cannabis=freedom
11-14-2006, 04:04 AM
Hey, I just wrote this essay on bullshit prohibiton laws....I don't think even Stephen Harper himself could argue with it. Read, Canadians, if you like. It may provide you reasons to convince others that weed is good.
Marijuana??Legalize it now
As most people know, in most countries of the world, marijuana (or cannabis, as it is known), is an illegal substance. Most people do not question this, and believe that because the government says that marijuana is illegal, it is illegal for a good reason, and the government knows best.
The truth is, the government does not know best. Governments are made up of a group of people with a particular viewpoint about the way society should function, and their opinions are not inherently more correct than that of the average citizen. Let us here abandon the governments?? opinions and think for ourselves about the issue.
Origins of prohibition:
The first drug to become illegal in Canada was opium in 1908, under the Anti-Opium Act. Why this occurred was that in the previous year, 1907, Canada??s new railroad had been completed and the gold rush was over, and Canada??s majority Caucasian population was angry against Asian immigrants to Canada, whose only purpose before had been, in the eyes of most Canadians of the status quo, to be a supply of cheap labour to work in the most dangerous and unsanitary conditions of the railroad and mines, the industrial equivalent of cannon fodder. The media (controlled by whites, of course), denounced the Asian immigrants, and on September 8, 1907, there was an anti-Asian riot in Vancouver, where an angry white mob broke the windows of and burned many Asian businesses. The Asian businessmen asked the federal government in Ottawa for compensation for the damage, and two of the businessmen??only two, out of many??were licensed opium dealers. Ottawa responded by ignoring the racist and unjustifiable nature of the riot, and found an outrageous excuse that the riot was justified because ??white women and girls? were customers. The government ignored the truth that the riot was about racism, not opium. William Lyon Mackenzie King passed the Anti-Opium Act of 1908, North America??s first anti-drug law, which was more or less openly racist, as it forbade the sale of opium in Chinese opium dens but allowed it to be continued by white businessmen.
Now we know that Canadian drug prohibition has its roots in discrimination against Chinese businessmen, we can continue.
Cannabis prohibition was very ironically started due in part to Emily Brown, the first woman judge in Canada??s history, and one of the famous five who fought for and won women??s suffrage (the right of Canadian women to vote). This was a woman who had spoken out against the ridiculous status quo and fought politically for freedom, so one would think that she would not be involved in the creation of one of the most ridiculous and oppressive laws in Canadian history.
Emily Brown began writing a series of articles in 1920 called ??The Grave Drug Menace.? These tales were mostly racist hypocrisy against the Chinese and their opium dens, but marijuana was also mentioned. Murphy plagiarized scare stories directly from American newspapers, which used cannabis as a scapegoat for basically any crime committed in that nation. Prime Minister Mackenzie King and Murphy both had seen opium as a ??tool the dark races used to seduce white girls?, and marijuana was simply added to the list. The Canadian people had never heard of ??marijuana?, but had always known it as cannabis, a medical plant (Many years ago, Queen Victoria had been prescribed cannabis by her doctor for her menstrual pains). Canadians therefore did not know what they were dealing with, and the government used propaganda and lies about above-said dark seduction of white women to scare Canadians into supporting its prohibition.
John D. Rockefeller, Sr. was a powerful American businessman in the oil industry, who also had large Canadian investments in synthetic medicine. Since cannabis was a natural medicine, he saw it as an opponent to synthetic medicine and a threat to his investments. Not only that, but hemp (made naturally from cannabis), was his natural competitor for the fuel market in North America. Cannabis was not a good thing for Rockefeller??s personal interests, and Rockefeller was a powerful man who had influence over Mackenzie King since 1915, when he was not yet prime minister. Encouraged from Rockefeller??s influence and Emily Murphy??s writings, cannabis was outlawed in Canada in 1923 with no parliamentary debate.
Now we understand that cannabis prohibition in Canada was the direct result of racism, hypocrisy, personal business interests, corporate control over government, propaganda, scare tactics, misinformation and ignorance, we can continue.
Continuance of prohibition
Sadly, people often have the tendency to believe that legal and illegal define right and wrong, with no questions asked. This was the case for many years. In the 1960s, a hippie counterculture emerged that advocated peace, free love, and psychoactive drug use. Though many claimed and felt that cannabis was an enlightening tool that gave the mind an unspoken clarity, a new wave of conservative opposition to the plant resurfaced. Cannabis was more hated than ever by those in power, but it was not the plant itself that was hated, it was the fact that it was a symbol of the hated counterculture, and they felt it encouraged people to question authority and live a nontraditional lifestyle. Once again, the government and the average upper and middle class people had found another group of people to persecute, with cannabis as a symbol of it.
Both the counterculture and the authoritarians have existed in varying forms ever since, and other than the people who have had the sense to question laws, the majority of people have blindly and obediently followed the status quo.
Now we understand that prohibition continues to be a form of discrimination against cultural groups that are disliked by those higher up, we can continue.
Given reasons for prohibition
Ask any government official or conservative or mainstream person why weed is illegal and they say ??because it??s bad for you.? However, medical studies have shown that possible long-term health effects are minimal at best. Not only that, but it has been proven to have great medical value to patients of AIDS, cancer, and other illnesses. On a lesser level it can also relieve stress and cure common annoyances like headaches. Many people use it for spiritual purposes, claiming that it brings them in touch with something higher.
If you were to poise these contradictions to a prohibitionist, he would probably splutter for a while and then come up with, ??Well, it??s a gateway drug. You take one toke and you??ll be a heroin addict before you know it.?
Based on the data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), formerly named the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, by SAMSHA, the percentage of those who have ever tried marijuana and then ended up using heroin once per month is around 1 in 1000. To explain this further, since the estimated number of monthly heroin users in the United Status in 2001 is 100,000, that is the maximum number of people who can have gone on to use heroin regularly after trying cannabis. Since there are an estimated 83 million people in the US who have ever tried cannabis, this works out to 0.12% (100,000 / 83,300,000). Well, that??s another myth torn to shreds.
Also, let us look at alcohol and cigarettes. Both of these drugs are legal, yet they have both been medically proven to have potentially severe health risks. Both are potentially addictive (marijuana has been shown to not be; daily users who stop suddenly can at the most experience mild nausea and insomnia for a few days at most). Alcoholism causes thousands of deaths per year, yet there has not been one medically recorded marijuana death in the last century. Drinking in excess can result in alcohol poisoning and possible death, whereas a cannabis overdose is a physical impossibility (a 165 lb. man would have to ingest all the THC in twenty-one joints all in one hit). Alcohol is correlated with an increase in volatile and violent behaviour, yet cannabis produces a mellow and peaceable feeling.
Why, then, are alcohol and cigarettes legal substances, but a substance that is many times less harmful and addictive is not? It is because alcohol and cigarettes are an accepted part of North American culture; fine lords and ladies have historically always drank and smoked. Society can accept tradition, but not a free-thinking counterculture. Also, booze and smokes are heavily taxed, and the government can make money off of them. Why else do you think you need a license to produce alcohol? The government cannot make money off of private plants grown in somebody??s house, therefore there is nothing in it for them, therefore it is banned. It is high time the government puts the interests of the people ahead of its own.
The government has no right to make an act that endangers no one else, and endangers very, very minimally the user. Freedom of thought, one of the nine types of political freedom, holds that people can think in whatever manner they choose, meaning that they should be able to alter their mind if they so wish it. Suppressing this is a violation.
Taxpayers collectively spend millions of dollars annually to enforce these null and void laws, and prisons are filled with innocent, nonviolent people who were merely exerting their civil rights. Prohibition is in effect discrimination against people who hold different viewpoints and reject the status quo. Banning a substance does much greater harm than the substance itself, and people suffer because of it.
Even if you believe that pot smoking is not a good thing, you must surely realize that criminalization is stupid. Turning an apple into forbidden fruit makes people who before did not care for apples want to eat a bushel. Also, young people hear from the government and society that marijuana is evil and harmful, and then they try it and realize it is not. The majority of hard drug addicts probably did this and thought that the government has been lying to them about hard drugs as well, and so tried them too.
I could probably write twenty pages on exactly why prohibition is stupid, unnecessary, harmful to society, a violation of rights and freedoms, and hypocritical, but if the above has not convinced you I do not know what will. Let us work together and end this bullshit.
Marijuana??Legalize it now
As most people know, in most countries of the world, marijuana (or cannabis, as it is known), is an illegal substance. Most people do not question this, and believe that because the government says that marijuana is illegal, it is illegal for a good reason, and the government knows best.
The truth is, the government does not know best. Governments are made up of a group of people with a particular viewpoint about the way society should function, and their opinions are not inherently more correct than that of the average citizen. Let us here abandon the governments?? opinions and think for ourselves about the issue.
Origins of prohibition:
The first drug to become illegal in Canada was opium in 1908, under the Anti-Opium Act. Why this occurred was that in the previous year, 1907, Canada??s new railroad had been completed and the gold rush was over, and Canada??s majority Caucasian population was angry against Asian immigrants to Canada, whose only purpose before had been, in the eyes of most Canadians of the status quo, to be a supply of cheap labour to work in the most dangerous and unsanitary conditions of the railroad and mines, the industrial equivalent of cannon fodder. The media (controlled by whites, of course), denounced the Asian immigrants, and on September 8, 1907, there was an anti-Asian riot in Vancouver, where an angry white mob broke the windows of and burned many Asian businesses. The Asian businessmen asked the federal government in Ottawa for compensation for the damage, and two of the businessmen??only two, out of many??were licensed opium dealers. Ottawa responded by ignoring the racist and unjustifiable nature of the riot, and found an outrageous excuse that the riot was justified because ??white women and girls? were customers. The government ignored the truth that the riot was about racism, not opium. William Lyon Mackenzie King passed the Anti-Opium Act of 1908, North America??s first anti-drug law, which was more or less openly racist, as it forbade the sale of opium in Chinese opium dens but allowed it to be continued by white businessmen.
Now we know that Canadian drug prohibition has its roots in discrimination against Chinese businessmen, we can continue.
Cannabis prohibition was very ironically started due in part to Emily Brown, the first woman judge in Canada??s history, and one of the famous five who fought for and won women??s suffrage (the right of Canadian women to vote). This was a woman who had spoken out against the ridiculous status quo and fought politically for freedom, so one would think that she would not be involved in the creation of one of the most ridiculous and oppressive laws in Canadian history.
Emily Brown began writing a series of articles in 1920 called ??The Grave Drug Menace.? These tales were mostly racist hypocrisy against the Chinese and their opium dens, but marijuana was also mentioned. Murphy plagiarized scare stories directly from American newspapers, which used cannabis as a scapegoat for basically any crime committed in that nation. Prime Minister Mackenzie King and Murphy both had seen opium as a ??tool the dark races used to seduce white girls?, and marijuana was simply added to the list. The Canadian people had never heard of ??marijuana?, but had always known it as cannabis, a medical plant (Many years ago, Queen Victoria had been prescribed cannabis by her doctor for her menstrual pains). Canadians therefore did not know what they were dealing with, and the government used propaganda and lies about above-said dark seduction of white women to scare Canadians into supporting its prohibition.
John D. Rockefeller, Sr. was a powerful American businessman in the oil industry, who also had large Canadian investments in synthetic medicine. Since cannabis was a natural medicine, he saw it as an opponent to synthetic medicine and a threat to his investments. Not only that, but hemp (made naturally from cannabis), was his natural competitor for the fuel market in North America. Cannabis was not a good thing for Rockefeller??s personal interests, and Rockefeller was a powerful man who had influence over Mackenzie King since 1915, when he was not yet prime minister. Encouraged from Rockefeller??s influence and Emily Murphy??s writings, cannabis was outlawed in Canada in 1923 with no parliamentary debate.
Now we understand that cannabis prohibition in Canada was the direct result of racism, hypocrisy, personal business interests, corporate control over government, propaganda, scare tactics, misinformation and ignorance, we can continue.
Continuance of prohibition
Sadly, people often have the tendency to believe that legal and illegal define right and wrong, with no questions asked. This was the case for many years. In the 1960s, a hippie counterculture emerged that advocated peace, free love, and psychoactive drug use. Though many claimed and felt that cannabis was an enlightening tool that gave the mind an unspoken clarity, a new wave of conservative opposition to the plant resurfaced. Cannabis was more hated than ever by those in power, but it was not the plant itself that was hated, it was the fact that it was a symbol of the hated counterculture, and they felt it encouraged people to question authority and live a nontraditional lifestyle. Once again, the government and the average upper and middle class people had found another group of people to persecute, with cannabis as a symbol of it.
Both the counterculture and the authoritarians have existed in varying forms ever since, and other than the people who have had the sense to question laws, the majority of people have blindly and obediently followed the status quo.
Now we understand that prohibition continues to be a form of discrimination against cultural groups that are disliked by those higher up, we can continue.
Given reasons for prohibition
Ask any government official or conservative or mainstream person why weed is illegal and they say ??because it??s bad for you.? However, medical studies have shown that possible long-term health effects are minimal at best. Not only that, but it has been proven to have great medical value to patients of AIDS, cancer, and other illnesses. On a lesser level it can also relieve stress and cure common annoyances like headaches. Many people use it for spiritual purposes, claiming that it brings them in touch with something higher.
If you were to poise these contradictions to a prohibitionist, he would probably splutter for a while and then come up with, ??Well, it??s a gateway drug. You take one toke and you??ll be a heroin addict before you know it.?
Based on the data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), formerly named the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, by SAMSHA, the percentage of those who have ever tried marijuana and then ended up using heroin once per month is around 1 in 1000. To explain this further, since the estimated number of monthly heroin users in the United Status in 2001 is 100,000, that is the maximum number of people who can have gone on to use heroin regularly after trying cannabis. Since there are an estimated 83 million people in the US who have ever tried cannabis, this works out to 0.12% (100,000 / 83,300,000). Well, that??s another myth torn to shreds.
Also, let us look at alcohol and cigarettes. Both of these drugs are legal, yet they have both been medically proven to have potentially severe health risks. Both are potentially addictive (marijuana has been shown to not be; daily users who stop suddenly can at the most experience mild nausea and insomnia for a few days at most). Alcoholism causes thousands of deaths per year, yet there has not been one medically recorded marijuana death in the last century. Drinking in excess can result in alcohol poisoning and possible death, whereas a cannabis overdose is a physical impossibility (a 165 lb. man would have to ingest all the THC in twenty-one joints all in one hit). Alcohol is correlated with an increase in volatile and violent behaviour, yet cannabis produces a mellow and peaceable feeling.
Why, then, are alcohol and cigarettes legal substances, but a substance that is many times less harmful and addictive is not? It is because alcohol and cigarettes are an accepted part of North American culture; fine lords and ladies have historically always drank and smoked. Society can accept tradition, but not a free-thinking counterculture. Also, booze and smokes are heavily taxed, and the government can make money off of them. Why else do you think you need a license to produce alcohol? The government cannot make money off of private plants grown in somebody??s house, therefore there is nothing in it for them, therefore it is banned. It is high time the government puts the interests of the people ahead of its own.
The government has no right to make an act that endangers no one else, and endangers very, very minimally the user. Freedom of thought, one of the nine types of political freedom, holds that people can think in whatever manner they choose, meaning that they should be able to alter their mind if they so wish it. Suppressing this is a violation.
Taxpayers collectively spend millions of dollars annually to enforce these null and void laws, and prisons are filled with innocent, nonviolent people who were merely exerting their civil rights. Prohibition is in effect discrimination against people who hold different viewpoints and reject the status quo. Banning a substance does much greater harm than the substance itself, and people suffer because of it.
Even if you believe that pot smoking is not a good thing, you must surely realize that criminalization is stupid. Turning an apple into forbidden fruit makes people who before did not care for apples want to eat a bushel. Also, young people hear from the government and society that marijuana is evil and harmful, and then they try it and realize it is not. The majority of hard drug addicts probably did this and thought that the government has been lying to them about hard drugs as well, and so tried them too.
I could probably write twenty pages on exactly why prohibition is stupid, unnecessary, harmful to society, a violation of rights and freedoms, and hypocritical, but if the above has not convinced you I do not know what will. Let us work together and end this bullshit.