Should Indiana decriminalize marijuana?

[Atlas Shrugged]

This post may be somewhat off topic, but it concerns another matter that ought to be addressed by the incoming General Assembly. Massachusetts voters approved a ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, making getting caught with less than an ounce of pot punishable by a civil fine of $100. The change in the law would maintain the state's existing penalties for growing, trafficking, or driving under the influence of marijuana, while ensuring that those caught with less than an ounce of pot would avoid the taint of a criminal record. Indiana spends too much money prosecuting and incarcerating pot violators. We waste valuable police time on this nonsense. We can shed our former resolve and righteous indignation and decriminalize this matter. Everyone, but me, smokes pot. And if you don't, your children do and so do most of your friends. Indiana needs a new direction. Republicans. I love you. But your children smoke pot. Life is complicated enough without nonsensical criminal prosecutions crowding our courts and ruining future job prospects. Its a new century.

[ablye84 at gmail dot com]

I live in fort wayne, my life has been turned upside down due to a weed charge from back in '06...I was 22 then. I'm presently a 3rd yr law major attending ipfw...I was supposed to graduate in '06...my life has come to a complete halt due to this charge. I respect and understand the law to a high degree...I consider myself to be a fairly well to do young guy with dreams and aspirations of being a public servant...this weed charge has totally given me absolutley nothing as far as a lesson goes...since june of 07' I've paid the state of indiana $5400 of my extremely hard earned money...there are worse things I'm sure I could be doing rather then reefer...I need to graduate and get on with my life...lsat's, law school, bar exam etc..I'm worried that the country my ancestors as well as yours have fought to preserve is in the toilet...I've lost my faith in the gov't as well as in myself...I'm now to be cosidered as a criminal before a citizen...it just seems like some civil rights laws are being ignored...I can safely say that the city of fort wayne pratically supports itself on the misery and despair of blue collar workers and otherwise well to do citizens...with the shape that the country is in, it makes it harder to trust the gov't...many claims and stories will prove that the FWPD as well as the criminal justice dept would do more to harm and hinder a citizen rather than find a solution to help. There is a police commander or sargeant in fort wayne named Bonar..he is considered to be the dui king of fort wayne..with a base salary of $60,000 a yr...Bonar brought home a whoppin $104,000 last year..how you ask? 269 reported dui's for 2008 some I'm sure were marijauna related, I don't think I have to explain further, imagine what those 269 families are going thru with indiana unemployment at an all time high (most employers won't hang on to a labeled "drunk driver") the point I'm making is that ...decriminalization is defintely in order if we want to consider our great country to be moving forward. Poverty and crime begat poverty and crime...why give citizens extra oppurtunity to ruin their life, career, family.

[Derricks]

ablye84 at gmail dot com wrote:

I live in fort wayne, my life has been turned upside down due to a weed charge from back in '06...I was 22 then. I'm presently a 3rd yr law major attending ipfw...I was supposed to graduate in '06...my life has come to a complete halt due to this charge. I respect and understand the law to a high degree...I consider myself to be a fairly well to do young guy with dreams and aspirations of being a public servant...this weed charge has totally given me absolutley nothing as far as a lesson goes...since june of 07' I've paid the state of indiana $5400 of my extremely hard earned money...there are worse things I'm sure I could be doing rather then reefer...I need to graduate and get on with my life...lsat's, law school, bar exam etc..I'm worried that the country my ancestors as well as yours have fought to preserve is in the toilet...I've lost my faith in the gov't as well as in myself...I'm now to be cosidered as a criminal before a citizen...it just seems like some civil rights laws are being ignored...I can safely say that the city of fort wayne pratically supports itself on the misery and despair of blue collar workers and otherwise well to do citizens...with the shape that the country is in, it makes it harder to trust the gov't...many claims and stories will prove that the FWPD as well as the criminal justice dept would do more to harm and hinder a citizen rather than find a solution to help. There is a police commander or sargeant in fort wayne named Bonar..he is considered to be the dui king of fort wayne..with a base salary of $60,000 a yr...Bonar brought home a whoppin $104,000 last year..how you ask? 269 reported dui's for 2008 some I'm sure were marijauna related, I don't think I have to explain further, imagine what those 269 families are going thru with indiana unemployment at an all time high (most employers won't hang on to a labeled "drunk driver") the point I'm making is that ...decriminalization is defintely in order if we want to consider our great country to be moving forward. Poverty and crime begat poverty and crime...why give citizens extra oppurtunity to ruin their life, career, family.

You broke the law jacka$$. Your civil rights aren't being violated. You are getting exactly what you deserve. With your attitude it is obvious you will never amount to jack shite. You have learned nothing.

Who did the weed ? You did. Who broke the law ? You did. Who is responsible for breaking the law ? You are. That is what happens to idiots who do drugs. They think they won't get caught. You got a bunch of stoners on here telling people lies and saying that they will never get caught. Well you got caught.

You are the example of what happens if you do drugs.

Accept responsibility for what you have done. Stop doing drugs and grow up. Quit pissing and moaning and grow up.

[not quite]

Derricks wrote:

<quoted text>You broke the law jacka$$. Your civil rights aren't being violated. You are getting exactly what you deserve. With your attitude it is obvious you will never amount to jack shite. You have learned nothing.
Who did the weed ? You did. Who broke the law ? You did. Who is responsible for breaking the law ? You are. That is what happens to idiots who do drugs. They think they won't get caught. You got a bunch of stoners on here telling people lies and saying that they will never get caught. Well you got caught.
You are the example of what happens if you do drugs.
Accept responsibility for what you have done. Stop doing drugs and grow up. Quit pissing and moaning and grow up.

The philosophy behind reasonable law is that the punishment should be in proportion to the harm caused by the crime. The punishment the law doles out for petty little victimless "crimes" like possession of an ounce or less of weed FAR exceeds a reasonable punishment. In addition to that, it costs the state a disporportionate amount of money in enforcement. Jacka$$. Your simple-minded authoritarian black-and-white reduction of a complex philosophical situation to a flat binary totally ignores the *real* discussion of why the laws are as they are and how to make them more reasonable. The marijuana laws in this country are counterproductive, unduly costly, and cause law enforcement to waste time that might be better spent solving crimes with actual victims.

[Derricks]

not quite wrote:

<quoted text>
The philosophy behind reasonable law is that the punishment should be in proportion to the harm caused by the crime. The punishment the law doles out for petty little victimless "crimes" like possession of an ounce or less of weed FAR exceeds a reasonable punishment. In addition to that, it costs the state a disporportionate amount of money in enforcement. Jacka$$. Your simple-minded authoritarian black-and-white reduction of a complex philosophical situation to a flat binary totally ignores the *real* discussion of why the laws are as they are and how to make them more reasonable. The marijuana laws in this country are counterproductive, unduly costly, and cause law enforcement to waste time that might be better spent solving crimes with actual victims.

More jibberish from a stoner. The intent of the law is to punish people who indulge in illegal drug use. It isn't suppose to allow you stoners to do whatever you please. Tough. I support even harsher punishment for illegal drug users and have called my State Senator and Representative. They are both in agreement with increasing penalties for illegal drug users. So keep doing your drugs to your detriment. You take the risk of ruining your reputation and getting a criminal record. You take the risk of bringing shame on yourself and your family.

People, If you see cars pulling up at all hours of the day and night to the neighbors house you suspect is an illegal drug user, you may have a problem. Take pictures of their license plates. Be sure the date and time stamp is on. Do this over a period of a week or so. Take them to the police to see if there is a pattern. They can run the plates for warrants. They could start an investigation. If pot is around, chance are there is also narcotics, meth and cocaine too!

You can help the police rid your neighborhood of illegal drug users. Keep the poison of drugs away from our children.

[not quite]

Derricks wrote:

<quoted text>More jibberish from a stoner. The intent of the law is to punish people who indulge in illegal drug use.

It's spelled "gibberish" - and you only see it that way by ignoring the whole point of my post.

The intent of the law is to punish and prevent, and the punishmnet, to be reasonable, must be in proportion to the actual harm caused by the "crime" - please don't ignore that point.

So a stoner sits at home one night, gets baked and chows on some chee-tohs, falls asleep, wakes up the next morning smelling bad. Who's the victim here? Nobody! Why does this justify making a criminal of someone who's only doing mild damage to himself?

[White American]

Atlas Shrugged wrote:

This post may be somewhat off topic, but it concerns another matter that ought to be addressed by the incoming General Assembly. Massachusetts voters approved a ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, making getting caught with less than an ounce of pot punishable by a civil fine of $100. The change in the law would maintain the state's existing penalties for growing, trafficking, or driving under the influence of marijuana, while ensuring that those caught with less than an ounce of pot would avoid the taint of a criminal record. Indiana spends too much money prosecuting and incarcerating pot violators. We waste valuable police time on this nonsense. We can shed our former resolve and righteous indignation and decriminalize this matter. Everyone, but me, smokes pot. And if you don't, your children do and so do most of your friends. Indiana needs a new direction. Republicans. I love you. But your children smoke pot. Life is complicated enough without nonsensical criminal prosecutions crowding our courts and ruining future job prospects. Its a new century.

Ok people let's take a closer look at the problems we have been having with illegal drugs of all types.
We have people dying because of gangs and drug cartels a product of the use of drugs. They have gotten so strong with recruits with their illegal wealth they accumulated they are a problem for the Government of many countries including our own.
Back during prohibition of alcohol making it illegal only made the use go underground. It increased the mafia with money and influence. The Government couldn't stop it they finally gave in and legalized it.
That is in my opinion what should be done now with the illegal drugs. That takes the drug business away from the cartels, gangs and off the streets. They can be audited with the collection of information about those using it, with all the restrictions that alcohol has now.
I don't use drugs and have made sure that my children knew the risks of using it. They are now adults and never got into it.
The U.N. says that drugs can be controlled by changing the law from a criminal one for the users to a health care issue.

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory...

Failed states and failed policies

How to stop the drug wars
Mar 5th 2009

[veritas]

White American wrote:

<quoted text>Ok people let's take a closer look at the problems we have been having with illegal drugs of all types.
We have people dying because of gangs and drug cartels a product of the use of drugs. They have gotten so strong with recruits with their illegal wealth they accumulated they are a problem for the Government of many countries including our own.
Back during prohibition of alcohol making it illegal only made the use go underground. It increased the mafia with money and influence. The Government couldn't stop it they finally gave in and legalized it.
That is in my opinion what should be done now with the illegal drugs. That takes the drug business away from the cartels, gangs and off the streets. They can be audited with the collection of information about those using it, with all the restrictions that alcohol has now.
I don't use drugs and have made sure that my children knew the risks of using it. They are now adults and never got into it.
The U.N. says that drugs can be controlled by changing the law from a criminal one for the users to a health care issue.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory...
Failed states and failed policies
How to stop the drug wars
Mar 5th 2009

We certainly don't want the un dictating,they would have us all labeled mentally ill and drugged against our will to conform.What we ingest as adults in a free country is NOT the buisness of government.The real drug pushers push their wares on tv.
SS: What is the story behind the secret settlement between Eli Lilly and the survivors who sued the company after Joseph Wesbecker shot 20 coworkers after being put on Prozac?

RW: During this trial in which Eli Lilly was being sued, the judge was going to allow some very damaging evidence showing wrongdoing by Eli Lilly in a previous instance. The judge said, "Go ahead and introduce this at the trial." But next thing you know, they don't introduce this; and in fact, all of a sudden, the plaintiffs no longer are presenting very damaging evidence to make their case. So the judge wonders why they are not presenting their best case anymore. He smells a rat. He suspects Eli Lilly has settled with the plaintiffs secretly and the deal is that, as part of this settlement, the plaintiffs will go ahead with a sham trial so that Eli Lilly will win the trial. Then Eli Lilly can claim, "See our drug doesn't cause people to become violent."

And, indeed, that's what happened. Eli Lilly felt it was going to lose this trial. They went to the plaintiffs and said they would give them a lot of money. They agreed to go ahead and settle the case, but had the plaintiffs go ahead with the trial. That way Eli Lilly can publicly claim that they won the trial and Prozac doesn't cause harm.

SS: How did this even come out into the light of day?

[White American]

veritas wrote:

<quoted text>We certainly don't want the un dictating,they would have us all labeled mentally ill and drugged against our will to conform.What we ingest as adults in a free country is NOT the buisness of government.The real drug pushers push their wares on tv.
SS: What is the story behind the secret settlement between Eli Lilly and the survivors who sued the company after Joseph Wesbecker shot 20 coworkers after being put on Prozac?
RW: During this trial in which Eli Lilly was being sued, the judge was going to allow some very damaging evidence showing wrongdoing by Eli Lilly in a previous instance. The judge said, "Go ahead and introduce this at the trial." But next thing you know, they don't introduce this; and in fact, all of a sudden, the plaintiffs no longer are presenting very damaging evidence to make their case. So the judge wonders why they are not presenting their best case anymore. He smells a rat. He suspects Eli Lilly has settled with the plaintiffs secretly and the deal is that, as part of this settlement, the plaintiffs will go ahead with a sham trial so that Eli Lilly will win the trial. Then Eli Lilly can claim, "See our drug doesn't cause people to become violent."
And, indeed, that's what happened. Eli Lilly felt it was going to lose this trial. They went to the plaintiffs and said they would give them a lot of money. They agreed to go ahead and settle the case, but had the plaintiffs go ahead with the trial. That way Eli Lilly can publicly claim that they won the trial and Prozac doesn't cause harm.
SS: How did this even come out into the light of day?

LOL Well I don't want the U.N. dictating to any of us either. I was just showing their view on this issue. Personally I don't like the use of any kind of drugs legal or otherwise.
But the drug situation is way out of control and good people are getting killed in the cross fire. While those running the drug cartels are becoming billionaires.
As to Eli Lilly law suit unfortunately money can get away with murder and it is absolutely a shame.
Two thoughts about the case: Is that not illegal for the plaintiffs to make a back door agreement with the defendant, not inform the judge, yet still go on with the trial?
The other thing if what Eli Lilly did was reckless and irresponsible, causing death, why didn't the DA charge the CEO's with....something?

[Cody]

Derricks wrote:

<quoted text>More jibberish from a stoner. The intent of the law is to punish people who indulge in illegal drug use. It isn't suppose to allow you stoners to do whatever you please. Tough. I support even harsher punishment for illegal drug users and have called my State Senator and Representative. They are both in agreement with increasing penalties for illegal drug users. So keep doing your drugs to your detriment. You take the risk of ruining your reputation and getting a criminal record. You take the risk of bringing shame on yourself and your family.
People, If you see cars pulling up at all hours of the day and night to the neighbors house you suspect is an illegal drug user, you may have a problem. Take pictures of their license plates. Be sure the date and time stamp is on. Do this over a period of a week or so. Take them to the police to see if there is a pattern. They can run the plates for warrants. They could start an investigation. If pot is around, chance are there is also narcotics, meth and cocaine too!
You can help the police rid your neighborhood of illegal drug users. Keep the poison of drugs away from our children.

Your a idoit...enough said...

[Jupiter]

Derricks wrote:

<quoted text>More jibberish from a stoner. The intent of the law is to punish people who indulge in illegal drug use. It isn't suppose to allow you stoners to do whatever you please. Tough. I support even harsher punishment for illegal drug users and have called my State Senator and Representative. They are both in agreement with increasing penalties for illegal drug users. So keep doing your drugs to your detriment. You take the risk of ruining your reputation and getting a criminal record. You take the risk of bringing shame on yourself and your family.
People, If you see cars pulling up at all hours of the day and night to the neighbors house you suspect is an illegal drug user, you may have a problem. Take pictures of their license plates. Be sure the date and time stamp is on. Do this over a period of a week or so. Take them to the police to see if there is a pattern. They can run the plates for warrants. They could start an investigation. If pot is around, chance are there is also narcotics, meth and cocaine too!
You can help the police rid your neighborhood of illegal drug users. Keep the poison of drugs away from our children.

You could get yourself killed taking pictures of their license plates. Or arrested for trespassing.

[Cody]

Derek Cantau wrote:

<quoted text>Since you are not on their property, there is no trespassing involved. Nice try stoner, you lose again, go to jail.
I thought all you stoners say no one gets hurt doing drugs. Now you say I could get shot. Which is it stoner ? You see how easy it is to poke holes in your stoner logic ! You pot heads are all alike.
I have personally provided evidence that has put 7 illegal drug users in jail. I take great pride in having removed 7 dirtbag, scumsucking, potheads from the community. Please join me in making life for illegal drug users unbearable.

You really are stupid...Not much to say to someone that lacks the intelligence such as yourself..

[Jupiter]

Derek Cantau wrote:

<quoted text>Since you are not on their property, there is no trespassing involved. Nice try stoner, you lose again, go to jail.
I thought all you stoners say no one gets hurt doing drugs. Now you say I could get shot. Which is it stoner ? You see how easy it is to poke holes in your stoner logic ! You pot heads are all alike.
I have personally provided evidence that has put 7 illegal drug users in jail. I take great pride in having removed 7 dirtbag, scumsucking, potheads from the community. Please join me in making life for illegal drug users unbearable.

I am not a stoner. I don't do drugs. But what I'm saying is that if you walked into their driveway to take a photo of the license plate, you could be arrested for trespassing. Or shot, if the house is really a "drug house."

I don't know of one "stoner" that ever said you couldn't get hurt doing drugs. There are risks involved injust aboug anything involving a controlled substance: tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription drugs, etc. And your logic in saying that being shot by a drug dealer for investigating them is a poor example of being hurt doing drugs. You are not "doing" drugs in that instance.

I do not promote the legalization of all illegal drugs, but I think that marijuana could be legalized, with laws set up similar to what our alcohol laws are. In my opinion, marijuana is less harmful than alcohol.

[Derrick]

Jupiter wrote:

<quoted text>And your logic in saying that being shot by a drug dealer for investigating them is a poor example of being hurt doing drugs. You are not "doing" drugs in that instance.

Not to mention, if we legalized marijuana, it would remove the risk of being shot by invading someone's property in order to capture the evil pot smoker. I can't say that I've ever heard of a drunk going to a bar and being shot by the bartender.

[curious]

I am not a pot smoker but I guarantee that if I seen someone on MY property taking pictures of MY car they will be met by me and my pistol. That Is my property and I will protect what I have worked hard for, if that means shooting someone, then so be it. I have an extremely large family and there is constantly people coming and going, that doesn't make my house a drug house. If you people go to that extreme by taking pictures then go join the police academy, until then MIND YOUR OWN BUINESS. As I said I am not a pot smoker but it does need to be legalized, with the economy the way it is everyone would benefit from the "pot taxes" the same as the cigarette taxes and alcohol taxes help everyone. I have known so called "potheads" and alcoholics, there is no doubt I would rather be driving beside a pothead in a car than a drunk.

[Oooook]

@ Derek

I don't smoke pot myself, but your posts really make you look like a fool. Please explain to me how the act of smoking marijuana in one's home is harmful to someone besides the smoker. Dangers and negative repercussions associated with sales it cannot be included in this conversation; they are a consequence of prohibition. If someone would like to smoke a joint in the privacy of their own home, how does it differ from someone smoking a cigarette or having a drink?

All this prohibition does is empower real criminals: those who are willing to hurt or kill others in order to further their own agenda. This is no different than the prohibition of alcohol (although alcohol does do more lasting damage to the body), just trade "mafia" for "Mexican Cartels."

Again, how does an adult's choice to smoke a joint in the privacy of their home endanger anyone else?

[Jupiter]

curious wrote:

I am not a pot smoker but I guarantee that if I seen someone on MY property taking pictures of MY car they will be met by me and my pistol. That Is my property and I will protect what I have worked hard for, if that means shooting someone, then so be it. I have an extremely large family and there is constantly people coming and going, that doesn't make my house a drug house. If you people go to that extreme by taking pictures then go join the police academy, until then MIND YOUR OWN BUINESS. As I said I am not a pot smoker but it does need to be legalized, with the economy the way it is everyone would benefit from the "pot taxes" the same as the cigarette taxes and alcohol taxes help everyone. I have known so called "potheads" and alcoholics, there is no doubt I would rather be driving beside a pothead in a car than a drunk.

I think you need to run for office. You have my vote!!

[Jupiter]

Derek Cantau wrote:

<quoted text>Right, not a pot head ???Ha, ha, ha. You are so believable ? Anyway, the police will figure out if you are selling drugs, not me.
You never have to go on anyones property in order to take a picture of their car and license plate. You can take it anytime they come in or leave from their driveway. That's right, You are on drugs and confused. You see you just don't have the ability to think this through.
That is why we are always smarter than you dopers. That is why they call it dope, dope. You missed out on that too !

You are really nuts.

[curious]

Derek Cantau wrote:

<quoted text>Since you are not on their property, there is no trespassing involved. Nice try stoner, you lose again, go to jail.
I thought all you stoners say no one gets hurt doing drugs. Now you say I could get shot. Which is it stoner ? You see how easy it is to poke holes in your stoner logic ! You pot heads are all alike.
I have personally provided evidence that has put 7 illegal drug users in jail. I take great pride in having removed 7 dirt-bag, scum-sucking, potheads from the community. Please join me in making life for illegal drug users unbearable.

On another post I said I wasn't a pot smoker but I have a lot of traffic due to a large family. You may not would get shot since you wouldn't be trespassing, but once I proved that I wasn't dealing after you turn the pictures over to authorities, YOU WOULD BE SUED FOR HARRASMENT AND SLANDER. Have a good day.

[Oooook]

Derek Cantau wrote:

<quoted text>Apparently you have missed all the killings along the border. Illegal drug smuggling bringing illegal drugs into our country.I can't expect you brainless drug pods to understand any of this because your brains are polluted with illegal drugs. You talk in circles and confuse yourselves with your own words. Another byproduct of your illegal drug use.
Us normal people pay no attention to your blather and just do what is good for our communities. Ridding our community of scum like you is quite rewarding. A friend contacted me yesterday. She wants help getting rid of druggies in her apartment complex. I am taking her over one of my cameras. I feel bad that her children are being exposed to this. We all need to help friends and neighbors get rid of illegal drug users.

@ Derek

As I stated, I do not smoke pot; however, I am a firm believer in individual rights (as they are defined in our constitution), and feel that the government should not have the power to dictate what a person can or cannot do in their own home when it does not harm another.

Moving on, you are focusing on the negative effects created by prohibition, not on pot itself. Those killings on the border? Mexican cartels. Where do you suppose they get most of their money? Smuggling pot. You are completely correct when you state that this is a problem. If pot was regulated within the U.S. as a crop, however, it would put these cartels out of business. Have you ever heard of any tobacco-smuggling cartels which have more power than the Mexican government? I think not.

I will re-state my initial question (which you have not answered). How does an adult, making the decision to smoke a joint in their own home, harm another? Again, I am not asking how the business that springs from circumventing prohibition hurts people. I am asking how an individual, who grows a pot plant for their personal use, hurts another by choosing to smoke it in their own home.