Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Google Flu Trends: Google to share sickness-related info with the government | Main | Lindsay Lohan and the first "colored" president »

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Marc Emery: Creeping Jackboots

Marc_emery_2 In his latest column for the Western Standard, entitled "Creeping Jackboots," Marc "Prince of Pot" Emery sounds the alarm bells over a changing legal climate that permits the fire department and electricity cops to search your home without a warrant.

But an Emery column wouldn't be complete without a passionate defense of the marijuana culture, as well as those who choose to smoke pot. As poll after poll has consistently shown, Canadians endorse, at a minimum, a detente over the war on marijuana.

Emery writes:

It’s impossible to remain a civilized nation when the government labels 60 per cent of Canada’s people as “heretics”. When the people and their critical thinking are the problem, despotism is just around the corner. Polls since 2004 have shown each year a majority of Canadians want marijuana legalized, from 53 per cent to 62 per cent, and gaining each year.

Still, the real point of the column is the changes in the legal system. Here's a longer excerpt:

...a new criminal law system has been established by stealth, designed to replace the existing uncooperative and ‘stupid’ court system. Search warrants, fair trials, rules of evidence, disclosure, judges and juries have all been eliminated. In their place is this omnipotent all-powerful cabal of vested interests whose pay-cheques are more and more dependent on marijuana prohibition.

As the Langley symposium showed, these bureaucratic inquisitors currently have the right to invade your home anytime they want and as often as they want, treat you in a rude and abusive manner without consequence, steal your belongings (at least one theft investigation has been admitted to), shut off your power on a whim, search your home, fine you into financial ruin, evict you, and publicize it all forever.

This new legal system is being used to persecute Canadians who grow marijuana, a plant that two out of three Canadians insist should be legal. A suspected murderer, rapist, or thief has more rights than people suspected of growing a single marijuana plant in the privacy of their own residence.

You can read the rest here.

Emery conducted a remarkable interview with former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent Cellerino Castillo, who uncovered the Oliver North Arms-For-Drugs DEA-CIA involvement in Central America. The YouTube video of that two part interview is below the fold.

Part 1

Part 2

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on November 11, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e2010535e73ef5970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Marc Emery: Creeping Jackboots:

Comments

Why do you let this criminal speak in this forum?

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-11 5:37:43 PM


Hah! He's just preaching as much as he can before he spends the rest of his life stamping out license plates.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-11 5:54:27 PM


Go DEA!

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-11 5:55:36 PM


Florence, Colorado is too good for him. Send him to the Louisiana State Prison at Angola.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-11 5:58:00 PM


It'll be a federal prison, Zeb. Try FCI Marion in Illinois. I only wish Alcatraz wasn't closed.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-11 6:18:13 PM


Oh darn you're right. It would have been nice to see Emery deal with his "oppressed homies." He'd find for himself the true meaning of "oppression." I wonder if there's enough drugs in the world to dull the pain he'd receive.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-11 6:29:02 PM


Check out the very revealing interview with me from "Le Quebecois Libre"!

http://www.quebecoislibre.org/08/080415-9.htm

Posted by: Marc Scott Emery | 2008-11-11 6:39:19 PM


DEA agent Cellerino Castillo makes an incredible interview! Definitely check out those two video interviews I did with him. Castillo's book "Powderburns" is a searing indictment of DEA murder, rape, government destabilization, drug smuggling, illegal weapons smuggling & supply.

Posted by: Marc Scott Emery | 2008-11-11 6:42:09 PM


Shane: does Emery know that he'll never escape justice?

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-11 7:02:14 PM


A detente.

Apparently, only one side needs to step back from the debate and listen to the blah, blah, blah from the author.

Posted by: set you free | 2008-11-11 8:26:40 PM


Markie.

The new criminal law system would not be much of a problem if you drive a gray four door sedan and keep a low profile.

And don't forget that they are out there to hassle you not necessarily the rest of us unless we stand on the roof of a bright Porsche and wave a bag of pot over our heads.

There is something to be said for being subtle about your activities. Most smart people subvert in private and don't have a problem.

The crappola that would come into play in the legalization, production and distribution of pot would eventually make everyone wish they could go back to the good old days where you just quietly bought a bag from your neighbor and take it home. No problemo.

It would be more useful if you put your considerable promotional talents to work in areas of reducing government red tape for business, to reducing income taxes, ridding us of the gun registry, the CHRC .... but pot???? There is no big problem with smoking pot in Canada.

Pot must make you manic and thus you do that hyper silly stuff you do that is taking you to a US slammer. It's just makes me sleepy. :0)

Posted by: John V | 2008-11-11 9:49:40 PM


Smoking pot has been illegal seemingly forever. People continue to smoke pot. Kind of like global warming. Most people recognize bullshit when they see it. Just another pissing contest between those that know whats good for you,...and you.

Posted by: peterj | 2008-11-11 10:20:22 PM


Damnit Shane....it's been 5 minutes. Where is you put-down reply??

Posted by: peterj | 2008-11-11 10:24:32 PM


Regardless of our views on liberalization of marijuana laws, we ought to condemn the abuse far and above that slated for murderers, rapists and thieves that the government reserves for marijuana growers and, to a lesser extent, users (or suspected growers or users).

The signal it sends implies a diminished sense of the relative severity of these real crimes and should be disturbing to us not only for that general symbolism but more specifically for the injustice it does to the victims of some very terrible crimes.

Posted by: Janet | 2008-11-11 10:38:44 PM


Actually, Janet, the difference is that those other crimes are very difficult to predict in advance, as there is usually little to no evidence or warning before the fact. That's not true with pot growers, is it? A more appropriate comparison would be white-collar crime like embezzlement, which usually comes to light via little clues that accumulate over time, similar to the way grow-ops do.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-11 11:18:15 PM


Put-down reply to whom? And more to the point, to what?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-11 11:18:50 PM


what surprises me is how many canadians and americans actually seem to side with the oppressors. As if "freedom" means we are free to do whatever a corrupt and coercive government tells us to do. Emery is trying to point out that we all have fewer and fewer rights, and that the oppressors have more and more rights, and zebulon and shane are all "Go nazis!"

we are talking about soviet-style government powers here.... how can you be FOR that and AGAINST privacy?

Posted by: Russell Barth | 2008-11-12 5:32:51 AM


Thank You Mr.Emery for an interesting article.

'Even if one takes every reefer madness allegation of the prohibitionists at face value, marijuana prohibition has done far more harm to far more people than marijuana ever could'.

William F Buckley.

Illegitimi non carborundum Mr. Emery.

Posted by: Jeff Franklin | 2008-11-12 6:17:39 AM


It won't be long before marijuana is legal. Our 'budding' neighbours to the South have just elected a Democratic President. America is also broke, they can't afford to build anymore prisons or to police or prosecute marijuana laws.

Massachusetts recently voted to decriminalized, Michigan voted to legalize medical marijuana. If they introduce a bill to decriminalize marijuana nationwide...Canada will follow suit. (Unfortunately, we always do)

And for Shane and Zebulon...the fact that you want Marc Emery to rot in prison is a little disturbing. I challenge you both to find ONE of his victims because if you think he should rot in prison...it should only be fitting that he has caused significant irreparable harm that has destroyed families and lives.

Posted by: Giddyup_99 | 2008-11-12 6:35:50 AM


Giddyup wrote: "1. It won't be long before marijuana is legal. Our 'budding' neighbours to the South have just elected a Democratic President. America is also broke, they can't afford to build anymore prisons or to police or prosecute marijuana laws."

1. On the other hand, America's crime rate has been in free fall ever since they started building those prisons, and even pot use among American youth is down (unlike pot use among Canadian youth, which has ticked sharply upward). That's a powerful incentive to stay the course. Results matter.

2. Massachusetts is on the wrong (and losing) side of the gay marriage debate and recently fielded a presidential candidate who, to listen to liberal apparatchiks, is the least popular in U.S. history. (Of course, he's also enjoyed the HIGHEST approval ratings in U.S. history, but they're conveniently silent on that point). Medical marijuana is a far cry from outright legalization, so that's a mighty big "if."

3. The fact that you would speak for this malignant narcissist is even more disturbing. Throughout his career he's dared the authorities to arrest him, schmoozing the camera the whole time. Now the Americans have said "Wish granted!" and all of a sudden he's scrabbling for freedom. As for "significant and irreparable harm that has destroyed families and lives," it's obvious you've never had deal with a drug addict.

The U.S. doesn't indict on what you feel should be, Giddyup. They indict on what the laws are. Marc Emery not only defied them, he flouted them, mooning the establishment of two countries and kicking them in the shins while he peddled his pot in both their backyards. He got what he wanted...attention. You should be happy for him.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 7:48:48 AM


Russell wrote: “1. What surprises me is how many canadians and americans actually seem to side with the oppressors. As if "freedom" means we are free to do whatever a corrupt and coercive government tells us to do.”

1. Spoken like a true anarchist. I keep telling you guys, I already know that pot smokers and their sympathizers have a deep anti-establishment bent. You don’t need to keep proving it to me. Who the hell do you think keeps VOTING for these governments?

2. Rights to what? To break the law and get away with it under the guise of “privacy”? To risk whole neighbourhoods and work for organized crime and sell drugs to our kids so they can drive around in noisy Ferraris and sport the latest in bling-bling? What about the rest of society’s rights to not have to put up with this kind of garbage?

3. No, we’re talking about a longtime white-collar criminal who has openly defied the law for decades and has been finally called to account, who is thus now hysterical with grief, panicked at the reality of a situation he cannot drive away with cannabis dreams, on-camera shenanigans, or Godwin’s Law.

I can’t believe how much I rule. Care to have another go?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 7:56:34 AM


Sorry. Post to Giddyup, Paragraph 2, should begin: "Massachusetts is on the wrong (and losing) side of the gay marriage debate and recently fielded a presidential candidate who LOST TO A MAN WHO, to listen to liberal apparatchiks, is the least popular in U.S. history." Haven't had my hit of Coke yet. (Coca-Cola, smart mouth.)

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 7:59:04 AM


Shane -

You're pretty full of yourself aren't you , big fella.
You must be a cop to have such a NAZI attitude.
I'll bet you'd love to line all of the offenders you hate
up against the wall and shoot them, wouldn't you?

Posted by: Joe | 2008-11-12 8:38:40 AM


All you are doing is appealing to Emery's Messiah complex. He truly believes he is taking a bullet for all potheads out there and dying for their sins.

Unfortunately, Emery is no god-man. He is just another forgotten loser rotting in prison, his disciples too brain fried to even remember his name.

Epsi

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-11-12 9:10:52 AM


Consider your surrender accepted, Joe.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 9:11:43 AM


Emery reminds me of the character Cyrus from the movie "The Warriors" - he's a marked man.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-12 10:12:16 AM


I would be delighted to purchase a license to smoke pot for say $400.00 per year. Responsible car drives buy a license, responsible gun owners buy a license. Sell me a license so I can find out what all the fuss is about. It will make some money for a legitimate government and take a bite out of crime fueled by prohibition.

Posted by: Spanner McNeil | 2008-11-12 11:17:30 AM


Then you're in the minority, Spanner. Most people would pay little or no tax or licensing if they could get away with it.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 11:29:34 AM


You can say that about any tax or license, Shane. It's a function of bureaucracy to enforce the regulations, a function of government to have reasonable laws.

Posted by: Spanner McNeil | 2008-11-12 11:42:58 AM


It is really sad and pathetic just how stupid this Shane Matthews appears to be. Taking delight with his fellow moron "zeb" these two shed a far brighter light on the idiotic juvenile mentality of those who hate Marc without ever meeting him!

And this Epsi makes the others look smart. His claims are ludicrous! He (Marc) is 1)NOT forgotten 2)NOT in prison 3) NOT a loser. People who know and respect Marc are NOT brain fried (as he appears to be)

Potheads committed NO sins! We are Doctors, Lawyers, Firemen, Police Officers, Teachers and more!

Shane Matthews is an ignorant egotistical bigot! He has NO IDEA that so-called pot smokers are from EVERY walk of life, they have no agenda, they simply choose a natural God-Given plant for either Spiritual, Medicinal or even its intoxicating effects!

His ignorance is almost as grande as his out of check ego... I mean really, look at the majority of the comments! All by Shane and his meat puppet who actually LIKED the Warriors! Juvenile Hacks!

Posted by: Freedom Rings | 2008-11-12 11:56:25 AM


Don't change the subject, Spanner. You suggest that most current pot smokers would gladly pay a licensing fee if it meant they could smoke pot legally. We both know that is not true.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 12:01:33 PM


Responsible smokers would be absolutely delighted to buy a marijuana license. We both know that is true.

Posted by: Spanner McNeil | 2008-11-12 12:06:26 PM


Well, let's see. Signs on with a name like "Freedom Rings"--yup, bound to be some attitude there, as well as the limitless self-regard potheads seem to have for themselves. Starts right in with the slagging, offering no solutions, no suggestions, no facts and no statistics, just a lot of self-righteous lather. Limitless self-regard. Oh, wait, that's not entirely true; he did get two out of three:

1. Marc Emery is NOT forgotten (but he soon will be).

2. Marc Emery is NOT forgotten (but he soon will be, probably for most of his natural life).

3. This last is not a fact: Marc Emery is NOT a loser. He is, in fact, and in short order he will lose where it really counts: the courts. Petulant children like FR will probably organize a toke-a-thon or marijuana march, terminating on the steps of the Vancouver Art Gallery, but at the end of the day their protests will come to naught; pot will still be illegal, and Marc Emery will be in a federal U.S. prison. Being a criminal sucks.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 12:07:20 PM


Freedom, your Messiah is going to jail for a looooong time. He is not dying on a cross like he tries to portray himself but rather he is being condemned to obscurity. And nobody cares. And nobody ever will care. You have hitched your wagon to a loser. Losers take drugs. You are a loser deparately trying to justify your addiction.

And I am female BTW.

Epsi

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-11-12 12:13:16 PM


Sorry, Spanner; "responsible" and "marijuana smoker" (with certain exceptions) are mutually exclusive terms. Remember, you're talking about a group who are perfectly willing to treat with criminals rather than give up something they totally do not need. Even if the law is someday changed and they are able to buy marijuana legally, the criminal mentality is still there, the mentality that allows them to effortlessly and remorselessly step over the boundary anytime they believe something they desire lies on the other side. Such people are poor candidates for "responsible."

A lot of people put buying pot into the same category as illegal downloads--technically illegal, but essentially victimless, except for a few corporate fat cats who don't deserve their money anyway. But gang wars, drive-by shootings, and the gangsta lifestyle are very little associated with MP3s. Marijuana smokers contribute to that every time they buy. They know it, too. They simply don't care. What they want is all that matters.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 1:56:18 PM


Ah, yes, now I remember why I don't come to this website anymore. Only trolls frequent the comment sections, spewing nothing more than bitterness, bigotry, hate, contempt, ad hominem attacks and misinformation... It's such a negative and intellectually retarding place to frequent.

It's unfortunate because the people who run Western Standard are excellent doers and thinkers with honorable goals and ideas. I wish the comment-posting regulars could be of the same caliber.

Now, for some clarifications:

Marc Emery never sold marijuana or any other drugs. He only sold marijuana seeds.

Revenue Canada, Revenue BC, Health Canada and the Canadian Parliament were all aware of, and endorsed, Marc Emery's seed selling.

In his 10 years selling seeds, Marc paid $500,000 in income tax to Revenue Canada and Revenue BC as a "marijuana seed vendor", and sent his marijuana seed catalogue to all Members of Parliament (inside Cannabis Culture Magazine) every two months. Health Canada told medical marijuana patients to buy seeds online from websites like Marc Emery's.

I could go on and on, but anyone truly interested in learning the facts can read it all at NoExtradition.net.

Marc has never hurt anyone. He sold seeds. If that's reason enough to want him to "rot in jail" and "all the drugs in the world won't help his pain there"... well, there's a word for people like you: schadenfreude.

Posted by: Jodie Emery | 2008-11-12 5:09:04 PM


Another clarification:

Marc and I do not have a vehicle. We walk to work from home, and use Zip Car (car share program) if we need to drive any long distances.

The night Marc was detained, he was driving a rental vehicle friends had brought up from Washington state. He was only driving it a few blocks, because the friends had been drinking and the vehicle was going to be towed.

The full story of that night can be read here: http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1437976#Post1437976

Posted by: Jodie Emery | 2008-11-12 5:51:41 PM


"Marc Emery never sold marijuana or any other drugs. He only sold marijuana seeds."

Same difference.

"Revenue Canada, Revenue BC, Health Canada and the Canadian Parliament were all aware of, and endorsed, Marc Emery's seed selling."

All providing a nice healthy evidentiary base for the US Drug Enforcement Administration. Someday you'll see the error in your choice of friends.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-12 5:53:09 PM


"well, there's a word for people like you: schadenfreude"

Do you really think you can shame a bourgeois society into supporting you? I support giving medals to cops who kill and/or arrest drug dealers and judges who issue fair sentences to malicious offenders. They're the heroes, not you.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-12 6:22:29 PM


"All providing a nice healthy evidentiary base for the US Drug Enforcement Administration. Someday you'll see the error in your choice of friends."

Canada--possibly the only country on Earth where you can find "conservatives" gloating over the prospect of one of their countrymen being extradited to a foreign country for violating that country's laws, and mocking their own government as "a poor choice of friends" for said countryman.

Zebulon Pike, Shane Matthews and Adam Yoshida (thrown in for good measure): proudly representing the Vidkun Quisling wing of the Canadian right!

Posted by: AWJ | 2008-11-12 7:21:47 PM


Cut the self-righteous crap, Jodie. The judge and jury will determine whether the law was broken, not you. It will not be a difficult decision for them to make—you were pretty frank about what you were doing. Hell, BALD would be a better word.

Now listen up. You are not a more evolved form of human. You have not proven yourself competent to hurl such bilious calumnies. All you’ve shown yourself is enough of a fool to marry a man with a self-proclaimed date with destiny on the other side of the bars. But you hitched your wagon to his train anyway, and now feel entitled to slag the entire country because they won’t come to his rescue as they ought to.

Marc made every effort to see that the police had all the evidence they needed to put him away while snapping his fingers under their noses, daring them to do it. Eventually someone obliged him—you knew it had to come sooner or later, didn’t you? The fact that he paid taxes on his earnings in Canada is irrelevant, because he smuggled seeds into the United States, and since smuggling is illegal in both countries, the extradition treaty applies.

In all likelihood, your husband is going to an American federal prison for several years, Jodie. It may be a great many. I advise you to get use to the idea of visiting him in jail. Even if the Canadian government were interested in blocking the extradition, they’d have a lot of trouble manoeuvring around the text of the treaty. You made a very serious mistake when you poked the American giant in the eye with your finger. Now he’s awake, he’s angry, he’s after you, and you wish us to interpose ourselves between your husband and him? Dream ON.

P.S. That bit about the rental car has no bearing on the issue whatever. You can stop trying to convince us what a wonderful human being he is, because the fact of the matter is almost nobody cares. Those Canadians who think to resent his extradition are more upset because it’s the Americans who extraditing him than over the extradition itself.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 7:42:07 PM


To whom are we traitors, AWJ? Consider your answer carefully.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 7:43:25 PM


What about Lori Berenson, imprisoned in Peru after being convicted of associating with known terrorists?

Shane: exactly = why should we reward stupidity?

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-11-12 7:54:10 PM


As for "significant and irreparable harm that has destroyed families and lives," it's obvious you've never had deal with a drug addict.

Shane,

You are absolutely right. Personally, I have never had to deal with anybody close in my life with any serious drug addictions.

I have however watched my grandfather die of liver and lung cancer due to years of extreme alcohol and tobacco abuse.

I have helped a friend recover from a tragic car crash, caused by a drunk driver.

I have worked with FAS children (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome) trying to teach them concepts so simple, we don't even have to concentrate to understand them.

I have also come to understand that I have yet to see cannabis ruin a life. The only part of cannabis that I have seen ruin lives is prohibition.

Posted by: Giddyup_99 | 2008-11-12 8:39:17 PM


As for "significant and irreparable harm that has destroyed families and lives," it's obvious you've never had deal with a drug addict.

Shane,

You are absolutely right. Personally, I have never had to deal with anybody close in my life with any serious drug addictions.

I have however watched my grandfather die of liver and lung cancer due to years of extreme alcohol and tobacco abuse.

I have helped a friend recover from a tragic car crash, caused by a drunk driver.

I have worked with FAS children (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome) trying to teach them concepts so simple, we don't even have to concentrate to understand them.

I have also come to understand that I have yet to see cannabis ruin a life. The only part of cannabis that I have seen ruin lives is prohibition.

Posted by: Giddyup_99 | 2008-11-12 8:39:18 PM


So what you're saying, Giddyup, is this:

1. Smoking tobacco causes lung cancer, whereas smoking marijuana doesn't.

2. People are hurt by drunk drivers, never by stoned drivers. Remember, until recently the police had little power or ability to test for marijuana intoxication.

3. Smoking dope while pregnant is great for babies, but smoking tobacco and (horrors!) drinking alcohol is not.

Marijuana is not a harmless distraction. It may not kill you, but enough of it will definitely pickle your brain (look at Chris Buors and Budoracle). And young children turned on to marijuana are far more likely to graduate to the truly frightening drugs, because they've taken that all-important first step. Never mind whether dope is legal or not. It's a psychedelic drug, unlike tobacco or alcohol, and everyone considers it such.

P.S. Prohibition, in and of itself, ruins nothing. You have to break the prohibition before you get prosecuted. Now I'd like to hear some really good reasons why this stuff is worth risking a criminal record for, when legal alternatives are available. I bet you can't come up with a single one.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 9:45:10 PM


do you deny Matthew saying Canada is looking like the former USSR.
You said it to me the night of the last prov election.
Please at least stand by what you say- I do.
Heck I am even being sued for my words.

Posted by: Merle | 2008-11-12 10:07:58 PM


The last provincial election was three years ago. Would you mind providing the entire quote? Because I certainly don't remember it.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-12 10:19:48 PM


Yes Shane, I am saying that marijuana smoke does not cause lung cancer.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm

I am not advocating that anybody should toke and drive. It does affect your driving skills, albeit...not as much as alcohol.

I am also not advocating that pregnant women hit the bong, I am sure that it is not good for the baby. But, please tell me what happens to fetuses exposed to marijuana smoke.

The gateway theory is ridiculous. For example, if marijuana use is currently at about 15% to 25%, and cocaine and other hard substances are roughly at about 2%, how does that prove the gateway theory??

Posted by: Giddyup_99 | 2008-11-13 6:55:50 AM


Really? Because studies I've read say some for, some against:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/141891.stm

I've heard the "marijuana cures cancer" claim before. Believe me, a great deal more work remains to be done before this claim can be given credence. Promising first results do not a scientific proof make. And isn't it strange that these properties were detected only now, once the medical marijuana bandwagon got rolling?

A single joint of potent B.C. bud can cut your reaction time in half. A second joint will cut it down to a third. It is precisely that same reaction time that alcohol affects and this is precisely the mechanism by which impaired driving causes accidents, not by hallucinating pink elephants tap-dancing on the highway.

What happens to fetuses exposed to marijuana smoke? Uh, they get stoned. Marijuana use can also affect hormone balances. And given its effects on the adult brain, you can imagine what havoc it could wreak on a developing fetal brain. Admittedly more research remains to be done and the only way to find out for sure is to put some fetuses at risk in the name of science. You progressive times should be all for that. You're already prepared to bump them off in the name of convenience.

Because those who use pot are more likely to end up on hard drugs than those who don't. Most people who smoke dope won't end up on the Big H, but their chances are several times higher, just as your chances of being in an accident are several times higher if you're drunk (or stoned). You'll probably get away with it, but why take the risk?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-11-13 7:33:07 AM


1 2 3 Next »

The comments to this entry are closed.