Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, February 13, 2009
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
Sometimes a Smoke Is Just a Smoke
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


WASHINGTON -- Drink and drive and it's grrrrrrrr-eat! Smoke pot and your flakes are frosted, dude.

So seems the message from Kellogg, which has decided not to renew its sponsorship contract with Michael Phelps after the Olympian was photographed smoking marijuana at a party in South Carolina.

That's showbiz, of course, but the cereal and munchie company had no problem signing Phelps despite a prior alcohol-related arrest. In 2004, Phelps was fined and sentenced to 18 months probation and community service after pleading guilty to driving while impaired.

The silliness of our laws -- and the hypocrisy of our selective attitudes toward mood enhancers -- needs no further elaboration. Even so, things are getting sillier by the minute.

Richland County (S.C.) Sheriff Leon Lott has now made eight pot-related arrests based on the snap that shot around the world. Seven were for possession and one for distribution, after deputies used warrants to enter the house where Phelps allegedly was photographed.

Phelps may be next.

In an earlier column, I gave Lott the benefit of the doubt, suggesting that his hands were tied given the laws of the land and South Carolina's political climate. I retract the benefit.

Sheriffs, though elected and therefore political, have great latitude as to what crimes they pursue. In a state that recently ranked among the most dangerous in the nation, one would think South Carolina's law enforcement officials have better things to do.

Indeed, they do. In our peculiar obsession to track down the Willie Nelsons, Rush Limbaughs, and now Michael Phelpses of society -- nonviolent, victimless imbibers of drugs -- we've actually made society less safe. That's the conclusion of 10,000 cops, prosecutors, judges and others who make up the membership of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

Howard Wooldridge, LEAP's Washington representative, is a former cop and detective who lectures civic clubs and congressional staffers on the futility of drug laws that reduce public safety by wasting time and money. He points to child pornography as just one example.

As of last April, he says, law enforcement had identified 623,000 computers containing child pornography, including downloadable video of child rape. Only a fraction of those have been pursued with search warrants, thanks to limited resources and staff shortages. What's worse, Wooldridge says, is that three times out of five a search warrant also produces a child victim on the premises.

Another example: Last year Human Rights Watch reported that as many as 400,000 rape kits containing evidence were sitting unopened in criminal labs and storage facilities. Between the Los Angeles Police Department and the L.A. County sheriff's office, nearly 12,000 kits were unopened, according to an NPR report in December.

Arguments against prohibition should be obvious. When you eliminate the victimless "crime" of drug use, you disempower the criminal element. Neutering drug gangs and cartels, not to mention the Taliban, would be no small byproduct of decriminalization. Not only would state regulation minimize toxic concoctions common on the black market, but also taxation would be a windfall in a hurting economy.

No one's saying that drugs aren't dangerous. Alcohol and tobacco are also dangerous.

And no one thinks children should have access to harmful substances, though they already do. Parents who recoil because their child became an addict should note that prohibition didn't help.

What prohibition did was criminalize what is essentially a health problem -- and overcrowd prisons. In 2007, there were 872,720 marijuana arrests in the U.S. Of those, 775,137 were for possession. South Carolina just added eight to this year's roster.

The greatest obstacle to drug law reform is public fear and politics, says Wooldridge, as he set off to give eight presentations on Capitol Hill Thursday. "I've had staffers tell me that to even call a hearing will get you un-elected."

Which, perhaps, explains why Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va. -- the only congressman to even approach the subject recently -- has tackled the drug problem through the issue of prison overcrowding. Webb has held two hearings before the Joint Economic Committee on U.S. drug policy and incarceration costs. This year, he has promised to push for a blue-ribbon commission to study why the U.S. has more people in jail than any other country.

The answer -- and the solution -- seems clear.

I'm not convinced that all drugs should be legalized, but we should at least put prohibition on the table to take another look. In the meantime, Sheriff Lott has some 'splainin' do to.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Hey Ms. Parker......Looks like you......
are starting to understand the common folk a little....this was a pretty humorous statement by YOU:

"made eight pot-related arrests based on the snap that shot around the world."

Your argument in the column actually makes some sense.......however, IF Phelps by chance had a long conversation with a 10-Foot Raggedy Ann doll while "holding' his bong......then truly he must be charged. That's what I would call criminal pot.

Excellent article! 5 stars!
It's time to end this stupid "war". I have no desire to use any of this, but I certainly have no desire to restrict anyone else's liberty.

War on Civilization
A headline I read recently claimed 7000 dead in drug dealer turf wars along the Mexican border in the last two years.

It's not enough that our asinine drug policies have wrecked the lives of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of our own fellow citizens, we have created virtual war zones in several other countries as well.

If Obama can get one thing right in his presidency -- and I'm highly skeptical of that eventuality -- it would be to end this farce once and for all. Law enforcenment needs to focus on unsolved rapes, murders, and other serious crimes of violence. Leave the potheads be, just as you leave the juiceheads be.

pot
Smoking pot is unhealthy and illegal.
Phelps IS a role model for hundreds if not thousands of young people.
Kellogg did the right thing in deciding not to have Phelps' face staring back at children from their cereal boxes.

flip flops
fleur writes:
"
pot
Smoking pot is unhealthy and illegal.
Phelps IS a role model for hundreds if not thousands of young people.
Kellogg did the right thing in deciding not to have Phelps' face staring back at children from their cereal boxes."

Drinking is unhealthy, Drinking and driving is illegal. Phelps IS a role model. So tell us again how it is ok for one but not the other.

For Some...
Pot is really a bad idea for some people: in one study, 50% of those studied demonstrated (temporary) psychosis. In a study with people suffering from manageable schizophrenia, the use of marijuana made their symptoms much, much worse. That part of the study was discontinued in the name of humane treatment (and it wasn't what was expected, at all, since people with the disease tend to crave THC, the active ingredient.) In another study, pot created (temporary) inhibition of an area of the brain that is also frequently underused in people with schizophrenia. In other words, hi-tech and low-tech tests all say the same thing: the drug is bad for some people, perhaps as much as 50% of the population.

I would argue that alcohol is damaging in some way to at least that percentage, if not more. Some people should be prohibited from using alcohol, perhaps. If you have to get a permit to have a concealed handgun, maybe we need a permitting process to drink alcohol? (Nah, that sounds like a Nancy Pelosi version of Viagra.) Point is, some things shouldn't be used by some people.

Ya gotta wonder who gave the Sheriff a badge - and a gun. I wouldn't trust him around my kid (stepson) - he'd be tossed in the can for spitting on the sidewalk. Such idiocy only increases disrespect for law enforcement. Not good.


KP
excellent points once again. What a waste of time and resources (I hate Rush, but he should not have been investigated). Focus needs to be on true criminals and not some long lost battle from the 60's. Prescription drugs are much more harmful pot when abused. (Rush would no doubt concur). KP the rwcons here are starting to appreciate you a little more.

Nice Bill Bennet Talking Points!!!
Good cut and paste of his broadcast yesterday. I do like Bill but his rice bowl when he was really relevant WAS the disastrous WAR on drugs. HARD drugs like heroin and meth sure, we need to divert resources from burning pot fields to shutting down the labs and SEALING the borders to keep the cheap Mexican brown out.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

Lighten Up
Americans have to ditch the "Savior" complex. We can't save everybody. Those, for whatever reason, determined to destroy themselves should be allowed to do just that. The cost of rehab would probably equal the costs of trying to enforce these laws. It would be a wash and the country would benefit from recusing itself from trying to nursemaid every citizen's aberrant behavior.

Pot, marijuana, weed, whateveryoucallit
Legalize it, tax it and sell it with cigarettes.

Let sick people who need it, use it.

Let everyone out of jail/prison if incarcerated for ONLY pot possession, use or growing.

All the nonsense the government spouts is just that - nonsense. I've known people who have smoked for 50 years and no ill effects, no 'gateway to hard drugs' - just the munchies.

Reply: For some
Jim, are you trying to say that 50% of us are psychotic and shouldn't be let out of our cages. That means the other 50% of us are going to have to support them. I guess that means we need a test done on HS graduation day to see if you fit into one of these groups. Psychotic, get a cage. Normal, you get to work and pay. Isn't that what we are trying to do now, tell others how to live their lives. What ever happened to Freedom and Liberty.

No, Folks, Parker is STILL Wrong
The difference here is that Phelps was not already under contract with Kellogg's when he drove drunk. Had he been famous then, the MADD Mothers would have made Frosted Flakes a controlled substance.

Smoking dope gets KINDER treatment than driving drunk. Ask Clinton and Bush, the former received unqualified forgiveness; the other nearly lost an election.

As far as penalties and repurcussions, I do not know of any insurance policies that call for an increase in premiums over a charge of possession of pot. And, as I checked a Pothead website, I saw that some states (MA, CA, NY) don't even incarcerate after repeated offenses. Can you say that for DUI?

You cannot compare the Florida State Attorney's wasteful crusade against Limbaugh with Lott's mere contemplation of charging Phelps. And how does Phelps' losing one contract compare with Nelson's ordeal with the IRS that left him penniless? Is someone proofreading your material for congruity?

Lott's jurisdiction did not contribute to SC's high crime rate - it was Myrtle Beach - a city with super strict laws against drinking in public. So, I guess replealing those laws will help reduce violence in SC, according to crime expert Parker.

So those of you who want to make pot legal - at least there will be some great business opportunities in your hometowns. Watch the headshops spring up everywhere! You'll love the hedonistic riff-raff and crime it engenders, too. Also, you will have one less weapon to use to discourage your children from using marijuana. Just picture the teenage brats getting in your face with, "Hey, it's LEGAL now, Mom!" And, get ready for Social Services to accuse you of abuse when you punish junior for bringing dope into your house.

Parker, please go to Huffington's employ. And take Rush-hating wrightstrong52 with you. I will miss knocking you out of the water on every column you write, though.

sometimes it not a joke
Bringing up kids in this society is tough enough without putting an ok stamp on "recreational drugs"! I'm with John in Va., what kind of society do we really want? At least by having laws that stand against immorality in what ever form, we engender a better chance at better behavior. I realize laws can't make a person "want to do right" or whats best for them or others, but it can provide "pain" when crossed.

tom et al
It's not whether or not we're morally "ok" with it, it's about enforcement. The only real way for government to control a "thing" is to let it exist and regulate the heck out of it. If you think the current track is working, then I suggest research so that you can see the facts are contrary to your view.

"Do it for the children" . . .
There is a DIFFERENCE between children and adults. Activities such as drinking and smoking are generally reserved for ADULTS. I ask the prohibitionists and other well meaning folks: Should adult behavior be predicated on what children should do? If so, we are ALL children inder the thumb of the nanny state and other busybodies with nothing better to do.
As to my children, the "consequences of one's actions" was discussed (and understood) at a very early age. It was explained that things that adults do are not necessarily good for children and that "actions have consequences" and it pays to THINK before acting. They have all grown up to be good citizens (with a healthy mistrust of the "powers that be" government, "news media", people with nothing better to do than to enforce their version of "societal norms".
People, THINK for yourselves.

Comical Kathleen
I find her articles highly entertaining for their skewed viewpoints, and "altered" perspectives. Perhaps she has a few puffs before writing this trash, eh?

How she still manages to get on Townhall is beyond me, she stands out like a sore thumb.

There is such a thing known as THE LAW Kathleen. While you and city mayors skirt or ignore those laws, we are a nation of laws. When we start deciding all by ourselves which ones we will follow or ignore, anarchy ensues.

Why must I find myself lecturing you on Civics 101??????

Perhaps you can print this post out and use it as a reference the next time you decide to share you're perverted views.

Mod Mark You Missed the Point
My remark about social services was ironic and indeed an indictment AGAINST govt involvement in rearing children.

The Rule of Law is not socialism. All laws are moral judgments designed to govern behavior, even in our great republic. Social engineering is done outside established law, such as when a workplace or a school mandate "classes" for politically incorrect behavior.

You of the legalize pot crowd are anarchists. You naively believe that YOU can handle all misbehavior yourself without thinking about the second and third order effects.

my two cents
1) Kathleen - good column. So the kid is a kid and took a hit or two on a bong at a party - big deal

2) You still owe me a Geraldo column - 8 years and counting

how long must I want?

at least 50% of the 50%...
...who exhibited some temporary psychosis while smoking pot were simply paranoid about getting busted. make it legal and that percentage goes up in smoke, so to speak...

Stupid is As Stupid Does
Everyone pays for the health consequences of using mood altering substances -- whether it's alcohol -- 1 in 4 hospital beds have a patient who has an alcohol-related problem and place an enormous strain on society by the dysfunction and trauma generated by addiction . . .domestic violence, child abuse, crime, traffic fatalities, premature death, AIDS, STDs, heartache . . .marijuana is not legal -- Phelps' DUI was the first clue that he has an addiction problem -- normalizing pot use by having a president or star athlete use a substance which is illegal should not be defended . . .substance abuse is a HEALTH issue not a moral issue. Using illegal substances is a LEGAL issue --

Question
Ms. Parker, do you use marijuana? There is a sad misperception that "recreational" use somehow protects someone from the health consequences of a substance . . .alcohol poisoning has escalated -- some 8000 kids a year die from overdosing on alcohol . . .one correlation may be the increase in combining smoking pot with drinking -- if you can't throw up when you have ODed on alcohol you will die --sadly too many people think they can control an addictive substance -- impaired thinking never produces responsible decisions -- drunks drive impaired because they don't think they are drunk -- don't ask society to legalize a substance to assauge your conscience . . .

It's not going to be a good day...
... when I find myself agreeing, even in part, with KP and the libertarians.

The laws do need to be changed. But for those who advocate complete legalization, all I'd ask in return for my support is this:

Sell any current controlled substance to someone over 21, it's your business and theirs.

Sell to under 21, it's a capital offense.

KathleenParker
No doubt Kellogg’s had a clause in the contract covering this, else they would not turn out America’s Golden Boy so easily. So Kellogg’s was WELL within their rights. As for the war on drugs, TOO MUCH time and TOO MUCH of OUR MONEY has been spent on trying to stop the unstoppable. Legalize ALL OF IT and tax/sell it to anyone 18 or older, this will:
1. Free up Law Enforcement Resources to go after Rapists, Pedophiles, etc.
2. Open a new revenue stream for The Government.
3. Take the profit out of it, which will cut the throats of drug dealers.

Besides which, anyone who is STUPID ENOUGH to smoke, snort or shoot their way into a COFFIN is a waste of oxygen and America is better of without them.

BTW Libtards, don’t forget to start smoking to help pay for BULLSCHIP. When you light up, you are doing it FOR THE CHILDREN!

Yeah yeah yeah
We've been smoking for 35 years, I hold a full time job.
My wife has her own business.
We have never used other drugs.
I have been saying for years, the government is missing out on one the biggest taxible items in the country.
California's cash crop is pot not citrus fruit like they would have you believe.
The only down fall is... if pot smoking leeds to a thought process like Nancy Pelosi's, we are all in for a train wreck.
Get off our civil liberties and get on with providing for the national defense. That is what I have to say to our "government"

Karen,
Whether combining cannibis with alcohol prevents an alcohol poisoning victim from purging the alcohol or not doesn't change the fact that it is the alcohol that causes the overdose death. That is one of the farthest reaching arguements against cannibis that I've ever heard.There are thousands of times more alcohol related deaths than ones linked to cannibis. Also bear in mind the chemical analysis methods used when detecting alcohol and cannibis in a person's system. When alcohol is detected,the person is still under the influence. Cannibis analysis detects metabolites of the substance which stay in ones system for weeks after the effect of the drug has worn off.Therefore the analyses used for cannibis incident related statistics isn't accurate.

sell to
Doc Liberty
That should be 18. If your old enough to fight and die your old enough to decide for yourself.
Decide for yourself is the operative phrase. We do not need government to tell us what to do!!!

Interesting program on ...
The History Channel recently pertaining to the marijuana laws. My memory is a little fuzzy, but, back in the 1930's, congress could not find justification in the Constitution to ban pot. The SCOTUS overturned all such legislation. At least they did until Congress was able to successfully pass gun legislation banning machine guns. Somehow, that flouting of the Constitution opened the flood gates by giving far more power to the federal government then they were ever able to wield before.

As far as morality goes, I'm morally opposed to many things that are sin by my Christian faith. But I live in a land of liberty that calls me to allow others the freedoms to do things that I don't agree with. In that vein, I support decriminalization.

Tod Kozeluh
Lexington, KY

Barry Smokes
BHO admitted to smoking pot( and inhailing I might add). Did it stop his unpresidented to the position of messiah?

TAKING DRUGS SHOULD NOT BE A CRIME

.....Committing a crime while under the influence of drugs should be a Capitol Offense ...problem solved case closed ...

.....On the other hand let's beef up the "War on Drugs" ...we have so much success so far .....COLOSSUS

K PARKER KOOL-AID SHOULD BE OUT-LAWED
TONY THE TIGER SAYS NEVER EAT A BOWL OF KELLOGGS,CEREAL WHILE READING A KATHLEEN PARKER ARTICLE!JUST SAY NO TO DRUGS!AND THE QUEEN OF CHAOS!

Good Article
Kathey, you do pretty well when you stay away from politics. I say make pot posession a civil offence like a traffic ticket, confiscation and a $100 fine. Not putting those rape kits on a fast track is criminal in itself.

Karen in Texas...
do you, or do you not, support individual liberty? Do you think it is the governments responsibility to protect us from ourselves?

Decriminalization of marijuana laws has nothing to do with assuaging ones conscience. It's all about freedom and responsibility.

I don't use marijuana because it is illegal. However, if it were legal, I might use marijuana like I do the occasional adult beverage. Which is to say, extremely rarely. I will be traveling to Jamaica in a few weeks. I hear they have some good stuff down there. Maybe I'll partake. Then again, maybe I won't!

Tod Kozeluh
Lexington, KY

I'll say it again
as I do every time this subject comes up. Bill Clinton , Al Gore , George W. Bush ,Sarah Palin and Barack Obama have all admitted to smoking cannibis. Why do they smoke it themselves and then say that if you do you're a criminal ? Well let's look at some of the reasons cannibis is really illegal. First,prohibition makes an easily grown weed worth a fortune. Do you think that the kingpins,terrorists and drug gangs want to lose all of that money ? Second, look at what prohibition has done to expand the criminal justice system. Just think of the lost revenue from property seizure,arrest, incarceration and probation of these offenders. Also consider the massive private drug testing industry which has followed drug free workplace requirements. Hard drugs stay in ones system 1 to 3 days while metabolites of cannibis remain for weeks after a single use. Then,we have the industrial threat of cannibis which directly competes with cotton,pulpwood and petroleum products, not to mention the alcoholic beverage industry.

Doc Liberty
I'll meet you half-way. I'd agree to prosecute adults (i.e. those over 21) for contributing to the delinquency of minors; capitol crimes are those where violence has been inflicted on unwilling, innocents. Under-age drug and alcohol abuse is on the same level as seeking to lose one's virginity; many of us are willing participants.

I started drinking alcoholically as a pre-teen. My parents, who both died of alcohol-related illnesses, always had an abundant supply, so my getting into it was no challenge. Sometime thereafter, while drinking, did I try pot. Didn't like it. Tried a bunch of other drugs along the way. Didn't like them either. But no one held a gun to my head at any point and forced me to do any of it; I chose to do those things of my own free will.

I quit drinking at 30. I'm now 52. I'm in the top economic quintile and I pay my taxes. Had I been busted along the way for minor recreational use, I may have spent as many as 20 years incarcerated (at about $60K in taxpayer money a year) for only hurting myself. I don't see how society would have been better served in that scenario.

Kathleen Parker
You have some serious problems. You suffer from moral equivalence.

I will tell you what...you go ahead and use Phelps as a shining example to your kids and see what you get.

You are part of the creeping incremental ism in this society. Drink here, a drink there, a doobie here, a doobie there...

Light at the End of the Tunnel?

The answer to all of this is to follow the evidence. I know it is hard for many of you, but you have to learn to drop your personal preferences in favor of what the evidence says.

And there is no case I can think of where public policy is more in conflict with the evidence. Marijuana is a more benign drug than almost anything you can name. It is certainly less harmful than alcohol. Alcohol is implicated in 250,000 deaths per year at a minimum. There has not been a single case of marijuana use leading directly to death of which I am aware.

SMoke too many cigarrettes--you die. Drink too much--you die or kill other people. Take too much aspirin you--die. Take too much tylenol--you die. Fail to take enough anti-depressant, you get suicidal. Smoke too much pot, you fall asleep.

Follow the evidence!

taxing, legalization and history
High quality cannibis is easily grown and people aren't going to buy pre packaged,dried out,foul smelling weed grown in radioactive soil by big tobacco. The only way I see to tax legalized cannibis is to issue personal use growing permits for a fee of course and to sell tax stamps for transport and possesion of small, personal amounts ,which was done in the past during the beginning of prohibition. I also don't see a problem with the dispensery system currently being used for medical cannibis. I don't use the term "Marijuana" because that is the name used by the original authors of prohibition to link the substance to Mexican migrant workers that were in competition for badly needed jobs during the depression.The effect of cannibis can make hard monotonous tasks,such as agricultural field work,seem more interesting and seemingly make time pass more quickly. Then there was also the prohibitionists' link to "Negroes" and jazz musicians that would become sex crazed fiends looking for white women under the influence of cannibis. They also claimed that cannibis made white women desire these sex crazed "Negroes". If anyone doesn't believe me , look it up. It happened.

USE and TAX?
Currently, a combined death rate of almost 400,000 lives annually to the effects of alcohol and cigarettes -- both legal substances if you meet the age requirements and both taxed . . .the number of people arrested for DWI or jailed for pot use is miniscule compared to the number that are not prevented from breaking the law . . .one in 10 drivers on a weekend night are driving impaired and the average person has driven 200 times impaired before being arrested for driving under the influence -- because a person can "function" doesn't mean they don't have an addiction problem . . .how can ingesting more than 400 chemicals into your body be desirable? Mood altering substances are toxins plain and simple -- if you are dying from cancer or AIDS and think smoking pot is preferable to state of the art medications -- then that's one argument, but don't pretend the benefits of smoking pot are for medical reasons . . .also, don't bring up past misinformation as a defense against paying attention to what is known today -- addiction is a disease, your brain is impacted by chemical use, there are health consequences . . .taxing would only marginally defray the additional health costs.

Lolo is Right
Mod Mark, you are as ubiquitous as you are simplistic. Please, run along and play.

FROG
Look up the difference between the words "freedom," "liberty," and "license," -- we live in a society that requires personal responsiblity -- we have laws to govern and protect -- we have the freedom to break those laws, but we don't have the freedom to escape the consequences of bad choices.
Phelps isn't a kid -- he's 24 . . .just like "free speech" doesn't mean you can say anything you want to (check the Bill of Rights)sedition and causing injure to the public by saying something not true are punishable . . .freedom doesn't mean you can do anything you want to -- citing politicians using marijuana as evidence that it should be legalized raises the question -- were they pathological liars and sociopaths before or after smoking dope?

Mod Mark
I guess I was assuming it's legal down there. If it isn't, I absolutely will not partake.

Tod Kozeluh
Lexington, KY

MOD MARK
The drinking age has been 21 in all states since 1987 and saves lives. Alcohol related fatalities for teenagers was reduced by 49%; lowering the minimum BAC level also reduced alcohol related fatalities and crashes.
The increase in alcohol poisonings begs the question WHY? If you throw up when you are drunk, you eliminate the toxin, if you can't throw up because you are also stoned . . . you die. Kids and many adults don't even recognize alcohol poisoning for what it is . . .if pot didn't impair and change your skill sets no one would use it . . . pretending pot is 1)safe and 2)it's use is without consequences is called DENIAL . . .

Legalize and Reduce Use
If the statistics are correct, most of us posting here have at one point or another gave pot a try. Why? Mainly because of it being an illegal substance. Legalize it and suddenly, the glamor of marijuana vanishes. It isn't dangerous anymore. It's no longer exotic when you can find it sitting next to Marlboros and canisters of Skoal at Wal-Mart. This will dramatically drive down use while making the product safe to manufacture and use by those who still care to. Legalization will kill demand.

It was the repeal of the 18th Amendment, not the automatic weapons ban, that killed organized crime in America and the prohibition of drugs that built it right back up again. Raul the Columbian drug lord and Jamal the local pusher can't compete with Wal-Mart. When they go away, so does all the crime that built up along with it.

Suppose the Sheriff did nothing
Kathleen, let's suppose the Sherriff did nothing about the Phelps issue and instead pursued more of the child pornography issues that you mentioned.

This picture of Phelps and those he was partying with are now all over the place.

Phelps is rich. We can probably conclude that the party he attended consisted of mostly the affluent crowd. That's a fair guess, I think.

The Sheriff doesn't pursue it.

We would now have every Civil Rights group and every other "defender of the little guy" swarming the town. The Media would be on this non-stop. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be leading protests and "racism" would be every other word from their mouths.

Can't you just hear it over and over again, Kathleen: "Poor Black kids are being sent to jail, while the rich White kids can get away with it...even where there are pictures to prove they were doing it!"

Can't you just hear it?

Hmmm..
Phelps was arrested because of a picture. We have politicians who come out and say they have partaked in the same behavior so why aren't they getting arrested? Obama gladly admitted it so where is the reprocussions for him? Talk about role models? He is the President so I guess that is one law for politicians and one for the rest of us.

Kathleen...
... what makes you think the ex-cop from LEAP's breathless number of computers with child porn is any more reliable that Sheriff Lott's pot-busting priorities?


Anyone want to bet that Karen...
... belongs to half a dozen groups with "Angry Mothers Against..." in their titles (and that her husband sleeps on the couch)?


Cannabis criminalization...
--
...has a sordid history, of which it appears NO social pseudoconservative is aware.

Read *A Drug War Carol* to get an accessible appreciation of this history (online at http://www.adrugwarcarol.com/ADWC.php in its entirety).

(( You'll find in it a brief recounting of the story of William Stewart Halsted, M.D., the father of modern surgery and one of the founders of Johns Hopkins Hospital, who was a clandestine morphine addict from 1886 until his death in 1922, during which he was INCREDIBLY productive as both a surgeon and an educator. Medical students learn about this in "History of Medicine" courses; but how many of you social pseudoconservatives have been to med school? ))

The true American conservative trusts government with NOTHING.

Government is too damned much like an above-the-knee amputation. Bloody, agonizing, horrible, and always - ALWAYS - a last resort to which one repairs only if the alternative is death.

Recreational drug use (especially use of marijuana) is not now, has never been, nor will ever be deadly.

And resorting to the "Malevolent Jobholder" of government to address even the psychotic imaginings of the social pseudoconservatives is nothing less than criminally malfeasant.

--

Karen
You propose that marijuana is a contributing factor in death by alcohol poisoning.

Aside from your personal belief, is there any evidence to this effect? I ask because this should be easy to obtain: autopsies and drug screens would be available for all or most of those who died in this manner.

This is a quesiotn we can and should answer.




Reply to Wade
Wade: I suppose I could live w/ 18, though the "old enough to fight" doesn't really hold all that much water with me; you can't be President or even a Congressperson at 18, after all.



Karen...
Freedom isn't selective. Responsibility is the other side of the coin, as you noted. But the responsibility doesn't have to include, let alone be limited to criminal prosecution and punishment.

If we eliminate the taxpayer funded safety nets for people whose behavior hurts only themselves, then that should act as a motivation to avoid intoxicants of all kinds. Instead of excusing crimes and misdemeanors performed while under the influence, perhaps we should make the penalties harsher. Don't just limit airlines and nuclear plants to drug testing of employees, but allow any association, employer, school, or whatever to decide for themselves whether they will permit members to consume intoxicants, and on what basis. It's called freedom of association and addicts should have no standing to call themselves victims of discrimination. Building and property owners should certainly have the right to prohibit consumption on premises if they wish. People that have to work to support themselves and their dependents rarely have time to abuse intoxicants and their jobs usually require them to be sober. If they can perform their work to the satisfaction of their employer while intoxicated or can afford their habit and their life without going to work, good for them.

Reply to Just Another Jones
First, congratulations on your success.

Second, I agree that prosecuting and jailing people for mere use is counterproductive.

Third, we'll have to disagree on the punishment for selling to minors. The whole argument is "adults should be able to put what adults want to into adults' bodies." Fair enough. But the only way to ensure that kids don't get sold to is to make d@mn sure that the penalty for selling to minors is so high that no one would dare even consider it.

As far as whether kids want to or not, that's irrelevant. My 8 year old wanted to drive the other day. I didn't let her.

Doc Liberty
Okay. Let's say your 8-year old (at a later date) gets busted with possession of such a controlled substance. Instead of revealing the true identity of the provider of said substance, for fear of his/her life, he/she claims that some other adult provided the substance, maybe even dear ol' dad. The cops have no other leads. You still want the offense to be a capital crime?

Doc Writes..From the Group W Bench
Right. Capital punishment for an 18 year old smoking a joint with his 17 year old brother.

What is it about some people that makes killing other people such an attractive idea?

John, ask Clint...
"Some people just need killin'!"

One of his spaghetti westerns, but I remember which right now.

Reply to Just Another Jones, 2
What part of "I agree that prosecuting and jailing people for mere use is counterproductive" did you miss? Why are you presenting me with a hypothetical that under my own proposal could never happen?

But, as long as we're playing that game -- how hard should the slap on the wrist for selling meth, crack, and smack to Head Start kids be? 90 days and a 5 benjamin fine too much of a buzzkill?

Reply to John "from the Group W"
You type, "Capital punishment for an 18 year old smoking a joint with his 17 year old brother."

I wrote, "Sell to under 21, it's a capital offense."

Let me repeat with emphasis: "SELL to under 21."

Not possession. Not use. SALE.

And this is what I get for being even somewhat sympathetic to your position. Jeez, the way things are going here, you'd think controlled substances kill brain cells or something.

RW
You would be wrong . . .looks like I struck cord . . .and my husband is an extremely happy man . . .

Folly is so much fun!
Dear Kathleen -

You had me since "... they could put their AK-47's under their burqas" and this is the very first time I disagree.

I believe conservatives innately understand "slippery slope" and what the "dark-side" of man can do - when given a "loophole". As a past counselor in the mental health field, I know what people (including children) do. Cheap legal pot in the 7-11 leads to a cost in social care-taking that would stagger the imagination! Most drugs are more than just a money problem, but take that out of the equation and for many ... that is all (and I do mean ALL) they'll do.

Please re-think this.

THE RESEARCH
If my posts motivate one person to look at the research I will be happy. I have spent 30 years in the substance abuse prevention field and care passionately that young people grow up healthy with the maximum opportunities to be successful, contributing adults . . .so much for being "angry" RW -- I worked at NHTSA for 6 years and worked on the legislation to increase the drinking age.
Here is some information from NIDA.NIH.gov website which would be a good place to start sorting fact from wishful thinking -- researchers report what they find . . .Heavy marijuana use impairs a person's ability to form memories, recall events (see Marijuana, Memory, and the Hippocampus), and shift attention from one thing to another.8,33 THC also disrupts coordination and balance by binding to receptors in the cerebellum and basal ganglia, parts of the brain that regulate balance, posture, coordination of movement, and reaction time.11 Through its effects on the brain and body, marijuana intoxication can cause accidents. Studies show that approximately 6 to 11 percent of fatal accident victims test positive for THC. In many of these cases, alcohol is detected as well.34, 35, 36

In a study conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a moderate dose of marijuana alone was shown to impair driving performance; however, the effects of even a low dose of marijuana combined with alcohol were markedly greater than for either drug alone37. Driving indices measured included reaction time, visual search frequency (driver checking side streets), and the ability to perceive and/or respond to changes in the relative velocity of other vehicles.
I do get discouraged when so many people post opinions rather than actually understand the science.
Not sure why anyone feels compelled to insult me . . .


Phelps
I really do not know that any one could prove that Phelps and his friends had marijuana smoke in that bong. I really think he will follow the straight and narrow from now on. The discipline that allowed him to win eight gold medals will allow him to reject his own temporary bad behavior.

Follow the money
What could we do with the kind of money that taxation of drugs would be bring in? Sure, it would just be a drop in the bucket of the new debt our "ruler" is putting us under, but it's better than spending billions trying to stop people from doing drugs. So how is that drug war going, anyway? Hardly anyone using them? Nobody getting killed over it? No criminal kingpins or terrorists getting rich off of it? I personally don't smoke anything, legal or not, nor do I drink alcohol. I would just like one of you anti dopers to tell me how having weed for sale at the convenience store is any worse than the rotgut that is available there now. Don't even get me started on tobacco. And yes, any employer that doesn't want employees that are drunk, stoned, or have smoke coming out of their faces should be able to eliminate them from his workplace. Just my opinion.

Use your head, not your lips

I have the absolutely perfect solution to the pot problem.

Do exactly what was done with alcohol. Prohibit any one under 18 from using it at all, and make sure everyone else uses it in a proper, legal, safe manner.

Now you know that has worked for the past 50 years, don’t you. Have you every heard of a youngster even tasting alcohol? And haven’t all adults used it carefully and safely?

All you need is proper people, acting properly. Now me for example, I have never seen pot anywhere, and have no idea where it can be found, and my only experience with alcohol was one time I stuck my tongue a quarter inch in a glass of wine, and suffered for 10 minutes before that horrible taste went away.

I can’t imagine any reasonable person who would use either pot or alcohol, do you?

Buckley and Schulz
Among others, Bill Buckley and George Schulz are/were for the legalization of drugs.

So am I. To me, it's a no-brainer.

Think of the money saved, to then be used for better purposes, especially education and 12-step-type recovery programs. (I've been involved in AA and Al-Anon since 1986; these programs work!) Think of the time and money saved vis-a-vis police work.

Much praise and honor and glory to Senator Webb of the great State of Virginia.


"Machine Guns" were NEVER banned!
The Firearms Act of 1934 merely set a $200 federal transfer tax on EACH sale of a fully automatic weapon (Class III). Many states allow for ownership of a Class III firearm AFTER you go through the electron microscope anal exam they give you.

There are HUGE full-auto shoots each year. One in AZ is SO large that the FAA reroutes ALL air traffic as they do several night firing with full auto QUAD .50 caliber mounts and TRACERS!!

I said "machine gun" because to most gun ignorant folk ANYTHING that keeps firing as long as the trigger is held is a machine gun. WRONG. A true machine gun would be a LARGE CREW-SERVED weapon with a BELT FED system like the .30 Browning or the .50 caliber Browning aka "Ma Deuce".

A LIGHT machine gun fires RIFLE ammunition such as the .308, .303, or .223 rifle ammunition. A HEAVY will fire something like the .50 caliber BMG cartridge.

When you see an UZI, Schmeisser or Ingram MAC-10 SUBmachine gun that is a weapon that fires a PISTOL cartridge like the .45ACP or 9mm Luger Parabellum.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

An Open Mind
Kathleen Parker embodies what might be called, to allude to the late, great Allan Bloom--The Opening of the American Mind.

Our foremost symbol of this much-hoped-and-prayed for Opening--remains the miraculous election President Barack Obama (I'm tempted to add the epithet, The Greatest, alla Mohammed Ali, but I'll wait till after what I hope will be Barack's Eight Years of Continuous Recovery).

Dear GOD!!!
What HAVE you been smoking? Don't get all misty eyed and carried away here. We're just cutting Kathy a bit of slack. Most of us would rather she chew a big wad of Mighty Putty.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

Karen
You are right about the physiologic effects of marijuana, still I'm not sure that criminalizing its use is warranted. (BTW, I've never used it so I don't have a dog in the fight.) Many substances are bad for our bodies, but we can't outlaw them all. Drug use, like any other irresponsible act, is a moral problem, not a political one.

Pot
Bottom line pot is illegal, bravo to Kellogg's. Phelps screwed up once drinking, now smoking pot. What is this the old movie"Airplane"? Where in it Lloyd Bridges gets stressed than progressively gets worse and worse, smoking , drinking , popping pills and it is all ok ??

In a couple of years it could be, oh, poor Phelps now he is shooting heroin. Hopefully losing the contracts and learning a good lesson that if you are a role model you should act like one, not be weak and wimpy...oh boo hoo, I'm sorry again.
Unfortunately we have a low life as prez who did smoke pot, when he was "misunderstood"(boo hoo again) and did a little blow..so I guess with him as a role model..it will "who cares about right or wrong" for hopefully only 4 (long) years..I say it again , it is great that a corp. like Kellogg's stood up to the pressure .

Is this the same Kathleen Parker......
who wrote some ridiculous tripe about Sarah Palin? If so, it makes sense why she writes what she does. Until I learn otherwise, enough said......

Parker is waaaay past her "best-by" date
Politico posted a story an hour ago naming the four "columnists" that the Magical Mulatto Marxist and his controller Michelle-from-hell took with them on their weekend getaway flight to Chicago: Ron Brownstein, Clarence Page, E.J. Dionne, and .... Kathleen Parker.

Hope the Obamawhore enjoys the payback for the slime she slung at Sarah last fall. And I hope Jonathan Garthwaite finally sees the billboard-writing on the wall and dropkicks this loathesome witch out of Townhall for good.

What the problem may be
I once heard a saying about the drug war. It isn't winnable, but it is infinitely fundable. Like drugs themselves, law enforcement and prisons have created a culture of arresting non-violent drug offenders and it's not going to stop because it's just too easy to single out pot. Tracking down child pornography, which is way harmful than all the pot in the world, is just a lot harder and why would anybody want to work harder when they can still look as though they're doing their jobs by arresting these non-violent drug offenders? It's a sick self-reinforcing system that won't go away without another major revolution and that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon.

Kellogg's has the right
Of course Kellogg's has the right to end the contract with Phelps. If Kellogg's wants to uphold their own image as one of not condoning drug use, more power to them. And I'm sure that if Phelps had, while under contract to them, been convicted of DWI, they would have had the same reaction. I'm fine with that. But in real life, there is a big difference between driving drunk, and smoking some pot while hanging out with friends. As far as I'm concerned, driving intoxicated, or anything else that puts others in danger is inexcusable. When you're at home, do what you want, kill yourself with drugs. I don't care. And the tax money collected by legalizing drugs shouldn't be used to rehabilitate drug users. It should be used for something constructive.

Parker RIPPED on Palin more than Obama
What does Phelps have to do with anything? This is Parkers 2nd article on him. We are in terrible shape economically. $1 Trillion has passed.

Why isn't LIBERAL Parker writing articles about Obama on Townhall? She had more SCATHING comments about Palin than Obama here.

Is Parker still auditioning for MSNBC??


Hey Kathy!
The words out...you're doing the mile high with the new Prez. I guess just sitting in at the White House Dinners wasn't enough for you, now you're "Jet Setting" with your new master.

Now that you have made it perfectly clear WHAT you are...I guess you're just haggeling over the price now.

Not Over.

KP on Air Force One!!!
I just read over at Ben Smith's column at Politico that Kathllen Parker was on Air Force One with Obama when he went to Chicago.

Ben Smith: "The Obamas flew back to Chicago tonight, taking four columnists -- Ron Brownstein, Clarence Page, Kathleen Parker, and E.J. Dionne -- along for the ride"

Well isn't that special that Kathleen is flying on Air Force One as Obama's special guest.

Townhall Please bag this woman. She doesn't belong here!

what has kat been smoking?
Victimless crime? Isn't that what the addicts always say? I think there's an ulterior motive for her in banning prohibition.

legalization
Be careful what you wish for. This administration will be needing alot of prison space soon for all the political dissidents that are standing out against the changes we asked for by a landslide win (According to the supreme one). After all he won we lost so sit down and be quiet. Legalizing weed will make just enough room for all those pesky republicans who keep getting in the way of his bipartisan effort to toss the constitution in the Potomac river. And hey wonder if we will find that his porkulus bill will end up buying smoke for those poor welfare cheats who cannot afford to buy their own? By the way look how much our government has evolved.Our leadership has gone from the best and brightest to total communists in less than a generation. Darwin would be proud.

The fascists are taking over...
...and KP wants to divert your attention to Phelps' pot bust.

Parker, why don't you get lost.

pga301
KP's in good standing with the Obamanation.

With her focus on child porn, this column might be the start of an initiative to regulate the internet.

She's a fifth columnist that I wish TH would get rid of.

Petronius
"...I hope Jonathan Garthwaite finally sees the billboard-writing on the wall and dropkicks this loathesome witch out of Townhall for good."

Couldn't have said it better. However, rather than KP leaving, we might see some of our favorites booted instead.

Heritage Foundation used to operate TH until it was bought by Salem Communications. If some of this fascist 'stimulus' money finds it's way to the site's ownership, we may see the Obamanation dictating content even at our venerable TH.

Kennedy couldn't attend the 'stimulus'
Kennedy couldn't be moved to make a dramatic appearance at the 'stimulus' vote. Although he dearly wanted to be triumphantly wheeled, pushed, carted what have you into the senate chamber, it was clear he had already been showing signs of withdrawal (i.e. DTs, spasms, seizures, etc.) when the intravenous bourbon drip was pinched off, even for a brief moment.

Mercifully, his planned appearance was unnecessary and therefore canceled when it became apparent that enough RINOs (Snowe, Collins, Specter) were available to put it over the top.

Although they have already set up the procedural reporting and the 'quality of life' evaluation killing mechanism in the 'stimulus', in deference to Kennedy, the Obamanation fascists won't attempt the wholesale takeover of the health care industry until Kennedy's alcohol sodden brain stops producing telemetry.

The plan is that it be produced as The Obamanation's Kennedy Memorial Rationed Medical Care Act.

I hope all you senior citizens, rewarded as you are for all your years of loyal Democrat party support, will accept your role as economic 'stimulators' by not burdening society with any unnecessary medical expenses or undue, unproductive and less than quality years while doing your socially conscious duty by contributing ALL your lifetime savings under the 100% Death Tax to the Obamanation which will surely put it to a more socially just use than you ever would have.

And have a nice death...

Are You Kidding?
So, let me see if I have this right? We have an ADMITTED COKE HEAD, who refused to release his MEDICAL RECORDS, as PRESIDENT. And THAT'S not a problem. But we're gonna go after Michael Phelps because he took some hits off a bong? Anyone else see a problem, with that?

Reply to Grubby in CA.....

"contributing ALL your lifetime savings under the 100% Death Tax to the Obamanation which will surely put it to a more socially just use than you ever would have.

And have a nice death..."

lol....you crack me up......lol....(great post)

Happy Valentine's Day Ms. Parker.....

SO WHAT!
LOOK AT WHAT BARNEY FRANKS PUFFS ON?
AND HE'S A CONGRESSMAN??

Karen #49 on Drinking ages
Late in the conversation but, "The drinking age has been 21 in all states since 1987 and saves lives." from Karen #49. Um... why is it then that countries with lower drinking ages seem to have less problems. All the the 21 age drinking law did was to put drinking for people under the age of 21 under ground and create binge drinking for college students. Good job.

Sometimes a Smoke ...
Why is this hide-out liberal beltway elitist still writing for Townhall?

Parker, please come out of the closet!
What is it with this lady? This past year, she made it very clear that she CAN'T STAND Christians and thinks they should stay OUT of politics, that she abhors pro-life conservative women, and would rather lose to the Dems than elect a conservative woman like Sarah Palin.

So what does she decide is THE story to write about on February 13th, the week that the LARGEST spending bill in history is getting crammed down Americans' throats? She spends an entire column WHINING about poor Michael Phelps losing his Wheaties endorsement, and about the plight of the poor, oppressed potheads across our land!!!

I suppose some might come to her defense and argue that she is a libertarian, and as such, her views have a place on the right side of the political spectrum, but I was always under the apprehension, or was it a misapprehension, that libertarians believed STRONGLY in limited government. If so, why would this lady allow a nearly $1 trillion enlargement of big government to be superceded in the thought processes of her brain by the plight of potheads and other assorted druggies? Is that THE issue of the day?

I guess Ann Coulter was right when she complained about the time she sought the Libertarian nomination for Congress so she could run against her liberal Republican Congressman, but at their party convention, all the Libertarians cared about was her position on LEGALIZING DRUGS!!! Needless to say, she didn't receive their nomination. She left that place convinced the Libertarian Party is just a front for drug-legalization advocates.

So, now we know; Kathleen Parker must be a pothead.

Parker, please come out of the closet!
What is it with this lady? This past year, she made it very clear that she CAN'T STAND Christians and thinks they should stay OUT of politics, that she abhors pro-life conservative women, and would rather lose to the Dems than elect a conservative woman like Sarah Palin.

So what does she decide is THE story to write about on February 13th, the week that the LARGEST spending bill in history is getting crammed down Americans' throats? She spends an entire column WHINING about poor Michael Phelps losing his Wheaties endorsement, and about the plight of the poor, oppressed potheads across our land!!!

I suppose some might come to her defense and argue that she is a libertarian, and as such, her views have a place on the right side of the political spectrum, but I was always under the apprehension, or was it a misapprehension, that libertarians believed STRONGLY in limited government. If so, why would this lady allow a nearly $1 trillion enlargement of big government to be superceded in the thought processes of her brain by the plight of potheads and other assorted druggies? Is that THE issue of the day?

I guess Ann Coulter was right when she complained about the time she sought the Libertarian nomination for Congress so she could run against her liberal Republican Congressman, but at their party convention, all the Libertarians cared about was her position on LEGALIZING DRUGS!!! Needless to say, she didn't receive their nomination. She left that place convinced the Libertarian Party is just a front for drug-legalization advocates.

So, now we know; Kathleen Parker must be a pothead.

Kathleen Parker: old school conservative
Interesting how Kathleen Parker always manages to bring out the rage of you oogedy-boogedy, fake "conservatives."

Of course, she is one hundred percent correct that pot should be legal. Indian Hemp is a mildly inebriating roadside weed that, when cultivated, is an excellent source of rope fiber, fabric, and high-quality oils.

I would only go one step further and say that all drugs should be legalized. What you put into your own body is your own damned business. In a free society, the government has no business telling anyone what they can and cannot ingest, drink, or smoke in the privacy of their homes.

The only "regulations" on drugs, if you can call them that, would be prohibitions against purchases by minors, and prohibitions against impaired driving (or other activities that result in a public menace). Outside of those limitations, you should be able to buy hemp by the bale, and opium derivatives by the pound.

The Parker Problem
So Parker, you have dropped "Greg" in favor of "Paolo" now?

From what I read, I don't disagree with you ( I seldom finish any of your columns as it is just not worth the wait while the second page downloads)but I still think you are something that rhymes with ....

(no not rich!).







The Phelps Problem
Michael Phelps is in no way shape or form a role model for children especially after the stunt he's pulled. He has now stooped to the level of illegal activity to gain media coverage and attention from the sports world. The fact that he got 18 months probation for an alcohol-based offense proves this. Michael Phelps should be so very lucky that he's not facing real punishment for his actions. I guess it wasn't enough for him to have all those medals. Too bad. He is a problem and I wouldn't want my children to turn the cereal box around to see his face and say, "hey, that's the guy who smoked pot and I'm gonna be just like him, yuk yuk." I am glad Kellogg's cut his stupid a**!. He's not worth the money or the time. Go away Phelps, you greedy bast***!.

The Phelps Problem, continued
to add to the Phelps problem, Kathleen Parker, you're right in the sense that if you're going to punish the one, you should punish the other. Phelps should have received a punishment for the 2004 offense and sadly didn't because he's wealthy. Another problem with your article however is the fact that you stated he was allegedly in a photograph. He was in the photo graph, Ms. Parker. He also admitted to smoking the drug. Not an innocent person here. He has a record and the fact that he was allowed to compete in an arena for real, uninhibited athletes is appalling. He's not an athlete in the least. He may be something but he's not that.

Check Your Facts
Anyone who believes "countries with lower" or no minimum drinking age have fewer health and mortality problems is just plain misinformed . . .France has the highest rates of alcoholism and cirrohis of the liver rates . . .it's a myth that drinking was driven underground and somehow bingeing became necessary -- look at at stats when it was 18 -- there is a 3 year span of influence that 21 imoacts -- 18 year olds are more likely to hang out with 15 year olds than 21 year olds . . .
Underage drinkers drink to get drunk plain and simple . . .and it's not the forbidden fruit nonsense -- use before the age of 15 and you can develop an addiction in 5-15 weeks; use before 21 and it can develop in 5-15 months; typically the longer you delay first use the less the chances are you will become addicted . . .drinking, getting drunk isn't a rite of passage for children . . .again, this is about healthy choices . . .

Checking Results
"College presidents from about 100 of the best-known U.S. universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus."

From:
http://www.nysun.com/national/college-presidents-want-lower -drinking-age/84123/

If not 18, at least 19 when they are out of High School

What?
Kathleen, do you smoke dope? You seem to really make a valiant attempt at minimizing the use of reefer.Curious coming from a grown-up.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.