Jump to content

More Than Half Of Arrests Last Year Were For Marijuana..

greenbuddha

Recommended Posts

LITLJON Advanced Member

LITLJON

Posted
Posted
FROM THE ARTICLE

Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 88 percent (758,593 Americans) were charged with possession only. The remaining 99,815 individuals were charged with "sale/manufacture," a category that includes virtually all cultivation offenses.

 

I wonder of that 758,593 how many were convicted for under a oz. and how much was spent to prosecute and incarcerate these individuals? Also how much could have been made by treating them as a infraction with a fine. Even at 1/2 that amount +$37,929,650 (almost 38mil) at $100 a fine compared to a 1/4 amount being incarcerated for a year -$6,258,392,250 (6 1/4 bil). Just a guesstimate on the numbers. Positive numbers are better negative ones, unless your a politician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bisharoo Advanced Member

Bisharoo

Posted
Posted

Why are the fiscal conservatives not enraged by this?

 

Rob420 you probably already know why.

The term "fiscal conservative" implies conservative on some things but not others. The so-called conservatives of today are called conservatives by the media and politicians but are no more conservative than any other stateist. They are just different flavor of state control of the masses.

The true conservatives, which the media must black out and ignore or impune by name calling (because the media and most elected and non-elected officials hate individual human rights) were originally the Jeffersonian Liberals. That is when Liberal stood for Liberty from oppression for each individual human to be able to choose whatever they wish in life (as long as they do not infringe on the rights of any others) for their own pursuit of happiness.

So, today's fiscal conservative wants to protect individual rights when it comes to property rights or government spending (to a small degree usually), but they want to control many other choices that individual humans want to make.

And, even though it harms no others and helps the individual human using the medication, today's so-called conservative or fiscal conservative see a huge conflict with the waste of money and resources on the one hand and their hatred for individual human rights (free will or choice) on the other.

All stateists, whether they be fiscal conservatives or marxist pragmatists and evrything else in between always work against protecting all rights of all humans. They pick which personal choices they will approve and which ones they will disapprove of, and then decide which group of voters is likely to vote for their brand of stateism and usually join that party.

Now by demonizing the other main political party you can make many people think you are so different from each other, as Joseph Stalin (supposedly on the left politically) spoke of his contemporary and fellow progressive Adolph Hitler. Stalin said that there was "not 2 degrees difference between the two"), and he is exactly right. All stateists want to control our lives to some degree or other (tyranny).

Fiscal conservatives or today's psuedo-conservatives are just another flavor of stateist who hares your individual human rights on some level or other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
greenbuddha Advanced Member

greenbuddha

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Rob420 you probably already know why.

The term "fiscal conservative" implies conservative on some things but not others. The so-called conservatives of today are called conservatives by the media and politicians but are no more conservative than any other stateist. They are just different flavor of state control of the masses.

The true conservatives, which the media must black out and ignore or impune by name calling (because the media and most elected and non-elected officials hate individual human rights) were originally the Jeffersonian Liberals. That is when Liberal stood for Liberty from oppression for each individual human to be able to choose whatever they wish in life (as long as they do not infringe on the rights of any others) for their own pursuit of happiness.

So, today's fiscal conservative wants to protect individual rights when it comes to property rights or government spending (to a small degree usually), but they want to control many other choices that individual humans want to make.

And, even though it harms no others and helps the individual human using the medication, today's so-called conservative or fiscal conservative see a huge conflict with the waste of money and resources on the one hand and their hatred for individual human rights (free will or choice) on the other.

All stateists, whether they be fiscal conservatives or marxist pragmatists and evrything else in between always work against protecting all rights of all humans. They pick which personal choices they will approve and which ones they will disapprove of, and then decide which group of voters is likely to vote for their brand of stateism and usually join that party.

Now by demonizing the other main political party you can make many people think you are so different from each other, as Joseph Stalin (supposedly on the left politically) spoke of his contemporary and fellow progressive Adolph Hitler. Stalin said that there was "not 2 degrees difference between the two"), and he is exactly right. All stateists want to control our lives to some degree or other (tyranny).

Fiscal conservatives or today's psuedo-conservatives are just another flavor of stateist who hares your individual human rights on some level or other.

 

Bish.. You have done your homework!

 

As you pointed out, MOST of today's 'conservatives' will say they are for the citizen's individual rights... but THEY want to be the ones to define JUST WHAT those rights will BE.

 

It is right and correct IMHO to limit a person's acts if they would harm another person, violence, robbery, etc., but to limit what a person may do with their OWN body is something that should NOT be determined by someone else.

 

If a person uses a chemical substance to the point that they lose reason and they pose a hazard to others then that person should be offered 'help' in the form of 'treatment' NOT a billy club over the head OR incarceration. If this person is stealing or harming others in getting the chemical substance they use, then yes, that then becomes a 'legal' issue to be dealt with by the law enforcement agencies.

 

Unfortunately, today BOTH of our major political parties are so busy chasing the money from 'big business' to get elected or re-elected the 'rights' of the individual citizen become of no value and the 'law enforcement agencies' are left to 'regulate' and control the citizenry .

 

And anyone that does not know by now that 'law enforcement' is a 'business' that works to maintain the tax money it gets by 'tallying' up 'crime' statistics has been wearing blinders.

 

Don't forget to VOTE this November 2nd... and HOPE that it does some good this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...