Free Keene

Comment by Anonymous

October 19, 2009 @ 10:48 am

Fags.

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 10:49 am

Hey numb nutts, The Police were just doing their job!!! doesn’t meen they agree with it the Law, it says the have to. In my opinion the Police acted very professionally. So if you don’t like it do what you have to do to try and change the law this is not the way of doing it.

Comment by Paul

October 19, 2009 @ 10:59 am

Immoral laws should not be enforced. “Just doing my job” has been the favored excuse for the perpetrators of all kinds of tyranny and abuse through history. It’s balloney. If is a job is immoral it should not be done.

Comment by Vitruvian

October 19, 2009 @ 11:12 am

The first two comments remind me of the courtroom scene in Idiocracy.

Comment by Vix

October 19, 2009 @ 11:14 am

Publics Eyes: They all have the ability to use discretion when it comes to up holding any law. They don’t have to do anything they don’t want to its all up to them.

Comment by xrazorwirex

October 19, 2009 @ 11:18 am

“, it says the have to.”

No, it doesn’t.

Quit making shit up.

Comment by institute_for_pig_studies

October 19, 2009 @ 11:23 am

Oh yeah, one more reason why the cops’ “just doing our job” line is utter BS, that I forgot to put in my last comment–There’s also a significant percentage of cops who participate in the drug trade either through direct corruption or protection or passive oversight. They can even do it so it seems like it is all official and honest too, like when they allow a drug trafficking network to develop with their informants inside, and only move to roll it up when there is enough forfeit-able property and profits to fatten police budgets and make them rich. If prohibition ended all these opportunities for police enrichment would stop. Think about it, have you ever seen a cop who lives in a studio and sleeps on a futon? Most cops support big blue collar families in suburban houses, but how do they do this on 40k a year I wonder? Hmmmm…

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 11:48 am

They are just following orders that are given to them down through the chain and it starts with the State Legislators, so YES the are just doing their job and doing what the are told to by there Supervisor’s. And to answer your statement XRAZORWIREZ and VIX New Hampshire RSA Chapter 318-B Controlled Drug Act Section 318-B:26 read it and understand it if possible with your mindset. Do I agree with the Law you might be wondering no I DO NOT. But I respect the Law. Believe me I would be the first one in line to get some if the legalized it.

Comment by loveroflaws

October 19, 2009 @ 12:02 pm

is anyone else concerned with the narrator’s exasperation while WALKING down the street? compromised lung function, anyone?
and paul, i think you mean bologna, not balloney… not a word.
another nice attempt at trying to make cops out to be nazis but you’ve got a hell of a long way to go. many of us don’t care for your second hand smoke or your ability to double risks of fatal accidents by smoking pot. you think your actions don’t have consequences to the rest of us but they do, and they are real (you guys just hear what you want to and disregard the rest- really intelligent). and when KPD has to hire 394850 more cops so they can have a 6:1 ratio just to carry ONE of your dumb asses to “cages”, everyone’s going to hate you that much more. go home and free your own state.

Comment by Vix

October 19, 2009 @ 12:09 pm

Publics Eyes: Read kneene\’s police carter its says discretion right in it.

AND here is a cop telling you u are wrong:
http://freekeene.com/2009/10/18/free-keene-fest-after-party-at-westmoreland-jail/#comment-84237

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 12:26 pm

VIX you are wrong again! RSA 266:18-f Assembly or Disassembly of Double Trailers. Last I knew that had nothing to do with marijuana or Drugs. It looks like to me you have smoked to much!!!

Comment by dalebert

October 19, 2009 @ 12:30 pm

LoverofLaws, Why do you respect a law that justifies horrible acts of violence against innocent people? It makes no sense to respect such a law. That is blind obedience, and it’s dangerous to any society trying to be civilized.

And I’m probably a tad out of shape, but as I said in the video, I was running late and rushing to get to the square on time and I had already walked quite a distance, almost at a jog. I slowed down a little to hold the camera steady. Good grief.

Comment by BigMike

October 19, 2009 @ 12:34 pm

I have now decided to end my quest for liberty in my lifetime and will be heading back to Detroit. This is too tough of a battle to wage and I’m giving up because I am a spineless coward.

I the good citizens of Keene who are worried about what my former Free-State friends are doing to your precious City of Keene to meet me bright and early tomorrow at the Keene Police Department and demand the resignation of every officer who has ever let a speeder off with a warning.

If those cops aren’t going to enforce the law we need to get some cops in Keene who are willing to do their jobs.

Discretion be damned. The law is the law.

Comment by profreedom

October 19, 2009 @ 12:38 pm

No matter what words are written on paper, no group of people has the right to tell me what I can and can’t put in my body as long as I don’t hurt anybody else. You can call this group of people government, but laws are still just words on paper.

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 12:47 pm

YO! PUBLICEYES! *THEY*, *THEIR* *THEY’RE* *THEY ARE*…once or twice is a typo, but when you keep making the same “mistakes” over & over & over, well, you really *ARE* a stupid, poorly educated motherfucker…also, uh, dude, what’s the difference between “to”, & “too”???…c’mon, my kids in middle school type more correctly!…you actually started post #84282 by spelling “they” *correctly*!…was *that* a mistake???…roflmao!…

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 1:46 pm

I admit my grammar or spelling is not the best but at least you can understand what I am saying and that I have a college Degree. But one thing that I have that blows all of you out of the water is common sense. So I and I am very worried about your kid I hoped that you folks wouldn’t reproduce. Hopefully your child does not share the same thoughts as you KING SHIT

Comment by r3VOLutionist777

October 19, 2009 @ 2:46 pm

Dear Friends of Liberty in NH

I just wanted to drop you line and let you know that I appreciate your struggle for freedom in NH and to let you know what we’re doing in our neck of the woods.

A couple of liberty activists in my home state of North Dakota planted hemp on the DEA’s front lawn!

Both are conservative Republicans.

Heh. Awesome.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iSJWKTKnGyJkJkOKzx0F-55Z05VQD9BANGN04

Comment by Paul

October 19, 2009 @ 3:14 pm

loveroflaws,

Baloney is slang: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/baloney

I don’t smoke pot.

Any idea how much alcohol, which is legal, affects driving accidents?! It’s driving recklessly, or crashing into someone that’s a real crime, not the very act of smoking or drinking something. If someone does harm another person while on a drug, then they have committed a real crime — go after them for that.

That would be you choosing to hire more goons to attack innocent people, not me.

I am a native of Keene.

That’s 0 for 5 — 0 for 6 if you count the Dale comment. Nice try though — even Ted Williams had slumps. Take a few more swings, maybe you’ll get a hit . Or, you could just let people make their own decisions about their lives and bodies .

Comment by Certified Genius

October 19, 2009 @ 3:16 pm

Great news everyone! 2+2 officially can equal 5!!! Also I am not a mammal! Oh I wish I was a platy-puss! But seriously people, 2+2=5, it’s called a synergistic affect. If you have a dodo bird and you add another dodo bird all you have is schizophrenia, because dodo birds are extinct! Peace y’all!

Comment by Dickface

October 19, 2009 @ 3:20 pm

That is so not true! Dodo birds are not extinct!

Comment by Anus Toad

October 19, 2009 @ 3:21 pm

I like to get high off of dem derr dodos, they be tasty!

Comment by Penis

October 19, 2009 @ 3:22 pm

We are teh sex!

Comment by Anon

October 19, 2009 @ 3:23 pm

YOu people are all bitchez and I will smexorz myself into oblivion.

Comment by xrazorwirex

October 19, 2009 @ 3:36 pm

Great, Pubic Eye’s horribly undereducated children got on his computer when he was gone and made a bunch of internet poop.

Either that or the local trolls have mentally degraded past the point of even bothering with their facade….

Comment by Tom Nealaus

October 19, 2009 @ 3:51 pm

FAG!

Art imitating life…no wait, I got that backwards

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 4:22 pm

xrazorwirex,

Well I don’t have any children. But I am a local Born and raised right here in Keene and proud of it!!! I am also sure that you wouldn’t be saying any of this if we were face to face.

Comment by Tumbleweed

October 19, 2009 @ 4:31 pm

No need for veiled threats, Publics Eyes, even jokingly.

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 4:32 pm

…the biggest problem with flaming *TROLLS* is their *NOMEX MINDS* as best as dei can, too…try new “college Degree” for women, it’s soft enough for a man, OAK HAY?…”largeblackdicks”???…Dude, how did you *FIND* that site, & why would you even *LOOK* for it???…let alone post it as your pseudo-link!…it was ok, until about the 4th one…try a different persona for each “name”…”I and I” is usually Jamaican, that is, *RASTAFARIAN*…actually, I’m not too sure you graduated *MIDDLE SCHOOL*!!!…try some rare sense…that common stuff don’t seem to work so well for you…

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 4:38 pm

…”…local Born…”???…I’m *LOCO BOURNE*…BWA HA HA ho hum.

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 4:40 pm

…i think public eyes has spent too much time @ largeblackdicks…

Comment by S

October 19, 2009 @ 4:51 pm

Comment by theKINGofKEENE
October 19, 2009 @ 4:40 pm
…i think public eyes has spent too much time @ largeblackdicks…

I think Brad (akaKINGofKEENE) has spent too much time smoking dope.

Comment by thinkliberty

October 19, 2009 @ 4:52 pm

Hey Public Eye, Both Police and mafia hitmen just do their job!!! It doesn’t mean they agree with the Law or a Mafia Don’s order to extort or beat up a person. In my opinion the Police acted very much in the same way as a Hitman.

I guess people could join the mafia and try to change the mafia by working in it’s system, but I don’t think they care about what is right and wrong. The mafia buys cops all the time, just like politicians.

So, YES the Police and mafia hitmen “are just doing their job and doing what the are told to by there Supervisor’s… understand it if possible with your mindset.”

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 4:52 pm

Sorry Tumbleweed your right. But I am not joking. I do wonder how long it will take for this group to realize that there not going get anywhere with their beliefs in this city.

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 19, 2009 @ 4:59 pm

Well that is an interesting theory . But with that statement hits close to home. I have never heard of anything like that in this City County or State so try finding a more realistic one.

Comment by Paul

October 19, 2009 @ 5:11 pm

I think the comparison is quite good in certain ways. Consider:

The mafia boss funds his organization by ordering everyone in his territory to pay the protection racket, or his hitmen will come and take their store away.

The politician funds his organization by ordering everyone in his territory to pay property taxes, or his policemen will come and take their home away.

Or, consider:

Al Capone funds his organization by controlling the sale of liquer in his territory. If anyone else sells liquer, his hitmen will intimidate them until they stop.

The politician funds his organization by controlling the sale of liquer in his territory. If anyone else sells liquer, his policemen will lock them in jail.

Or:

The mafia boss funds his organization by requiring all people to ask his permission, and pay him a fee, before he will let them start a business in his territory. If someone starts a business without his approval, his hitmen will intimidate them or extort money from them until they give up, or pay.

The poltician funds his organization by requiring all people to ask his permission, and buy a license, before he will let them start a business in his territory. If someone starts a business without his approval, his police will threaten to throw them in jail if they do not pay up.

Comment by Adolf

October 19, 2009 @ 6:21 pm

Publics Eyes, you really are a fucking putz. And yes, I’d say that to your face.

Are you even remotely familiar with history? See, there was this little military police action, oh wait, war, in Europe a few decades ago. People did horrible things to other human beings. They deprived them of their wealth. They deprived them of their pride. And unfortunately in many cases, they deprived those other human beings of their lives. These people I speak of were employed by the NAZI Gestapo. And they too were ‘just following orders’. A funny thing happend though. After the war, when certain former gestapo employees were tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity, they tried to use the line ‘but I was just following orders’ to excuse their reprehensible behavior. Guess what? It didn’t work so well for them. But I suppose if you were one of those responsible for trying those Gestapo employees, you’d have simply said ‘good enough for me, they were just following orders’, right?

Fuck you and everyone like you who continues to excuse the violent acts of armed thugs against peaceful people. History will record people like you as unenlightened, just as those who insisted the world was flat. Why not pull your head out of your ass all by yourself and be part of the solution instead of part of the problem?

Comment by Tumbleweed

October 19, 2009 @ 6:29 pm

I dunno, Publics Eyes. One of this group just about an hour and 20 minutes ago, from all indications because of their beliefs, took it upon himself to follow armed robbery suspects from a Pharmacy and to inform authorities about whatever details he noticed.

Comment by xrazorwirex

October 19, 2009 @ 6:55 pm

“Well I don’t have any children.”

That’s good; children shouldn’t have children.

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 7:18 pm

Comment by S

October 19, 2009 @ 4:51 pm

Comment by theKINGofKEENE
October 19, 2009 @ 4:40 pm
…i think public eyes has spent too much time @ largeblackdicks…

I think Brad (akaKINGofKEENE) has spent too much time smoking dope.
First of all, my name is not now, nor has it ever been, Brad. yes, there’s another person who posts on here under the name “Brad”. That’s *NOT* me, OK? Second, I haven’t spent too much time smoking “dope”. I have never smoked “dope” *AT ALL*. I *HAVE* used “dope” to coat the tissue to cover balsa-wood airplanes. Are we clear on all that? Good. So, what’s *your* excuse for all the time *YOU* waste on here? Me, I get paid $$$ to do this! BWA HA HA ho ho ho hummmmmm…….ppplbbt!…

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 19, 2009 @ 7:19 pm

Ct. reg….

Comment by S

October 19, 2009 @ 7:53 pm

THEKINGOFKEENE,

Sheer amusement. Hmm, my mistake. Your posts are amazingly similar to ones posted by Elkhart/Fart and previously Brad Hutchinson.

Comment by bil

October 19, 2009 @ 8:27 pm

Do you mean the constant CAPITALISATION of KEY words,and the CONFUSION caused by the *ASTERICS* instead of *QUOTATION8 *MARKS*??It does make for interesting reading,but the whole thing seems to have degenerated into garble.Free Keene,with every fill-up. —bil

Comment by END GAME

October 19, 2009 @ 9:26 pm

King….you get paid to write here?, S The brad you think used to run with communist activists in the 80’s

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 20, 2009 @ 8:51 am

UH, END GAME, you are seriously confusing me with somebody else…Sure, we have “outed” the occasional poster on here, when we felt it was warranted…A while back, some asshole posted pretending to be Fred Parsells, for example. *MANY* of us spoke/wrote up in Fred’s defense. Parody, satire, juvenile insults & stupid name-calling are one thing, even the occasional baseless vague accusation of some official wrong-doing, but outright deception(pretending to be somebody else, with bad intent, for example…), all that is not at all cool. As to the confusion, a while back, some punk-kid was selling *DRUGS* on the streets of Keene, & had a serious firearm in his car, to boot…When he got busted, the story hit the papers…His street name was “B-rad”, (Bradley Beastel, or something like that…), and a guy I know, Bradford, got confused by him in people’s minds…also, there was a father/son pair of DRUG DEALERS around a long time ago…They were both named “Brad”, again, not “Bradford”…As a closing example, over in Marlborough, there’s a “Karen Parsells”, who had a $100,000+ job / contract w/the school district…she was “let go”, but still gets her $100,000+ as specified in her school district contract. Of course, that’s not Fred Parsells’ wife, Karen, is it now!?…Sure, there’s another Karen Parsells around here, too!…must be, huh???…///…as for “run with communist activists in the ’80’s”,… you’re not referring to George Corrette / Mike Casner / Faire Gaily / Bernie Howard / Mary Jensen / Eric Aldrich / Alan Champney /, etc., are you???…I seem to remember they had a little “radical cell” thing going, run & bankrolled by Tim Robertson…but that’s ancient history, now, right?…I thought you were “*born here*”, dude!?!?!?…WTF?…yes, I get paid to write this stuff, but hey, I’m a professional writer. I’ve fabricated stories for the Keene Sentinel, too…of course, I’m retired from the FBI “COINTEL” PRGRAM now, so…GOD BLESS AMERICA, kiddies!…

Comment by theKINGofKEENE

October 20, 2009 @ 8:57 am

Also, I believe that Elkheart “adopted” *ELKFART* to honor anarchjesse’s verbal jousting skills…that’s how I’m recalling it from the archives, anyway…///…i only get $$$ up to a certain word / post count…beyond that, i’m giving it away…like now…

Comment by bil

October 20, 2009 @ 8:59 am

Certainly not from COINTELPRO-those guys were much better spellers,at least the one in N’awlins! —bil

Comment by matt

October 20, 2009 @ 10:29 am

I am all for reforming marijuana laws, and it’s great to stand up for what you believe in. But people come on. You guys are college kids, but the arguments you were vocalizing simplest crap everyone already knows. You guys should maybe did some research and told some statistics. To get people questioning the laws, you have to come up with some new arguments. Again, ones you were saying, everyone already knew. Come on you guys , you didn’t sound like educated college kids, just typical stoners who just want to get high every day.

Comment by ELKFART

October 20, 2009 @ 10:54 am

that’s right, Matt…stoners *DO* want to get high every day…I’d rather hang out with a stoner, than a drunk, or a druggie, or some college kid snorting his ritalin…they laugh more, and they are so much less annoying…these 420 protests would be so much quieter, if all the protesters would just get stoned *BEFOREHAND*!..P.S.:the freestaters/420crowd are *CONTROLLED OPPOSITION*…run by Fred “the FED” Parsells)…fuck you, too, Rivera, I retired, effective 11/03/09, what the fuck do i care? `I still get my full contract salary, +no, I don’t have to report this!10-4!

Comment by ELKFART

October 20, 2009 @ 11:02 am

…can’t wait to see how close the vote is, when *GERIATRIC DAYCARE* *OVER-RIDES* governor lynchmobs’ medical marijauna bill veto, now that Sen Shaheen has arm-twisted Eric Halder into the new DOJ policy, re: Fed action against states’/citizens’ RIGHT TO POSESS & USE DRIED FLOWERS!…(think about it, boys & girls…the *SIMPLEST* description of what “marijauna” *IS*, is “dried flowers from weeds”…why do you think it’s called *WEED*???…You can shoot a gun, you can shoot dope, but how the hell do you *SHOOT FLOWERS*???…

Comment by Mark

October 20, 2009 @ 12:18 pm

Publics Eyes: The protesters are doing it exactly right.

If we wait for a fair and honest response to our queries, we\’ll wait forever.

40 years of waiting is enough.

Unleash the Hounds of Protest!

Comment by Paul

October 20, 2009 @ 1:11 pm

Matt,

I don’t know which arguments you’re referring to, but there is a larger principle at work here. I would not try to convince someone to support cannabis decrim because of statistics showing it is not damaging to people’s health, for example, because the implication would be that if it were damaging to people’s heath, it should be illegal.

I reject the idea that the politicians own anyone else’s body, or have a right to dictate to them what they do with it — what they eat, drink, smoke, etc. Fundamentally, the enforcement of arbitrary victimless crimes is immoral and tyrannical. I think many are not willing to compromise that larger, more important point, in order to garner a little support on this particular issue.

Comment by matt

October 20, 2009 @ 4:43 pm

Paul
Do you know why drugs are illegal in the first place?

Comment by matt

October 20, 2009 @ 5:41 pm

Don’t get me wrong, the laws should be reformed. To make an impact on legalizing or decriminalizing it, you guys should start at the school and prove that if you do indeed smoke marijuana you can still achieve a good GPA. That’s a typical shot to marijuana. Is that kids do shitty in school, and it also lowers people’s motivation. And people see that first hand in high school. But prove this shit wrong, and you college students can do so. As to my comment before, what I mean is present the facts in a college level. I’m sorry, but the guy with the microphone is a dumbass. Why not put some thought into your arguments. It’s like getting arrested for internal possession of alcohol and claiming you drank mouthwash. Come on! We heard it, thousands of times, and guess what it hasn’t worked, nor will it ever. Don’t get me wrong guys, don’t think I’m bashing on you guys, and if I was you wouldn’t give a fuck, but the augments being argued are failing but so is the “war” on drugs. So this says let’s try something new, let’s bring new material to the table, things that people never knew before, or really haven’t heard often. The reality is that not one drug is illegal because it’s harmful, but because years ago they wanted the minorities out of the country, stress that. That raises major questions. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, alcohol and tobacco combined are responsible for about 520,000 deaths a year. In 2004 the death toll connected with illegal drug use (including overdoses, drug related homicide, suicide, motor vehicle accidents, HIV infections hepatitis, ect.) was only 17,000.

Comment by Paul

October 20, 2009 @ 5:48 pm

Why historically, or why philosophically? Historically there were and continue to be a number of factors, as there always are — as I understand it, for example, cotton growers were big behind the push to outlaw cannabis and hemp, as the crop was a major competitor.

It’s the same with many regulations — the government gets its sticky fingers into an issue, for usually completely false reasons, and won’t let go. For example, the only reason marriage licenses are required today is because states at one time wanted to prohibit interracial marriages.

The crux of the issue for me is the larger philosophical point, because it is behind a wide variety of government abuse, not just the drug war. People today are under the delusion that completely immoral behaviors magically become moral if a large enough mob supports it. That’s how we get a nation of people who would never dream of breaking into their neighbors house and stealing their TV, or mugging them on the street corner, to help subsidize, say, their corn farm — but have no problem hiring government goons to do the same exact thing for them.

Comment by Paul

October 20, 2009 @ 5:53 pm

Hey, I’ve got no problem with trying some new arguments. I guess, I’m just personally motivated by the fundamental moral issue at hand. You should come to the 420 event some time, make up some signs outlining your arguments (if they can be boiled down to sign-size), and get your message out! Heck bring a megaphone if you want — it’s still a sorta kinda free country in that way at least.

Comment by AnAmazedReader

October 20, 2009 @ 7:03 pm

Matt,

With due respect, I’d urge you not to fall for the shtick. This site is not about solving problems; it’s about losers who have developed a cast of villains to blame for their failures in life. All they’ve got is a self-assigned, delusional sense of moral superiority with which they hector local folks who disagree with their point of view. It’s their reason for being, and the aggression behind it would never be sated by engaging in the sort of study, open-mindedness and push for tangible accomplishment that most people consider a constructive response to a perceived injustice (that sort of thing is for “untermenschen”). Mindless protest is the point here, because somehow it makes these guys (and yes, this group is, by and large, post-adolescent guys) feel better about themselves. You will notice that the little dustup in Central Square over the past few weeks hasn’t actually resulted in any substantive, “documentable” progress on the actual issue. But a few of these folks got some attention, and just as when a mother finally responds to a child that’s acting out, that attention is an obsessively-desired, perverse stimulant. That’s what FreeKeeners are about; the actual issues are irrelevant.

Comment by Paul

October 20, 2009 @ 7:41 pm

Ann, if you were at all interested in study, open mindedness, or substantive discussion instead of smarmy and arrogant snap psychological judgments of strangers, you would have answered the questions posed in my comment here, which I have brought to your attention a number of times: http://freekeene.com/2009/08/14/courtroom-disobedience-frightens-fellow-slave/#comments.

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 21, 2009 @ 3:13 pm

ENDGAME

TO clear Fred Parsells, The old Principle Karen Parsells that you speak of would be Fred’s Parsells Brother Donald’s newly married wife. Now Fred does have a wife also named Karen just an FYI.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 3:20 pm

I just got one more question. How is smoking marijuana a moral issue? Morals are principles of right and wrong issues. You guys CANNOT argue that smoking anything, whether its tobacco or cannabis, is right. I know you guys haven’t said this but, I’m so sick of people who start smoking marijuana and think their “Hippies” and think the drugs all peace and love. First of all hippies are no longer, they don’t exist! Just wanna be’s and think it’s cool. GET A MIND OF YOUR OWN! As far as people thinking is all “peace” and filled with “love”… HA! Who do you think brings this stuff into the country? Gangs and drug cartels who are willing to kill anyone who gets in their way. I’m only directing these comments to people who are like this, start smoking and think there all about peace and love, I’m sorry that is bullshit.
This is a bit different but I recently went to UNH to visit and I noticed kids walking around with balloons full of nitrous. I was like what the fuck is that shit. These kids were like “Dude you see that Steve-o thing on MTV. That was so sick!” I’m saying to myself, you fucking moron, he produced that show to discourage people from doing using drugs, not to encourage drugs. I also know you guys do that up in Keene too. What I’m getting to kind of is that if marijuana was legal, would everyone who uses drugs be satisfied? And where will the legalization of drugs stop. On the video an old guy was holding a sign advocating all drugs. Is that what you guys are for? Or all drugs? If you guys are about all drugs, have you ever known a heroin addict and what they act like? Take that Steve-o show for an example; do you want society acting that way? What will this country get accomplished? I asked myself this question because I used to smoke every day, but no longer really touch the stuff, but I want to ask you Marijuana smokers this. If you had to get some delicate surgery, say heart surgery, where one slip of the scalpel could kill you. Would you want the doctor to be stoned? It doesn’t impair you……right? Think about it and comment back. Again I’m not bashing on you guys, but I thinks is appropriate to be rational and look at both sides. Don’t be bias just because you want to get high and don’t want to be bothered by the law. THINK RATIONALLY. And really think morally.
Matt (SORRY ITS SO LONG!)

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 3:29 pm

Smoking cannabis is not a moral issue — I myself don’t use pot at all. Throwing people in cages who do use it, however, is a moral issue. Threatening and using aggressive violence against your peaceful neighbors in order to force them to live in ways of which you approve is morally wrong.

Of course no one should be stoned while performing surgery, that’s just silly. I wouldn’t want a drunk doctor either, and alcohol’s legal.

The issue is not drug use itself. The issue is widespread violations of personal liberty on the part of the government, and the failure of government bureaucrats and enforcers to live up to basic rules for moral decency in their interactions with their neighbors.

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 21, 2009 @ 3:32 pm

ELKFART

Are you saying Fred Parsells is running this freestaters/420crowd ????

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 3:35 pm

Paul

The people who are getting thrown in jail arent the people just buying 20 bags. These people distrubute by the pound and often carry guns and wouldnt hesitate to kill. Look at mexico, hundrend are dying because of marijuana. These are the type of people who are getting locked up. Not you and I who would buy like a QP at most

Comment by Publics Eyes

October 21, 2009 @ 3:35 pm

MATT

Well put!!!

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

Are you guys just for marijuana or all drugs?

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 3:48 pm

Matt, the reason drugs are distributed by these sorts of people is the drug war itself. It is the same thing that happened during the prohibition on alcohol, when Al Capone took over the industry. If we were to legalize drugs, the funding would be ripped out from nearly every violent gang in the country, and international cartels overseas. These people could not compete with CVS, walgreens, or the legit American farmer — they survive only because these products are illegal. After all, where do you go for alcohol these days? I’m guessing not Mick on the corner.

What’s more, murder IS illegal, and should be. If they’re murderers, that’s what they should be locked up for.

It’s not about the substance, it’s about its legality. If you made orange juice illegal today, and started a “war on orange juice”, tomorrow it would also be supplied by gangs, violent criminals, or the mob.

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 3:58 pm

I believe the only legitimate crimes are aggressive acts of violence against another person or their property. If a person manages to use a drug without harming other people or their property, I absolutely would leave them alone.

The initiation of aggressive violence against a peaceful person is always immoral. That is, the only appropriate use of violence is defensive. I have all sorts of beliefs about right and healthy living, but I have no right to force them on you at the point of a gun.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 4:45 pm

So your saying you should be allowed to do any drug? Lets say i get addicted to heroin, is my health insurance comapny gonna pay for my rehab? Even if you legalize them, drug crmies will still exist. Hard drugs, legal, or illegal, they will still ruin people and they will still commit crimes to get the drug. The drug will consume their lives and they will end up still stealing for the drug. What about mothers who raise children, they should be allowed to be high?

Comment by Dr. Q

October 21, 2009 @ 4:55 pm

Matt wrote:
“Hard drugs, legal, or illegal, they will still ruin people and they will still commit crimes to get the drug.”

If that’s true, then what’s the point of making them illegal?

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 4:57 pm

You have to agree, out of all the things this country needs to do, this isnt very important.

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 4:58 pm

“Lets say i get addicted to heroin, is my health insurance comapny gonna pay for my rehab?”

I don’t know, that would be between you and your insurance company.

“Even if you legalize them, drug crmies will still exist. Hard drugs, legal, or illegal, they will still ruin people and they will still commit crimes to get the drug. The drug will consume their lives and they will end up still stealing for the drug.”

There would be far, far less crime. Most of these drugs would be extremely inexpensive in a free market environment, which would mean addicts would not have to come up with thousands of dollars to fund their habit. Again, consider alcohol, which, during prohibition, used to be associated with a huge number of crimes. I am sure a person exists somewhere today who robs in order to buy booze, but at a couple bucks a bottle for the cheap stuff, it’s certainly not common. And, as I say, it would cut off the flow of money to these cartels and gangs.

“What about mothers who raise children, they should be allowed to be high?”

It seems to me that it might be difficult for a mother to use hard drugs without being neglectful or abusive. Neglect and abuse should be prohibited — they represent an act to harm the baby, who would be the victim. If, somehow the mother could use a drug without being abusive or neglectful, that’s their business.

Also, if the mother is nursing, use of drugs itself would represent an act to harm the baby, as the baby would also be consuming the drug.

Just remember: When you are saying a behavior should be illegal, you are saying that violence should be used against people who do it. Ask yourself this: If you were a neighbor to the mother in question, what actions of hers do you think would justify you going over to her house with a gun and, say, taking her baby?

I would feel justified doing so only if her acts were directly inflicting harm on the baby, or if I truly felt that the baby were in eminent danger of serious harm.

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

Actually, Matt, given the degree violence caused by gangs and cartels, and the number of peaceful people thrown in jail for simple possession (almost a million now) — and of course the harm done to their kids and spouses which they leave behind, I would say it’s vitally important.

It is also important to establish that the government does not own our bodies. You may not use cannabis, and I don’t, but believe me, the creeping tyranny will continue. They’re already prohibiting people from allowing smoking in their own restaurants, banning trans-fats in some areas, huge penalty taxes on fast food in some places, and on alcohol most places, etc.

As Pastor Martin Niemöller once said regarding the tyranny in his time,

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

I must stand for the liberties of others, even if I don’t personally choose to exercise those liberties.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

Dr.
Good comment and good point. My point is that Paul said all drugs are legal it will fix all these problems but all the problems that come with being addict you can never solve. Why make illegal? These types of drugs you shouldn’t be able to go to the store and pick. Have you ever known a heroin addict? I bet if you did you would think otherwise. Although I will say in your favor that some country I forget which one made heroin legal and the amount of usage dropped 60%. That’s GINORMOUS figure. However, they made it illegal. However DR, when you have kids, do you want them to be able to go to the store and buy MDMA or heroin? You can say yes, but I bet when you have kids you will think otherwise.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 5:13 pm

“They’re already prohibiting people from allowing smoking in their own restaurants”
Second hand smoke is proven to be deadly. Dont get my wrong, i smoke cigs and i would love to toast one in those types of places. But honestly, is it fair to those who dont smoke, and have children. However banning smoking in bars, restaraunt owners reported a big drop in business

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 5:14 pm

I don’t think legalizing drugs will fix all problems — you are right that heroin, for example, is a horrible drug that destroys lives. I just don’t think it helps the situation to throw that person in jail. They should be getting help — like alcohol abusers do in AA. Sadly, many are too scared of prosecution to come out and ask for the help they need.

I wouldn’t have a problem with it being illegal to sell drugs to young kids — same as alcohol (although I think 21 is probably too old of a cutoff). Young kids are not yet capable of making fully informed decisions about their lives.

Comment by Dr. Q

October 21, 2009 @ 5:15 pm

No one is arguing that all the problems associated with drug abuse will disappear over night if drugs are legalized, but I do think that some of these problems are caused or exacerbated by the fact that drugs are illegal (for the reasons that others have already stated).

Do you really believe that locking drug users (including ones who haven’t committed other crimes that actually have victims) up in cells is going to solve anything?

And please stop conflating my support for the legalization of drugs for support for the use of drugs. I believe heroin should be legal, but I would never recommend heroin use to anyone.

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 5:16 pm

Matt, It should be up to the owners to decide whether they will allow smoking. If an owner decides to allow it, and you don’t like second hand smoke, you have a right to not patronize his restaurant. It’s their business, and their property, not yours or mine.

Comment by Dr. Q

October 21, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

Matt wrote:
“Second hand smoke is proven to be deadly. Dont get my wrong, i smoke cigs and i would love to toast one in those types of places. But honestly, is it fair to those who dont smoke, and have children.”

If people don’t want to inhale cigarette smoke when they go to restaurants/bars, then all they have to do is not patronize restaurants/bars that allow smoking. No government bans are necessary. It really is that easy.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

So its the prison systems fault.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 5:25 pm

Dr
I don’t know if I understand what you are saying. But if you were a restaurant owner, knowing that allowing the right to smoke helps business. However, on the other hand, morally you know it’s wrong, what would you choose?

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 5:32 pm

I don’t think it would be morally wrong to allow smoking, as long as you made it clear, perhaps with a sign on the door, that smoking is allowed. People who don’t mind smoke, or smoke themselves, could come, while those who don’t like smoke can stay away.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 5:45 pm

We’re getting of subject, but law regaurding smoking in public place was just recenty changed in 2004. They want be change in the near future. I dont think it will ever change back. Modern day society is all about health and fitness.

Comment by Paul

October 21, 2009 @ 5:47 pm

Heath and fitness is great, but it should be a personal choice. When I start showing up at your door at 5am with a gun, to force you to take your morning jog, the issue is not personal fitness, it is tyranny.

Comment by Dr. Q

October 21, 2009 @ 5:55 pm

If I owned a restaurant, I probably wouldn’t want people to smoke in it, because I can’t stand cigarette smoke.

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 7:50 pm

paul
i dont get what you trying to say about this “When I start showing up at your door at 5am with a gun, to force you to take your morning jog, the issue is not personal fitness, it is tyranny.” Whos pointing a gun at you regaurding marijuana?

Comment by joe

October 21, 2009 @ 9:18 pm

I am done, you guys in Keene good luck! Fight for what you think is right! But please put some research behind it and get some educated facts. Don’t advocate what everyone already knows. To legalize it you have start making citizens of all question the law. So put some thought into it and you will make a much bigger impact. The argument “Well Alcohol is legal, why isn’t marijuana” is old and not effective. Like I said before it’s like getting arrested for internal possession of alcohol and claiming you drank mouthwash. But if you get a lawyer to defend you they are going to bring facts and arguments that are educated to convince the jury. The jury in yours is well society. All of you guys should get together and put together a research paper. This will for one show marijuana smokers aren’t lazy, but motivated, and its shows you are committed in what you believe in. Don’t take the easy way, which is doing no work, get high, at argue “I want to get high because I can get drunk” You all are college kids, use your brains and put something that will get people questioning. Its either do the stoner way, which you guys are doing know (Don’t take it personal) or doing the proper way with facts and knowledge. GOOD LUCK!

Ps. don’t let that guy with the microphone have it again, better off leaving him in jail. You need smart people who give thoughtful argument and know actually know what their arguing about.

My personal opinion on the situation, decriminalize it, not legalize it.
-Matt

Comment by joe

October 21, 2009 @ 9:21 pm

Dr
Why should families not go to restaurants because others are a health concern? The point of going out to eat is to eat. Not smoke. It’s not hard to step outside quick

Comment by matt

October 21, 2009 @ 9:23 pm

Joe? Im fucking matt. I dont know why my comments are named Joe. Who the hell is he!

Comment by observer

October 22, 2009 @ 11:13 am

This is mainly directed at Ian and anyone else that harbors his position on this matter: While I think stoking it up should not be an issue at all and I generally dislike cops and what they stand for, I’ll say this: You people were warned not to come out that day. It is my understanding that you have been doing this every day for the past few months without incident. What does that tell you about the position the cops have taken on your protests? Sounds like an unspoken agreement on their part to not bother you guys even though the law tells them they should bother you. They told you that on pumpkin day that they were going to be cracking down so anyone that went that day was looking to get arrested for protesting. Fine, your choice. Like Mark on FTL said, don’t go copping an indignant attitude as if you’re surprised at the outcome when you knew in advanced of what you were doing. YOU were warned, and YOU choose to go anyway, ergo, YOU wanted to get arrested. I don’t think you should have been arrested but that is not how it went and don’t pretend that it was a surprise and that you’re the poor little victims. The fact that there is such an issue about what people choosing to do with their bodies at all shows how retarded society is. To those that see this as a moral issue: You’re an idiot and I hope eventually you figure out why.

Comment by anano

October 22, 2009 @ 3:45 pm

You need to get a permit for the right to assemble like that. If the plice try to break it up then its spells law suite all over it. But i mean pumkin fest has littls childern and families enjoying the season. Its one thing exposing them to the issue, but the action of doing the actual drug in fornt of them. Thats totally wrong!

Comment by observer

October 22, 2009 @ 3:52 pm

@Aano: I don’t know you so I can’t say if you’re being facetious but remember that part I said about people thinking it is a moral is a retard. How is it “wrong” to smoke weed in front of a kid compared to a cig? What difference is it to the kid? You trying to tell me joints are more destructive and addictive than cigs? If so, then crawl back to your government and ask them to save your child from the big bad pot heads not to mention YOU.

Comment by Paul

October 22, 2009 @ 5:36 pm

Matt, my comment was intended to address the cigarette issue, but the government certainly is pointing a gun at me regarding cannabis. They literally threaten to show up with guns and put me in a cage if I smoke, grow, or sell it.

Threatening violence against someone in order to force them to have what you consider a healthy lifestyle is absolutely tyrannical and immoral.

Comment by anano

October 23, 2009 @ 1:19 pm

well, reality is that ones legal, ones not.

Comment by matt

October 23, 2009 @ 1:25 pm

You have still neglected to answer my question. Should legalizing drugs be the country’s main priority? How about bring the troops home?

Comment by Paul

October 23, 2009 @ 1:33 pm

For my part, if I had to only choose one: cannabis legalization or bringing the troops home from the 130 odd countries they’re in around the world, I would choose the latter. Taxes are another issue I consider more important than cannabis — it actually really underlies both of those problems and many others, but that’s probably a bigger, more difficult fish to fry.

Comment by thinkliberty

October 23, 2009 @ 1:58 pm

Matt,

I think ending ALL violence should be the country’s main priority. That includes legalizing drugs and bringing the troops home.