Quote :

"'Mistake' Changes Longtime GI's Life PASCAGOULA, Miss. — He was back in uniform, back where he belonged. Twenty-seven pounds lighter. On the verge of a promotion to staff sergeant. Happy again, and sober. A man escaping an ugly past to build a respectable future. The phone call would change everything for Pat Lett. "Dad," his daughter whispered, "the cops are here." The seven-hour drive from Fort Polk, Louisiana, to Alabama never seemed longer, but he was home by nightfall and at the county courthouse by dawn. When he walked in, officers slapped cuffs around his wrists, read him his rights and locked him away. He'd never spent even an hour in jail, never been arrested. He was a U.S. soldier, going on 18 years. He knew right from wrong and honor from shame. The military code of conduct had been his way of life, his moral compass, and he'd followed it religiously - except during five weeks when he says depression and booze led to disastrously bad judgment. In the Army, when you screw up you pay the price. Now Lett was learning the civilian world was not so different. If his military accomplishments made him different from others who find themselves on the wrong side of the law, it was only in degree. "A drug dealer with a conscience" a judge would call him. But, Lett wonders, doesn't conscience have a place in crime and punishment? Should one mistake ruin an otherwise good man's life? --- He'd chosen the right path, despite all the efforts to steer him onto another. He grew up poor in Monroeville, a dingy southwest Alabama town, where role models were scarce but addicts plentiful. His father was an alcoholic, his stepfather a soldier, so Lett picked the military when it came time to chart a course for his future. He joined the National Guard at 19, the Army six years later. His uniform gave him a sense of purpose, a feeling of authority and a code of conduct to live by. Service also had its costs. Married and divorced, he had three children who grew up while he bounced between military bases. Sent to Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War and to Iraq during the second, he saw combat and witnessed things he still tries to forget. In December 2003, he decided to make a change. He went to Virginia, moved in with a girlfriend and plotted out a new life as a police officer. Some soldiers make a smooth transition to civilian life, but Lett didn't. He missed the military's structure, the uniform's prestige, his peers' respect. He and his fiancee soon grew apart, and he left town. A month later, he found himself back in Monroeville, back in the three-bedroom home he shared with his mom and two of his daughters, back to care for a dying father. He needed to find a new way to support his family. As Lett would detail, his return home drove him into a deep, dark depression. Each morning, he'd take his daughters to school, then start pounding beers. In a town full of out-of-work cousins and friends, it wasn't hard to find drinking buddies. He'd join about a dozen guys from the neighborhood at his cousin Michael Lett's backyard, gather around a cooler and share stories. Federal court records eventually outlined what else Michael Lett did with his spare time: He was a go-to guy in Monroe County for drugs, a college dropout who would buy powder cocaine wholesale in Montgomery and resell it back home for a tidy profit as cocaine or crack. And he'd use friends and family as his agents. Lett feels like he was roped in around February 2004 when he borrowed $700 from his cousin to fix his Jeep's transmission. A few days later, he was asked to return the favor. They were in Michael Lett's backyard, as usual, when his cousin promised to forget about the loan if he helped close a drug deal. Lett's thoughts were a drunken jumble, he recalls now. He didn't want to look soft. He didn't want a loan hanging over his head. Even through his haze, though, Lett says he knew that working with his cousin was a mistake. He just didn't care. So when a burgundy Honda rolled up minutes later and a man in dark sunglasses stepped out, Lett quietly handed over a small brown package to him. The next week, the man with the sunglasses was back. Five more times, Lett would confess to "helping" out his cousin with his drug deals. But with each sale also came remorse and guilt, he'd say. And with guilt came a refusal to accept his situation. He gave up trying to rationalize his decision. He stopped trying to blame others. He started searching for a way out. And he kept reaching the same conclusion: His salvation was back in the military. He stopped drinking, dropped the weight and enlisted again in October 2004. His life in Monroeville was behind him again, along with the mistake. How could he know the man with the sunglasses was an undercover agent, and that his bad judgment was about to catch up with him? --- Before his sentencing, Lett was hopeful. He had pleaded guilty to seven counts of drug possession. His cousin would be sentenced to prison on drug charges, but Lett was confident his sterling record would win him leniency. At his April 2006 hearing, his military commanders testified he exemplified Army values. They praised him for taking troubled soldiers under his wing. His captain said he'd put his life in Lett's hands. Then Lett took the stand. "I was placed in this position because of my desperation for something," he said. "I wasn't out there trying to be some big-time drug dealer. Ain't no way, Your Honor. That's not my lifestyle." The prosecutor, John Cherry, didn't waste the chance to question Lett again. "When you sold to the undercover officer, it was you selling - it wasn't Michael? Michael wasn't with you, was he?" Lett mumbled something, so Cherry kept pressing. "Let me ask you this: On these occasions, Mike wasn't standing there telling you you had to do this, was he?" "No, sir." A veteran himself, U.S. District Judge William Steele seemed torn. He concluded that Lett was a model soldier, but said he had a duty as well. "There is no way that I can legally go below that five-year mandatory minimum," Steele said at the sentencing, "even if I wanted to." As Lett began to serve his time, his friends kept working to keep him out. Matthew Sinor, a close friend who was a law student at Ohio State University, wrote a letter with professor Doug Berman questioning whether the law really demanded a five-year sentence. They argued that a "safety valve" provision in the law for first offenders allowed the judge to ignore the minimum sentencing requirements. "If ever there's a poster child for someone who can rehabilitate himself, this is it," Berman would say. "He's got his life on a better path." If Steele was looking for legal grounding to reduce Lett's sentence, this was it. Lett had spent 11 days of his five-year sentence when he heard his name rumble across the prison's loudspeaker. He trudged to the warden's office. On April 26, 2006, Lett was a free man once more. --- Each time the phone rings now, Lett holds his breath. Any day, he could get the call that tells him his luck has run out. His mistake follows him to the barren brick apartment in Pascagoula, where the 38-year-old now lives. He works four days a week laying fiber-optic cable at a shipyard in this gritty town in south Mississippi, and it's a job he knows he's lucky to have. After his release from prison, Lett was ready to move on with his life. But prosecutors pressed his military commanders to oust him from service. And they asked the federal Court of Appeals in Atlanta to reconsider the case, arguing that a sentence of only 11 days in prison was far too lenient. In January, Lett was dismissed from the Army. In April, he feared losing his freedom as well. A three-judge panel agreed then that Lett was a tragic figure who has done his best to redeem himself. Nonetheless, the panel concluded that his crimes demand five years behind bars. He'd be in prison now, but his lawyers appealed, asking the entire 12-judge court to review his case. "It is hard to imagine an American more deserving of a second chance," read one of their filings. The chances of success are slim. Lett tries to stay upbeat, but he seems defeated. "You know what scares me the most?" he asks as he dances his fingers nervously across his kitchen table. "Will I come out the same person, that's humble and respects others? Or will I come out like the thugs and criminals in there, will I adapt?" He sighs, and rubs his temples some more. "I've made my mistake, and I've moved on." But the justice system hasn't. So he waits for the call from his lawyer."

http://wral.com/news/national_world/national/story/1488298/

6/10/2007 4:33:56 PM

I do not believe in the war on drugs. I do believe in a war on crime. Drug crimes, just like any other crime should be punished. This notion that if we stop enforcing drug laws, the problems with drugs will disappear is hogwash.

6/10/2007 4:37:57 PM

yeah a great argument for the war on drugs . A soldier down and out of luck handed over a package containing drugs (omg think of the children) doing his cousin's dirty work after borrowing $700. That REALLY deserves a 5 year sentence [/sarcasm]. I am sure there are people that have gotten lesser sentences for assault, sex crimes, stealing, and embezzlement. Crimes that actually do hurt people. The war on drugs is so stupid

6/10/2007 4:45:45 PM

let's get beyond the myth that selling drugs does not hurt someone.

6/10/2007 4:51:57 PM

^^^ yeah, that's more or less my take

but mandatory minimum sentences do more harm than good, from what i've seen.

[Edited on June 10, 2007 at 4:55 PM. Reason : sdfasdfa]

6/10/2007 4:55:04 PM

the war on drugs does nothing but keep jails full, gun crimes up, and causes violence in inner cities and rural areas


oh yeah... it also makes people rich

6/10/2007 6:15:09 PM

Quote :

"the myth that selling drugs does not hurt someone"

Myth? Selling anything to anyone doesn't hurt anyone

unless you get a paper-cut from the money AMIRITE

Quote :

"This notion that if we stop enforcing drug laws, the problems with drugs will disappear is hogwash."

The problems won't disappear, but most of the problems will. Some problems will always exist with legal narcotics, as do with legal alcohol, tobacco, firearms, gambling, prostitution, etc.

If crack, heroin and other drugs were available for a dollar a pound OTC, then there simply wouldn't be black market drug dealers. None. No drug gangs. No drug terrorists. No drug territory gun violence. A lot fewer drug money muggings. A lot less closet addiction.

Sure, we'd have lots more addicts on our hands, but shit man, we're all gonna get fucked when Hilary socializes medicine anyway, so we'll be able to handle the rehab load.

6/10/2007 6:59:13 PM

I am pretty sure that after all that shit was made OTC eventually people would learn not to try it.

At least the smart ones. Kind of like natural selection.

6/10/2007 7:04:06 PM

^

6/10/2007 7:12:51 PM

^^And I suppose selling napalm to someone doesn't hurt anyone either?

I'm not sure what type of utopian world you live in, but legalization of drugs will create more problems than the current system.

fact of the matter is, we cannot allow for these products, which have no redemptive value to be sold openly on the markets.

just because there is a black market for something doesn't mean we just give up.

6/10/2007 7:24:09 PM

^Give up?

[Edited on June 10, 2007 at 7:32 PM. Reason : ]

6/10/2007 7:32:34 PM

Quote :

"he knew that working with his cousin was a mistake. He just didn't care."

Quote :

"he knew that working with his cousin was a mistake. He just didn't care."

Quote :

"he knew that working with his cousin was a mistake. He just didn't care."

6/10/2007 7:57:28 PM

Quote :

"The military code of conduct had been his way of life, his moral compass, and he'd followed it religiously - except during five weeks when he says depression and booze led to disastrously bad judgment. "

Quote :

"back in the three-bedroom home he shared with his mom and two of his daughters, back to care for a dying father. He needed to find a new way to support his family."

6/10/2007 8:01:12 PM

Quote :

"let's get beyond the myth that selling drugs does not hurt someone."

yeah b.c some rich toolbag at a college party doing a line of coke in the bathroom, or some stoner blazing a bowl listening to music hurts society so much more then the guys at the bar getting lung cancer from smoking cigarettes or getting hit by someone driving drunk home from the bar.

6/10/2007 9:21:53 PM

It costs 25-40 THOUSAND dollars a year to keep someone incarcerated.

6/10/2007 9:32:29 PM

The illicit drug market is in no way comparable to prohibition and anyone who says otherwise is engaging in intellectual dishonesty.

Drugs should and will remain illegal, now, marijuana on one hand should be legalized. But the notion that cocaine, crack, meth, etc. should become legal is bullshit. Those substances have absolutely no cultural, or redemptive value.

Quote :

" yeah b.c some rich toolbag at a college party doing a line of coke in the bathroom, or some stoner blazing a bowl listening to music hurts society so much more then the guys at the bar getting lung cancer from smoking cigarettes or getting hit by someone driving drunk home from the bar."

What about the person who does a line of coke, and ods? what about the person who does a line of coke and beats the shit out of someone? what about the person who gets stoned and kills someone with their car?

Far more societal ills can be associated with illicit drugs than tobacco and alcohol. As a proportion of the market they control, when it comes to altering substances, they are by far more dangerous than anything out there.

[Edited on June 10, 2007 at 10:37 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2007 10:34:43 PM

Quote :

"What about the person who does a line of coke, and ods? what about the person who does a line of coke and beats the shit out of someone? what about the person who gets stoned and kills someone with their car?"

well if they ods then only they are directly effected. They win the darwin award for the day. Besides how many people over drink and die each year??? For your next point this makes no sense; applying the same logic we should just ban all guns and non-culinary use knives. Afterall i might get angry and shoot/stab someone. If a blow head beats up someone then i hope the judge throws the book at them for assault and battery. Lastly, from my observation drunk drivers are a lot more dangerous and more likely to drink and drive. Smoking Pot does not physically impair you as much as alcohol does.

I will agree some substances like heroin/(street synthesized meth) are too dangerous to allow uncontrolled distribution and regulation. However, methamphetamine is a manufactured legal drug created by the pharm companies under various prescription names

6/10/2007 10:47:31 PM

^^ I agree.

Opium was made illegal in 1729 in China, because it had a negative effect on society... something like 30-40% of the Chinese became addicted to opium, which is a less potent progenitor of heroin. Cocaine and other types of drugs are in this class.

Heroin was made illegal throughout the US 13 years before marijuana for the same reasons (except was not as commonly used).

6/10/2007 10:54:34 PM

No doubt that drugs such as crack and meth should remain illegal or very tightly controlled. However, the "war on drugs" hasn't done anything except consume vast quantities of tax payer money and overfill our prisons. And all for what? Are our streets any safer? Do the drug gangs and cartels possess any less powerful of a presence than they did when this all started? As soon as one gang is shut down, another one rises to take its place. No matter how many borders and check points are set up, drug dealers and pushers don't seem to have any trouble getting their product onto the street. The truth of the matter is that drugs bring far too much money for crime to ever look the other way, no matter how risky it becomes due to law enforcement.

Nobody's saying that legalizing drugs will cause all problems to evaporate over night. What people are saying is that legalizing them will allow people to buy them from trust-worthy, legitimate places such as a pharmaceutical center, instead of from shady pusher on the corner. When people don't have to buy it from the big bad scary gangsters, that gang's revenue eventually dries up, and soon it becomes economically unviable for crime to continue running the business. That's not to say that nobody will ever try to peddle drugs on the black market, because even legal goods will be exchanged on the black market (cigarettes being sold on the New York black market, for instance, but that's mainly because it's cheaper to do so because of all the taxes placed upon them up there). But the majority of people will choose to buy their stash from a legal, safe and cheap place. And since drugs are no longer so illegal and taboo, we don't have to send somebody to jail for five years simply because they were caught with possession (but not use) of dope. So prisions become less crowded and the penal system requires less money to run.

Now I do agree that weed should be fully legalized, albeit restrictions should be placed upon it that are similar to alcohol, mainly that you not operate a vehicle while you are high. You get caught driving while you're high, you should receive the same penalty for driving while drunk. You hit somebody and/or kill somebody while high, you should lose your license and possibly have your vehicle impounded.

[Edited on June 10, 2007 at 11:12 PM. Reason : blah]

6/10/2007 11:09:03 PM

^ This guy for president

6/10/2007 11:40:32 PM

I've no problem with smoking weed except that it is illegal and I hate smoking in general, well modulo that tasty cherry cigar smoke... Anyway, in terms of societal harm I think there is possibly just as much damage being done by legal drugs applied illegally. Between parents and teachers unnecessarily medicating misbehaving kids and hypochondriacal moms hopped up on depression meds and of course the narco addicts, there is plenty of abuse to go around. Sure most of the time nobody dies, but lives are dulled and twisted by the destructive influences of these addictions. On the other hand there are many cases where these legal drugs are procured through illegal activity, violence, theft etc...

Likewise, surely not every one who uses cocaine ends up being a carjacker, look even the exalted Obama did it, right? There is a minority of hard core addicts who can't control themselves, yet then we blame the drug. Its odd we only seem to do that with the illegal drugs, why can't we see the same with legal drugs ?

Is this all just the Ad. Council's brainwashing effect through there ever so clever and hip commercials?

[Edited on June 11, 2007 at 12:03 AM. Reason : .]

6/11/2007 12:01:09 AM

6/11/2007 12:34:48 AM

the war on drugs isn't necessarily a bad thing, but its totally misused and poorly focused as it is now......I think we need to take the approach of weed being decriminalized (or close to it) and much stiffer penalties on dealing synthetic drugs such as heroin or coke. Focus funds and efforts on harder drugs and increase punishment for dealing them.

6/11/2007 10:16:30 AM

i really feel that we should end the war on drugs and use all the money that is pumped into it and direct that money into our schools. also i believe that money from legalized drug revenue should go towards the school system, development for arts and music, and possibly even health care.

6/12/2007 9:41:32 AM

if certain "drugs" were available like cigs are, it would reduce the amount of people that fall into the "gateway drug" trap

if peopel bought their pot at a "store" as opposed to the guy in the trailer park thats also flipping rocks on the side, they may be less likely to venture into other drugs


prohibition is stupid and does nothing but increase crime

6/12/2007 9:49:13 AM

Quote :

"prohibition is stupid and does nothing but increase crime"

before someone attacks this, yes its obvious because if its not illegal, then the act is no longer a crime.

but what he meant is it also promotes additional crimes that are in relation to the other criminal substances.

6/12/2007 9:59:07 AM

yeah...

I hope people understood that


it would reduce the problems in the inner cities and in the rural areas... where it's needed most

6/12/2007 10:04:16 AM

fuck that shit - he dealt, he goes to jail. he's lucky he wasn't in the military at the time or 5 years in state prison would look like a cake-walk. he got to have a civilian court and judge. his ass would be breaking rocks in levenworth right now. he needs to man up and stop being a punk bitch crybaby. he's just pissed he left 2 years before retirment...what kind of stupid fuck does that?

6/12/2007 10:10:40 AM

^^I agree to a point......but hard stuff like heroine should never be readily available for recreational use. I do think legalizing weed would have far reaching benefits tho.

Quote :

"fuck that shit - he dealt, he goes to jail. he's lucky he wasn't in the military at the time or 5 years in state prison would look like a cake-walk"

I don't know, I know a guy who got popped for selling oxycontin in Germany. He did a little over a year in a prison in Germany and a little over a year in Washington state.

6/12/2007 10:17:58 AM

Quote :

"it would reduce the amount of people that fall into the "gateway drug" trap"

the gateway theory is such bullshit. The stoner blazing out and jamming out to Grateful Dead all night is not the same person snorting lines in the bathroom at the club downtown.

correlation does not equal causation.

6/12/2007 10:38:57 AM

so true. plus most people try alcohol before they try any of the other drugs. so really alcohol is the gateway. but it honestly boils down to some people are more experimental and willing to try some drugs while others aren't, and some of those who try them are less disciplined and allow it to become the center point of their life.

me, por ejemplo

i've tried mushrooms, pot, and opium. thats all. i'd never touch coke not in a million years. i'd never touch acid, not in a million years. i tried opium and mushrooms both just because i was curious about what they were like and woudl have tried them even if i wasn't already smoking pot. i haven't touched opium in years, nor have i touched mushrooms in years, and its not because of lacking availability.

6/12/2007 11:12:11 AM

well

I agree for the most part


but lets be real

many of the places a young person buys pot from also has other things available... at least it did back when i was younger

I've smoked pot in plenty of houses with dealers that had much more than pot around, I just chose not to really mess with the other stuff

alcohol and cigs are a gateway afaic also

if you eliminate the middle man, you can cut down on some of the other drug abuse

and DARE needs to just be honest with kids, so they don't think EVERYTHING is a lie

[Edited on June 12, 2007 at 11:14 AM. Reason : .]

6/12/2007 11:13:01 AM

^i agree somewhat. i've been to dealers that have had other stuff available, but most of the people i deal with only deal and do pot, so it keeps a much less creepy clientèle.

but i do agree that taking out the middle man could reduce many other types of abuse. if the drug isn't at the dealers house and him suggesting you should try it (in the same fashion a pharm sales rep would) then you're going to be less likely to bite and move on to that harder more dangerous drug.

also, DARE does more harm than good.

6/12/2007 11:31:12 AM

Legalizing drugs won't work. Lemme explain why and this is coming from someone who was very much in support of legalizing marijuana. I have no interest what so ever in pot, smoking or otherwise. Never have.

Here's a life lesson. most people that "need" the drugs shouldn't be doing them in the first place. The same goes for alcohol. Sure many of us would able to manage ourselves just like drinking but a good percentage would not.

A normal person would not do drugs just because they know the negative effects. Those that choose to do them are looking for an escape/fun of some kind and don't care enough about those negative effects.

Add to the mix making it easily available, people who shouldn't be doing them, that otherwise would not be, are now.

Lets expand on this idea. Now we have a market for this substance. It has to follow the same drug laws as any other pharmaceudical. You cannot possibly make these over the counter so a doctor has to be involved to perscribe it.

Lets expand on this more. Now we have a market where there is a manufacturer who is required to meet certain standards. If they fail in this situation someone can die. Maybe not with pot, but with coke, or heroin etc. Now you have to deal with people overdosing, not taking correctly, abusing... etc except in this situation it's so much EASIER for it to occur.

Lets expand even more. The user may develop a dependency on this substance just like alcoholism. If it's over the counter how does one stop them from taking it? How are they identified. Why would a business WANT someone who uses this. Now the legal aspects come into play about how someone who's a coke head can sue a business for not wanting them to be employed. What rights should drug users have? What rights should businesses have. Right now a business cannot fire someone for smoking, but they can for alcoholism.

Lets expand on this idea yet again. What makes a person want to do these things? What societal problems cause them to need this "way out". What changes to society can be done to resolve this?

So now you see that it's a circular arguement. There is absolutely NOTHING positive about legalizing any drug besides making it easier for people who shouldn't be doing these things, access to them. Look at any drug user. Maybe 1% of those users are successful in society long term and those are the users who rarely dabble into that. This opens the debate to what defines a successful member of society. I'm not talking job, or what they own etc.

As far as this guy... I think he should be required to do a shitload of community service. The whole point of punishment is to teach a lesson. He obviously learned it long before the law caught up to him, however, the law also should strike fear into those who would consider committing the crime. Seeing a method to do the crime and not have to pay for it is not good.

I think he should be given 5000 hours of community service focusing around drugs and the community.

6/12/2007 12:12:11 PM

can we say obtuse.

6/12/2007 12:31:17 PM

Quote :

"I think he should be given 5000 hours of community service focusing around drugs and the community."

Agreed. He committed a crime, and needs to repay his debt to society. He has however learned the error of his ways and repented. He presents absolutely zero risk to the American public and thus will gain nothing by being in prison for "rehabilitation" purposes.

A proper punishment fits the crime. A 5-year sentence clearly does not reflect the circumstances of this case.

6/12/2007 12:45:23 PM

^

It would take him 250 weeks to complete that sentence of community service at 20 hours a week. He would also have to be working a job obviously to support himself. That would take him 5 years as well, but I guess he would at least not be in prison.

6/12/2007 1:00:38 PM

Quote :

"Lets expand on this more. Now we have a market where there is a manufacturer who is required to meet certain standards. If they fail in this situation someone can die. Maybe not with pot, but with coke, or heroin etc. Now you have to deal with people overdosing, not taking correctly, abusing... etc except in this situation it's so much EASIER for it to occur"

so regulating the drugs would make them more dangerous than from the streets?

Quote :

"Look at any drug user. Maybe 1% of those users are successful in society long term and those are the users who rarely dabble into that."

where are you getting your numbers guy? and are you talking about any illegal drug?


I agree that most drugs should be illegal (I would even support stiffer penalties for some synthetic drugs), but there is no logical reason for pot to be illegal.

6/12/2007 1:34:14 PM

Quote :

"Here's a life lesson. most people that "need" the drugs shouldn't be doing them in the first place."

Thanks for the advice, government Mom.

Quote :

"A normal person would not do drugs just because they know the negative effects."

So a "normal person" is someone who abstains from behaviors that have negative effects?
What?

Quote :

"Those that choose to do them are looking for an escape/fun of some kind and don't care enough about those negative effects."

self-medication, religious sacrament, academic research, artistic stimulation, etc.
JUST FOR FUN!! Wheeeeee!

Quote :

"It has to follow the same drug laws as any other pharmaceudical"

Why? Why not some new ground?

Quote :

"You cannot possibly make these over the counter"

Again, why not?
A bill is drafted, it passes both houses and the veto, then boom:
Heroin at every grocery.

Quote :

"a manufacturer who is required to meet certain standards.......someone can die....."

Great, more vigilance is a good thing. What's the problem?

Quote :

"If it's over the counter how does one stop them from taking it?"

One doesn't.
It not one's responsibility to in the first place, anyway. (unless it's your kid or something)
If they're gonna stop taking it, it'll be on their own. They'll have to get themselves into treatment.

Quote :

" How are they identified?"

Identified? By who? For what?
Just because they suffer from a medical issue?
Hello? Big Brother? Big Mother? WTF?

Quote :

"What makes a person want to do these things?"

You really seem to think that the mere intent to "take drugs" is a problem.

The desire to self-medicate with foods, herbs, and/or preparations is older than spoken language. Humans are not the only animal to do this. (See: zoopharmacognasy) Certain of other species (butterflies and elephants to name a couple,) also prefer intoxicated states of mind. Every religion, language, and human culture in the history of mankind draws from the use of body and/or mind altering substances.

Your notion of the War on Drugs being only about people "getting high" is wrong.
Your notion of the mere desire to "get high" being wrong, is wrong.

Quote :

"What societal problems cause them to need this "way out"?"

This kind of thinking is way off.
If you're only talking about people abusing drugs as a "way out", you're really only talking about a psychological or emotional issue, not drug use. Drug abuse, food abuse, sex abuse, and many other forms of abuse may be a symptom of the underlying psychological issue, but the substance abused, in and of itself, is not necessarily unhealthy, (i.e. it is not necessarily unhealthy to use drugs, eat food, or have sex.)

Quote :

"There is absolutely NOTHING positive about legalizing any drug besides making it easier for people...[to] access...them."

OK, now I know you're trolling.
There are SO many positives about legalizing drugs, posting them all would trigger flood control.

Quote :

"Look at any drug user. Maybe 1% of those users are successful in society long term..."

Wow.
Just, wow.
Do I even need to ask?

Quote :

"Lets expand on this more"

I think we all know what you need to expand....

6/12/2007 1:35:51 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/12/cheese.heroin/index.html

Quote :

"Cheese' as common a problem as pot"

what fucking stupid "PR" bullshit statement. Because a drug derived from opium mixed with other CNS depressants giving it a potential to kill after one dose is EASILY comparable and just a big of a problem as a naturally growing plant that causes people to sit on there couch and eat cheetos all afternoon.

Quote :

"addicts are now as common as those seeking help for a marijuana addiction."

i wish i could see the source on this one. Not counting court mandated "rehabilitation" after someone gets caught with pot, I have NEVER heard of someone going to rehab for marijuana. If you did all the alcoholics, coke heads, recovering heroin addicts, and meth addicts would probably laugh and kick your ass after class.

[Edited on June 12, 2007 at 2:55 PM. Reason : l]

6/12/2007 2:52:55 PM

Quote :

"Moncibais then asked how many students knew a "cheese" user. Just about everyone in the auditorium raised a hand. At one point, when he mentioned that the United States has the highest rate of drug users in the world, the middle schoolers cheered. "

6/12/2007 3:05:57 PM

we're number 1!

6/12/2007 3:23:22 PM

if drugs were legalized Cheesy foods would have a whole new meaing.

6/12/2007 3:36:51 PM

Quote :

"Cheese' as common a problem as pot"

except you couldn't name 1 person that died from an OD on pot, whereas there have been 20+ this year alone from that shit.

6/12/2007 3:42:32 PM

yeah that was kinda my whole point

6/12/2007 4:00:23 PM

just wanted to drive it home.

6/12/2007 4:03:29 PM

thanks bro, positive reinforcement is key

6/12/2007 4:06:22 PM

Try this method used by the DEA:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/06/appeals_court_r.html

Appeals Court Rules Cops Can Steal Cars and Lie to Victims To Conduct a Warrantless Search

Click to read in full.

Quote :

"On December 18, 2004, Ascension Alverez-Tejeda and his girlfriend were stopped at a traffic light near La Pine Oregon, and when the light turned green, the car in front of them stalled. Alverez-Tejeda stopped in time but a pickup truck behind him rear-ended him. When he got out to look at his bumper, the police showed up and arrested the truck driver for drinking and driving. The cops then convinced Alverez-Tejeda and his girlfriend to go to a nearby parking lot, ordered them out of their car and into in the back of the cop car for 'processing.' While they were in the cruiser, a person jumped in their car and took off. The cops ordered the pair out and set off in full pursuit up the road. A few minutes later, the stolen car comes flying back down the road with the police cruiser in pursuit. The pursuing officer returns alone with the woman's purse, telling the duo that the carjacker thrown it out the car window and escaped. The woman is so upset she hurls and the police put the distraught couple up in a motel. But it was all a set up worthy of David Mamet. DEA agents were tracking a drug gang and had bought drugs out of the car months earlier, though not when Alverez-Tejeda was there. Using wiretaps and surveillance, the DEA learned that Alverez-Tejeda was using the leader's car to transport illicit drugs. The agents then decided to stage something, perhaps even a carjacking, in order to seize the drugs without tipping off the conspirators. They never consulted a judge, but every person in the story, other than Alverez-Tejeda and his girlfriend, was a cop of some sort."

6/13/2007 3:21:00 AM

That is some fucked up shit. I am glad we have decided in this day in time that we can follow the constitution only "some of the time". The founding fathers put all the safeguards in it for a reason. I am somewhat hesitant about circumventing the constitution to combat terrorism. But when it comes the "Drug War" shit has gone to far.

Lets hijack a car and drop a small bag of coke into this womans purse, oh shit arrest those two for drug dealing. I doubt the DEA planted evidence in this case but power corrupts.

We should all not forget why this country originally came to exist...

Quote :

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security...... "

[Edited on June 13, 2007 at 11:14 AM. Reason : l]

6/13/2007 11:11:59 AM

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/story/673610.html

Quote :

"CLAYTON - Thirteen years after Alva Mae "Granny" Groves was locked up for conspiring to trade crack cocaine for food stamps, she's finally home. It took death to free her. Federal prosecutors wanted the ailing great-grandmother behind bars for at least another decade as punishment for her role in the family scheme. Groves will be buried today among generations of kin in Johnston County. She died last week at a federal prison hospital in Texas after being refused the privilege of dying at home under the watch of her children. She was 86. "It's a relief she's dead, but it's a hurt, a real hurt we weren't with her," said daughter Everline Johnson of Red Springs. "What could she have hurt?" Prison officials wouldn't comment on Groves' case, citing privacy concerns. In a brief letter that was mailed to Groves on her death bed, prison officials advised her that her crime was too grave to allow her to be turned loose. Groves was tending her garden the day investigators stormed her double-wide mobile home and hauled her to jail. Within a year, she was sentenced to federal prison for 24 years after pleading guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to sell and distribute cocaine and aiding and abetting the trading of crack cocaine for food stamps. She was 74. 'My real crime' Groves' family says prosecutors came down hard on her mostly because she wouldn't help investigators build a case that could have locked up her children for life. "My real crime ... was refusing to testify against my sons, children of my womb, that were conceived, birthed and raised with love," Groves wrote in a 2001 letter to November Coalition, a non-profit organization rallying support to free her and others sentenced to prison for long stretches on drug offenses. Groves, who was caught up in the nation's aggressive war on crack cocaine in the 1980s and '90s, became the face of a movement to lighten prison sentences for non-violent crack dealers. As the drug hit urban streets in the mid-1980s, Congress enacted tough penalties for dealers. Long mandatory minimum sentences are still in effect, although several bills pending in Congress could lighten those prison terms. It isn't clear how much Groves knew about the crack cocaine being traded in her home. Her daughters swear she had no part in the scheme but didn't force her kin to do business elsewhere. 'She was a player' Buddy Berube, the lead investigator for the Johnston County Sheriff's Office, insists Groves took part in the trade. "She was a player, for sure," Berube said. "Not as big as her son, but when he wasn't around, she would take care of things." All told, five family members were sent to federal prison. Her son, Ricky Groves is pulling a life sentence in Butner. Three generations of Groves women landed at Tallahassee (Fla.) Federal Women's Prison in 1996. Groves' oldest daughter, Margaret Woodard, and Woodard's daughter, Pam Battle, also were convicted after the bust. Groves was a sight in prison, said Garry Jones, a retired correctional officer who knew her in Tallahassee. The oldest inmate by at least a decade, Groves would sit beneath a tree in the prison yard, issuing stern warnings to younger inmates who flirted with correctional officers and wore tight pants. She once came down on Jones, then a lieutenant at the prison. "She told me that she'd spank me herself if I didn't do anything about these 'fast-tailed girls' having sex with the officers," Jones said. "She told me, 'I'm too old to be listening to all this moaning and groaning. You better straighten this out.'" Eventually, the officers were caught and fired, Jones said. Fellow inmates protected her, Jones said. They nicknamed her "Granny" and took turns pushing her wheelchair to pick up her daily regimen of pills. They made sure she had the lightest duties in the cafeteria -- rolling silverware and filling salt shakers, said Dorothy Gaines, a fellow inmate who was freed in 2000 after a pardon by former President Bill Clinton. Gaines also did time for conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine. Prison life took a toll on Groves. She despised the food, a poor substitute for the butter beans and peas she grew in her garden. "She shrunk down to a bag of bones," daughter Louise Smith of Clayton said. Her family tried to fatten her up during their pilgrimages to Tallahassee. Two or three times a year, dozens of relatives would pile in vans and cars and visit Groves in prison. Her daughters stashed country ham and biscuits in their bras to sneak them past prison officers. 'I want to die at home' Groves never imagined she'd die in prison, even though her sentence stretched long past normal life expectancy. She talked of planting a new garden, buying a red Corvette and meeting great-grandchildren who were born while she was locked up. Groves took a turn for the worse early this year. Her kidneys started to fail after a long battle with diabetes. Prison officials sent her to a federal prison hospital in Fort Worth, Texas, where she stayed until her death. She wrote November Coalition about her fears of dying in prison: "I realize everyone has a day to die; death is a fate that will not be cheated. But I don't want to die in prison. I want to die at home surrounded by the love of what's left of my family." Permission denied Last winter, Groves' family asked again that their mother be freed to die at home. They wrote to the president, to congressmen, to every prison official they encountered. National organizations like November Coalition urged Groves' release, too. Jones, the former prison guard, even lent his support. In May, a probation officer flew to North Carolina to inspect a bedroom Everline Johnson had prepared for her mother. Groves, hopeful, started to pack her scant items in a suitcase. Permission didn't come. On July 19, as Johnson and her sister Debra Pettiway leaned over Groves' hospital bed and tried to remind her who they were, a prison official handed Johnson the letter denying her release. She's grateful Groves never saw it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alva Mae Groves is survived by nine children: Margaret Woodard, imprisoned in Tallahassee; Louise Smith of Clayton; Joyce Session of Smithfield; Ruby McClamb of Smithfield; Everline Johnson of Red Springs; Conrad Groves of Smithfield; Ricky Lee Groves, imprisoned in Butner; Debra Pettiway of Selma, and Fontell Groves, imprisoned in Petersburg, Va. She is also survived by 36 grandchildren and more than 60 great-grandchildren. Her funeral services will begin at 3 p.m. today at St. Peter's Church of Christ in Smithfield. Visitation will be held an hour before the service. "

8/17/2007 2:42:13 PM