War on Ashcroft

I read today that Asscroft and his bunch were happy to announce their latest maneuver on the war on drugs by clamping down on drug paraphenalia…pipes,clips,bongs, etc sold in shops or via www. What next ZigZag & Tops?
How much more of this fuckin trashin can we put up with?
The waste of tax dollars, ruination of people’s lives by the forfeiture laws and incarceration of thousands of heads, and busting an authorized grower just makes my blood boil.
What is it going to take to get this monstrosity stopped in it’s tracks? NORML and other groups want to take the non-violent approach , but the feds and locals want to take the violent approach - I guess it’ll be titfortat somewhere down the road and i’ll gladly be there on the front line if I can just figure out where the line is.
fuckingoddamn federal assholes - They’re the ruination of this whole country.

Mr. Ashcroft is seeking to enforce the law. Why is your ire directed at him, rather then the Congress that wrote the law, and the President that signed it?

I realize the last line of your post is a much more indescriminate condemnation - but the title of the post seems like misdirected rage.

Avoiding the debate over right or wrong in the “Drug War”, logically, if drugs are illegal, then those materials manufactured for the sole purpose of taking drugs should not be readily available. These shops provide a tacit societal sanction to drug usage.

Driving it “underground” may or may not help reduce drug use, but it is hypocritical to have the free and open sale of paraphenalia designed specifically for an illegal activity.

Hmmm… Drugs are bad, m’kay?

What a waste of money. Does Ashcroft really think ridding the world of pipes and bongs is going to affect drug usage? I mean, come on…A teenager with a pocketknife can make a pipe out of a beer can in under 10 seconds.

The coolest bong I’ve ever seen was made out of a Sippy Cup.

UncleBill:

then why not ban guns?

Because the use of guns can, is some instances, be legal?

You can smoke tobacco with a pipe, no?

Ah, but when tobacco is illegal…

Guns have one intention, to kill people. If the act of likking them is leagal or not, thats for the coursts to decide.

You can use a pipe for legal activities, like smoking tobacco. When smoking tobacco is illegal, then go after the pipes.

jjimm, I told you to stop hanging out with Michael Bloomberg, man. That guy is bad news.

Marijuana doesn’t get people high, people get people high.

Also for “sport” (not illegal) and “self-defense” (not illegal in some jurisdictions). Not that I’m pro-gun, but that’s the argument.

Nah. Guns can be used for hunting (to kill animals).

I don’t see why a handgun could be used for hunting, but its a fair point. No need to hijack this further.

Hunting

with

handguns

I don’t hunt. I know a guy that hunts with a Thompson Contender. That’s a very accurate long-barreled single shot pistol available in many different calibers. However, nobody hunts with a 10 shot semi-automatic, for example. Not legally anyway, I don’t think.

I agree that federal resources could be better allocated than to crush head shops.

Yeah, guns are legal. But so are some of the uses for bongs and such.

Let’s be consistent, okay?

You can use shotguns etc. as pipes for dope. Ala Platoon.

Stupid law IMO. Lazy lawmaking. It will solve nothing but it’s a easy call and makes some people think that they live in a safer world.

Homemade bongs are preferable any way and more fun.

About 10 years ago, when I was news editor for my college paper, we ran a photo on the front page of a bong that had been constructed entirely out of glassware pilfered from the chemistry department. Campus security had found it in a student’s dorm room and had confiscated it. The thing was a work of art.

Because I may need my gun to protect myself and my family when a drug addict breaks into my home after getting high, or to get money to buy drugs.

Yes, you can also water your lawn with a bong, or wear it as a hat, but that is not its intended purpose. If ALL killing by firearm were illegal, and ALL threats of killing by firearm were illegal, and ALL pistols were illegal, I would support the prosecution of stores and websites that sold pistol holsters, and pistol grips, and pistol-related gear, even if the NRA was saying that a holster could be used as a place to hold a cellphone. I may also leave the country, or campaign to have the law changed, but if Law Enforcement went about enforcing the law, I would bitch about the law, not the enforcement of it.

I disagree. It’s a question of resource allocation. The people who enforce our laws make choices every day regarding how to allocate resources to enforce laws. If I’m the police chief in a city, I need to give my officers direction as to which types of violations to crack down on. If my city has a particular problem with, say, traffic backups on Main Street, I might direct my officers to pay more attention to people who double-park and cause traffic problems. More traffic-related citations will be issued and hopefully traffic becomes less of a problem.

To continue this hypothetical example, if I instead decide to crack down on teenage drinking and allocate resources to that problem, I still have a traffic problem that pisses people off. And anyone who lives in my jurisdiction would be right to criticize how I’m allocating resources.

Check out this link. It’s a Washington Post story about the issue in the OP. And look at the final paragraph - this sums up my feelings on the issue pretty well. If there’s no evidence that cracking down on drug paraphernalia reduces illegal drug use, then why allocate resources to it? We’ve got bigger fish to fry.

That’s why I think Ashcroft is an ass. (Well, at least that’s ONE of the reasons.) He gets to choose which enforcement issues take center stage. The drug paraphernalia issue is not a critical one, IMHO. So Ashcroft should quit trying to appeal to parents who are terrified that their kids might be smoking pot, and he should get rid of wasteful efforts like this to free up more money for REAL problems like, say, terrorism.

That’s the point. Ashcroft’s making laws not Congress. A bat is considered a concealed weapon unless their is a baseball with it. Carry a pouch of tobacco. No worries.
Ashcroft is not upholding the law,he’s circumventing it.