|
|
ترجمت:
             
لما يشرّع حشيش صنع إحساس
يوم الخميس, أبريل - نيسان [2ند], 2009
ب [جو] [كلين] | للماض عدّة سنون, يؤوي أنا يتلقّى يكون تصور, حرب صليبيّة متأخّرة سياسيّة ل ال [بب-بووم] جيل. نحن, الذي بدأ على الممر ال [ريغتيووسنسّ], يسير ل [سفيل ريغت] وضدّ الحرب في فييتنام, حاجة أن يجد مقاربة [هيغ-ميندد] بشكل مناسب إلى حياة مخرجة جسر رفع. [إين ثيس كس], يعني أنا الجزء [هيغ-ميندد] حرفيّا. [أند س,] صفقة: قلت أعطيتنا عقارات, عقب عمر مؤكّدة -, 80 - كلّ عقارات, أيّ عقارات نحن نريد. في عودة, سيعطي نحن أنت [دريفر ليسنس] نا. (يعني أنا, يستطيع أنت تخيّلت كيف يرعب أمة من بالية, [سليبسستيك] 90 [ير-ولد] [بوومر] خلف العجلة كان?) كنت نحن سنترك أنت باشرت مع حيواتك - كثير [أف وهيش] ينفق يدفع لتقاعدنا, [إين ني كس] - دون يضطرّ سمعتنا اشتكيت حول نا كلّ ألم وإرتداد. نحن سنكون أيضا مشغولة يستكشف يغيّر دول الحالة وعي. أنا حتّى أتلقّى شعار للحملة: "وفّقت داخل, يلتفت فوق, قطرة ميّتة." تصور, يفترض أنا. غير أنّ, تحت ال [رويل] غاضبة من ال [إكنوميك كريسس], يبدأ محادثة وطنيّة يتلقّى بهدوء حول المنطقيّة من نا عقار قانون. هو يذهب فوق في [ستت لجسلتثر], مثل نيويورك, حيث الصارمة [روكفلّر] عقار قانون يكونون فوق لمراجعات; في أخرى دول, من كاليفورنيا إلى ماساشوستس, شرّعت أشكال مختلفة من قنّب هنديّ [دكريمينليزأيشن] يكون. وقد بلغ هو الأرضية الإجتماع, حيث عضو مجلس الشيوخ جيم [وبّ] و [أرلن] شبح قد اقترحوا كبريات [بريسن-رفورم] مجموعة, أيّ مباشرة خاطب [دروغ-سنتنسنغ] سياسة. هناك أيضا أكثر إشارات [بوكيش] من روح عصر تغير. [ا فو] أسابيع [أغو], قرّر البيت الأبيض أن يقدّم ساحة في أيّ الرئيس أجاب أسئلة يقدّم بالجمهور; 92,000 استجاب الناس - وأكثر من هم بدا يستحوذ مع القنونة القنّب هنديّ. كان الاثنان أسئلة شعبيّة أكثر حول "خضراء أشغال وطاقة," مثلا, حول إناء. صرف الرئيس التدفق - بشكل مناسب, أنا أخمّن - ك عبر إنترنت [بلّوت-ستثفّينغ] ويصرف القنونة سؤال مع بسيطة: "رفض." هذا كان مثال نادرة [برك] [أبما] يتجاوب [رفلإكسيفلي], دون يحاول أن يفكّر بإبداع, حول جدّيّة سياسة سؤال. أخذ هو كان, [إين فكت], الممر تقليديّة من الأقلّ مقاومة: أطلق جوابة غير متوقّع على قنّب هنديّ [تبلويد] [فيرستورم], يحوّل إنتباه من الميزانية معركة وكلّ أنّ إنقاذ من أزمة ماليّة. In fact, the default fate of any politician who publicly considers the legalization of marijuana is to be cast into the outer darkness. Such a person is assumed to be stoned all the time, unworthy of being taken seriously. Such a person would be lacerated by the assorted boozehounds and pill poppers of talk radio. The hypocrisy inherent in the American conversation about stimulants is staggering. But there are big issues here, issues of economy and simple justice, especially on the sentencing side. As Webb pointed out in a cover story in Parade magazine, the U.S. is, by far, the most “criminal” country in the world, with 5% of the world’s population and 25% of its prisoners. We spend $68 billion per year on corrections, and one-third of those being corrected are serving time for nonviolent drug crimes. We spend about $150 billion on policing and courts, and 47.5% of all arrests are marijuana-related. That is an awful lot of money, most of it nonfederal, that could be spent on better schools or infrastructure — or simply returned to the public. At the same time, there is an enormous potential windfall in the taxation of marijuana. It is estimated that pot is the largest cash crop in California, with annual revenues approaching $14 billion. A 10% pot tax would yield $1.4 billion in California alone. And that’s probably a fraction of the revenues that would be available — and of the economic impact, with thousands of new jobs in agriculture, packaging, marketing and advertising. A veritable marijuana economic-stimulus package! So why not do it? There are serious moral arguments, both secular and religious. There are those who believe — with some good reason — that the accretion of legalized vices is debilitating, that we are a less virtuous society since gambling spilled out from Las Vegas to “riverboats” and state lotteries across the country. There is a medical argument, though not a very convincing one: alcohol is more dangerous in a variety of ways, including the tendency of some drunks to get violent. One could argue that the abuse of McDonald’s has a greater potential health-care cost than the abuse of marijuana. (Although it’s true that with legalization, those two might not be unrelated.) Obviously, marijuana can be abused. But the costs of criminalization have proved to be enormous, perhaps unsustainable. Would legalization be any worse? In any case, the drug-reform discussion comes just at the right moment. We boomers are getting older every day. You’re not going to want us on the highways. Make us your best offer. Have Your Say: Why Legalizing Cannabis Makes Sense Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. Related News
|
Cheap Chanel Purses Last post by rjonny13 @ 08:37 PM
Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
Libertas Party Election Broadcast 26 May 09 Last post by Victor @ 06:03 PM Join ae911truth NOW! Last post by Regina @ 04:37 PM 9/11 Citizen Investigation. Last post by psikeyhackr @ 04:36 PM In pictures: “Israeli culture is an inhuman culture” Last post by Unregistered @ 04:13 PM Toy Story 3 Teaser Trailer Last post by Regina @ 02:46 PM Nude Madonna and Guy Ritchie painting to be auctioned Last post by Regina @ 02:26 PM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More Breaking News  Archive
|
TOP NEWS DISCUSSIONS |
LATEST NEWS DISCUSSIONS |
|
|
10 Things You Might Not Know About ID Cards Who's Watching You? Lost Military Disks Had Personal Information Google Street View causes another stir How To Protect Your Privacy In IE8 The anti-cluster bomb campaign |
charlie castelnau commented on: The anti-cluster bomb campaign Marvellous, wish you all well. I can imagine the last thought of each civilian about to be killed... Continue Reading & Reply Dik Roytman commented on: Scientists to study synthetic telepathy Telepathies in the pure state do not exist, being a by-effect of system of stabilisation of a... Continue Reading & Reply asswipe commented on: How Chinese Military Hackers Took Over A Nuclear-Armed B52 You’re crazy man Continue Reading & Reply Diana Bailey commented on: Who’s Watching You? I Diana Bailey a human computer of the nazi-nuckelhead s of the Federal bureau of Investigation and the... Continue Reading & Reply |
|
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
![[رينف] ساحة](http://www.rinf.com/grunge-nav/GRUNGE-NAV_02.gif){kind=small}
Loading ...
