Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 7074690" data-attributes="member: 549629">Interesting addition to the thread pioneer, thanks.Now that Lazy and mine's silly argument seems to be over, maybe we can get back on track towards an interesting discussion on the topic. Id like to add some history to the discussion, how marijuana was illegalized in this country. Its a story of govt over stepping its authority, to do what it felt was right, no matter the means necessary.The federal govt illegalized marijuana in 1937. Before this, several states had adopted laws illegalizing it, but the laws were notoriously unenforceable. These state laws were brought about not due to any testing of the substance, or any correlation to killing brain cells, OD'ing on it, or even the popular idea that it is 'easily abusable'. At that time, marijuana was seen as a drug primarily used by Mexicans. It was thought that if the substance was illegalized, it would help stem the tide of illegal immigrants (amazing how some things never change).But again, these laws were not really enforceable, so the federal govt decided to step in and turn up the heat. Harry Anslinger is credited with making this happen. He is the father of 'reefer madness', the push to propagandize the substance as dangerous. Its this reefer madness that spawned early television ads depicting people literally going insane after trying marijuana. One such ad showed two small children with a joint, trying it for the first time. As one boy took his forst hit off the joint, he became crazed, and immediately jumped through a window of his apartment building, killing himself. The mother ran to the window and screamed, followed by a narrator coming on and saying "this could happen to YOUR child". Yes, smoking one single hit turned people into crazed, suicidal lunatics. Much of that propaganda is still alive today.But simply scaring the piublic into staying away from the substance was not enough. Anslinger pushed further. He knew the federal govt could not simply illegalize the substance, as it would violate constitutional mandates that defined state versus federal powers. He also knew prohibition did not work (also the reason for the reefer madness propaganda). He, and the fed, wanted to illegalize it however, using any means necessary. And they found that means by looking at how the thompson submachine gun was illegalized.Then, as now, the NRA had power, and outlawing the thompson outright was not possible. Right to bare arms and all that. But due to the popular use of the weapon by gangsters, they decided it must be outlawed under any means. So they devised a plan, the thompson was not outlawed, but it had a 'tax stamp' law devised which said you must obtain this tax stamp in order to lawfully own a thompson. The fed then proceeded to not distribute, or even make, a single one of these tax stamps. Viola, they didnt technically illegalize the thompson, but they did create a way in which one could not be owned legally.Anslinger borrowed this plan and applied it to marijuana. A marijuana tax stamp law was written which also stated marijuana was legal to posses only if you own the tax stamp. The catch 22 was, in order to purchase the tax stamp, you must posses a certain amount of marijuana. Of course, if you showed up to purchase your tax stamp, with the marijuana in hand as you were suppose to, you were already in violation of the law by possessing that marijuana without the tax stamp. An unavoidable legal catch-22. Fair, right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif In reality, the govt knew it was impossible to avoid, so they never even printed a single one of these tax stamps. Not one.The very first day that the tax stamp law went into affect, a man named Samuel R. Caldwell was arrested for possessing the substance without the tax stamp, and sentenced to 4 years hard labor at Leavenworth.In 1970, even the federal govt had to acknowledge this swindle was unconstitutional, and created the controlled substance act which is the father of all modern day drug laws.So I ask this, if the feds had to come up with this back door plan to illegalize the substance, why should we trust them?Id also like to note that back in the 30's when Anslinger was devising his tax stamp law, a committee under mayor La Guardia of New York, did an independent study to determine the effects of marijuana. This commission found the substance to be "relatively harmless" and the marijuana problem to be a medicinal problem, not a legal one. But this commission was ignored, while Anslinger's reefer madness testimony in front of congress was taken as gospel. Anslinger later admitted he lied in much of his testimony before congress. In 1970, yet another committee was appointed by President Nixon, the Shaffer committee, to study the effects of marijuana. Nixon set up this commission, fully expecting it to confirm the dangerous effects of marijuana, and expected to use it as political ammunition to help pass the controlled substances act. To Nixon';s surpirse, the Shaffer Commission came to virtually the same conclusions as the La Guardia committee had decades ago, that marijuana was "relatively harmless and that drugs were a medical problem not a criminal one".So the reality is, the illegalization of marijuana was brought about by racism against Mexicans, flat out lying by the federal govt to shove an agenda down the public's throat at any cost, while almost completely ignoring independent scientific testing of the substance, and a systematic propagandized program that depicted the substance as something it isn't: dangerous.Remember this story the next time you ask yourself if the govt can be trusted.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list