Letter I just sent to Fox news-Kelly

[bwalker42]

Message bodyI would like to know why the amount of money Congress spends each year and continuously on the War on Drugs, is never addressed by Fox or any other news media in the info given to the public when it comes to the budget talks, and spending. And why would we be borrowing money to put our kids in jail and prison for smoking a joint.
Really, enough is enough and too much stinks.
40 yrs of a failed drug war.
Why keep destroying our peoples lives over bad law.
Brenda Walker-Moody

[BentSailor]

I doubt you'll get an answer from "Fox News Kelly", but I can posit one for you.

Fox News is deliberately targeting the conservative audience. A fair proportion of these conservatives are "social conservatives" (judging from the expressed opinion of the channel's talking heads on same-sex marriage), which means a fair proportion of their audience are quite likely to be against legalising drugs such as marijuana.

Fox News are not going to alienate those viewers by supporting a policy they know they dislike. They're going to stick to basic demagoguery and keep the money rolling in

[ssneade]

at least one news agency targets conservatives. one tires of the pussie-lib rhetoric after a while. that's why they're the highest rated news channel in the U S. but i agree with your statement. most conservatives (and some libs) are against legalizing cannabis and fox is definitely not going to support an agenda that will remotely alienate them from their viewers.....

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by ssneade

at least one news agency targets conservatives. one tires of the pussie-lib rhetoric after a while. that's why they're the highest rated news channel in the U S.

Only because the pussie-lib rhetoric is divided up across all the rest of the media outlets. Doesn't the fact that, as you state, Fox is the only angry-right outlet tell you anything? Just the fact that scuzzball Murdoch owns it is enough reason to not patronize it.

Originally Posted by ssneade

but i agree with your statement. most conservatives (and some libs) are against legalizing cannabis and fox is definitely not going to support an agenda that will remotely alienate them from their viewers(

One more reason to be down on conservatives. (How many reasons is that now??) Maybe if they smoked some it would mellow them out - get them giggling instead of ranting in anger. The increase in food sales would help boost the economy as well.

[landmineop]

If the pussie-libs got off their butts and did even a basic search online (I know, "work", a totally new concept to them) the stimated cost in 2011 so far is almost $10 billion> They could find the information easily enough at the "Drug War Clock" at drugsense dot org. That is, if they could follow a coherent thought thru to fruition.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by landmineop

If the pussie-libs got off their butts and did even a basic search online (I know, "work", a totally new concept to them) the stimated cost in 2011 so far is almost $10 billion> They could find the information easily enough at the "Drug War Clock" at drugsense dot org. That is, if they could follow a coherent thought thru to fruition.

First, you have no idea how hard I worked and work now - Between 1978 and 2011 my wife and I never had a vacation - we started our marriage by me having to go to work on our wedding night to implement a major new computer system and she had to fly out the next morning to work out of town. We always spent our vacation time working - on our kids, houses, boats etc. We never had more than the odd, rare weekend away. Also, I twice worked myself so hard as to require hospitalization so don't tell me I'm some sort of welfare case or I'll start calling you an angry, unemployed, resentful redneck who sits at a screen drinking beer and ranting about how the world and those East coast libs are screwing him - and then I'll come looking for you!

Next, it seems to me that it is us pussie-libs that are far more in favour of ending the WOD - it was started and continues to be primarily supported by angry-rightists so I fail to understand the "point" of your rant.

Last, $10 billion is only a fraction of the cost of the WOD, probably the direct policing costs - the real cost including courts, prisons, broken families, gang wars and THEIR costs, lost productivity, and on and on and on is probably in the hundreds of $billions per year.

[MikeinLA]

Originally Posted by BentSailor

Fox News are not going to alienate those viewers by supporting a policy they know they dislike.

I would suggest emailing MSNBC instead. Based on the reportage I've seen there, most of them must already be stoned. Personally, I've never really understood adults who liked taking drugs or who supported their use.

Mike

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by MikeinLA

I would suggest emailing MSNBC instead. Based on the reportage I've seen there, most of them must already be stoned. Personally, I've never really understood adults who liked taking drugs or who supported their use.

Mike

It's not a case of liking them or supporting their use - that is the attitude that keeps things so screwed up. It is a matter of facing reality - people ARE going to use drugs (and patronize hookers and gamble illegally etc.) so we have to face that reality and minimize the harm they do, not criminalize large numbers of people for a relatively harmless vice and thereby allow the creation of huge criminal empires to service the demand.

Prohibition didn't stop people drinking, it only succeeded in turning a bunch of minor gangs of thugs into making the Mafia a huge, national organization.

The same thing has happened on an even larger and much more vicious scale with weed, coke etc.

Tobacco used to be smoked by about 70% of the population in the 50's - now it is around 17% - done with social pressure and changing tastes, not with prohibition. If prohibition had been tried with 'baccy, I'd venture that smokers would be in the 30% - 40% range - the thrill of the risk, being part of "the underground" and so forth would lure people in, just as it is with weed. Make weed, coke, smack etc. available through controlled outlets and you'll see usage go DOWN, not up, within a few years.

[BentSailor]

Originally Posted by MikeinLA

I would suggest emailing MSNBC instead. Based on the reportage I've seen there, most of them must already be stoned.

Ah yes, it's OK Fox News is self-confessed in it's bias because I don't like other channels

Personally, I've never really understood adults who liked taking drugs or who supported their use.

Yeah, because what adult in their right mind would support the drinking of alcohol... oh wait, that's probably a majority of people on this forum

Look, I don't particularly want my kids smoking weed, never really wanted (nor want) to do it myself, and I sure as hell don't want them (or myself) on harder stuff. Doesn't mean that prohibition works. In fact, my school mates smoked more weed at fifteen than they consumed alcohol/tobacco smoke - both of which are regulated for 18+ before purchasing. Obviously regulation works better at lowering it's use than making it illegal outright.

[landmineop]

"Coke, weed and smack" used to be legal in this nation until the costs to society at large increased to a prohibitive level. They were also legal the world over until the costs to society, again, got prohibitive. Your line of reasoning has been tried and failed. The present draconian laws against weed do need to be modified but until the majority of people in each affected nation change the laws we play the hand we were dealt. The alternative would be to just ignor the laws you think are wrong and follow the others. That would lead to chaos on an unimaginable scale. You ignor the laws you dislike and I ignor the laws I dislike. Result ? No coherrent society at all. So until the laws are changed we have to live by them not just the ones you like, or I like or our neighbors like.