Marijuana: A Chronic History

Marijuana: A Chronic History

2010, Drugs  -   143 Comments
7.35
12345678910
Ratings: 7.35/10 from 23 users.

The fight against drug use in America has been going on since the turn of the last century but the term War on Drugs only became part of our national dialog in 1970 when it was first used by President Richard Nixon.

The President later formed the DEA and started a push to outlaw drugs of all kinds. Among the most discussed drugs in this war is Marijuana.

This special will look at the storied and strange history of Marijuana in America. Probably one of the better documentaries, mostly seems pro-cannabis and by far the most pro-cannabis documentary thus far released by the History Channel.

The documentary attempts to educate everyone who still has a Reefer Madness mindset, who still thinks cannabis prohibition is reasonable, and who have no idea that widespread cannabis use is relatively harmless compared to alcohol, tobacco, and especially pharmaceutical and other drugs.

More great documentaries

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

143 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
KW Hatch
KW Hatch
6 years ago

Can I purchase Marijuana: A Chronis History ? Where ?
Thank you.

WonderPlant
WonderPlant
6 years ago

We are now in 2017 and much has changed. The history of cannabis is much more colorful and farther reaching than described in this show. Much has been learned since 2010 medically, economically, environmentally and recreational with both industrial and high THC versions of the plant. Statistically its perhaps one of the safest and most useful substances on the planet. This broadcast should not be labeled as "new". Recent renewed vigor of our newly appointed Attorney General and the drug war proves legalization is a threat against an endless supply of criminals for privatized prisons and a way to create a reason to fuel lies and fears with our tax money - it is more apparent then ever as more and more states continue to legalize for its benefits. Demonizing this plant is not the answer.

charles a peck
charles a peck
7 years ago

COME ON HISTORY CHANNEL!!
this, "Marijuana" show is from 2010.
It's mid 2016 and legal in some states!
UPDATE IT u JITZU'S

Kris Williams
Kris Williams
8 years ago

Cannabis tourism is indeed a thing... I could not believe I found a cannabis airbnb... Hundreds of listings around the globe called:budandbreakfast.com Its a whole new world!

BohoChickKy
BohoChickKy
9 years ago

What happened to part 1? It automatically jumps to part 2. :(

jaberwokky
jaberwokky
10 years ago

Aw s*it, american prime time is getting in on the weed doco action. Queue the ridiculous effects, cruddy music and irritating movie trailer voices. Ah well, twas too good to last.

1beyourowndoc2
1beyourowndoc2
11 years ago

I am offended that I have lived in a state that marijuana is illegal. For 75 years I have been deprived of the potential benefit of hemp and marijuana. In a free society I should have been able to make that choice. Hopefully my grandchildren will experience choice on what plants to consume.

Cheyenne Williams
Cheyenne Williams
11 years ago

Heh..Rogan

Terri Scott
Terri Scott
12 years ago

it is a false stereotype to say Christians are against marijuana. I am a Christian & I am for the legalization of marijuana! It is a herb that God gave us.
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which [is] the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein [there is] life, [I have given] every green herb for meat: and it was so.
Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Carlos Zapata
Carlos Zapata
12 years ago

what can i say about marijuana? HELL FUKIN YEA!!!!

Trey Hash
Trey Hash
12 years ago

marijuana isnt just a way of life, its starting to become a religion, taxing marijuana is not right, and keeping it illegal is just blaspemus against my beliefs and many others, christians did not like it when it was illegal to be christian, and got killed for it, and now that it is legal christian religion makes billions of dollars a year, they dont pay taxes, they recieve taxes wich is not right you should not need to pay for your beliefs,

Robert Becker
Robert Becker
12 years ago

"Hey how am I driving, man?", "I think we're parked."

jasohjg
jasohjg
12 years ago

The fact that they use comedians/actors as people for marijuana use just discredits the pro argument. These people are not any more qualified than anyone else and for the most part are a bunch of idiots.

ShortyWild_21
ShortyWild_21
12 years ago

The war on weed is an outrage. Nixon had it all wrong when he tried to stop the use,cultivation,and distribiution of weed. The prisons and jails are overcrowed due to maraijuna offences that are considered criminal!! I have smoked weed myself and I know for a fact that there is nothing criminal about getting high. The problem comes in when money is being made off it and people get greedy. If weed were to be made legal, then the earning potential would be limitless. I would totally support the idea of the government making profit off of it cause that help everyone in the long run. Just think of the problems tha would be solved just by legalizing weed. here are some examples: Crime rate would go down tremendously, Money could be made to stimulte the economy, teens would no longer need to lie to there parents about it. Soooooo much money could be made from it. I think more should be done towards getting weed legal so America can reap the finicial benefits from it. I will be thinkng on ways to do just that.

fonbindelhofas
fonbindelhofas
12 years ago

i have problem understanding cops in here, jez they are dumb...

pyledriver8
pyledriver8
12 years ago

Our leaders are still fighting amongst themselves on how to balance the budget. The government is so slow and lame, they still continue to push an Impeached Presidents 1970 Drug Laws on Marijana. Yet $600 BILLION DOLLARS has been wasted on trying to eradicate a weed since NIXON. This president is still costing taxpayers money. All these COWBOY (want to be) Weed Whackers are costing taxpayers over $13 BILLION DOLLARS Annually!

I say that if we cut out these gungho programs instead of cutting out the important ones our country would not be in this shape. It could tax marijana and probably make back double the $13 BILLION DOLLARS Annually! These Vietnam type helecopter patrols that swarm our country hunting for weeds are not only costly, but also scares the hell out of the Wildlife that roam our forest.

Cannabis prohibition is stupid and has a 1960's mindset, and our government still has no idea that widespread cannabis use is relatively harmless compared to alcohol, tobacco, and especially pharmaceutical and other drugs. Nixon's lame history and last century's Reefer Madness mindset should be abolished as a stupid waste of time and money!

highPHI521
highPHI521
12 years ago

Couldn't tell if the dumb blonde with ignorance spilling out of her mouth or the vice president of Californians police chief's was more naive. Other than that, great movie with non biased, enlightening information.

class1driver
class1driver
12 years ago

I don't use pot because I had a bad reaction to it in 2000, BUT I still don't believe it should be illegal. I want to drink bleach, or eat dung beetles, how does that harm anybody. Laws should ONLY be based on protecting others from harm, not for protecting an individual from potentially harming himself. Its so stupid to put people in jail for consuming a plant that some idiot, like the blonde in the doc, thinks is bad for us. In believe its Holland,where pot was essentially legalized, that young people consume less pot than their American counterparts do where it is illegal. Look how much problems were created from the prohibition of alcohol: The goodie-two-shoe war didn't work then, and this goodie-two-shoe war won't work either. If you don't want your children to swear, then don't swear in front of them. If you don't want your children to drink, then don't drink. I you don't want your children to smoke, then you shouldn't smoke. But why the hell do you think you should be able to dictate your morals, beliefs, and insane, warped ideals that have no sound scientific corroboration, onto the general public, and thus denying adults the freedom to choose what they put into their bodies? And these same individuals are naive enough to proclaim that they live in a free and democratic country? That's like the fisherman saying to the fish that he doesn't need water to breathe because he knows what is best for him.

Bella Bracelet
Bella Bracelet
12 years ago

if any congessman (woman) reads this and I get shot next day... or if they make profit of my assumption and I do not get credit... we'll see.
Promote the industry of Hemp, (Canabis sativa) IT IS NO DRUG. You can make ropes, tissue, cloth, wood etc. from it. THE POLEN WILL CONTAMINATE THE MARIGUANA, ( Canabis indicus) and pot for smoking, will be only be possibly obtainded from very careful farmers

Nakor420
Nakor420
12 years ago

That skinny blonde with all the maekup on is a f***ing moron. Everything that came out of her mouth was bulls***. I mean REALLY stupid. She says it's a "dangerous, poisonous drug", that the portugal model wouldn't work here because we are a "super power"9wtf does THAT have to do with anything?", then she sais everyone in america is intelligent and respectable. For 1 that's simply not true, and for two, that's like saying everyone in portugal is an inbred retard. She shouldn't have even had a spot in this doc. ACTUALLY, maybe she should, cause she just helps the cause by making the reefer madness freaks look even dumber.

legalizeit420
legalizeit420
12 years ago

Hi, I am an ignorant American and I believe the propaganda from 1914-1967 handed down from our grandparents that destroyed a renewable resource, a medicine and a cash crop that our Country was founded on and ran off of for 175 years, but was made illegal because of discrimination of blacks and Hispanics. Wake up America! There is a difference between Marijuana and Hemp. Marijuana is excellent to get someone on 12 different drugs down to 2-3 and Hemp can be used to make over 35,000 different industrial products...

dtpheifer
dtpheifer
12 years ago

if you exempt medical marijuana from the fact, then there is no plausible way, well yeah if i exempt the fact that i am able to breath righ now, there no evidence to say i will be able to breath tomorrow. why are these anti-marijuana people so dumb?

dtpheifer
dtpheifer
12 years ago

whats the name of the "nip it in the bud" woman, because she has to be the most ignroant close minded, idiotic person i have ever had the displeasure of hearing speak.

Darren Ray Gohring
Darren Ray Gohring
12 years ago

I have been forced into Alcohol adiction, because most ALL companys will not hire you, If you smoke weed? So I will die young due to liver disease, So I can keep my job.... Thank America, Land of the FREE???? Yea right

dtpheifer
dtpheifer
12 years ago

if anything that caused any kind of addiction was illigal these legal things would also be illigal: alcohol, cigarettes, any kind of food, sex, video games, movies, televison, any kind of entertainment whatsoever, or any kind of fun, because anything that causes dopamine to go to the brain, causes an addiction.

tkurnas
tkurnas
12 years ago

If marijuana is criminal then so is stupidity. We don't yet have enough jails.

Hojeans
Hojeans
13 years ago

I smoked pretty much every day for about 6 months and had been smoking a few times a week for about a year before that. I must say when I stopped I did find my mind became clear again and my brain worked faster. My memory began to improve pretty quickly too. Saying that I still smoke once a week and could function fine when I was still smoking a lot. It should not be illegal

Clay Webb
Clay Webb
13 years ago

Marijuana is awesome

Luke123
Luke123
13 years ago

I have smoked marijuana every day for a year. It has made no mental / physical effect on me. I work 40 - 50 hours a week in retail so it is a great way for me to unwind and really relax after a tough work shift. I take it in my room, lie down late at night and watch random shit on my laptop. What harm am I possibly doing?

It has been proven that cannabis is a cure for asthma.

There have never been any cannabis related deaths (drinking is a different story)

FREEEEE DE HURBBBBB!

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@daniel

you poor traumatized animal... j/k lol
a fine for ingesting a herb in my own body is unacceptable and criminal.
especially from a bunch of alcoholic cops.. they should just mind their own business and chase after real criminals

Daniel
Daniel
13 years ago

Canabis should stay illegal but just be decriminalized. The Gov would make money and if you enjoy smoking the herb like i do then a fine for being caught with it is a risk we can take.

bert
bert
13 years ago

So in the US cannabis is schedule 1 and coke and Crystal Meth are schedule 2, also PCP wtf?

Makes no sense at all?

That blond from nip it in the bud, "well in europe they may smoke it but americans are smart, sophisticated, etc etc" i can't remember exactly but bloody piss take none the less!

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ ez
peace

Ez
Ez
13 years ago

@ Princeton

Whatever I just don't have the energy. I don't think you are right, but majority rules. So get it done if you can. All this could of, would of, should of, doesn't matter anyway- what matters is "is". And this "is" the end. Have a good day.

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

its strange to me how people hate on businesses and the free market, but cheer for the government and claim it needs more power.

the government is just another business or service provider.. with one exception. they can and do use violence to achieve their ends.

there is nothing the government does that cannot be done by any other business, again with the exception that people will actually have to pay those businesses voluntarily as opposed to threatened to pay or else...

we can avoid all the problems and inefficiencies that arise through reliance on government, if our service providers actually had to work for our money and fight off competition from all angles.. but alas, we have this giant company (the government) that is supposed to service us, but instead has more money than we who put it in power do.

its like a super-walmart that comes to your house, shoves a gun in your face, takes half your money, then sends you whatever they feel you need and call it "the common good".
"if you don't like it, you can vote, try to become a manager, or just leave"

Yeesh...

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ez
'How would you like to travel two hundred miles and find out that in this state you don’t own ....."
well, the thing is today we have internet and worldwide communications, so i'm sure we can know conditions in a localized area before we travel there. same reason i dont travel to places like Iraq or send my wife to Afghanistan wearing short shorts, knowing she might get acid thrown at her.. a communal/irrational/violent society cannot keep that a secret for too long, and without governments enforcing borders and laws to keep their people caged in, would probably lose support & citizens to the more capitalistic and rational societies pretty quickly.

" .. states and local governments need more power ... we also need a central power to organize efforts ...."
not at all, this has been thoroughly refuted for over a century (maybe even longer). communities of independent people coordinate and manage very complex situations without the need for a central power to kidnap them if they don't get in line.

I am all for self defense and believe in using force to defend myself and my property when necessary, but the fact is that the common defense (military industrial complex) you refer to is not doing this but instead is turning their guns on the same people they are supposed to protect (and creating enemies/chaos around the world). what we have is force being used to simply achieve a small group of individuals' interests at the expense of millions of people's life liberty and property. It would be easy for a voluntary society to establish means to protect itself and its citizens without also contradicting its very purpose and aggressing against those same citizens for money.

"until you can answer everyone of those complicated questions, no one is going to pay you any attention accept others that are too simple to understand how complicated this world is"
Again, not at all.. anarchy is the humble and realistic approach to complex social problems, because the whole premise is an admittance that the world is too complex for one person (or small group of people) to pretend they have the answers and go around shooting people who don't agree with them.
even a majority rule society is blatantly illogical and leads to insurmountable problems because as we all know the majority is not always correct, and often a small minority have the real solution, but with a mob rule society, that minority has to suffer and work at great lengths to ever impact any change, which ultimately "harms" the whole society.
My whole premise is that we (me, you, governments) cannot & will never know how best to organize society and its utterly arrogant to force people (no matter how few) to bend to our ideas of what society should be like. basic economics principles of supply and demand apply here, which is to say, what the people really need, can and will be provided voluntarily if they really want this service, not whether they say/vote that they want it, but if they actually put their money where their mouth is. this is irregardless how few or how many people want this, the market will respond to that demand nonetheless, so long as no one is getting hurt (directly and tangibly, not hypothetically or their feelings).

a voluntary society will still defend its members (individuals) through violence if necessary, but differs greatly from what we have now because violence will not be the norm, nor will it be used simply to achieve personal, political and ideological goals.

did you ever take a look at the ludwig von mises institute or do a google search from freedomainradio . com ? you will find a growing number of experts and professionals who agree with this perspective and who have actually proposed many solutions to what you think cannot be achieved without using force.

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ ez
yes indeed.. i do agree with your last portion and did state myself that the system we have may be the best in the world up to now, but i also cannot ignore the logical contradictions that come with saying things like..

"People lust for power and will do what ever they think they can get away with to get what they want including murder and torture" but then insist that the solution is to create an organization that can justifiably use violence to achieve its ends. I think this is the reason why governments always get bigger and governments always end up collapsing, because you create a "legal" entity that allows all the crazy violent people to act out their ish without any social recourse.

If you are right about your assertions concerning the majority of society and people, then it is also a logical contradition to assume a majority rule system will result in anything better than what we have. can you see the logical contradictions.

social security is one aspect of taxation which is forced upon me and my employers. maybe it has some good aspects to it, but the truth is we have no choice whether to participate or not and this within itself kills any hope of actually improving on it or creating a much better alternative.

income taxes are not voluntary and business owners have to turn over some 10% of their sales to govt or face getting shut down forcibly. properties are taxed at purchase and throughout ownership at the risk of getting taken from you. i could go on and on... but I know it is not voluntary.

I already made a few posts to you in regards to how and why companies would standardize and have an incentive to refrain from secrecy in an open and competitive market, because the competition can exploit any perceived wrong or threat to individuals to increase their sales or takeover business. businesses like airlines and phone companies standardize because they can thus provide a better product and remain in business, for if they don't, without any government protections, other businesses will start-up and create that standard and most customers will pay more for reliability and global service.

Ez
Ez
13 years ago

@ Princeton

"so your stance is that we should be made by force to help and “care” for each other? am I correct?"

No, you are not correct. I think that people by their very nature do not plan ahead, do not disciplin themselves when it comes to dangerous drugs and so forth, are selfish and look after not just their needs but the excess they think they need. They will do this at the cost of bringing down a whole nation and hurting their neighbors. People lust for power and will do what ever they think they can get away with to get what they want including murder and torture, whether it be for material gain or to advance some ideaology they think is right. If we had no law and no government we would soon have mayhem and rampant violence resulting in mass fear. We would have religious nuts out killing in the name of thier so called god and inforcing some rigid morality they believe in. We have much of this happening right now, while we have laws and goevernment in place trying to hold it at check.

I agree that the system is horrible right now, we are over taxed and overly controlled. We are manipulated and lied to constantly. Media has been bought and paid for so we never really get the truth and our attention is constantly drawn to the wrong things purposely. I am not blind nor am a patriot.

But the wrong thing to do is to let everyone do as they will. Yes, some will do the right thing, some will contribute to charity and help society move forward, but not the majority. The majority will do nothing, thats right nothing at all but sit on their a55 and complain and want. Then we would have another smaller but still large sect that would rape and kill, rob and pillage, assert power over the weak and needy, etc. We see this over and over in places that have no laws or government. Look at Africa, look at South America. Everywhere there is no control things go hay wire and people live in filth and fear. I just do not understand what makes you or anyone else think this will not happen here just as it did there. We are just people like them, we will do many of the same things if left to our own devices and judgement.

Not to mention the amount of coordination we need for things like air travel, sanitation, communications, education, infrastructure maintenance and design, common defense- the list goes on and on. I do not see the American public doing all of this strictly by volunteer efforts. People would just go to work when they felt like it. They would abandon things they became bored with or that got to complicated. The more able and educated would not rise to the top and innovate, why should they? There is no currency without government, no rights to your intellectual property, no way to rise above due to your efforts. We would not look after the common defense, and other countries will and will come here and take what is ours like taking candy from a baby. If you think we would then how would you coordinate between states? You would need a central power to do this, now you are simply recreating what you say we do not need. I don't think you appreciate the complicated systems that are in place to make things run smoothly here. I don't think you appreciate the amount of diplomatic efforts neccessary to keep us afloat in this global economy. We have to have some type of centralized control to synchronize efforts through out this vast land.

Yes, I agree that states and local governments need more power to look after the problems only they can appreciate because they are here and know what is happening. But we also need a central power to organize efforts between those states and facilitate standards like weghts and measures, ownership of property, labor laws, etc.

How would you like to travel two hundred miles and find out that in this state you don't own your car or any other property as they have decided to practice communal ownership here. These things happen in places like Africa all the time. People talk about traveling two hundred miles and suddenly finding themself in a whole other world were they do not understand the customs or rules. We have far too many people that know what they think is right is right. They will not submit to the common good unless forced to.

As far as being forced to care for one another, I don't know what you are talking about. Your tax dollars are not spent in this way. You pay into social security because one day you will draw from social security. You pay into unemployment insurance because one day you will be unemployed and need an income. You pay into the common defense because you need that defense the same as me.

I disagreed with the stimulus completely. Not because I don't see that we can't just let all these huge businesses fail and all those citizens be out of work, but because it is only putting of the inevitable. No matter how much funny money we pump into the system we are only creating another bubble that will burst. Sooner or later we have to face up to the fact that we let the economy get out of hand. We removed too many regulations and this allowed big business to do bad things, like letting businesses become to big to fail without it killing our economy. Like selling debts instead of standing behind the loans we made, like allowing wall street firms to sell portfolios that they are betting against on the market. Like letting Bernie get away with an obvious ponsy scheme that would have been caught had we of been regulating like we used to. These companies have shown us what they will do if we let them. Now people like you have gotten in your head somehow that they are on your side. That if we let them go they will share the wealth by reinvesting in the system. Bull sh1t, they will invest in cheaper labor markets and schemes like debt bundles. We the people will not see any of the wealth in the form of jobs, this has been proven beyond doubt, if you simply study economics you would see this.

That is my stance, and until you can answer everyone of those complicated questions, no one is going to pay you any attention accept others that are too simple to understand how complicated this world is. You see we do not have Stockholm syndrome. We know that the current plliticians are screwing us over. But it is what we have to work with right now. And until we can make a smooth transition to something better we are better off this way, at least we are safe enough to operate and know what to expect from day to day. We live in a fairy tale compared to most people on this globe, surely you will admit that.

nick_kcin
nick_kcin
13 years ago

staying right out of the disagreement there but..

"The average trip is four to six hours of spiritual awakening"
haha good one ez, I also find it very distressing that people are so quick to give warnings about drugs when they have absolutely no experince with them, but most people would disregard the advice of someone who is extremely experienced with them as though they're some crazed junkie whos too 'drug f--ked' to know what they're on about.

people who are former meth or heroin addicts usually say things like "dont even try, it'll kill you". People who have heavily used hallucinogens usually say things like "The average trip is four to six hours of spiritual awakening". what does that tell you?

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ resinpro

awesome name if thats what i think it means

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ ez
that last part of my post was not about you directly.. sorry if i didn't specify and it sounded that way.

so your stance is that we should be made by force to help and "care" for each other? am I correct?

see, i don't think you can accurately speak for all of society, but only mostly for yourself. are you actually saying that if you had a choice, you would not help the poor, contribute to childrens' education, and pay for food and medical oversight voluntarily?

I know personally, I would be glad to do so along with many individuals who have given to various charities I have participated in.. but again, I can't speak for all of society..

I think your belief in the system is a mistake, because it doesn't matter who is in charge of a system that is based on theft. are you denying that our present governmental systems are all predicated on theft?

all politicians throughout history have and forever will be corrupt based on such a system, and so are the people who blindly follow their orders for a paycheck. they are all directly participating in a violent system, and I don't think they are unaware of this. I think it's a motivation, because the system as it is will only attract those who are comfortable with the idea of using force against civilians for their "ideology" and "benefits." I personally know this, most of my family is military, and they are not "friendly" nonviolent individuals, but then again, that is only anecdotal and i cannot bunch everyone together. I understand Some have just fallen prey to decades of propaganda (public school) but nonetheless, they know the full implications of their actions when they travel thousands of miles to shoot at civilians, or kidnap teenagers smoking pot and hold them for ransom (bail)

Resinpro
Resinpro
13 years ago

Princeton=

A refreshing voice of reason in a sea of drifters wearing hamburger ear muffs.

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ Princeton

Oh, I understand all you have said. Its not very complicated, trust me. You lie by putting arguements in my mouth that i never said at all. Never once did I say the current leaders wanted peace or had our best interest in mind or any of that bs. You want to make me out to be some blind patriot when in reality I only support a system, not those that run it. As far as the supreme court stuff, I trust my own researched facts coupled with educated professionals and congress over someones word that i don't know and have never met, I'm funny like that. But you keep on ranting and trying to put words in my mouth Princeton, people see through it you know.

I wanted to let this go and not even post anymore, but I am not going to let you lie about what i believe or what i support nor make me out to be gullible when it is you that is saying how people will do the right thing and volunteers and charity will take care of everything. Thats the gullible stance here Princeton. Mine is a cynical stance if anything, not gullible.

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ Orpheus

You are confused yourself friend, and you say you don't smoke weed at all. Weed can not even start to be compared with meth and other hard drugs. And to say it henders spiritual recognition is WAY off the mark. If anything it makes you very sensitive to spirituality.

Mushrooms and LSD are also uncomparable to hard drugs, completely so. LSD is non-addictive and well known for its psychological effects which can include altered thinking processes, closed and open eye visuals, synaesthesia, an altered sense of time and spiritual experiences. It is used mainly as an entheogen, recreational drug and as an agent in psychedelic therapy. Mushrooms are very similar but produce a more intense and shorter experience. The average trip is four to six hours of spiritual awakening.

The drug you and no one else seems to bring up causes the hardest addiction to cure. It is the most abused and one of the most destructive to the body. Opiates, or pain pills, are prescribed to us as if they were harmless. In fact this addiction is the absolute hardest to get over and actually changes brain chemistry, forever in many cases. But with the pharma community making so much money off of the addiction they spread, we will never see this drug treated as it should be.

Why is it that people will admit they know nothing of things they have no experience with, such as yoga or meditation. But when it comes to drugs they feel they know exactly what they speak of with no experience what so ever. Do you believe every commercial you see for wonder drugs? I doubt it, so why do you believe everything they tell you about these drugs you group together as if they are all the same? It the same thing one is selling a product the other a concept, but they are both selling something to advance an agenda.

People have no common sense about drugs. I often hear people say, "I just do not understand why they would want to do those drugs." Thats the dumb3st statement I have ever heard, they do them because they make you feel good. We all do things that make us feel good that have negative effects on us, we over eat-drink alcohol-smoke cigarettes-drink caffiene-etc. and no one ever asks us why we do it like it is some puzzle. But when drugs come in the picture all common sense exits.

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ ez
ok.. ill just accept my bull headedness.. i think i've said enough on this topic and i'll just go on saving myself and my friends money along with avoiding jail time because of my so called "arrogance" and "ignorance." i think you are the one who is and will ultimately pay the price for your overt trust in "authority," so called "experts" and "prestige." good luck with your case, sincerely.

oh the old "do as we say or leave"
its laughable.. so i guess you guys own me and my family's property to tell us what we should or shouldn't do right. or maybe we owe you guys money just for staying on our land. that's a silly notion.

sad thing about that argument is that no matter where i go on this planet at this time, some local mafia will come around and put guns in my face for money.. and because of people like you, they feel they are justified.

the only stated purpose of the government is to protect and maintain individual (not society which doesn't have any) rights. anything other than that is a breach of their own stated purpose. To get our money taken by force is a direct violation of our rights.

I don't think i go too far, I'm only too blunt and honest to individuals who are highly invested in statist ideologies and that simply refuse to acknowledge that they support a system based on stealing from their neighbors.

the majority agrees with me insofar as most of their life decisions do not involve coercion or the initiation of force, but only within the realm of politics is this reversal of values allowed (Alice in wonderland) where theft, murder & kidnapping are good and moral, so long as you're wearing a costume.

point taken roach.. i just feel i gotta say something ( i rarely post on forums) because all around me are individuals that have developed some form of Stockholm syndrome, siding and sympathizing with their abusers just to get the bread crumbs that fall off the plates of politicians as these crooks steal from us who actually work to create real value, by using sentimental rhetoric and pretending the majority of us civilians actually want to be robbed. we may have been trained to accept it or taught not to think about or ever challenge it, even demonizing words like anarchy, & mesmerizing us through charismatic "rulers" who order the deaths of thousands with a smile on their face, lying through their teeth to make us believe "its for our own good", but the future will agree with me (if governments don't kill us all). you can remain blind to the lies you have been fed if it helps you sleep at night, for i know from personal experience it sucks to realize almost every one lies to you from day one, just to cover up the fact that they cannot live up to their own "morality" and simply cheer the use force and coercion to squelch anything that makes'em uncomfortable, while outwardly pretending they really want peace.

oh well.. if you can't see/understand anything else i have said, can you at least understand and agree the government doesn't own everything, and that they are funded through threats of violence?

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ roachinkansas

I agree, but I can't. I guess that is showing- huh. Man, I can't wait to get this stup1d case off my back. Thanks for the advise though, you are exactly right. I'm done with this, it is stepping all over my groove.

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ Princeton

No, I call your holding your opinion higher than that of congress, Cornell university, lawyers, etc. arrogant. My opinion doesn't matter. He11, I wish you were correct and i could get out from under this felony on my back, but its not. The statute I listed was there to define all cases of original jusisdiction. I am tired of this, you win have it your way. Your to bull headed for your own good, period. It will catch up to you, it always does. You know better than to say that what is written in the constitution is the final say. The supreme court gets to interpret what is written and congress gets to set the jurisidction of all federal courts of which the supreme court is the highest, if you really do not know this then you are not fit to defend anyone.

You and no one else is forced to obey the laws of the land, you choose to live here. You want to enjoy the benefits while claiming foul at the same time, its ridiculus. The majority speaks and that is the way it is, if you don't like it leave. Otherwise you can keep complaining until you get the majority on your side, but with your crazy ideas that will never happen. You go too far, not all government is bad government. Not every law is corrupt or unfair. Anarchy will never win the day, period. If it did people like you wold last all of a day, maybe, before someone came along and did you in. You don't care for labels, thats a laugh. If the statute doesn't mention it? It does mention it directly and it says you are wrong. You are so blind.

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ The Prince of all

You said: "I thank you for strengthening my arguments and methodology"

I tore your areguement to pieces, you are the only one that refuses to see that. Of course anything you can use to strengthen you blanket theology, you will- blind arrogance Princeton, thats all.

ez2b12
ez2b12
13 years ago

@ princeton

Like I said congress, cornell university, local law professors, an educated experienced lawyer, the very sites you qoute mine to defend your position, and a recognized law library say you are wrong. You said you wanted statutes, I gave you statutes- but of course that's not good enough for you is it? Like I said you are impossible to debate with, I am done. Spit and strut in your pathetic tantrum all you want.

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@ ez
i belittle no one, nor do i hold any contempt for education, all i stated is the obvious truth that degrees are not synonymous with correctness and sometimes highly educated individuals, are not truth seekers, but simply want to make a lot of money. a degree or prestigious education in and of itself tells me nothing about the credibility or honesty of an individual.

also, I only bold printed that line to direct your attention to the point I was making which does clearly say all other article 3 courts are of general jurisdiction, and i Know you cannot falsify that.

I am amazed at how well i have tolerated your verbal abuse, but hey, sometimes kernels of truth do arrive, and I thank you for strengthening my arguments and methodology.. I can admit I learned something and it will be very useful to me in defending my property from so called "experts."