It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New York Times calls for end to Marijuana prohibition

page: 1
35
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+13 more 
posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 10:47 PM
link   
If the New York Times has its way, the United States government's prohibition on marijuana will end. Don't hold your breath. But in any case, to have the national 'paper of record' come out for an end to prohibition (as they say, "again") and get on a bandwagon which has already been rolling along for decades is an interesting and welcome development to people who care about freedom of choice and freedom of association. It should also make it easier for members of the U.S. social and economic establishments to express similar feelings (if they have them).

And have a look at the interesting gif graphic that the Times put up along the entire left side and top of the page, quite creative for the paper some call 'The Grey Lady".

www.nytimes.com...


It took 13 years for the United States to come to its senses and end Prohibition, 13 years in which people kept drinking, otherwise law-abiding citizens became criminals and crime syndicates arose and flourished. It has been more than 40 years since Congress passed the current ban on marijuana, inflicting great harm on society just to prohibit a substance far less dangerous than alcohol.

The federal government should repeal the ban on marijuana.

We reached that conclusion after a great deal of discussion among the members of The Times’s Editorial Board, inspired by a rapidly growing movement among the states to reform marijuana laws.



edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Aleister

I had this conversation with my cousin who lives up by DC last night we both came to the same conclusion as the article did.



We recognize that this Congress is as unlikely to take action on marijuana as it has been on other big issues. But it is long past time to repeal this version of Prohibition.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The momentum is just beginning, and it is about time.

It is no longer politiclly incorrect to support legality.

Mexico is literally reeling economiclly already and word has it the Cartels are looking for new markets North of the Border in canada where the legalisation issue had lagged and is being ignored,this would be a tradgedy after the Americans snuffed the Cartels cash flow in the US, hoefully we can see a North American agreement that completely disables the Cartels,as it looks now Canadas Prime Minister Harper must supprt the mexican Cartels and their way of making money off of Illegal drug sales because he is not keeping Canada in line with the times and in doing so he is making the Canadian People vulnerable to the criminal impacts that America just put a stop to.Harper is selling out his own Country and setting the table for the provision of an alternative market for mexican drugs.

I do not want to see the muders and damage that has now been stopped in the US come North of the Border and it looks like Harper is trying to set this dynamic into play for some odd reason.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

To have the Times publicly endorse such a move may influence some of the upcoming votes (Oregon, Alaska, Portland in Maine, maybe D.C. itself), and make it easier for other media outlets to join the call. Politicians will have some more cover with this event. Pretty important, imnho. And happily, they call for the prohibition to end only for those 21 or over, which I wholeheartedly agree with (as do the laws being voted on in the various U.S. states this year).


edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   
There is too much money to be made to not legalize it.

The US economy is hurting and needs another bubble. The Cannabis Industry looks like it is shaping up to be that bubble.

All bubbles eventually burst....
edit on 26-7-2014 by jrod because: typo gremlins



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

I agree with you and would add that once Big Pharma/cororate control gets their claws into it, that day it will be destroyed. It is already happening with the medical program in Canada. I have read articles about it. Also there is the huge corporate control of the medical industry in California. It has been documented that once the corporations got ahold of it in Canada, they sold an overpriced and inferior product. Since the plant has so many uses, I think it should be treated as a human right.
edit on 7/26/2014 by InFriNiTee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:47 PM
link   
The editorial ends with a nod to the iconic cannabis culture number 420, kind of inside-baseball for those readers who know its meaning. Interesting. Is this the 'New York Times' or 'High Times':


On Monday at 4:20 p.m. Eastern Time, Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor, will be taking questions about marijuana legalization at facebook.com/nytimes.

edit on 26-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod
There is too much money to be lost by legalizing it as well.
Big pharma for one.
Doctor issues script for pill that will ease pain abit (not fully, just a little) but will cost you 10 bucks up to use your imagination.
The pill also may give you suicidal tendencies, explosive diarrhea, organ damage, and a whole myriad of other bad things.
Or you could just grow a plant for free, the only side affects are good rest and an increased interest in baking!
The propaganda machine cannot fight truth anymore in this here information age.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 12:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Aleister

I had this conversation with my cousin who lives up by DC last night we both came to the same conclusion as the article did.



We recognize that this Congress is as unlikely to take action on marijuana as it has been on other big issues. But it is long past time to repeal this version of Prohibition.


Maybe if Congress were to partake a little of said marijuana they'd get a little creative and get s# done.

But we all know that wouldn't happen.

They couldn't decide on who to pass it to next.


Times a changin' though; and for that I'm thrilled.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: g146541

There is not much more that can be made with it being illegal anyomre. Big pharma and friends have their hands on it. The plant will not become monopolized like corn and other produce and medicine. Just like craft brewed beer there will always be a market for the small guy.

Corporate America will never conquer nor destroy this industry, they know this and this is probably a reason why prohibition has lasted so long.

The people of America are sending a clear message as to what they want in regards to this issue.
edit on 27-7-2014 by jrod because: 321



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: one4all

Im all 4 you and would give you a star for every Canadian if i could....



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: TiedDestructor

It's likely that over half of the members of Congress have potted this plant in one form or another, and that some of them may very well light up at parties once it's totally legal in Washington D.C. Like the first congressmen to come out as gay it'd be interesting to see the reaction of one of them finally saying "Not only did I experiment with it in college, but last night in my congressional office."

The New York Times editorial is on the streets and homes right now, so America is waking up to what lots of them see as the nation's best newspaper joining the legalization crowd. Jon Stewart and Colbert may have something to say about this, and when Bill Maher gets around to it there may be a "New Rule" in effect.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Aleister

You don't think this is a ploy to sell more papers do you. After all, we need something to roll our weed in.

On a more serious note.
It might be helpful if someone actually came up with a plan which would allow a revenue stream to be generated from marijuana.

Rather than establishing a tax on pot, it may be better to simply start by selling and issueing a "permit to grow" a set number of plants for personal comsumption. This could be done thru the local governments, county or city, with the proceeds being "split" among the other government levels as well. Kind of like an open bribe as it were.
This permit would allow for the planting and possession of, say two, plants per year. This should be enough for a single user during this time frame. It would still be illegal drive or work under the influence, so nothing else need change.
If a person were caught transporting or selling pot, current laws would apply plus they lose their permit and can be charged with tax evasion if they do not have a permit.

I think the effects of such a program are quite apparent. First a LOT of money would be generated from the sales of permits. The expense of enforcing our current drug laws would fall greatly. The illegal transport and sales of marijuana would likely disappear after a few die-hards were caught and prosecuted.

I am not trying to say such a program would be perfect. I am only attemting to find a place to start some constructive discussion about atleast a partial fix to the current mess we have with the current situation.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: teamcommander

Something like this editorial position must have been discussed and argued about, from time to time, at the New York Times for years if not decades. The weight of public opinion, probably the personal use experience, and long-term analysis of incarceration rates in the United States likely convinced the holdouts at the Times to go along with the people who would have wanted this editorial to appear long ago.

Now, the powers-that-be at the Washington Post and other media outlets who take a similar position may have more of an influence on the direction they take as well.


edit on 27-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Aleister

A couple weeks ago I caught some Bill O'Reilly on TV fuming over legalization while I was at the pub. I am willing to bet he has something to say about the times with this.

It almost makes me miss cable....eh...nah not really.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

And it's interesting that the Times chose to make it the Sunday editorial, which is their largest paper of the week, the one that people used to lay around in their pajamas and read. Monday's cable chatter should be an eye-and-earful.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I have a daughter going into sixth grade and she has been told for years how much more dangerous the weed is today than when I was a kid. Making pot legal after all that propaganda would leave a bad impression wouldn't it? After all, they have been told how bad tobacco is too. so is that a lie they can ignore?



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

And my 8 year old niece still believes in Santa Clause. Should we keep that farse up too?

After all that propoganda, I don't think she'll be able to think straight anymore.

edit on 27-7-2014 by HandyDandy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

Please advise her that if she's ever interested in trying the plant, which of course isn't more "loaded" than it was in the 1970s, that she should wait until after she's 21. Educate her on how the brain develops, and advise to let it develop on its own without interference by marijuana, alcohol, sugar, and the other chemistry-changers that the brain has to put up with (I'd personally add "meat" and other animal-products into that mix).



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Aleister

ya just don't eat sugar until your 21. lol

I smoked when I was in my teens I don't think you can stop it, why make it illegal? I'm sick and tired of criminalizing
ANYONE. knock it off already.




top topics



 
35
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join