1. Name Calling or general rude behavior is no longer acceptable in the Cafe, We are adults which means that we should be able to debate without resorting to name calling. Warnings will be given out if users fail to act appropriately.

"If mj were legal black men would rape white women" and other ignorance-who said this

Discussion in 'Politics' started by cleatis, Apr 30, 2010.

  1.  
    cleatis

    cleatis Well-Known Member

    I have read and heard arguments like this one used in the early days of prohibition, but I can never seem to find who said these kinds of things. Tried a google search and ended up here again (where I read it in the first place).

    Does anyone know some names of the people that used these ridiculous arguments (so that I can quote them)? I am trying to compile a list of these utterly ignorant arguments. I ask because I know the guy that's running for Lieutenant Governor here and he asked me to write something up for him to use in his decriminalization angle. Normally I'd have more time to research this stuff, but this was thrown on me in short notice.
  2.  
    brandon.

    brandon. Well-Known Member

    It wasn't just one person that was the general consensus. Check out the documentary "Grass".
  3.  
    Moldy

    Moldy Well-Known Member

    Harry J. Anslinger is the MF-SOB that started that shit. Google that name and it should turn up something.

    STATEMENT OF H. J. ANSLINGER,

    COMMISSIONER OF NARCOTICS, BUREAU OF NARCOTICS, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
    MR. ANSLINGER: Mr. Chairman, my name is H. J. Anslinger; I am Commissioner of Narcotics in the Bureau of Narcotics, in the Treasury Department.
    Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Ways and Means Committee, this traffic in marihuana is increasing to such an extent that it has come to the be cause for the greatest national concern.
    This drug is as old as civilization itself. Homer wrote about, as a drug that made me forget their homes, and that turned them into swine. In Persia, a thousand years before Christ, there was a religious and military order founded which was called the Assassins and they derived their name from the drug called hashish which is now known in this country as marihuana. They were noted for their acts of cruelty, and the word "assassin" very aptly describes the drug.
    The plant from which the drugs comes is a hardy annual, growing from 3 to 16 feet in height.
    Marihuana is the same as Indian hemp, hashish. It is sometimes cultivated in backyards. Over here in Maryland some of it has been found, and last fall we discovered three acres of it in the Southwest.
    As I say, marihuana is the same as Indian hemp, and is sometimes found as a residual weed, and sometimes as the result of a dissemination of birdseed. It is known as cannabin, cannabis Americana, or Cannabis Sativa. Marihuana is the Mexican term for cannabis indica. We seem to have adopted the Mexican terminology, and we call it marihuana, which means good feeling. In the underworld it is referred to by such colorful, colloquial names as reefer, muggles, Indian hay, hot hay, and weed. It is known in various countries by a variety of names.
    MR. LEWIS: In literature it is known as hashish, is it not?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir. There is a great deal of use of it in Egypt, particularly. It was found years ago in Egypt. The traffic has grown so that something like 14 percent of the population are addicts. In India it is sold over the counter to the addicts, direct, and there it is known as bhang and ganja.
    At the Geneva Convention is 1895 the term "cannabis" included only the dried flowering or fruiting top of the pistillate plant as the plant source of the dangerous resin, from which the resin had not been extracted. That designation was used in the uniform State act. "but research that has been made during the past few months has shown that this definition is not sufficient, because it has been found by experiment that the leaves of the pistillate plant as well as the leaves of the staminate plant contain the active principle up to 50 percent of the strength prescribed by the United States Pharmacopoeia.
    So we have urged the States to revise their definition so as to include all parts of the plant, as it now seems that the seeds and portions other than the dried flowering tops contain positively dangerous substances.
    We were anticipating a challenge in one of the States of that old definition. There was a case in Florida recently in which a defendant appealed to a higher court on the ground that the prosecution had not proven that this was the dried flowered top of the pistillate plant.
    The higher court said:
    "We are of the opinion, therefore, that the information was insufficient to clearly apprise accused of the nature and cause of the accusation against him because of the sale of cigarettes containing cannabis, from which the resin had not been extracted may relate to the resin of the staminate plant, the resin of which appears to be harmless."
    As a matter of fact the staminate leaves are about as harmless as a rattlesnake.
    So in this act it was necessary to make the definition all inclusive.
    In medical schools, the physician-to-be is taught that without opium he would be like a one-armed man. That is true, because you cannot get along without opium.
    But here we have drug that is not like opium. Opium has all of the good of Dr. Jekyll and all the evil of Mr. Hyde. This drug is entirely the monster Hyde, the harmful effect of which cannot be measured.
    I have here an excerpt from a report made to the League of Nations by the Council at its last session. It says:

    Excerpt of League of Nations Document O.C. 1542 (O) Dated Geneva, February 17, 1937

    Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs, Sub-Committee on Cannabis

    (Report by Dr. J. Bouquet, hospital pharmacist, Tunis, inspector of pharmacies, Tunis, containing answers to questionnaire submitted to the experts)

    VII (P. 39)

    (7) (A) Do any preparations of Indian hemp exist possessing a therapeutic value such that nothing else can take their place for medical purposes?
    No.
    (a) Indian hemp extract has been recommended for the preparation of corn cures products, that most often consist of a solution of salicylic acid in collodion; the action of the cannabis extract is nil.
    At my request, experiments were made for several months in 1912 with different preparations of cannabis, without the addition of other synergetic substances (Profession Lannois' Service, Lyons Hospital). The conclusion reached was that in a few rare cases Indian hemp gives good results, but that in general it is not superior to other medicaments which can be used in therapeutics for the treatment of the same affliction.
    To sum up, Indian hemp, like many other medicaments, has enjoyed for a time a vogue which is not justified by the results obtained. Therapeutics would not lose much if it were removed from the list of medicaments.
    MR. DINGELL: I want to be certain what this is. Is this the same weed that grows wild in some of our Western States which is sometimes called the loco weed?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir, that is another family.
    MR. DINGELL: That is also a harmful drug-producing weed, is it not?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Not to my knowledge. It is not used by humans.
    THE CHAIRMAN: In what particular sections does this weed grow wild?
    MR. ANSLINGER: In almost every state in the Union today.
    MR. REED: What you are describing is a plant which has a rather large flower?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir, a very small flower.
    MR. REED: It is not Indian hemp?
    MR. ANSLINGER: It is Indian hemp. We have some specimens here.
    MR. VINSON: When was this brought to your attention as being a menace among our own people?
    MR. ANSLINGER: About ten years ago.
    MR. VINSON: Why did you wait until 1937 to bring in a recommendation of this kind?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Ten years ago we only heard about it throughout the Southwest. It is only in the last few years that it has become a national menace. It has grown like wildfire, but it has only become a national menace in the last three years. It is only in the last two years that we have had to send reports about it to the League of Nations.
    MR. VINSON: We did not have to have any convention adopted by the League of Nations in order to legislate on this subject?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No; but it was covered in one of the conventions.
    MR. VINSON: It seems to me you have been rather slow in getting to this legislation.
    MR. FULLER. I do not think that is any defense for this measure.
    MR. ANSLINGER: We have been urging uniform state legislation on the several States, and itt was only last month that the last State legislature adopted such legislation.
    MR. VINSON: You have not urged the passage of any legislation upon Congress.
    MR. ANSLINGER: There is no law in the District. This uniform act has been urged upon the states for four or five years.
    MR. VINSON: But you have not urged Congress to pass this act or anything that looks like it until now.
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir.
    MR. FULLER: That is no defense, if it is a good measure.
    MR. VINSON: I am not talking about their defense. It seems to me it has taken a long time to get this before Congress.
    MR. FULLER: It took a hundred years to get the Harrison Narcotic Act.
    MR. ANSLINGER: It is only in the last two years that we have a report of seizures anywhere but in the Southwest. Las year, New York State reported 195 tons seized, whereas before that I do not believe that New York could have reported one ton seized.
    Let me quote from this report to the League of Nations:
    This discussion disclosed that, from the medical point of view in some countries the use of Indian hemp in its various forms is regarded as in no way indispensable and that it is therefore possible that little objection would be raised to drafting limitations upon medical use of derivatives.
    That is only last year.
    Here is what Dr. J. Bouquet, hospital pharmacist at Tunis, and inspector of pharmacists at Tunis, says. He is the outstanding expert on cannabis in the world. He says:
    To sum up, Indian hemp, like many other medicaments, has enjoyed for a time a vogue which is not justified by the results obtained. Therapeutics would not lose much if it were removed from the list of medicaments.

    That comes from the greatest authority on cannabis in the world today.
    MR. MCCORMACK: What are its first manifestations, a feeling of grandeur and self-exaltation, and things of that sort?
    MR. ANSLINGER: It affects different individuals in different ways. Some individuals have a complete loss of sense of time or a sense of value. They lose their sense of place. That have an increased feeling of physical strength and power.
    Some people will fly into a delirious rage, and they are temporarily irresponsible and may commit violent crimes. Other people will laugh uncontrollably. It is impossible to say what the effect will be on any individual. Those research men who have tried it have always been under control. They have always insisted upon that.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Is it used by the criminal class?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, it is. It is dangerous to the mind and body, and particularly dangerous to the criminal type, because it releases all of the inhibitions.
    I have here statements by the foremost expert in the world talking on this subject, and by Dr. Cutter a noted and distinguished medical man in this country.
    (The statements referred to are as follows:)
    (From the report by Dr. J. Bouquet, Tunis, to the League of Nations)
    Does Indian hemp (Cannabis Sativa) in its various forms give rise to drug addiction?
    The use of cannabis, whether smoked or ingested in its various form, undoubtedly gives rise to a form of addiction, which has serious social consequences (abandonment of work, propensity to theft and crime, disappearance of reproductive power).
    From the Washington Post, Nov. 23, 1936
    TODAY'S HEALTH TALK
    By Dr. Irving S. Cutter
    A Dangerous Intoxicant
    Ever since the world began man has been searching for chemicals or charms that would relieve pain. Out of the East came Indian hemp, and it is surprising how rapidly its properties were recognized and how widespread became its use.
    History relates that in the eleventh century a remarkable sect of Mohammedans established themselves as a powerful military unit under the leadership of a sheik who led his marauding band to victory while under the influence of hemp. In South Africa the Hottentots smoked the drug under the name of dagga.
    The plant was originally native in Persia and India, but because of the desirability of its fiber it is now cultivated in all parts of the world. For the last few years marihuana, as it is commonly called, has been sold in the United States and Canada, chiefly in the form of cigarettes, which are peddled frequently in dance halls. Much of the raw material comes from Mexico or the West Indies, and occasionally press dispatches will report that the weed had been grown even within prison walls.
    As a stimulant to crime the drug is probably as important as cocaine, certainly far more so than opium or any of its derivatives, and narcotic-control agencies will be put to a severe test in routing out this traffic.
    As a rule the addict passes into a dreamy state in which judgment is lost and imagination runs riot. Fantasies arise which are limitless and extravagant. Scenes pass before the mind's eye in kaleidoscopic confusion and there is no sense of the passing of time.
    Under relatively large doses consciousness does not leave entirely, even though actions and movements are out of control. As the influence of the drug persists there may be periods of stupor from which, however, the patient can be aroused. In most individuals there is no succeeding nausea and the thrill seeker finds inhibitions destroyed and, abandoning his normal sense of propriety, he may do and say things quite foreign to his makeup.
    Cannabis indica is the medicinal preparation known to physicians. But the potent resin produced chiefly by the top of the female plant is as much sought after in certain quarters as is opium. Its legitimate use in the field of medicine is relatively limited, as other drugs more accurate and dependable as to effects have largely taken its place.
    Cases of fatal poisoning rarely if ever occur. Nevertheless, it is one of the dangerous drugs that should be known only to be shunned--an intoxicant with the most vicious propensities.
    Copyright, 1936, by the Chicago-Tribune, New York Times Syndicate, Inc.

    I will give you gentleman just a few outstanding evidences of crimes that have been committed as a result of the use of marihuana.
    MR. REED: The testimony before the committee of which I was formerly chairman in reference to heroin said in reference to the effect of it that it made men feel fearless, and that a great majority of the crimes of great violence that were committed were committed by addicts, and one man stated that it would make a rabbit fight a bulldog. Does this drug have a similar effect?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Here is a gang of seven young men, all seven of them, young men under 21 years of age. They terrorized central Ohio for more than two months, and they were responsible for 38 stick-ups. They all boast they did those crimes while under the influence of marihuana.
    MR. LEWIS: Was that as an excuse, or a defense?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir.
    MR. LEWIS: Does it strengthen the criminal will; does it operate as whisky might, to provoke recklessness?
    MR. ANSLINGER: I think it makes them irresponsible. A man does not know what he is doing. It has not been recognized as a defense by the courts, although it has been used as a defense.
    MR. LEWIS: Probably the word "excuse" or "mitigation" would be better than defense, I think.
    MR. ANSLINGER: Here is one of the worst cases I have seen. The district attorney told me the defendant in this case pleaded that he was under the influence of marihuana when he committed that crime, but that has not been recognized.
    We have several cases of that kind. There was one town in Ohio where a young man went into a hotel and held up the clerk and killed him, and his defense was that he had been affected by the use of marihuana.
    MR. FULLER: The only question was whether or not he knew what he was doing, whether he was insane. That is always a defense, whether or not a man is in such a state of mind that he does not know good from evil. The question is whether or not his mind is right, whether he is responsible.
    MR. ANSLINGER: As to these young men I was telling you about, one of them said if he had killed somebody on the spot he would not have known it.
    In Florida a 21-year-old boy under the influence of this drug killed his parents and his brothers and sisters. The evidence showed that he had smoke marihuana.
    In Chicago recently two boys murdered a policeman while under the influence of marihuana. Not long ago we found a 15-year-old boy going insane because, the doctor told the enforcement officers, he thought the boy was smoking marihuana cigarettes. They traced the sale to some man who had been growing marihuana and selling it to these boys all under 15 years of age, on a playground there.
    MR. JENKINS: In my home town just recently two boys were sent to the penitentiary for life for killing a man, and their defense was built upon the fact that they had used a drug. I do not believe it was this drug.
    MR. ANSLINGER: There have been a number of cases in Ohio recently.
    MR. JENKINS: The defense was made for them by a very successful lawyer.
    MR. REED: Is there any cure for a person who becomes an addict?
    MR. ANSLINGER: I do not think there is such a thing as not being able to cure an addict. Marihuana addicts my go to a Federal narcotic farm. But I have not seen many addicts who could not be cured. An addict could drop it and he will not experience any ill effects.
    One of these boys I referred to went insane, and they stopped it. Here in Colorado -- and Colorado seems to have had a lot of cases of violence recently -- in Alamosa County, and in Huerfano County the sheriff was killed as the result of the action of a man under the influence of marihuana. Recently in Baltimore a young man was sent to the electric chair for having raped a girl while under the influence of marihuana.
    I will show you how this traffic is increasing.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Have you completed your statement in reference to the criminal cases?
    MR. ANSLINGER: I have a number of cases here.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Are you acquainted with the report of the public prosecutor at New Orleans in 1931?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir.
    MR. MCCORMACK: I think that would be valuable. That was a case where 125 our of 450 prisoners were found to be marihuana addicts, and slightly less than one-half of the murderers were marihuana addicts, and about 20 percent of them were charged with being addicts of what they call "merry wonder".
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is the same thing.
    MR. ANSLINGER: You are acquainted with that?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, I have that report.
    MR. MCCORMACK: There was a report from other cities also.
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is one of the finest reports that has been written on marihuana by that district attorney. He had daily contact with the problem and saw its effect on crime in that city.
    I might say in that connection, that he said this-- and this is the report of Eugene Stanley -- in which he has said:
    Inasmuch as the harmful effects of the use of the drug is becoming more widely known each day, and it has been classed as a narcotic by the statutory laws of 17 American states --
    Since that time we have that in every State---
    England and Mexico, and persons addicted to its use have been made eligible for treatment in the United States narcotic farms, the United States Government, unquestionably, will be compelled to adopt a consistent attitude toward the drug, and include it in the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Law, so as to give Federal aid to the States in their effort to suppress a traffic as deadly and as destructive to society as the traffic in the other forms of narcotics now prohibited by the Harrison Act.
    This drug is not being used by those who have been using heroin and morphine. It is being used by a different class, by a mostly younger group of people. The age of the morphine and heroin addict is increasing all the time, whereas the marihuana smoker is quite young.
    MR. DINGELL: I am just wondering whether the marihuana addict graduates into a heroin, an opium, or a cocaine user.
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir; I have not heard of a case of that kind. I think it is an entirely different class. The marihuana addict does not go in that direction.
    MR. DINGELL: And the hardened narcotic user does not fall back on marihuana.
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir: he would not touch that. Dr. Walter Bromberger, a distinguished psychiatrist in New York has made this statement:
    Young men between the ages of 16 and 25 are frequent smokers of marihuana; even boys of 10 to 14 are initiated (frequently in school groups); to them as other; marijuana holds out the thrill. Since the economic depression the number of marihuana smokers has increased by vagrant youths coming into contact with older psychopaths.
    MR. LEWIS: Do they make their own cigarettes?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir. The cigarette is usually rolled by the peddler. It is crudely rolled cigarette.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Is not Dr. Bromberger the senior psychiatrist at Bellevue Hospital?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir.
    MR. MCCORMACK: What did he say in reference to crime?
    MR. ANSLINGER: He argued one way and then he argued another way. His conclusions were based on a study made of those men who had been sentenced to prison. But that is not a fair conclusion because at the present time we have so many in prison in the several states sent up as a result of using marihuana.
    I think in some states today that study would show a fairer conclusion than he arrived at, although in one part of his article he did say he believed that this excited to crime a man who would be less likely to commit a crime.
    MR. MCCORMACK: He did admit that it was a drug?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir. I think he realized, and his article indicated that he realized, the danger of it.
    Last year several states made 338 seizures of marihuana that we know of. In most of those we participated, because we are cooperating with the states in carrying out the uniform State legislation. We have also assisted several states by sending chemists to the local police to show them how to identify this drug, and we have conducted chemical research here.
    Most of the complaints about this drug have been coming to the Federal office, and because time is of the essence we would like to have this legislation enacted very much, so we can step into the situation where it is highly desirable that we do so.
    I will refer you to the case of a man in one of the Southern States. One of our good friends gave us information to indicate that this man had about a ton of these high explosives stored in his barn. There was no Federal law and no State law. We took up the matter with the attorney general of that state, and we had to wait until the state had its act enacted, before we could take any action.
    THE CHAIRMAN: How many states have laws in reference to marihuana?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Every state, except the District of Columbia.
    THE CHAIRMAN: You said there was no state law.
    MR. ANSLINGER: In that particular state at that time there was no state law.
    THE CHAIRMAN: The states now all do cooperate?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Every one of them, yes, sir. But they do not all have central enforcement agencies.
    MR. MCCORMACK: You say every state has a law, and there are about 35 of the states that have the uniform state act?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir. The uniform state act has been adopted by 35 states.
    THE CHAIRMAN: With this uniform state legislation, why can they not stamp this out? What progress are they making?
    MR. ANSLINGER: They are making some progress, as is indicated by the 338 seizures made last year. Last year the state of Pennsylvania destroyed 200,000 pounds.
    MR. LEWIS: Under the uniform state act the growth and distribution is prohibited. Is that correct?
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is true in most of the states.
    MR. LEWIS: What would the effect be in this case of our imposing an act under which we would be collecting revenue, and making the growth and distribution legitimate from the standpoint of the Federal Government.
    MR. ANSLINGER: The state acts provide for that. They provide for legitimate distribution and for licensing of the grower under certain conditions.
    MR. LEWIS: Does this act require the licensing of the grower?
    MR. ANSLINGER: It requires registration.
    MR. LEWIS: What is the legitimate distribution of this drug? You spoke of the industries.
    MR. ANSLINGER: There is its use in medicine. Then the hemp product is used in some parts of Kentucky, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. It is grown for hemp purposes. It makes very fine cordage, and this legislation exempts the mature stalk when it is grown for hemp purposes.
    MR. MCCORMACK: There are other commercial purposes:
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes.
    MR. MCCORMACK: There is fiber out of which hats are made?
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is not done so much in this country.
    MR. MCCORMACK: There is some of that.
    MR. ANSLINGER: Just a little.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Then is not the seed used for paints and oil?
    MR. ANSLINGER: They import all their seed from Manchuria.
    MR. MCCORMACK: And it is also used as a constituent of commercial bird seed?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Mr. Lewis asked you a question about the commercial purposes.
    MR. ANSLINGER: Those are the only commercial purposes that I know of.
    MR. JENKINS: Mr. Hester said that he thought the commercial purposes were practically negligible . I understand you to say that most of the products that are made from the seed are made from imported seed.
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is for oil.
    MR. JENKINS: You say that 35 of the states have adopted uniform legislation. Where do they get that uniformity from?
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is from the commissioners on uniform state laws. They were adopted by the American Bar Association and approved by the American Medical Association and some of the drug trade.
    MR. JENKINS: If each state has a law on this subject I wonder why that does not reach it.
    MR. ANSLINGER: It does reach it, but in spite of the act, we get requests from public officials from different states, and I will name particularly the states of Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Louisiana, and Oklahoma that have urged Federal legislation for the purpose of enabling us to cooperate with the several states.
    MR. JENKINS: It seems to me if the states have taken such action on this subject so far, and if we are going to take any action at all, we ought to be able to stamp it out.
    MR. ANSLINGER: I think this bill will do that.
    MR. JENKINS: If you are going to temporize with them and say as it seems you say here "No, we can not stamp it out; we will encourage its growth. it is all right to grow it." I do not see how you will stamp it out.
    MR. ANSLINGER: We do not do that for hemp production, and we recognize the fact that it is grown, that the farmers in some of these states grow it for hemp purposes. I think about 10,000 acres cover that. Dr. Dewey can tell you about that. He has been with this problem for 30 years, and I would defer to his judgment, particularly as to legitimate uses.
    MR. MCCORMACK: There are state laws in reference to other drugs?
    MR. ANSLINGER: The uniform state act covers opium and its derivatives, coca leaf and its derivatives, but there is a twilight zone there that the peddler breaks right through if the state has not taken action.
    MR. MCCORMACK: This is a tax measure and we might as well get the revenue out of it that enables the Federal government to cooperate with the states in connection with the state activities.
    MR. ANSLINGER: And you get a certain uniformity. You also get to help the local police, and the always want it. You also get to help the state police, and the always ask for this help. Whenever they find marihuana the first place on which they call for help is the Federal narcotic office, so that they can take a man along who is a specialist on narcotic matters.
    The have 35 states under the uniform act, and we have Federal legislation dealing with opium and coca leaves.
    With this legislation we will make a drive on this traffic, and bend every effort to stamp it out, and it will not cost very much.
    I say that advisedly because we have men throughout the country at the present time who are dealing with the narcotic problem. But the use of marihuana is increasing.
    I want to show you one more thing and that is in reference to the international side of this problem. Canada made some seizures over here last year and they pointed the finger of scorn at us and said, "Why do you not do something about this?" We had to admit that we did not have any legislation.
    There is some evidence that this drug is being smuggled to China today. We have always pointed the finger of scorn at China, and now marihuana is being smuggled out to China, by sailors.
    We are far ahead of any government when it comes to the 1912 Hague Convention, and the 1931 convention, but we are behind on the 1925 convention. We are not signatories to it, but we cooperate with them.
    We were in a curious position only a few months ago when an exporter sent a lot of cannabis to a British firm. It was a legitimate shipment, but the British law demanded and export certificate, and we had to tell the British government that we did not have a law to compel that exporter to stop the shipment of cannabis. He will probably do so, as a matter of cooperation. But we had to warn him to stop violating British law, and that goes for practically every government on the face of the earth, except the United States. Over 50 nations have national legislation on this problem, and it is very humiliating to have to say to these people when they trace the matter right to our shore, to tell them that we have no legislation to deal with that problem:
    MR. LEWIS: You spoke about the District of Columbia having no law. How about the Territories?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Hawaii has a law. I cannot tell you about Alaska. Puerto Rico dos have a law. The only place I am not sure about is Alaska.
    MR. LEWIS: You are sure about the District of Columbia?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Not having a law?
    MR. LEWIS: Yes.
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir; because last year there were 15 dealers arrested here for peddling marihuana, and they had to be prosecuted for practicing pharmacy without a license.
    MR. BUCK: Have you suggested the enactment of such a law to the Committee on the District of Columbia?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir; they have had a proposed uniform state laws for 3 or 4 years.
    MR. BUCK: Have they taken action on it at all?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir.
    MR. THOMPSON: What is the price of marihuana?
    MR. ANSLINGER: The addict pays anywhere from 10 to 25 cents per cigarette. It will be sold by the cigarette. In illicit traffic the bulk price would be around $20 per pound. Legitimately, the bulk is around $2 per pound.
    MR. THOMPSON: How does that compare with the price of opium or morphine? Do the class of people who use this drug use it because it is cheaper than the other kinds?
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is one reason, yes, sir. To be a morphine or heroin addict it would cost you from $5 to $8 a day to maintain your supply. But if you want to smoke a cigarette you pay 10 cents.
    MR. BOERNE: Just one of them will knock the socks off of you.
    MR. ANSLINGER: One of them can do it.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Some of those cigarettes are sold much cheaper that 10 cents, are they not? In other words, it is a low-priced cigarette, and that is one of the reasons for the tremendous increases in its use.
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes; it is low enough in price for school children to buy it.
    MR. MCCORMACK: And they have parties in different parts of the country that they call "reefer parties".
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir; we have heard of them, and know of them.
    MR. FULLER: Another thing is that they will not be able to get other kinds of dope, but they do have an opportunity to get this marihuana, which causes it to be so much sought after and used in the community.
    MR. ANSLINGER: That is true, and the effect is just passed by word of mouth and everybody wants to try it.
    MR. WOODRUFF: Have you put into the record a statement showing the names of the different states in which this drug plant is grown?
    MR. ANSLINGER: It is grown in practically all states. I have a statement in reference to the seizures, which I will put in the record.
    MR. THOMPSON: I would like to know whether or not these marihuana cigarettes move through legitimate channels. Are there manufacturing concerns that make them, or are they rolled in the kitchens and cellars like illicit liquor used to be made?
    MR. ANSLINGER: It is 100 percent illicit.
    MR. THOMPSON: No concerns make it legitimately?
    MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir.
    MR. MCCORMACK: As a matter of fact, I understand they found that some were grown in one of our Federal prisons.
    MR. ANSLINGER: They found some marihuana growing in one of the prisons. We heard of that.
    There was a seizure made in the Colorado State Reformatory for boys not long ago.
    MR. MCCORMACK: Was there not one made at San Quentin?
    MR. ANSLINGER: Yes, sir.
    MR. BUCK. Mr. Hester testified that there were about 11,000 acres in cultivation in the country. Is that legitimate cultivation?
    MR. ANSLINGER: That would be legitimate cultivation. Dr. Dewey of the Department of Agriculture can give you that exact information.
    MR. REED: Mr. Anslinger, you have been interrupted in your statement from time to time, and I am wondering if you have not some statement that would give the general information to the committee on this subject which you might like to put in the record.
    MR. ANSLINGER: I would like to put in the record the statement of the district attorney that I referred to. I also have a statement showing the seizures of marihuana during the calendar year 1936 in the various states.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Without objection, you may extend your statement in the record by inserting such information as you think would be helpful to the committee.
  4.  
    redivider

    redivider Moderator

    ding ding ding!

    you have a winner!!! Aslinger.

    that happened 60+ years ago. that argument isn't be important in a decriminalization argument. you should look at the cost-savings the state is looking at from laying off prosecuting weed, the tax-revenue increase that a sales-tax on weed would have..... those types of things.....
  5.  
    RickWhite

    RickWhite Well-Known Member

    Are you writing a class paper? Here is some advise. If you are trying to make a point, you should pick the other person's strongest argument and show why it is logically incorrect. Picking out their weakest point or trying to deamonize them by pointing out something they said that was stupid or racially charged is not an effective way to argue. It is common, but not effective.

    For instance, the gateway drug argument is a simple case of confusing correlation with cause. One could also point out that 99% of violent crimes are caused by someone who consumed bread shortly before committing the crime.

    See, that is a logical refutation of a key claim. Pointing out obvious stupidity does nothing to tackle the other guys key claims.

    I hope this helps.
  6.  
    cleatis

    cleatis Well-Known Member

    There are a few main arguments that I think have pretty much become dead to the people. 1) marijuana deaths vs deaths from smoking, drinking, caffeine and shit-food in a sack. 2) prison overcrowding and the cost to house an inmate over a sack of bud. While these are solid arguments, it just seems to me like the people simply don't care to hear them anymore. They know all these things, yet everything is still the same. Part of the angle I'm working with this is that Marijuana prohibition was founded on pure ignorance, racism and knee-jerk reactions yet we still support the prohibition - in that we still support the same ignorance and racism (look at all the minorities in prison vs. white folks). Also I'm working the angle that the prohibition is also founded on outright corporate interests and this makes prohibition not the problem, but the symptom of the disease (the disease being the voice and liberty of the people getting backhanded by the interests of the wealthy).

    And Moldy, I thank you. That was a lot of good info.
  7.  
    Moldy

    Moldy Well-Known Member



    You're welcome but I just Googled Anslinger and that popped up.

    Rick has some valid points. Prohibitionists won't go back in time and take responsibility for how poorly the law was crafted and passed. The law is still unconstitutional but that isn't a good arguing point these days since many laws go over that line. Thank our religious drum beaters and law makers for all that shit.

  8.  
    cleatis

    cleatis Well-Known Member

    I don't necessarily want them to take responsibility for it, I do however want to highlight the weak foundation of it. Most of the reason I want to use these kinds of things is to compare them to what we see and hear today. I'm finding the same sets of ignorance in today's arguments for prohibition. There are still prohibitionists that claim that marijuana use is race driven - that our white kids get "addicted" to it because of exposure to "degenerate minority types" and their loose morals and cultural values (and so on and so forth). The only difference I am finding in these arguments is that then they said "negro" today they say Afro-American.
  9.  
    RickWhite

    RickWhite Well-Known Member


    No man, you have it all wrong. Those are awful arguments. I'm not trying to insult you and I can understand where all this comes from because that is all the impostors in our schools are teaching. To be fair, they may love to hear them if that is what you are going for, but that kind of stuff just isn't solid. First, playing the race card is an appeal to emotion. Race has nothing to do with it. It is also a cop-out to call people ignorant for not seeing things your way. This is called ad-hominem which translates to "against the man." This is an attempt to undermine one's argument by attacking the character of the person making it. Plus, the racism stuff is pure BS. There are more minorities in prison because they commit more crimes and often can't afford good lawyers. And the conspiracy stuff is always lame.

    You could argue that prohibition has puritanical religious roots and was largely based on fear. Just understand that there are a lot of good argument on the other side as well. After all, weed is illegal just about everywhere in the world. I think your best argument is the cost and the injustice of enforcing prohibition and how much more effective education and treatment would be.
  10.  
    medicineman

    medicineman New Member

    Booze good, pot bad, the mantra of the middle aged white fool. Those same holes were smokin the shit in college, what happened? Oh that's right, the hippies became the yuppies and went for the money, same old shit. If it aint legal and has a smokin profit, they don't want to fuck with it. Besides, their children may get "hooked".
  11.  
    Dimefan89

    Dimefan89 Well-Known Member

    william randolf hearst. he had it made illegal because hemp was cutting into his timber industry. he is behind a lot of the propaganda
  12.  
    Parker

    Parker Well-Known Member

    It's bad enough we have to listen to your economic and political bullshit. Why don't you leave your racist bullshit at home.
  13.  
    ganjaluvr

    ganjaluvr Well-Known Member


    Ahmen to that my friend... life's too short to be worrying about the color of skin that someone else may have. It's ignorant and very immature!
    Besides not only that, but right now.. with the way society is these days... we shouldn't be hating each other.. if anything.. right now.. is the time to start spreading love around.. to everyone you can!! Life's just too short.. to be worrying about such bullshit. But hey, if you want to go through your whole life... wasting your time with hating people just because they might have a different color of skin.. then be my guest and go ahead and waste your life doing that.

    I myself, have no problem with anyone. No matter the race... however, the ones that I don't like.. are the terrorist's that are coming onto U.S. soil, and trying to kill innocent ppl and children! Those are the ones I have a problem with.. for instance.. the "terrorist" that attempted the latest bombing in Times Square.. in NYC. That's a fine example of the type of people I'd like to personally get my hands on. Ya dig?

    But yeah, as for just hating someone just because they're different.. is just plain ignorant and stupid. Grow up would ya???

    We've got bigger things to worry about these days..

    That's all I'm saying on this subject.

    peace.

Share This Page