digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Decriminalize Pot: Prison Room Needed for Pedophiles & Politicians

chron.com — Texas Ind. gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman for the decriminalization of marijuana to avoid further clogging state prisons with nonviolent offenders. "We've got to clear some of the room out of the prisons so we can put the bad guys in there, like the pedophiles and the politicians," said Friedman, a humorist and author.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • CloakandSwagger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+48I don't know much about where Kinky stands on other issues, but he's making a whole lot of sense on this one.
    Goes to show we still have some cool mofos down in the south.


    • jfreeman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25He proposes securing our border from all illegal entry by paying 5 Mexican generals to enforce it any way they see fit, and to cut funding for athletic programs in schools, saying that companies like Nike can pay for it if they want teams to use their products.

      I like him for those positions and the fact that he's not a career politician. The reality is he stands little chance of winning.
    • BigBaRay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I support you on this Kinky. I am as Conservative as they come and I'll go to the line with anybody about G.W.B, but this is one issue that makes sense.
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -19/+6I have a qualm with marijuana legalization. If it were to be legalized, you would see the exact same thing happen to it that happened to tobacco. Big companies would take over production of it, due to legislation that would outlaw the growing of it by anyone but those with a license (thanks to lobbyists).

      They would, in turn, dole out crappy weed rife with a bunch of toxic chemicals, and it would take 10 or 20 years for a whistleblower to come out and tell us that we're smoking deadly, addictive joints, and by that point, people would be so far addicted, they wouldn't even care.
    • TheBarge, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14@dclowd9901

      If it was legal, you could always just grow it yourself for free. Oh yeah.
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Yeah, you can grow tobacco yourself if you want to for personal use too, it's just that nobody does it.
    • funkpucker, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5@dclowd9901
      Are you... ummm, nuts?
      What's _more_ likely is that they'd create tremendous variety, make it more potent, and put it in wonderfully useful and visually creative packaging.
      For the addiction aspect, they could just add a little crack.
    • LoungeActx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11He's not talking about legalizing it. He's talking about decriminalizing it. Making it so that if you get caught you basically pay a fine instead of going to jail.
    • JackyTreehorn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I can imagine late night trips to the corner store to pick up a pack of Marlboro Extra Stickies.
    • asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Tobacco is significantly harder to grow and it ruins the soil so you have to change that annually. With pot you sort of just set it and forget it. But that's not the point. Most people will buy it instead of growing their own. Same with distilling alcohol.

      What *might* happen is you might have people who grow it in large amounts and then give it away for very cheap/free just for the hell of it. Because the pot community is like a big family. Of course legalizing it will probably kill that whole culture.

      Rolling Tobacco is NOT taxed. You can buy 50 grams of it for a few dollars. Most people opt to buy the pre-rolled cigs even though they are more than triple the price of rolling Tobacco in some places.
    • positron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@funkpucker
      Funny, because there are more varieties of marijuana, with more potency, now than ever before in history. Doesn't look like the War on (some) Drugs has managed to stop that development at all.
    • ellisgl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@LoungeActx:
      IIRC - California is that way. I remember growing "Shrooms" was legal in Texas until President Clinton signed a major drug law that included "Shrooms" that to be a controlled substance. Of course the laws in Texas were jacked up about them (and other laws specially recently ---- personal fit here: can't transport hand guns with out a license which makes it hard to transport unarmed guns to a firing range)

      Of Course I just watched a new episode of SWAT (A Dallas based show) where they were ripping apart houses for marijuana.... Funny thing is they didn't find anything - and guess who has to pay to repair the house? Not Dallas County...
  • AliceLillie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+48Friedman's marijuana ideas make a great deal of sense. In fact this is the only thing that does make any sense.

    To ban a plant that grows just about anywhere because of a mild intoxication effect is preposterous, especially in the light of the history of marijuana prohibition. There was this book that I bought from a NORML booth in Venice, CA back in the '90's called something like The Emperor Wears No Clothes. Get it.

    And, as most people know by now, the medicinal benefits of cannibis have been proven over and over. It helps cancer patients with the nausea caused by their medications, helping them keep their pills down. It does much more than that for some critically ill patients. Even the establishment is reluctantly allowing baby steps towards it's medical use in some states.

    My own personal opinion (and I am neither a medical or recreational user as I have no need for any drugs) is that all laws prohibiting, restricting, regulating or taxing cannibis or hemp should be repealed forthwith.

    Individuals own their bodies and their lives. They are a gift from God to individuals. The government has no proper stake at all.

    Medical marijuana patient Steve Kubby was instrumental in getting Prop. 215 on the California ballot and passed and then ran for governor of California in 1998. He nearly died as a result of constant legal harassment since.

    Now, Kubby has announced that he will seek the Libertarian Party's nomination for President in 2008.

    I, Alice Lillie, aka anti-Bush Alice, wholeheartedly endorse Steve Kubby.

    Learn more at http://www.Myspace.com/stevekubby . If that doesn't work, link to him through my own Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/alicelillie (and see my blog while you're there!).
    • Libberkey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Here's some advice from Steve Kubby about how to protect yourself from people who would want to harm you (not thugs; the police!).

      http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=94
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15"Individuals own their bodies and their lives. They are a gift from God to individuals. The government has no proper stake at all."

      So...

      We should also not be penalized for trying to kill ourselves.

      We should not have to wear seat belts in vehicles.

      Its our bodies, we should do what ever we want with them.
    • Diabolickungfu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm surprised you actually agree with that Tuba. Or was that supposed to be sarcasm?
    • joerod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2well said!
    • mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21"We should not have to wear seat belts in vehicles."

      There is actually an argument against that one that makes some sense. Getting in a car wreck w/o you safetly belt isn't going to kill 100% of the time, or even close to it with modern vehicles. It is going to hurt you very, very badly, though. In which case your insurance pays the bills and the money for this comes from all the insured people with that company... since the state requires you to have insurance to drive a car they should be allowed to take reasonable steps to keep the cost of insurance down as much as possible.. in this case by requiring seat belts.

      Personally, I think you should be allowed to not wear a seat belt if you chose, but if you are pulled over for some other offense and you're not wearing it, or if an officer observes you not wearing it, you don't get a fine they just send a notice to your insurance co. and they are required to impose an additional 'unsafe driver' fee on your bill which pays into a statewide fund to help cover the cost of medical care for people in auto accidents. But that's just me.
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@mrgreen4242
      That makes too much damn sense. Somebody get this guy outta here.
    • omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@TubaTechno

      I'd agree with that. It is your life and your body. If someone kills themselves, it's unfortunate, but shouldn't be illegal. Either you own your body or you don't. All or nothing.
    • cragga, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5pesonally, i feel things like seatbelt laws are ***** up darwinism for us all, if the dumb ones never get killed off they just keep becoming president, and you know how much that can suck.
    • ellisgl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@TubaTechno: Oh hell yes!!! The government the way I see should protect use from other people. What we do to ourselves should not be their concern. Suicide is the ultimate freedom --- I know people are going to bitch about that statement --- But I personal do not wish for it or want to ever to happen. I have had many people in my life family and friends choose that path.

      The seat belt issue: There are several types of people that don't wear it. A lot think not wearing it will save their lives from my own personal experience. My self - I always wear mine and try to drive cars with air bags, anti-lock breaks and traction control.
  • Foenetik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I've met Kinky and he's a good man,hopefully he can get the votes.
  • RatherDashing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21In NY it is already decriminalized. If you are caught with less than one oz (little more than 28 grams) in one bag, they will just take it away from you and write you a $50 ticket and send you on your merry way (well not so merry, you just lost $250 of bud and got a $50 ticket). The problem comes with a) having the marijuana in plain sight b) carrying it in two or more bags, or having empty bags in the region of the marijuana c) handing the marijuana to another party or d) smoking it, then you are in trouble.
    Doesn't make a whole lot of sense but its better than most states.....
    I'll give you one guess as to how I know all of this...and I'm not a lawyer or a cop ;)
    • mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3That's how Ann Arbor, MI is (or was, not sure if it's changed)... I think it's stupid. I'm all for decriminalizing it, but this half way stuff is stupid. By letting people have it for personal use but prosecuting dealers or people who are actually caught using it you are encouraging said dealers to commit crimes.
    • bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ohio is around the same, not quite as lenient, but close. Except a mandatory drivers license revocation for six months.
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5$250 for one ounce!

      I'm glad I live in Michigan!
  • elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -24/+3I haven't read it yet, but in response to the title:

    Yes, we need to decriminalize pot, but the other part is wrong. There's nothing illegal with being a pedophile, and politicians should be shot, not jailed.
  • greymaxcat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Hell... I'm moving to Texas!
    • drlha, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Only steers and queers come from Texas, Private Cowboy.
    • 10001110101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You know, pot is nearly legal in Canada too... You may want to rethink which direction you relocate too..
    • drlha, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Phillistines! How can you digg me down for a Kubrick reference. ;)
    • BigBaRay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Kubrick, also made Eyes wide shut. I realize he died during the filming, or in my opinon it killed him. End result is this great man lost a ton of credit and status. Therefore his quotes hold less water.

      How can I quote that terrible banging piano sound in Eyes wide shut?? Although now that I think about it Nicole kiddman did spend a bit of time in her panties.... Maybe the movie wasnt so bad.
    • 10001110101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I may be dugg down for this, bue Eyes Wide Shut is actually one of my favorite Kubrick films..
  • Foenetik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5While it might not be illegal to be a pedophile as long as they don't act out on others it's certainly immoral, and immorality goes hand in hand with being a politician.
    • toppgun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3thats why we need more statesmen and fewer politicians
    • Funkly, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1praise the ummm.. I dont beilive in that crap.. so well said topgun
  • PowerCow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Decriminalized also doesnt need to mean soft. You can still have high fines, and forced rehab, you just dont go to jail or have a criminal record.
  • chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Even as one of the 'conservative' diggers, we could do a lot to save money on the prison system:

    1. Decriminalize pot.
    2. Pedophiles do not goto jail, they go in the gound (much easier to keep track of them that way).
    3. Violent criminals goto an island somewhere - just drop them off and let them fend for themselves.
    • wozley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11That'll make another Austrailia.
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"2. Pedophiles do not goto jail, they go in the gound (much easier to keep track of them that way)."

      Unless they're female and really really hot, then the government should send them to me.
    • bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2like school teachers from the south do you? :)
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8George Carlin did a great bit about making whole states a prison system.

      Colorado and Wyoming (because they are square and easy to fence off).

      He said put sex offenders in one state and all other violent offenders in the other state.

      Then make a gate on the border that opens once a week for one hour, and film it and make it a reality TV show.

      Genius.
    • cragga, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4island idea, good.

      killing, not so good.

      try not to become the thing you hate just for vengeance's sake.
  • Langford, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Hmm, I don't know... I would rather see copyright reform than drug legalization, but I can appreciate the angle presented. If it resulted in drug related automobile accidents, it would cause a lot of backlash. Whatever they did, they would have to approached it very carfully.
    • allatti2d, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Langford --
      Please show me one case where someone smoking pot caused a car accident.

      Better yet, show me one case of someone actually getting up to drive after they've been smoking pot! More likely they stay on the couch or by the fridge, watching cartoons.

      I've always said the way to bring peace to the world is to put all the world leaders in a big room, give them all a couple of joints and a couple of bags of Fritos. No more war, I guarantee it!
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Maybe if reasonable people who use marijuanna are allowed to participate more in the political process then copyright reform won't be too far behind.
    • BigBaRay, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3We would need better faster drug tests to determine if people where high when the accident occured. If they are high and they caused it they should face the max penelty. (reckless endanger / involuntary Manslaughter).

      The drug tests would help alot but they must be able to tell that you are high not just holding some thc in your bloodstream.(very difficult I am sure).

      Americans would be shocked with the freedoms we could have if we would just be accountable for ourselves and stop the "I'm a victom" philosophy.
    • asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1No. What we need is NOT a chemical drug test. You might not agree with this morally but the truth is that some people CAN drive while they're intoxicated, be it on LSD, shrooms, Marijuana or Alcohol. Now, that being said, some people CAN NOT drive while they are sober!

      We need a test that can check the ability of the driver. A test to check the awareness, alert level, reflexes and so on of the driver. This will help us take BAD DRIVERS off the road. Bad drivers might do drugs, but drugs don't necessarily cause bad drivers. At least not when it comes to Tobacco or Marijuana.

      From experience, people should NOT drive while taking anti-anxiety meds. Benzos and tranquilizers can be worse than Alcohol.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You should read up on the studies. An Australian study found stoned people were less likely to die in a car wreck. If pot affected fine motor skills, there would be no jazz or skateboarding.
  • bntphoretwunny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7go kinky
  • wozley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Decriminalize marijuana? Do you even know the consequences!?!

    1. Slow drivers.
    2. Cheetos, Funions, and Dorito prices will rise.
    3. Skateboard lanes on roads will be a necessity.
    4. Fire safety will be paramount.
    5. Another Cheech & Chong movie.

    Do you REALLY want that?
  • 10001110101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4From the article:

    He also said he would favor a review of people already imprisoned on marijuana charges to "rehab them, try to get them back into society."

    I'd be interested in knowing what sort of 'rehab' a pothead needs...

    "No, chips and Joe Louis ARE NOT food groups!"
    "Did you remember your keys?"
  • rancemo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"He did say that he doesn't favor making marijuana legally available for purchase."

    That's dumb! Why decriminalize, then leave the black market that is mostly at the root of the problem? Put it in the liquor and drug stores, and maybe put a few standards in place for manufacturing, processing, and selling... Everyone would know what they are buying, what it contains, and where it came from.... It would also make it dirt cheap, so people wouldn't need to steal to buy it.
    • bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Since when do people steal to buy weed? I have never heard of anyone ever say they stole to buy weed.

      To quote bob sagat, "Did you ever suck @$%# for weed?"
    • rancemo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2There are definitely some shady operations involved with weed...
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I dugg your comment bemenaker, but I disagree.

      Maybe adults don't steel for weed like they do for hard drugs, but teenagers certainly do.

      Teenagers shouldn't be smoking weed even if it is legal, I know. I'm just saying if the prices were lower they wouldn't have to steal to buy it.

      And poor people who smoke pot would have a little more money. It's the weed tax on the poor! That's what it should be advertised as. Imagine how much money we could save the nation by legallizing it. It's probably more than the tax cuts Bush wanks to every night.
  • Jawood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Hell, just make legal. I don't see any reason why pot is illegal. Alcohol is much more toxic to the body, so it's not health reasons; there hasn't been any research that backs up the premise that pot leads to other drugs....I think it's illegal because there's some groups out there who just don't like it.

    There was an editorial in yesterday's Wall Street Journal by a cop who thinks drugs should be made legal. It would also stop the innocent people who gunned down by gangs AND police - look up "No Knock Warrants"....
  • jsls, on 10/12/2007, -0/+43. Violent criminals go to an island somewhere - just drop them off and let them fend for themselves....I think they tried that once already, ie; Australia

    Decriminalization is for sure the way to go, they decriminalized marijuana in Denver and other cities with "smart" politicians (and I use that term very loosely)....their just isn't enough jail space...I am sure in due time people will realize where priorities need to be...but then again maybe not...
    • asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I hope you're right but what makes me lose hope is the fact "they're gonna legalize it soon" has been people's attitudes since the 70s. You can get so close but then the DEA comes up with another bogus/exaggerated argument.

      It's very very important to realize that while all drugs have to be legalized, marijuana prohibition is the #1 thing that keeps the DEA going. Legalize that and then the DEA has nothing. It will lose all credibility for lying for a whole century. What if people actually find out that Pot is relatively harmless? *gasp* think of THOSE consequences.

      Think of everyone benefiting from prohibition. Alcohol companies, drug dealers, corrupt politicians, corrupt police, etc.. some of the richest/worst people are keeping prohibition alive for their own sake. It's going to be hard to undue a century of damage.

      But to end it on a good note, the Internet and sites like Digg are spreading awareness about the Drug War and about the truth on Pot. So we might be closer than ever.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That is because 80% of illegal drugs is pot.

      The other 20% doesn't amount to a big enough job to support a standalone agency like DEA.

      Think of the narcs' cheeeeldren, for heaven's sake! What will no-neck roid-rage daddy do without a job?
  • Foenetik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16For those unfamiliar with Kinky here's a little insight as to how he thinks:

    EDUCATION:
    "I think we're 48th in funding for public education. The only states below us are West Virginia, New Mexico and Arkansas. That means Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi are ahead of us. When Mississippi is ahead of you, you've got a problem."

    CAPITAL PUNISHMENT:
    "We're No. 1 in only one thing - executions. I'm not anti-death penalty. But I'm damned sure anti-the-wrong-guy-getting-executed."

    POLITICAL CORRECTNESS:
    "People are nervous. They're afraid to say 'Merry Christmas'. Afraid to light up a cigar. We didn't get to be the Lone Star State by being politically correct. America's last stand is Texas...I want to take things back to a time when cowboys all sang and their horses were smart. I'm looking to evoke an older, richer spirit of Texas. I'm going to fight this wussification of Texas if I have to do it one wuss at at time."

    RELIGION:
    "I'm not really a charismatic atheist. I have Jesus and Moses in my heart. They were both independents, by the way".

    DRUG ABUSE:
    "Us Jews have had cocaine around for thousands of years. We call it HORSERADISH...I admire people who struggle with their demons and conquer them.

    CHESS:
    "Willie [Nelson] and I play, on his [tour] bus, usually. He's very good and very fast. An instinctive player. Of course, you need to wear scuba gear to avoid the second-hand-smoke."

    CAMPAIGN SPENDING:
    "More than $100 million was spent in the last gubernatorial race by the two candidates for a job that pays $115,000. That smells fishy to most of us. Something is wrong with that picture. I've always said a fool and his money are soon elected. But not this time around. The guy with the most money shouldn't always win."
  • ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Who the ***** names their kid, KINKY?

    Seriously, WTF???

    (Although, he does have a good point.)
    • eggo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It's a nickname, his given name is Richard.
      Even better is his campaign slogan;
      Vote for Kinky: Why the hell not?
      He's got my vote.
  • warfang, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3I'm not 100% sure on this but isn't pot much more addictive than alcohol? I know many many more addicted potheads than alcoholics. And 2nd, although alcohol will screw up your liver, ect... weed from what I've heard slows the brain down even while off the high. Am I just being mislead or is this true?
    • rancemo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9You're mostly being misled. I have read that several studies have shown no physical addiction to pot (you won't get the shakes or get sick if you quit smoking). There are obviously people that make it a bad habit though. Some habits are hard to break!
    • bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The memory loss effect from smoking large amounts of pot is temporary effect. Alcohol also causes the same effect, but alcohols is slightly permanent. You stop smoking pot, and within a month, your brain works as good as it ever did.

    • Funkly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yes you are being misled, and it snot just you, most people believe that stuff. The only study that ever showed brain malfnction with pot was disproven, the tester were basically suffocating chimps with marijuana smoke for about 5 minutes at a time. That means no oxgen just smoke, ingest any 'smoke' or non-air substances you will show brain damage, if not suffocate.

      As far as being addictive, no one has ever proven any addiction connected with pot, well excpet for those tasty ass zingers at 7-11after you smoked out. but then that would involve getting up, going some place....
    • bcdowell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4pot is absolutely -not- addictive.

      I would know, I'm a nicotine addict. I have also used pot fairly heavily and frequently in the past, and I can tell you firsthand that there is a difference.

      At one point I had to give up pot for 6 weeks to get some IQ and aptitude tests. For the first night or two maybe, I had trouble sleeping because a j was just part of my winding down routine. But after that I didn't even know the difference. It was honestly no big deal. Actually I haven't smoked pot since then just for the lack of opportunity and it really doesn't bother me. I'm more addicted to Dr. Pepper than I ever was to cannabis.

      Now quitting cigarettes... if you've ever tried to do that then you -know- what addiction really is. The withdrawal symptoms gnaw at you constantly; you can't think straight; you are angry for no reason; you will start sweating; every sound will hurt your ears; the lights will always be too bright... your mind will be fixated on having a cigarette, and you won't be able to think about anything else.

      All I can say is, thank god for nicorette!

      So all that to say, anyone who claims that pot is highly or even mildly addictive is just spreading disinformation and lies.
    • asdfasdf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"I'm not 100% sure on this but isn't pot much more addictive than alcohol? I know many many more addicted potheads than alcoholics. And 2nd, although alcohol will screw up your liver, ect... weed from what I've heard slows the brain down even while off the high. Am I just being mislead or is this true?"

      Sigh. Do your own research, don't read bias .gov *****. Pay attention to the source of information. People have self interests that they want promoted. Anyone who thinks Marijuana causes much damage to the body/brain is seriously misled.

      http://www.perkel.com/politics/issues/pot.htm

      The founder of NORML is a 62 year old pot smoker. He's been smoking daily for 40 years and look at how good his health is.

    • TheCasablancan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I disagree about the pot addiction to a point. From personal observation and experience, I have found that while not PHYSICALLY addictive, it stimulates our pleasure/relaxation centers a good bit. Psychological addiction in some ways can be more difficult to break than physical, but I've never met anyone who smoked enough to need it to get through the day. They just bitch about not having any, or when you're smoking they appear out of no where and say "Let me get a hit of that."

      But I think that at worst, pot is a habit. Like popping your knuckles or something.
  • joerod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2go to amsterdam, its cheap and i've heard its really good...
    • OBDriftwood, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Amsterdam or the Netherlands/Holland is a good example of what decriminalization is. It's technically illegal in Holland to use and sell weed. But officials don't prosecute as long as it is used within some fairly liberal parameters. We should do the same in the USA. Over half of those incarcerated are there for drug offenses and the majority of those are simple possession. Let 'em out and let the police spend time prosecuting real crimes like robbery, murder, and the producers of the Jerry Springer show.
  • spellbin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"Marijuana is not a drug. I've sucked dick for cocaine, you ever suck dick for marijuana? NO! I didnt think so!" - Bob Saget in Half Baked (probibly misquoted)


  • NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1A pedophile is not a criminal. But hey, let's lock them up anyways, who am I to argue.
  • LordofShadows, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1/me adds another name to the "never vote for this guy list"
  • dvfreelancer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Go, Kinky! I disagree with a lot of his positions on issues, but at least I know where he stands. And I'd still get along better with Kinky when we disagreed than most politicians I see eye to eye with.

    I'm agreeing with this one. We're spending billions to enforce laws against a weed. Confiscating people's homes, pulling law enforcement resources away from serious crime, filling up our jails and clogging the criminal justice system...it's insane. From the beginning of time people who wanted to get high have found a way and that's never going to change no matter how many laws you enact. The more you try to regulate people's behavior, the more inspired they become in mischief.
    • ellisgl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Again being int Texas I think he would do more good than harm. When our current president was talking about how good he did with education in Texas I laughed, specially since I moved from California to Texas and saw the low level they taught here and many other things I don't want to mention.
  • ravenofwinter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Man, I'm moving to Texas just to vote for this guy.

    What, you say with Voter Fraud, I don't even have to move?
  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Unfortunately, Kinky is handing the election to Perry. Well, actually, the Republican redistricting and poll manipulation will do that, but it gives them somebody to point the finger at.
  • t3hCyborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ahh, Kinky Friedman, awesome guy. The bumper stickers he gives people to support him say: "My Governor is a Jewish cowboy."

    He's got my vote.
  • Clevinger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Can someone explain to me how crack creates violence? I was under the impression that black markets encourage violence, but perhaps my common sense and grasp of economics is flawed. :p
    • MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Well, if all you're going to care about is getting more crack, you'll probably be willing to do whatever you can to get some more.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Of course if you could get crack on the cheap at the local drug store, you really wouldn't need to steal.

      Drug addicts are violent because a lot of drugs are so incredibly expensive, no normal person can afford them. Take the pricing power away from the street dealers, and you put them (and the violence) out of business for good.

      Try raising the price of food or water to $250 an ounce and see how many people remain "Law-abiding citizens."
    • bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The addictiveness of crack is what creates the crime, on top of the high price. The urge and drive for more is so incredibly overwhelming, very difficult to control
    • realperson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1prohibition causes violence by making CRIMINALS the enforcers of the EXISITING MARKET . In a legal market trade disputes are solved by rule of LAW. In a black market trade disputes are solved by the LAW OF THE JUNGLE.

      You can pretend that by making trade goods forbidden the market goes away, but demand will generate supply regardless.
  • lokai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If Marijuana is not going to be legalized any time soon, at least lessen the penalties. Instead of putting every toker Joe with a spliff into prison, taking up valuable resources, just fine the hell out of him. People are going to keep smoking no matter how harsh the penalties are. If the government wants to make money off of marijuana smokers, it can do so through tickets and fines; it makes no sense to keep stuffing them into jails.

    I am personally for legalization somehow, but the topic is too hot to say anything more, in my opinion. Since it doesn't seem as though legalization or decriminalization will happen all too soon, lessening the penalties and no jail time might be a good move. ::shrugs::
  • Yage2006, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Having alcohol and tobacco legal and yet pot illegal is so ***** absurd :(
  • omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2As a former hemp activist, I fully agree with Kinky. The problems associated wtih marijuana are mostly due to the fact that it's illegal.

    If anyone wants a really well written fuller explanation of why it should be decriminalized, read this:

    http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/aint/303a.htm
  • MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'll tell you what. I'd rather see cartons of joints being sold by Marlboro than bags of pot being sold by trigger happy drug cartels.
  • JonnyTrombone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2All I have to say: The man was a musician with a band called "Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboys"
  • punkrock4life, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1kinky seems like a good candidate... and then i read about his wacky idea to police the border. what a stupid idea.
    • positron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You've obviously never heard how corrupt the Mexican military is. They are the ones working security for drug and immigrant smugglers. Pay them more than they're getting now, and I garauntee you'll have some extremely effective border security.
  • rubored, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Agreed. That is all, Diggers...
  • camelmix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1He makes me proud to be a Texan!
  • SmokeChiba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just because someone has a sexual attraction to a child does not mean they should go to jail. If that attraction is acted upon, they should rot in jail. Just wanted to point that out.

    You dont throw someone in jail that thinks about doing something illegal or sick just because they could have a elevated possibly of commiting that action.

    I argee on your issue with Pot however....
  • AlexLibman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Most pedophiles don't belong in jail, only the violent ones.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.