You probably remember the good ole’ frying pan, fried egg, fried brain anti-drug commercial from back in the day. If taking a good beating from a frying pan is what happens to your brain on drugs, you should check out what’s happened to your Bill of Rights on drugs. Almost 40 years ago, perhaps sparking the Bush team’s bright idea to declare a “war on terror,” President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.”
By the time George Bush Sr. entered the White House in 1989, a Washington Post-ABC News Poll found that 62 percent of Americans would be willing to give up a few of their freedoms in order to fight the war on drugs. And Uncle Sam has been more than willing to take them up on it. Most of the court cases within the past 40 years that have methodically abridged individual rights like freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures and property rights, have all concerned drugs. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall even coined a term for the growing practice of sacrificing constitutional rights in the name of the fighting drugs: the “drug exception.”
It seems appropriate on this Constitution Day to take a few moments to mourn all that we’ve lost from the Bill of Rights and the Constitution due to these “drug exceptions:” Freedom from Unreasonable Search and Seizure: Perhaps the big loser of all has been the Fourth Amendment, which limits the power of the government to enter and search one’s private property. Think about it: Unlike other crimes, drug offenses do not often have complaining witnesses (i.e.: people who come forward to request police assistance). The parties who use, sell or manufacture drugs are consenting participants who likely wish to hide their drug activity. In order to unearth drug crimes, the police must engage in wiretapping, surveillance, undercover operations, the use of confidential informants, entrapment by offering to buy or sell drugs, and countless other practices that strike at the heart of what the Fourth Amendment is all about.
In the name of the drug war, courts have allowed suspicionless drug testing of wide swaths of students and private employees, and the State of Michigan almost got away with conducting random drug testing of welfare recipients. The incidence of surprise, paramilitary-style raids on people’s homes – and courts’ approval of them – in the name of routine drug policing has skyrocketed in recent years. Similarly, courts have repeatedly given the stamp of approval to the ever-increasing use of police drug dogs to search homes, cars, bags and people. Freedom of Speech: When it comes to speaking out against the government’s drug policy, the right to free speech has also fallen prey to the drug war. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court carved out a “drug exception” to one of the most central tenets of free speech jurisprudence: the government cannot discriminate on the basis of the viewpoints being expressed in speech.
In Morse v. Frederick the Court ruled that a student’s speech could be censored at a school-related event (even outside the school), not because it was disruptive or because it provoked imminent lawlessness, but because it contained the word “bong.” The Court drew on other drug-related precedent to find that when it comes to students in the school context (and even students who are near a school, as in this case), the government can make exceptions to free speech rights when it comes to speech about drugs. Freedom of Religion: In a 1990 case brought by Native Americans who use peyote for religious purposes, the U.S. Supreme Court shunned the longstanding rules protecting the free exercise of religion and ruled that all religious practices give way to the general laws of the land – in this case drug laws. In response, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which restored the rights of people to participate in religious activities even when their practices appear to be in tension with other laws.
The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently struck down RFRA protections as applied to state laws so that when state laws and religious practices conflict, the state laws essentially win out. The silver lining, however, is that courts have ruled that RFRA protections remain intact in matters of federal law, such as in the case of Gonzales v. UDV (involving a church’s use of ayuhausca tea as part of its ritual, in conflict with federal drug laws) and Guam v. Guerrero (involving Rastafarians’ religious use of marijuana, in conflict with federal drug laws). Currently, courts are considering the legality of the Church of Cognizance’s religious use of marijuana. Right to Vote: Because the laws of many states continue to deny voting rights to those with current or prior felony convictions – many of them for drug offenses – an entire class of citizens has been shut out of the democratic process. To da
The shame and disgrace of the drug war is so evident… Between the Patriot Act and our Drug War policies there is so little left of The Bill Of Rights. We will only be able to honestly claim 2 or 3 of the lesser 10 Amendments for our protection in Bill of Rights. Not enough left to wipe your ass with!
At the twilight of his presidency, Barack Obama leaves unmet the huge need to change federal cannabis law. President Barack Obama will soon leave office. Although he will re-enter private life as one of America’s better presidents, he has failed to address the calamitous war on drugs, especially the eight-decade […]
I really couldn’t have summed it up better myself. Don Fitch lays it down in bruising detail. Prohibitionists truly have a lot more explaining to do… Who will take responsibility for the decades of deliberate lies and mistreatment at the hands of government and cause a change of course? I’m guessing no one. Not the President Not Republicans or Democrats or likely any citizens for that matter. Will it ever end then? We must continue to change culture with knowledge.
Surveying a wealth of new data on public attitudes toward marijuana legalization, E.J. Dionne, Jr. and William A. Galston explain the forces and limits behind the trend toward legalization. They seek to answer the following: Will America see the emergence of a broad pro-legalization consensus, or rather of a durably divisive cultural disagreement?
Opinions on Cannabis are changing rapidly. We are all at an interesting point in history when the effects of the information age are beginning to filter down to effect the lives of all Americans. The lies of the drug war do not stand up to scrutiny when people have information at their fingertips via the internet. So eventually the more rational argument floats to the top in this new age of information. There will always be propaganda but now the lies of the past are becoming exactly that… The lies of the past. Truth is inevitable? New understandings and developments in history and the archaeological record, Social justice campaigns like Black Lives Matter, cannabis legalization efforts throughout the nation, religious or spiritual awakenings and reforms, are all results of the so many ideas being able to be shared so quickly through communities large and small. Will our culture change? The answer is yes.
Another long list of people trying to make the world a better place by ending drug war policies worldwide. they use the same language that we typically use here at bostoncannabis.info
Local politicians should take note.
The unprecedented list of signatories includes a range of people from Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Bernie Sanders to businessmen Warren Buffett, George Soros, Richard Branson, Barry Diller, actors Michael Douglas and Woody Harrelson, Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, singers John Legend and Mary J. Blige, activists Reverend Jesse Jackson, Gloria Steinem and Michelle Alexander, as well as distinguished legislators, cabinet ministers, and former UN officials.
“The drug control regime that emerged during the last century,” the letter says, “has proven disastrous for global health, security and human rights. Focused overwhelmingly on criminalization and punishment, it created a vast illicit market that has enriched criminal organizations, corrupted governments, triggered explosive violence, distorted economic markets and undermined basic moral values.
“Governments devoted disproportionate resources to repression at the expense of efforts to better the human condition. Tens of millions of people, mostly poor and racial and ethnic minorities, were incarcerated, mostly for low-level and non-violent drug law violations, with little if any benefit to public security. Problematic drug use and HIV/AIDS, hepatitis and other infectious diseases spread rapidly as prohibitionist laws, agencies and attitudes impeded harm reduction and other effective health policies.
“Humankind cannot afford a 21st century drug policy as ineffective and counter-productive as the last century’s.”
“The influence and diversity of the leaders who signed this letter is unprecedented,” said Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which orchestrated the initiative in collaboration with dozens of allied organizations and individuals around the world. “Never before have so many respected voices joined together in calling for fundamental reform of drug control policies – in particular limiting ‘the role of criminalization and criminal justice… to the extent truly required to protect health and safety’.”
The UN Special Session, which will take place April 19-21, is the first of its kind since 1998, when the UN’s illusory but official slogan was “A drug-free world – we can do it!” The upcoming UNGASS was proposed in late 2012 by the Mexican government, with strong support from other Latin American governments. Last year UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a strong call-to-action, urging governments “to conduct a wide-ranging and open debate that considers all options.” Today’s public letter to him was prompted in part by the obstacles to such debate within the confines of the United Nations.
“This letter was drafted and all the signatures secured in just the past few weeks,” noted Nadelmann. “The signatories represent a tiny fraction of the distinguished leaders in politics and public policy, academia, law and law enforcement, health and medicine, culture and entertainment, business, and religion who would agree with the sentiments expressed in this letter.”
Reports about the disproportionate impact of the legal marijuana industry on minority and low-income neighborhoods and families deserve a closer look, according to Suffolk County Sheriff Steve Tompkins, who so far has focused his opposition to the legalization ballot question on its health impacts.
Tompkins, who was appointed sheriff in 2013, said he supported the 2008 ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, but believes the dangers of full legalization outweigh any criminal justice benefits from incarcerating fewer people on minor drug crimes.
OH NO! here we go. Lets be fair to the Sheriff here and walk through his comments carefully..
The article begins by referencing this politico article http://www.votestevetompkins.com/news1/2016/6/7/sheriff-concerned-by-reports-on-marijuanas-impacts-in-colorado
A separate report published by the Colorado Department of Public Health earlier this year found that juvenile arrests for marijuana-related crimes such as possession rose 5 percent since legalization took effect in that state, driven wholly by a spike in arrests of black and Latino teens. While white juvenile arrests declined 8 percent between 2012 and 2014, black juvenile arrests increased 58 percent and Latino juvenile arrests climbed 29 percent.
The politico article is about the complaints of residents in and near an industrial zone newly approved and zoned for cannabis growing. It goes on to explain how this new industry experiences some pushback from locals.
Now to Mr. Tompkins credit he did not lean heavily on the Colorado Department of Public Health report much but its obvious that there is not much to lean on there anyway. It claims a small 5 percent increase in cannabis possession arrests after legalization. That should raise suspicion alone because the very law itself is designed to decriminalize possession but forget about that because black and brown arrests went up dramatically as white arrests went down. This does not speak to cannabis as a public health issue these numbers point to continued racial disparities in policing!
Tompkins, a leading voice for criminal justice reform in Massachusetts, said he is reticent to discuss how law enforcement in other states operate without knowing all the facts, but has read the reports and is concerned.
“If that is in fact the case, then that speaks to the larger picture of not only the use of marijuana being able to harm one physically, but also if this does break down with black and Latino and low income individuals being singled out that has to be looked at,” Tompkins told the News Service.
“a leading voice for criminal justice reform in Massachusetts”
Thats right. This so called leader on criminal justice in the Commonwealth is a cannabis prohibitionist. It really explains a lot about the vacuum of local leadership and the lack of progress in criminal justice reforms to date.
No communities have suffered more under cannabis prohibition and the drug war than black and latino communities. Legalization aims at relieving this suffering. Continued prohibition of cannabis and other drugs supports crime, violence, mass incarceration and unhealthy communities that have gotten us here. A legalized system is proactive and meets peoples needs in a more therapeutic way. Ending the drug war would require a new culture around cannabis and drugs in general though. People like Sheriff Tompkins have been and continue to be agents of the drug war, carrying the flag for a corrupt and immoral drug war culture.
The article rebuts his statements with activist response..
Jim Borghesani, the spokesman for the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol, said Massachusetts and Colorado criminal laws concerning juvenile possession are markedly different, making the comparison a difficult one.
“I’m sure that Sheriff Tomkins is aware that juvenile possession in Massachusetts is a civil offense, unlike Colorado’s criminal offense, so his statement is perplexing. Equally perplexing is his lack of comment on the historic racial arrest disparity under the current prohibition system, which we seek to change,” Borghesani said.
He also touted the local control, through zoning, allowed for by the ballot question.
“Our initiative provides significant local control over the location, hours and manner of marijuana businesses, and provides an opt-out measure for communities. Results show that legalization is working in Colorado and it will work in Massachusetts,” Borghesani said.
Sheriff Tompkins wants people to elect him Sheriff but he doesn’t know much about cannabis, the most common illegal drug in America and believes that its better to continue to criminalize cannabis use than to legalize and regulate it. He seems to have the anti-cannabis talking points down pretty good though.
In March, the Massachusetts Sheriffs Association came out in opposition to the ballot question to legalize marijuana for anyone aged 21 and older. At the time, the sheriffs focused on the health implications of making marijuana more accessible to people.
The whole “cannabis is bad for your health idea” is becoming almost laughable in most circles but we don’t all come to truth at the same time.
Tompkins, who was appointed sheriff in 2013, said he supported the 2008 ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, but believes the dangers of full legalization outweigh any criminal justice benefits from incarcerating fewer people on minor drug crimes.
He and others want to keep cannabis illegal so as to still be able to wield it as a tool in their law enforcement careers and industry. He recognized the need for some changes in our cannabis policy and voted to decriminalize an ounce or less in 2008 but thats all he feels comfortable with voters having legal access to now. How much wine or beer should i have tonight Sheriff? How many Aspirin?
He is saying that he would rather lock people up for weed than legalize and cites health concerns and racial disparities?!? He fears the health and social effects of not criminalizing cannabis? He also like so many others may not yet be able to admit that he was completely wrong on cannabis. His entire thought process around cannabis has been corrupted by his career. He can not see it as the medicine it is. So he has no problem denying voters that medicine and even taking their rights away for doing so. He doesn’t know much about the fastest growing American industry and wants to deny voters access to that entire economy and market while they are shut out by more progressive and economically aggressive communities.
“I do not want to see all of these folks in jail if there’s another way for them to provide for themselves, but I really have to go back to the health issues,” Tompkins said.
This sounds crazy of course so he tried to help himself out by
Elaborating, Tompkins said, “I’m concerned with the ability to seriously manipulate the THC levels, and when you do that just about anything can go off the rails. If you can now put these things in gummy bears and brownies and the levels are jacked up to an outrageous percentage, god knows what can happen.”
Ahhh the children. Yes the children like candies… He is concerned with the the levels of a specific active ingredient in cannabis but doesn’t seem to know much else about cannabis. Anything can go off the rails? What is a dangerous THC level Sheriff? Good luck researching that answer. It can’t kill you so maybe we should be looking for things that can kill us and criminalize those? Beer? Coffee? Salt? Sugar? Tobacco? High buildings? Fast cars? Alarmist much Sheriff?
He acts and speaks as if incorporating cannabis into food is something new and untested or unknown! And of course invokes God for dramatic and moral effect.
We understand that a substantial amount of his professional and career income come from the apparatus responsible for The New Jim Crow. Sheriff Tompkins is not just for the continued criminalization of our communities through old, racist, immoral, ignorant, corrupt drug policies but is also for the continued denial and disenfranchisement of african-americans and all others here in the commonwealth to a legal local cannabis industry as well. Encouraging monopolies to develop by other more enlightened, knowledgeable, progressive and economically aggressive communities.
Suffolk County Sheriff Steven Tompkins and the state’s 13 other county sheriffs said Monday that the referendum would destigmatize drug use and make it easier for young people to get their hands on the drug.
He doesn’t want to destigmatize drug use he wants to continue to stigmatize drug use, despite the fact that such an approach has been proven to fail repeatedly. The drug war is what first stigmatized drug use. They were long vicious campaigns of lies aimed at making people scared of drugs. Reefer Madness refers to just one aspect of this campaign. It has lead to the mass incarceration problem we have now…
This is the attitude of a leading voice on criminal justice reform in MA? Someone please help us..
Cannabis is Medicine
On the question of cannabis legalization Sheriff Steve Tompkins wants to “error on the side of caution” and continue to criminalize people for possession of cannabis. That is a safe answer in todays politically conservative environment but it is not brave. It is not insightful, or even genuine. It is not an answer that serves our communities but actually serves the communities that need the least help.
Alcohol, Tobacco, Law Enforcement, Big Pharma and Prisons industries. These are the organizations and industries that benefit from our continued drug war. Sheriff Tompkins seems to be representing them when it comes to cannabis. He is corrupted by propaganda and has no problem continuing with criminalizing people for cannabis use because he does not recognize it as medicine. So he has no problem denying voters their medicine and even taking their rights away for possessing it. Cannabis use is religious. He does not recognize it as a sacramental or support true religious freedom because he still subscribes to the lies of the drug war.
He can ignore cannabis as a possible treatment for cancer and so many other maladies.. and he can deny all the thousands of otherwise law abiding voters that have taken it upon themselves to change the corrupt drug laws regarding cannabis. Yes voters are changing the policies towards cannabis NOT politicians. Politicians have not met the need of the public regarding cannabis. They have continued to support long disproven drug war dogma steeped in racism. It is the same political ignorance and cowardice that has marked the nations similar failings on race and justice that continues to call for cannabis prohibition.
No Justice, No Peace
Lets just kick the can of justice down the road?
Is this position supported by social justice groups? NO. Sheriff Tompkins doesn’t seem to understand or realize that his insistence on continued cannabis prohibition is morally corrupt. If he wants to represent and lead voters of the Commonwealth then I suggest he research cannabis properly before campaigning against the rights of voters to use cannabis in their personal lives and professional industries. It is time for a change and a break from the corrupt ways of the past. Cannabis prohibition is an immoral position for a modern politician. And BostonCannabis.Info is watching!
A Veterans Plea for Common Sense on the Drug War, Racism, and Cannabis policy.
“One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws” -Martin Luther King Jr.
People of Boston and the Nation. A tragic and inequitable situation has risen…
Racism, ignorance, and immorality are destroying our communities…
We must educate ourselves and fight to change this reality or in the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “perish together as fools”
The following ideas are absolutely not original to this post and can all be found researched through links on BostonCannabis.Info …
Mass incarceration is an immoral tragedy created through racism and ignorance.
Cannabis is the scientific name for what propagandists have referred to disparagingly as Marijuana.
Cannabis possession is the most popular drug crime and is responsible for the most drug arrests and charges.
Cannabis is a super-food and provides complete protein (hemp-seed), can be used safely to treat many diseases and ailments, and can be made into over 30,000 legal products.
Please stay with me as I elaborate…
Cannabis was the number one agricultural crop in the world and was listed in the American Pharmacopoeia of drugs and their approved uses until 1940 when American Politicians and officials campaigned for it to be illegal on purely racist and ignorant grounds.
Only made illegal after extremely racist public officials lied repeatedly to the American population. They said false, ridiculous, mean, hateful, racist, and ignorant things to support a wave of new drug laws that were not aimed at decreasing drug use, but were ONLY aimed at controlling ethnic populations, Blacks, Mexicans, Chinese…
Cannabis was made illegal only twice in American history. The first time was for racist purposes, 1937 Marijuana Tax Act. They said cannabis (marihuana) made Mexicans and African-Americans violent, and then later they said it makes them communist and pacifist, all lies of course.
White society has been known to see foreign or different ethnic cultural elements as scary or satanic. Just as certain Christian societies have viewed things non-Christian or not conforming to their culture as satanic. The only party invoking Satan into the discussion was the fearful white society.
Why doesn’t freedom of religion here in America protect cannabis use, as it is indeed used for religious worship the world over and through all time? Research will lead you once again to ignorance and racism folks!
Drug laws were first used to oppress the Chinese-Americans that were now coming to America at the turn of 20th century (1900s), and had become the focus of hostilities due to economic and social struggles. A popular Chinese cultural practice was the use of opium.
“Prohibition… goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes… A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.” – Abraham Lincoln
They were not under the false notion that they could stop opium use throughout the nation. They just wanted to be able to criminalize and control the Chinese populations which they blamed for certain problems of society.
Anslinger and others used this precedent to improve upon their system of oppression and inflate their new government agency using our society’s most vulnerable populations to be the nation’s punching bag. After alcohol prohibition failed so miserably, new civil rights laws were being enacted in congress leading to racist filibusters on the Congress floor; The Dust Bowl, Great Depression, and the Dirty Thirties laid waste to economies families and farmers and destroyed their way of life. Jobs were scarce. Charlatans whipped up vulnerable crowds into the politics of hatred and blaming others for all problems of society, Not unlike Donald Trump does today.
Lynching of African-Americans was commonplace at this point in US history, as is the modern gunning down of black-men by police, vigilantes, blacks and other Americans who have internalized the racial hatred and dysfunction of American society today.
The new law forced people to get a stamp for their cannabis but few stamps were handed out. The issue was tax revenue NOT public safety! They didn’t make any money in taxes if you grew your own medicine and supplies or decided to grow and sell the same. Department of Treasury NOT a public safety agency was who the New Federal Bureau of Narcotics would be under. Public safety concerns were racist fears of Blacks, Mexicans, and Chinese not the effects of medicine or drugs on individuals. Americans of the time transferred their fear of the black and Mexican population to a common, useful, household herb. Marijuana Tax Act was challenged and overturned by Timothy Leary and The Supreme Court in 1969. It was found to be unconstitutional.
Other Republicans like Reagan doubled down on Nixon’s policies. Democrats too. Leading us to the situation we have today. Reagan’s fake push to cure cancer in the 1980s was a lie to raise money while they hid cannabis related cancer research with the help of the DEA.
Feel safe lately? No? Thank your leaders for lying to us all and creating a dangerous, uninformed system of oppression and misery, that is destroying the country.
Drug prohibition made our streets and cities dangerous in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s just like Alcohol Prohibition did (1920-1933). Al Capone and the new American organized crime wave of the 1920s has become Pablo Escobar and El Chapo Guzman of the 80s, 90s and 2000s. We ended alcohol prohibition and now people do not shoot each other over a barrel of beer. Hopefully if we get smart and end drug prohibition… people will no longer shoot each other over drugs either. Drugs are not bad or dangerous on their own, their monetary value has been multiplied and inflated because of their imposed illegality. Illegal drugs and medicines are simply worth more money than other products because of prohibition. Drugs are medicines. NOT dangerous but helpful to all when used properly.
Many things can kill you when misused, does that make them all dangerous to where we need prohibition? Cannabis can NOT kill you even when misused! Is cannabis dangerous?
The bias against cannabis is cultural. Americans must stop supporting this corrupt, racist, ignorant, and immoral drug war! End institutional racism now! END DRUG PROHIBITION NOW!
If we do not find the courage to call out, expose, and honestly deal with all elements of oppression racial, gender, and otherwise, then we are all destined for complete failure due to cowardice. Cowardice to face the issues. You cannot ignore the systematic assault and oppression of so many people and then wonder why communities and institutions are failing. It is an ignorant and naive position and a vicious lie to say so. I challenge ANYONE to reference this course of events and defend any of this drug war behavior as not corrupt, not racist, not ignorant, not a tragic hypocrisy and morally right. Please see definitions for the following terms corrupt, racist, ignorant, and immoral at end of article.
“In things racial… we have always been and I believe continue to be in too many ways a nation of cowards.” Attorney General Eric Holder United States Department of Justice
Cowardice is defined as a lack of bravery. Fits well. You think?
Modern politicians and voters that believe and buy into the propaganda of “Reefer Madness” are still acting in unison with the racist and immoral officials of the past. Supporting racist and ignorant policies decades after they have been proven to be illegitimate, harmful, misinformed, and unconstitutional.
The last few presidential campaigns illustrate very clearly that a republican party goal is to disenfranchise people of color. Republicans do not want African-Americans and many others to vote, and have acted on those goals regularly for decades but increasingly more so recently. How different are today’s white Americans than all of those White Americans watching on in satisfaction or indifference as black families were tortured and murdered in the public square, as a sign to others. Not unlike how modern terrorists and groups, ISIS and ISIL (Islamic State In Syria/Libya), publicly torture and murder their victims to warn others. And not unlike so many American Police Departments that broadcast the murders that they will be getting away with every day on tv and the internet. It is a powerful message that law enforcement has been sending the black community for so many years. It goes something like this…
“We are given the power to destroy you on sight, publicly or privately and wherever or whenever we so please. You have no recourse so when you see police officers know that they have the right to do as they please with you, your person, your property, and your family. You have NO rights when an officer is talking to you BOY so listen up or suffer whatever the officer decides your punishment or execution should be. We can beat you, shoot you, rape or sodomize you, and kidnap and imprison you to do it all over every day for the rest of your miserable black life. Our society says as a white officer I’m better than you and its my job to make sure you are oppressed. I take my job serious and you should too.”
The presidential campaign of Republican Nominee Donald Trump is openly encouraging physical violence against African Americans now in August of 2016 and is promising to punish Muslims, people of Mexican heritage, and foreigners as well.
Are citizens allowed to fight back against oppression? The culture in America and Boston must change. These changes must happen or we can all expect the pitiful situation that our culture has created today to continue. The drug war, racist institutions, mass incarceration, police terrorism of the black population, increasing racial violence and white supremacist media rhetoric and groups, the Jim Crow paradigm, all will continue to lead us as a nation towards ruin. No one will feel safe or content until agents of oppression cease fire. The public will NOT trust government, law enforcement, or any of their representatives because it has been their policy to treat so many Americans as targets of oppression and have not bothered to change the dynamic. We have been waiting a VERY long time.
END AMERICAN COWARDICE!!! STOP OPPRESSION!!! END JIM CROW!!!
Loyalty Duty Respect Selfless Service Honor Integrity Personal Courge L.D.R.S.H.I.P.
Nothing about the drug war can be said to embody ANY of these American Army Values which are required to be memorized and practiced by all US Soldiers.. The Drug War is and always has been immoral. So as far as this veteran is concerned, The Drug War has no place in our society. For those that wish to continue the racist and immoral drug war… please let us know why the oppression of so many is necessary?
“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine
None of the previous has been a secret folks.. when will reasonable people act?
Chief – from BostonCannabis.Info
dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.
having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.
a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
having or showing the belief that a particular race is superior to another.
lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.