Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
V: if he were "king" he woulnd't "try to shove" anything down anyone's throats, he would have absolute authority. Congress would be meaningless. You don't understand what being "KING" means.
You've mis-defined "king" to mean "loud-mouth president". Apr 19, 2012
Masterrogue666: Guess you never studied alcohol prohibition. Drunk driving accidents went UP not down during prohibition. Youth drinking went UP not down during prohibition. Overall consumption of alcohol went UP not down during prohibition.
Separating the responsible users from irresponsible users in the eyes of the law doesn't get rid of the irresponisble people, but it at least stops wasting money and effort on the vast majority that *are* responsible, plus it sends all *their* alcohol money to GOOD law abiding citizens rather than criminal organizations. I like alcohol profits paying for Sea World and Busch Gardens much more than when it bought tommy-gunns for cartels.
The key thing to realize is that all the people you see arrested for misusing drugs would be arrested for misusing them even if they were legal for responsible usage, because the only reason they were caught in the first place is that they were negligent. The vast majority (over 99%) of drug users use their drugs SO RESPONSIBLY, that we'll NEVER catch them. The question to ask is, if they 're so responsible, why would we try? The ONLY problem they cause is their MONEY in aggregate fuels cartel activity, and there's NOTHING we can do to stop it, not even prohibiting possession of drugs outright. The intelligent thing to do is to focus the laws on the negligent and allow for LEGAL pathways for money to flow for the vast majority of responsible users as we have already done for alcohol.Apr 11, 2012
When Bush was president you had left-wing idiots that said word for word the drivel that Chatmandu002 typed. I guess there are also right-wing idiots. Anyone who refers to the President as "king" or says the president "thinks he is king" or "wants to make himself king" or "is going to appoint himself king" is not just stupid, they are actually mentally retarded. REGARDLESS of which party is in office. NOBODY is going to be KING. EVER.Apr 9, 2012
Its simply re-learning the lessons of the failure(s) of alcohol prohibition: You must have the law delineate between allowable responsible usage, and dangerous irresponsible usage. You cannot enforce a prohibition under the 4th amendment, and you don't need to. You just need to determine what activities regarding the drug are irresponsible and make them illegal, then you CAN enforce THOSE laws. There is nothing harmful about a person growing a plant in their home any more than them possessing alcohol in their home, or possessing a gun in their home. Adults CAN be responsible, and the law should allow for that. When it doesn't, as we learned during prohibition, violence erupts between cartels competing for access to the prolific markup prohibition provides for selling cheaply produced substances.Jan 5, 2012
Bill, even if you multiplied the seizures you cite by a factor of 10, it STILL wouldn't affect the price nor availability of drugs on the streets of Tempe by even 1%. The SCALE of seizures is overwhelmed by the SCALE of usage. The amount of drugs you cited get consumed DAILY in the Tempe area.
It doesn't matter if you seized 10 lbs of pot of 10,000. If you didn't reduce the price nor availability of the drug ON THE STREET, then you didn't do ANY good. All you did was saddle society with the costs to arrest, prosecute, convict, and incarcerate otherwise productive citizens. The problems of the drugs and usage are still there at 99.9% of their former rates.
It is time for people like you to GROW UP, and respect FACTS. The fact is that most people can use these "dangerous drugs" without every being detected. The FACT that alcohol prohibition's failed attempt proved is that you cannot enforce a prohibition under the 4th amendment. You can only engage the most brazen or encounter only the most negligent *1%*. The other 99% will continue to SUCCESSFULLY provide money to those willing to break the law to provide them with their freedom to exercise self-sovereignty. It is not the cartels that guarantee there will be someone to supply illegal drugs: it is the USERS. The users cannot be deterred by threat of unenforceable law. Alcohol prohibition's failure proves this. The solution is to separate RESPONSIBLE usage, from IRRESPONSIBLE usage. Just like we did with our alcohol laws. Notice how much the cartels make from selling illegal liquor? Nothing. There's not a large enough profit margin in it when american business can provide for the needs of the RESPONSIBLE users. The way to defeat the cartels is to bankrupting them. The only thing you need to do to bankrupt them is stop providing them with a product to sell and stop providing them with the artificial markup due to its illegality. You deal with the users either way. History proves this.Jan 5, 2012
Yes, because "rational human" absolutely KNOWS what EVERYONE ELSE feels.[wink]Dec 8, 2011
Or, we could just legalize and regulate the cannabis sale and consumption that goes on in america and cannot possibly be detected nor prevented by law enforcement because it poses no harm to anyone and does not create a victim to report the "perpetrator", and take 80% of the drug cartels funding out from under them.
We already deal with the activity, because drug interdiction efforts never stop even 1% of the activity. It is the same as with alcohol prohibition, prohibition doesn't affect the usage rates AT ALL, it just raises the crime and violence rates over 1000%.May 26, 2011
imanoid: you are WRONG about the mormons knowing about mrs brock. They knew SOMETHING was amiss but they DID NOT *KNOW* this was happening. They were INSTRUMENTAL in getting this exposed and bringing her to justice. Its the exact opposite of what you said.
That being said, ALL mormons should pray and think about their position on cannabis laws, and taking freedoms from a person who has harmed nobody.Jan 27, 2011
Ha ha hillstreet. This tax is your worst nightmare. With the MASSIVE amount of money it is going to bring in, and the need for tax revenue we have, this is going to make the law permanent and favored by even MORE people when "BAD" marijuana money is used for "good".Jan 26, 2011
Drop the deduction all-together. Private schools do not need public funding.Jan 25, 2011