What's new
  • Please note members who been with us for more than 10 years have been upgraded to "Veteran" status and will receive exclusive benefits. If you wish to find out more about this or support IcMag and get same benefits, check this thread here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Penn remarks on presidents hypocrisy on drug use

Wow...how over simplistic does it get.Conspiracies fit when you need them to I suppose.Quick,somebody tell Lil' Wayne, the rapper, not the ICMAG poet...
 

HempKat

Just A Simple Old Dirt Farmer
Veteran
I think a lot of blacks getting busted for drugs has to do with them dealing them on the street. Easy busts for the cops if they are out on the sidewalk selling to whoever. I see them doing busts on them all the time on the cop shows.

I seldom see whites doing this kind of dealing on tv but have no experience with street dealers in real life, even when I bought illegal. Friend of a friend of a dealer kind of thing.

Well the real disparity isn't the number of blacks arrested vs the whites but rather then amount of time blacks get vs whites for virtually the same offense.
 

ShroomDr

CartoonHead
Veteran
Wow...how over simplistic does it get.Conspiracies fit when you need them to I suppose.Quick,somebody tell Lil' Wayne, the rapper, not the ICMAG poet...

what the hell does this even mean?

What is over simplistic? More stops of young black males than total black males?

If youre going to make a statement about simplicity and conspiracy, feel free to enlighten us to your thoughts...

Hell the 'over simplicity' is hassling them all to catch a few.

"Shoot em all and let god sort it out" -Marge Simpson.
 
L

longearedfriend

laws are laws
if you break them, white black or brown, you have to face the consequences

I understand that sometimes white get off with a lighter sentence but... no one should be getting a harder sentence for the same crime... this is up to you to get a good lawyer...

if you don't like the laws, then work to change them

if you don't want to be arrested with drugs, then don't be around them or be careful and take precautions when you are around them... especially if you know that police are doing racial profiling..

all i'm hearing is whining and victimization

if you got a solution to the problem, then bring it to the table
 

stc9357

Member
laws are laws
if you break them, white black or brown, you have to face the consequences

I understand that sometimes white get off with a lighter sentence but... no one should be getting a harder sentence for the same crime... this is up to you to get a good lawyer...

if you don't like the laws, then work to change them

if you don't want to be arrested with drugs, then don't be around them or be careful and take precautions when you are around them... especially if you know that police are doing racial profiling..

all i'm hearing is whining and victimization

if you got a solution to the problem, then bring it to the table

Spoken from someone who has never had a DWB, WWB, RWB- Driving While Black, Walking While Black, or a Riding While Black all are serious offenses and can get you put in prison for a long time.
 
L

longearedfriend

I don't understand how you can go to prison (for a long time too) for just being black.

I can see how an officer or two, could make up a story about the guy resisting arrest or attacking.. or planting shit on the guy but I don't think this happens on the daily. Also there are cameras now in the dash of cop cars... and eventually things come to light, one cannot continue to be doing bad shit and not get caught up in your actions I believe.

All this racist stuff, I do not approve. I don't judge people on the color of their skin.

And I don't think it's fair to blame a whole system for a few people.
Do you people want to bring it down ? I believe some white folks in power are concerned about the threat to the system.

For sure I see a lot of wrongs, for whites and for darker skinned people but I believe everyone is doing the best they know to be doing. And that the universe has a way of working out things and that we have power, that we are not victims.

I did not want to minimize these incidents but rather hear some more positive, constructive ideas (if there are any) to adress this problem. (Do humans need to intervene anyway ?)
 
Last edited:

Anti

Sorcerer's Apprentice
Veteran
laws are laws
if you break them, white black or brown, you have to face the consequences

I understand that sometimes white get off with a lighter sentence but... no one should be getting a harder sentence for the same crime... this is up to you to get a good lawyer...

Spoken from someone who has never had a DWB, WWB, RWB- Driving While Black, Walking While Black, or a Riding While Black all are serious offenses and can get you put in prison for a long time.

I don't understand how you can go to prison (for a long time too) for just being black.

OK. Let's examine it.

Here's an example:

Chad and Tyrone go to the same high school. They both happened to bring a little weed because they were going to meet up with some friends after school.

After school, Chad and Tyrone both decide to walk to the park to meet up with their friends.

They are not walking together. They just happen to be going to the same place with similar intent. (To smoke a jay at the park after school.)

A police officer sees Chad, but ignores him, since Chad looks like any other white kid. He's safe. He belongs. He passes by without incident.

The police officer then notices Tyrone. Tyrone looks any other black kid, which makes him suspicious. He's potentially dangerous. He might be up to something. Better check.

Tyrone gets stopped and frisked, even though he didn't do anything Chad didn't do. Tyrone gets a ticket (or worse) for possession and has to appear in court, maybe hire a lawyer, pay a fine, court costs, etc.

Plus, now Tyrone has a record. Which will make him even MORE of a target. Even more likely to be frisked in the future. To have his car torn apart, etc.


Chad did all the same things but wasn't caught because they weren't looking to fuck with people who look like Chad. They fucked with Tyrone (and found something) only because they were looking to fuck with people like Tyrone.

Even if Tyrone didn't have anything incriminating on him, he would still be subjected to this sort of treatment because it is not based on any evidence of a crime or of criminal intent, but solely based on racial profiling. So a search occurs without justification which encourages him to "know his place" or to find somewhere else to go.

And that's how people go to jail for being the wrong color.
 

stc9357

Member
OK. Let's examine it.

Here's an example:

Chad and Tyrone go to the same high school. They both happened to bring a little weed because they were going to meet up with some friends after school.

After school, Chad and Tyrone both decide to walk to the park to meet up with their friends.

They are not walking together. They just happen to be going to the same place with similar intent. (To smoke a jay at the park after school.)

A police officer sees Chad, but ignores him, since Chad looks like any other white kid. He's safe. He belongs. He passes by without incident.

The police officer then notices Tyrone. Tyrone looks any other black kid, which makes him suspicious. He's potentially dangerous. He might be up to something. Better check.

Tyrone gets stopped and frisked, even though he didn't do anything Chad didn't do. Tyrone gets a ticket (or worse) for possession and has to appear in court, maybe hire a lawyer, pay a fine, court costs, etc.

Plus, now Tyrone has a record. Which will make him even MORE of a target. Even more likely to be frisked in the future. To have his car torn apart, etc.


Chad did all the same things but wasn't caught because they weren't looking to fuck with people who look like Chad. They fucked with Tyrone (and found something) only because they were looking to fuck with people like Tyrone.

Even if Tyrone didn't have anything incriminating on him, he would still be subjected to this sort of treatment because it is not based on any evidence of a crime or of criminal intent, but solely based on racial profiling. So a search occurs without justification which encourages him to "know his place" or to find somewhere else to go.

And that's how people go to jail for being the wrong color.

:thank you:
 

yesum

Well-known member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
They also go after Blacks to check for stuff because they get more 'stuff' per check. Not just hating them, a numbers game.
 
L

longearedfriend

Yeah I understand, thank you for writing that anti

I understood that this happened and happens

at what rate though ? that's what picks my curiosity

I really understand how fucked up that can be

anti : what is there to do about this ?

in my mind, the only thing that seems logical is for colored people to stand proud, and do their best, to fight against the stereotypes

I guess colored folks should be more careful... I know this does not solve the problem... and I don't feel at peace saying that

I imagine there is hate that is brought against white folks because of this too

it is not a subject which we can show evidence of can we ?

I know for sure that this happens but is there not a higher crime rate amongst minorities ?

I know that of course, being in lower class neighbourhoods, having less chances in life plays in

and I know the racial profiling ties into this too..


complicated thing huh
 

Danks2005

Active member
I don't think any of this racial stuff is the point, or how police handled drug offenses in the 70's.

The point is, the statutory laws were on the books. Regardless of the probability, the possibility was there in regards to statatory law, and Obama could have been arrested had he been caught. Had Obama received a felony record he probably would not be where he is today. This very thing regularly happens to citizens today. Felony equals no financial aid for school and difficulty in finding a decent paying job. Obama oversees as this is happening to people for the very thing he has done, albeit unscathed. This = hypocrasy.
 

HempKat

Just A Simple Old Dirt Farmer
Veteran
I don't think any of this racial stuff is the point, or how police handled drug offenses in the 70's.

The point is, the statutory laws were on the books. Regardless of the probability, the possibility was there in regards to statatory law, and Obama could have been arrested had he been caught. Had Obama received a felony record he probably would not be where he is today. This very thing regularly happens to citizens today. Felony equals no financial aid for school and difficulty in finding a decent paying job. Obama oversees as this is happening to people for the very thing he has done, albeit unscathed. This = hypocrasy.

I don't see how it's hypocracy Obama faced the same risk as everyone else. As has been pointed out IF he had been caught, he would have fallen victim to the same penaties as everyone else, perhaps even worse then many if you accept that blacks historically recieve more severe sentences than non blacks.

Now had he been caught and he had someone shielded him from the law and punishment because he felt the laws were unjust, and he then became President and did nothing to change the law. Perhaps you could call it hypocracy at that point. The only thing to save him was that he was careful enough not to get caught. He didn't have any special protection that protected him from getting busted. For it to really be hypocracy he would have had to feel the laws were wrong but had an ace up his sleeve that protected him. Under those conditions, if he did nothing lter as President then the hypocracy charge would be fair.

As far as we know though he only did it briefly and then decided it was wrong to use recreationally and likely decided to give it up because he understood the risk it represented to his future and decided to stop so he wouldn't risk getting busted.
 

HempKat

Just A Simple Old Dirt Farmer
Veteran
no that would have been cronyism.
one does not have to engage in cronyism to be a hypocrite.

I'm saying the hypocracy would be in if he felt it was wrong to be illegal but continued to do it knowing he would be shielded and then later when he had a chance he did nothing. As near as I can tell though he tried it and ultimately decided it's use was counter productive to his goals and stopped. Never have I heard him say that recreational use being illegal is unjust. Even in medical use he didn't say it was unjust only that to use federal resources instead of letting the state manage it was an unwise use of Federal resources.

As for Cronyism

Distionary.com describes Cronyism as:

the practice of favoring one's close friends, especially in political appointments.

I don't think Cronyism applies to what I was suggesting. I was thinking more like if he was from a wealthy family that could buy him out of trouble which would not be Cronyism. Cronyism would be more like if he appointed Holder as the Attorney General because they were old friends and in spite of the fact he wasn't qualified, but that wasn't the case.
 

Danks2005

Active member
Having other arrested and punished for the very same law you were willing to break makes you a hypocrite. Doesn't matter that he wasn't caught and it doesn't matter that he was taking the same chances as everyone else.
 

HempKat

Just A Simple Old Dirt Farmer
Veteran
Having other arrested and punished for the very same law you were willing to break makes you a hypocrite. Doesn't matter that he wasn't caught and it doesn't matter that he was taking the same chances as everyone else.

The only way that would make him a hypocrit would be if he instituted the laws. Nothing about his prior actions suggests he felt the laws were unjust. I mean all he did was try some drugs when he was a kid and then some 30+ years later he left the laws that have been in place his whole life, the way they were.

Had he created the laws then yes he would be a hypocrit but he didn't so he's not. Had he been a raging life long stoner who preached against prohibition and then upon becoming President he did nothing then he would be a hypocrit. He didn't though so he is not.

Just because someone decides to break a law out of curiousity once or twice does not mean he is automatically obligated to overthrow such laws should he ever obtain the power to do so. Beside this ignores a very basic fact that no President has the authority to just come into office and make sweeping changes to long standing laws or any laws for that matter, all by himself. It would be totally stupid and ignorant to waste the political capital on something that has almost no chance of being passed in Congress when there are so many much more critical issues that need to be dealt with. To us ending prohibition seems like the most important thing but it is not. Personally I'd much rather see a President address issues that help keep the system the way it is by doing things like instituting term limits for every Federally elected representative and doing away with the electoral college. Make those things happen and maybe, just maybe we might actually have representatives that serve the will of the people who elect them. Maybe at that point changing the laws might not be so difficult? Clearly this is not the case these days since a majority of Americans favor legalization and yet marijuana is still illegal.
 

Snoopster

Active member
Veteran
He absolutely is a hypocrite.
He acts like it wasn't a big deal, and has no plans to change the way we deal with drugs.

He could remove marijuana from schedule one if he wanted to, but has no plans to do so. That would make his bosses mad.

He said the feds would not go after dispensaries. The pharmaceutical people that gave him all those millions told him he can't say that. So he sent out another memo saying every one is subject to raids.

That is hypocritical.

His cavalier attitude about his own drug use is hypocritical. It is like saying it was fine, no big deal, but don't you do it, or you will be subject to arrest. He has the power, allegedly, to affect change. He has no plans to do so.

It is hypocritical and was an asshole move.
"I got away with it, ha ha."
 

Snoopster

Active member
Veteran
“I can’t nullify congressional law. I can’t ask the Justice Department to say, ‘Ignore completely a federal law that’s on the books.’ What I can say is, ‘Use your prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to go after things that are really doing folks damage.
-B.O.

“Attorney General Eric Holder was a guest of The Huffington Post at the correspondents’ dinner. Before it began, a HuffPost reporter noted to Holder that Obama’s reference to “congressional law” was misleading because the executive branch could simply remove marijuana from its “schedule one” designation, thereby recognizing its medical use. ”That’s right,” Holder said.
 
Top