]

I dunnmo if i am misunderstanding your comment, but Ron Paul is both Republican and anti-prohibition.  His voting record, at least, is almost all against prohibition and his comments strongly criticise it.  I can cite that if anyone wants.

Sry if my typing is a bit bad, i am both in the green forest and in the bitter sea, if you get what i man.  Alky and evryone's favrt. 

Anyway, paul is pretty awesome.  Super anti-gun control (i'm sorry, anyone who supports that is retarted; in every case gun control has been followed by an increase in crime; it would be better to provide every citizen a pistol and require a few monthly hours of range time.  That would practically end crime, or at least effective crime).

Ron paul is great cept for his war on terrorism.  I'mn not saying bush is perfect, but he is a decent man and a christian.  Despite what ppl in the drug community might say, christianity is basically a good religion, and makes sense.  After all, it looks set to be the most popular religion for a long while (or maybe a more simplified logic structure; but the idea of one grand creator and a holy trinity of body (jesus) soul (holy ghost) and the unity of the two (God) makes sense logically so it will probably stand considering it's present popularity.  Then consider the fact that if humans do not self destruct (unlikely considerint that, with presently available pulse drive fission engines we can travel .1c with 8 million ton ships and that with the increase in antimatter production world wide we might soon be able to feasibly create pulse drive antimatter ships which travel about .8 percent the speed of light (with 1950's technological estimates) we will probably be spreading to the stars whenever the stupid and self destructive anti-nuclear movements end) we will probably reach technology levels which allow us to create a "God-like" being.  What I'm saying is that, eventually, we will probably create a being who can freely move through all dimension (what's the current estimate, like 11?) which will be effectively god.  We will probably create it from the collective mental networks of humanity (neural nets would be pointlessly simple by that time), a single bieng which would be, effectively, god.  So, seeing as christianity is such a reasonably logical boil-down of religion (a simple, fairly logical model of religion) and it is currently so popular, the being who will become god will probably be created from a mostly christian set of minds.  Or, as I said, an even more boiled down, simple, logical, structure of humanity.  Say, for instance, just the concept that God is Love (one that I think works out logically) and "God is all" (God is the universe, everything, and we are like blood cells in his body.  I dunno, mebbe a bit more of a logical stretch, but I think it mamkes sence).  Anyway, that being being mostly of that belief, and the Universe being rapidly accelerating towards its entropic demise, he will recreate it.  He has the power to travel through time, after all, and through the higher dimensions.  Travelling through the ninth, tenth, eleventh, dimension freely would give such powers as to make Creation seem simple.  Now, in the view of the God he might not be doing something so impressive (after all, Creation from as many as eleventh dimensions must seem trivial) but in our view he is doing the best thing ever (we see in three dimension and about a second of the fourth, after all). 

Anyway, what I'm saying is that it makes sense that if Christianity or it's more logical nad simplistic future version persist, it will eventually (and therefor now is, through the continuous wheel of time layed out in the theory previously stated) become so.

I know that had nothing to do with topic.  Sry.  I dunno, I've just been following that logically yellow brick road for a while and been wanting to talk about it.  Sry.   I mean, it's halloween, u know, and i'm in one of the best college party towns in the US. 

Back to topic, yes, we are heading away from prohibition.  As the www expands and drug use naturally remains stable, knowledge expands.  Lack of knowledge - both among our reprasentatives and the populace - is what allows the war on drugs to continue.  upon halluconegens and mj, most certainly.  As that lack of knowledge shrinks, the end of the war on drugs (or the war on mj and hallucinogens, at least; perhaps coca; I think things like heroin and meth and crack will never be accepted fully, but I doubt there will always be a "war on drugs" against them; perhaps just mandatory treatment programs) draws nearer.  It will probably be within the lifetime of the people posting on this forum.  Definately the legalization of mj, probably the end of hallucinogen prohibition.  Certianly, the expansion into space will provide a flush of new prohibition-less zones.  I donj't see the helium-3 farming operations on the moon having strict laws, or the mining operations in the asteroid belt which we will se springing up within the next half century.  With the undeniable data which will emerge from such massive "drug experiments," and the increase of age prolongment (which will be coupled with anti-addiciton meds, safer drugs, etc), I think that the war on drugs will eventually just fade away.  Already, most ppl support legalization of mj.  Despite all of the conspiracy theories, we are a democracy.  Eventually mj will become legal, and that will lead to other harmless drugs becoming legal as well.

[Paradoxic]

Hmmm, I've never really thought too much about gun control, its not one of my issues. However, you got me interested. I looked up some statistics and it does appear that gun control really doesn't reduce crime. This makes sense to me for the most part because just like drugs people will get guns if they really want them. However, I do think that they there should be at least some regulation. I have the same opinion with drugs. Because if there is no regulation then things can get out of control. Basically I think guns would become too acceptable and at that point there would be an increase in crime because people will not be properly educated. Same goes for drugs, I think its much more effective to increase education about them rather then try to remove them from society, because like guns they are here to stay regardless.

However, I strongly disagree that bush is a decent man. He has no respect for the planet, other cultures or countries (except maybe Israel), human rights, or even U.S. laws. He may be Christian but he is using it in the wrong ways. The religion was based on good ideas, but its not about what was written down, its about how its interpreted. People pick and choose what they like and what works for them, thats just human nature. I mean if everyone followed the Bible it would be absolutely ridiculous. I read one clause saying that women on their periods are "unclean" and should not be touched and no one should not touch what they touch. I mean it was written thousands of years ago, what do you expect?

[Salvianaut]

Bush might stretch the law, but trust me if he had broken it in any tangible way the democratic majority would crucify him.  Since Clinton it is no longer taboo to go after the President, and the party rivalries right now are fierce.  He is portrayed so negatively, and yet is still supported throughout most of the country.  The media is simply against him; all but fox, which is very obviously a republican station.  An attack on America called for a swift and brutal response, and he provided it.  The terrorist organizations are mostly thrashed, shadows of their pre-war selves, and our worse problem now is foreign national fighters sent by our enemies.  He didn't do that bad, considering things from a military viewpoint.  The problem is the media is so stilted nowadays you only get one side of the issue.  PPL always want to say, it's about oil, it's about blood money.  The very same people who would be castigating the president, calling him coward in the streets if he simply allowed our oil sources to be cut.  People are fickle, and think what they are told to think. 

But anyway, once someone has actually decided what they think about politics, once they've made an informed decision, they seldom sway.  Never in debate.  So let's not bother.  I think everyone can agree that Ron Paul is pretty cool   I used to think that libertarians were a bunch of nuts, but when I actually read their statements on their websites, read about their goals, I realized that it was just most publicly visible libertarians being nuts, not the party.  They basically stand for freedom, in the constitutional sense.  You pay your taxes (which will be greatly cut) and they stay out of your lives.  No gun control, no drug control, etc.

And trust me, we would be better off without gun control.  We need a well armed, well trained population.  A mandatory range class in highschool, perhaps.  There is no better home defense than a gun and a dog.  Well, unless you have the money to like, put airtight partition locks in all of your doors so that you could trap and gas an intruder.  That'd be the shit.  Anyway, with a gun and a dog (not a lap dog, something with a voice) you have the advantage in the home against two or more armed men, any number of men without guns.  Why?  Well, the dog wakes you, it occupies the criminals (dogs are not easy targets running full speed through a darkened house), you know your house (the defender always has a defacto advantage) and you come upon your robber alert and prepared to fire.  Meanwhile, he's trying to peel a dog off of his face.  It is madness to tell a man that he may not be as well armed as his potential attacker when the police, admittedly, have no chance of actually preventing a home invasion. 

[Darty]

"Bush might stretch the law, but trust me if he had broken it in any tangible way the democratic majority would crucify him.  Since Clinton it is no longer taboo to go after the President, and the party rivalries right now are fierce."

Who is fierce? Obama? Hillary Clinton? The Democratic congress?? None of these people have the balls to stand up for what's right and haven't done much to heed the conservatives at all.


"He is portrayed so negatively, and yet is still supported throughout most of the country." 

Seriously? His approval ratings haven't been higher than 25% or so in quite a while.


"The terrorist organizations are mostly thrashed, shadows of their pre-war selves, and our worse problem now is foreign national fighters sent by our enemies.  He didn't do that bad, considering things from a military viewpoint."

Wow. Mostly thrashed? You kill one "terrorist" and ten more rally behind because of it. You kill one American soldier and more Americans rally behind their hero too. Destroying buildings does not destroy a collective cause; in fact, it reinforces it.


"People are fickle, and think what they are told to think."

That's what has kept Bush in office for this long, but people are slowly realizing what a terrible job he's done: that's why people are against him, not because they're fickle and told to do so. It's no coincidence that his approval ratings were highest after 9/11 because he used the event to levy support; it's also no coincidence that his rating has been steadily dropping alongside people realizing that they're involved in a war that simply cannot be "won" from a military standpoint. But you're right, from a military standpoint he hasn't done that bad. Just cost the lives of as many people that died on 9/11 over in the middle east with nothing more to show for it. 


"But anyway, once someone has actually decided what they think about politics, once they've made an informed decision, they seldom sway.  Never in debate.  So let's not bother."

This goes against one of the fundamentals of progress and is completely backward.
 

"And trust me, we would be better off without gun control.  We need a well armed, well trained population.  A mandatory range class in highschool, perhaps.  There is no better home defense than a gun and a dog.  Well, unless you have the money to like, put airtight partition locks in all of your doors so that you could trap and gas an intruder.  That'd be the shit.  Anyway, with a gun and a dog (not a lap dog, something with a voice) you have the advantage in the home against two or more armed men, any number of men without guns.  Why?  Well, the dog wakes you, it occupies the criminals (dogs are not easy targets running full speed through a darkened house), you know your house (the defender always has a defacto advantage) and you come upon your robber alert and prepared to fire.  Meanwhile, he's trying to peel a dog off of his face.  It is madness to tell a man that he may not be as well armed as his potential attacker when the police, admittedly, have no chance of actually preventing a home invasion."

Have you seen the movie "Bowling for Columbine"? It's pretty simple: America has the most guns per person in the entire world and, consequently, America has the most gun related deaths in the world, by a significant margin. I have to say, I don't think every person having a gun is the solution to anything. Guns heighten fear and fear is not something we should strive for.

I don't have anything against you, by the way. I just read what you posted and found that I disagreed with just about everything you said.

[Rochellena]

In Bowling for Columbine, don't they mention that Canada has fewer gun regulations and far fewer gun related deaths?  Also, look up the statistics in the UK. Once the gun ban went in to effect, violent crime increased dramatically. Gun laws don't prevent criminals from getting them, they just hinder the average person from being able to defend themselves from the afore mentioned criminals. Gun prohibition, like all prohibitions, are a waste of time and money and do not even come close to having the desired results.

[mconlonx]

LEAP spoke in our town, a great speaker named Christ (pronounced like 'grist') gave an anti-prohibition speech to our local Rotary Club(!). He had been invited by a member and I attended as a guest.

If you're into it, find out if there are any local community groups who would be open to a LEAP presentation--contact LEAP to find out who might be available to speak in your area and how you could go about setting something up. It's efforts like this that will get word out to ordinary people--Rotarians are businesspeople and the respect they gave Christ was pretty amazing to see. I'm not sure how many minds he changed, but they listened to what he had to say.

[mconlonx]

BTW, LEAP is happy to send you their anti-prohibitionist stance on their letterhead for use in support against state level salvia bans. They were one the only activist group to do so.