… or rather, the way they avoid thinking.
Over at RealPolice.net forum a junior commenter asked a question about marijuana and D.U.I., ending with this relatively innocuous statement:
I’m pretty liberal on my marijuana views. Don’t smoke it myself, but I am for decriminalization (not legalization). But people definitely shouldn’t be smoking it and driving.
Maybe a little enlightened for a cop forum, but still pretty tame. However, before long, a forum moderator shot out a warning
Please keep in mind when discussing this, the comment you made even just ‘supporting’ decriminalization borders very closely on the line to earning a ban here. This board has an absolute and strictly enforced ‘Zero’ tolerance policy against talk of drugs being ‘good’. Just a friendly fyi.
Now I’m assuming this is a private enterprise (I have no idea who runs it) and so they certainly have the right to set the rules of discussion the way they wish. I don’t object to that.
But I find it telling. We welcome people with a different point of view here. Now they may not find it easy, but we love having the discussion. In part, this is because we’re sure enough of our position to encourage open discussion. (Can you imagine me saying that anyone defending prohibition would be banned from my site?)
We’re the ones who call for debates (and are usually ignored). We’ll discuss the facts, the policies, the whole range of issues, any time, any place.
It’s not just that legalization isn’t in their vocabulary. They’re afraid of the discussion.
There are certain religions, or religious factions, that try to prevent people from experiencing certain movies, books, comics, scientific theories, music, art, etc. Whenever I see a religious group attempt to impose such a restriction on others, they immediately show themselves to be terribly weak in faith. If they have to shield people from reality in order to keep their faith, it must be pretty fragile.
In a way, prohibitionists (and this group of law enforcement officers in particular) are part of a religious-style cult whose faith is built on sand.
At the forum, it was interesting how members seemed to want to outdo each other in their eagerness to show how much they despise marijuana and drugs, even to the point of bragging about how they routinely violated the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution. Senior member jd524:
I hate MJ, and always have. I don’t run traffic to write tickets. I stop cars to get into them. I have a strong thirst to find drugs.
“I stop cars to get into them.” Wow.
It’s not that I’m surprised that happens (not in the least). But it surprises me that we’ve reached the point that they don’t even bother to hide their contempt for the rule of law any more.
[Clarification Note: This post isn’t about cops. It’s about the kind of cops who inhabit that kind of site. There are plenty of other cops out there who would find this attitude horrid. Also note that this is not a particularly recent post on that site, but the point of my response to it is still valid today.]
…
[Additional Note: I’d like to give a little shout out to my mom, who has taken to reading Drug WarRant to keep up with me (I really should write her more often), especially when I mention religion or the Bible. Hi, Mom!]
…
Sometimes these cop boards really reveal some amazing stuff, sort of like an unexpectedly open microphone in front of a politician.
If there are any cops out there reading drugwarrant, please remember that you shouldn’t have an us-vs-them relationship with the public. You signed up to help people and fight crime, not to bully people and look for ways to punish and hurt them.
Of course, if you are a cop and reading drugwarrant, you’re probably already seeing things at least somewhat our way, so try and get your fellow cops to see the light. America is about freedom and the pursuit of happiness, not authority and harassment.
It’s really no surprise to me at all. As much as I dislike stereotyping, many police are just far to easy to classify. I’m no psychologist, so I’m not going to delve into the “got picked on in high school” theme, but many of them seem to have something to prove and enjoy the power a badge and a gun provides them far more than they should.
Considering how much the average police officer actually gets paid for risking their lives, it stands to reason that there must be alterior motives for most of them becoming LEOs in the first place. I see far too many that are better described as “Hired Thug” than “Law Enforcement Officer”.
No, this doesn’t apply to all officers of the law. Hats off to the LEOs that are in the business to uphold the law with fairness and integrity. And, of course, to our friends at LEAP! 🙂
Police know roads are the weak link in the chain. All drugs and drug users must use the roads at some point.
Interestingly, transportation carries heavier penalties than possession. Sometimes heavier than intent to distribute.
Someone I know from childhood just got sentenced to 17 years for non-violent transportation offenses stemming from a broken tail-light. (I’m in California).
jd524 really does sound like a huge, shaved primate wearing blue.
At least we knows where he swings/stands.
I have friends who are LEOs, so don’t think that I’m bashing just to bash; but here’s the deal – you’re people, just like us. As Paul stated, the you vs. us is not the way to conduct yourselves.
So I wonder if stating simple fact about prohibition/drug war would get you banned? Facts like “marijuana has numerous medical benefits” or “decrim laws in Portugal has lead to an increase in people voluntarily seeking treatment and lower rates of new addiction cases and lower overall drug use rates” or “alcohol and tobacco cause far more deaths than all illegal drugs combined” and so on and so on. But I forgot facts mean nothing to these people…facts frighten them so they just refuse to engage (or ban us)…I would be interested to know if anyone here posts some facts on that site what kind of reception you get (though I can probably guess)
Looks like just another case of defending the goose that lays the golden egg/ While i defend everyones right to free speach . When active duty lawenforcement try to presuade the public that prohibition must stand that in my opinion is a violation of A standard that they are held to not particapate in the political discusions. they do have the right to express their opions but to do this they should resign thier public postion and do it as a private citizen. But few if any have the balls to do this.
When alcohol prohibition was done away with, did the LEOs of the day have this much trouble letting go of the past? Or are the LEOs of today just more “dumbed down?” And I’m speaking of the “sorry, we can’t listen to that stuff” types. Just leave their drugs of choice alone: alcohol, nicotine and saturated FAT!
I wonder if it isn’t also some folks protecting their not-so legal gains. Payoffs, confiscation, extra overtime. Let’s face it, busting druggies and confiscating their stuff, taking payoffs under the table, whatever is easier work than going after some other folks. End prohibition, and its back to armed robbers and thieves all of the time. Harder work, and with some danger and greater stress. No confiscation there, and the people are often violent. There’s no payoffs possible, and overtime would be rarer.
Wow. But I guess… think how many cops (and ancillary law enforcement employees) would be out of jobs if marijuana (let alone all drugs) possession was not a crime.
This is the problem with bad public policy. People get addicted to it. Their income, their livelihood, their mortgage, and their daily power-trip and sense of self-worth come are all dependent on drugs being illegal. Plus, if they actually had to go after real criminals they might get hurt. Why look for murderers when you can look for kids with leaves in their pockets?
So their jobs, money, safety, and sense of superiority all are derived from keeping drugs illegal. It’s shocking from a free-debate and marketplace of ideas point of view, but when you look at the whole picture and look at what these assfucks would be doing if drugs were not illegal, this makes total sense. They can’t have LEOs becoming members of LEAP. It’s against their self-interest in literally every way possible. Fiscally, with respect to employment, psychologically, safety….
Its things like that , this cop does it just to get into cars and ruin a life. ALL THE MORE REASON TO END PROHIBITION! I have every respect for LEO’s that stand for the citizens, but these ones that go out of their way to ruin a persons life. PHHH! Shows what their character contains.Most of these type were bullies to begin with I’ll bet.
It’s simple: Cops would have less of an opportunity to harass minorities without marijuana prohibition.
dmac: Bingo!
We are winning,but it will probably take overturning laws with jury decisions,not legislative actions that will set us free. There is just too much election fund pressure from the pharmaceutical industry for a majority vote,in the house,or the senate.
And that is especially true of medical marijuana. We are still waiting on the clarification by the Attorney General
on America’s new medical marijuana policy,because to have a medical marijuana policy,they must first reschedule marijuana,and that is what big pharmacy is fighting. If marijuana was rescheduled,it would not be required for the DEA too approve or deny medical testing,
and the DEA refuses any medical testing of marijuana because they are under the ONDCP and must operate within the guidelines and congressional mandates,which clearly states that no federal funds will be used to prove that marijuana is of any medical use,regardless of scientific proof. They are also required by law too lie,provide false studies and exaggerated achievements and to fight legalization by ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
The religious opposition to marijuana confounds me even more than the governments anti-marijuana stance. The very bible they are holding over their head while they are preaching against marijuana,tells them that God uit all seed bearing plants were put here for man too use,and it does not list any exceptions. So how do they justify their hypocrisy?
“So how do they justify their hypocrisy?”
Because fundimentalist Christians are uncomfortable with people feeling better. They want people to suffer, because feeling good is bad. They are not satified with denying themselves of any pleasures they want to make sure no one else gets to. If someone sneaks around getting all high and stuff then it makes them crazy and their desire to punish very strong.
Those are not fundelmentalist Christians but rather fake Christians/fake protestants who support the Romish-Masonic (think about William Randolf Hearst) drug war criminal racketeering for Virginia Bright Leaf cigarettes.
HI MRS GUITHER!
Can Pete come down and stay overnight here in Florida? We promise to feed him and make sure he doesn’t stay out too late.
And of course we’ll do our best to make sure his clothes match just in case he’s in a car accident. We don’t want the paramedics going to patch his broken ankle and finding anything that would raise questions about who taught him how to dress.
John Dean, writing for Alternet (Nov. 2, 2008), accuses the Republican base of being authoritarian followers. Dean lists characteristics of the authoritarian follower which bear a striking resemblance to the behavior we see among many prohibs, including some of the bloggers at PoliceNet.com. In the article, an authoritarian follower is someone who is:
* submissive to authority
* aggressive on behalf of authority
* highly conventional in their behavior
* highly religious
* possessing moderate to little education
* trusting of untrustworthy authorities
* prejudiced (particularly against homosexuals and followers of religions other than their own)
* mean-spirited
* narrow-minded
* intolerant
* bullying
* zealous
* dogmatic
* uncritical toward chosen authority
* hypocritical
* inconsistent and contradictory
* prone to panic easily
* highly self-righteous
* moralistic
* strict disciplinarians
* severely punitive
* demanding loyalty and returning it
* possessing little self-awareness
* usually politically and economically conservative/Republican
Researcher Robert Altemeyer thinks that about 25-percent of the adult population in the U.S. is authoritarian. If true, one would expect to find authoritarian prohibs in the mix.
Cliff: religions compete with drugs. Both provide altered mental states, feelings of “spirituality” and whatnot. They are in direct competition, and always have been. Money spent on drugs is money NOT given to religious establishments… and not for reasons of morality. The priests want their money and their little choirboys, and damn you if you stand in their way.
Wow. That thread you linked to on that police forum site is rather infuriating. This is one of those times where I repeat things to myself like “don’t freak out just because someone is wrong on the internet… there will always be people wrong on the internet…” but yeah, that’s terrifying. Not surprising, but still terrifying.
I was trying to write something witty about this, but all I can think of is that scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail about the townspeople and the accused witch. The police reaction to the questioner seems very like that.
Oh, and that’s at the beginning, about how excited the (ignorant) townspeople are about finding a ‘witch’ and what they want to do to her. The rest of the clip could be likened to the ivory tower idiots that dreamed up and implemented the DrugWar. Clueless, all of them.
I am honored being one of the readers of your blog post. Thanks to your generous support I am the first in my home to have some knowledge in regards to this topic. Growing up inside a less privileged area has not only provided challenges of internet access, but it has furthermore made me realize the significance of being blessed while using the wealth of information on your website.