Comments on: Legalization: My Anti-Drug

By: viagra

viagra — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:31:49 +0000

viagra ViaT8898111-01-01-22

By: loan kredit

loan kredit — Sun, 22 Jan 2006 04:21:17 +0000

Think about loans?

By: wether

wether — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:27:21 +0000

Good site! Very nice. Do you know wether tomorrow?

By: Jon H

Jon H — Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:13:50 +0000

“My anti-drug is having a hot, rich, Hollywood actress for a wife.”

By: Jefferson

Jefferson — Sat, 01 Nov 2003 03:06:04 +0000

Um, Roach, I think it’s that most people plan on raising their kids themselves, instead of relying on silly PSA’s to do it.

It’s a “role of government” issue.

By: Ventura

Ventura — Sat, 01 Nov 2003 01:39:32 +0000

Someone called roach is against drugs?

By: Brian Hawkins

Brian Hawkins — Fri, 31 Oct 2003 19:24:32 +0000

I went to the ONDCP’s site and submitted “Beer” as my anti-drug.

Funny, it hasn’t made the list yet.

By: roach

roach — Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:49:08 +0000

But the anti-drug campaign is part of a two-prong strategy. Some of you disagree with the enforcement side (or the supply side). But now you’re ridiculing the demand side efforts as well (I guess they’re just “uncool” and if you’re too ironic they’re just silly).

I always thought the argument of anti-drug war folks is that we should focus on demand side stuff with treatment, propaganada, and health care. But now you’re ridiculing that too. So what gives? (I.e., are you anti-drug-war or are you also pro-drugs?)

Just say NO!

By: Kronos

Kronos — Fri, 31 Oct 2003 13:49:10 +0000

I like this one
http://www.allposters.com/GetPoster.asp?CID=2C6075CB867149DFAC0B0DEBCB1DE90C&APNum=371323&search=1016&f=c&FindID=1016&P=3&PP=243&sortby=P&cname=Humor

By: Swamp Justice

Swamp Justice — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:56:58 +0000

If you’re talking about Rush, then sure. And wouldn’t the country be better off with fewer alcoholics and cigarette smokers? Let’s jail them, too.

I think drugs are a private health care issue, not a criminal act. If the government sends a drug addict to jail, they are STILL a drug addict. The country would still have the same number of drug addicts!

If the government’s TRUE GOAL was to reduce the number of drug addicts, then they could stop spending the MILLIONS on military aid to dictatorships (like the Taliban) and instead spend the money on health care.

So what is the government true goal then? Power.

By: roach

roach — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 19:01:22 +0000

With or without harsh sentencing, isn’t the country better off with fewer drug addicts.

By: Swamp Justice

Swamp Justice — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:48:58 +0000

roach, mandatory minimum sentences are part of the Drug War, not some inherent result of using drugs. Just as Rush Limbaugh.

By: kinsean

kinsean — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:10:11 +0000

he may be cool, but his wife is an anti-american douche bag. see her comments here... http://famousidiot.com/index.php?celebrity_id=105

By: zoltan

zoltan — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:46:49 +0000

You americans are funny
I thought you were the “land of the free”
what a funny joke that is!

By: roach

roach — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:55:05 +0000

But of all the things we do in the “drug war,” aren’t efforts on the demand side the most sensible? I mean wouldn’t you rather people not get caught up in drugs at all than get addicted and then potentially have to go to jail forever b/c of mandatory minimums.