Brendan Ruberry backhand project SAM with cannabis facts

As many of you may have known, I have always been a strong advocate of lifting the ban altogether. Whether through legalization or simply repealing the entire CSA, the latter is the preferred option. I have had concerns with Project SAM for many years because of their anti-cannabis rhetoric, their lobbying in the White House to pass agendas that serve their own bottom line, all under the guise of “protecting America from BIG MARIJUANA”.

For the most part, I don’t fight SAM directly as I’m almost sure I’m not on their radar. Rather, I intend to make the ammunition available to my readers to crush the rhetoric of the ban, as the “concerns” outlined by SAM have, for the most part, not manifested as they predicted.

Nonetheless, SAM has an influence in Washington and has been involved in many of the drug policies that still exist today. Fortunately, SAM isn’t as popular these days as it used to be. SAM has lice of the forbidden kind in a society that is more and more interested in freedom of consumption.

While browsing the web recently, I came across an article by Brendan Ruberry that was published on CT Mirror. In this article, Ruberry gives Will Jones, who writes for Project SAM, the equivalent of a digital backhand.

Bring you up to date …

The article I linked above is one of the most recent posts between Ruberry and Jones. It’s almost like watching “price fighters” type their minds into an intellectual battle of the facts about cannabis legalization. Of course – we don’t know how much influence they actually have on their readers, but it’s a beautiful synopsis between two opposing viewpoints.

It’s not rocket science to see where I stand on this issue – in fact, I’m sure that many advocates of legalization would conclude that my position on drugs is a bit “too liberal”. This is because I believe the government has no right to regulate what goes in your mouth and body when you are one consenting adult.

This is my main argument for any drug legalization. The concept of “physical property” far outweighs the notion of “harm and risk,” which is essentially the core of the debate between Ruberry and Jones. If you argue about whether or not smoking certain weeds causes the X symptom, I just want to point out that we as a society do not have the need to regulate people’s eating habits.

We allow people to choose what to eat – even if it’s bad for them. If all you look for is sugar, you will find that it is at the center of many diseases as the main cause – and just as addicting as cocaine. However, we feel no reprisals when we sell it to overweight people in virtually everything they buy.

If Covid doesn’t call people to wake up calls about a healthy diet, one would think the government needs to step in and “make sure people are healthy”. After all – the estimated annual health care costs for obesity-related diseases are a staggering $ 190.2 billion, or nearly 21% of annual medical spending in the United States. [Source]

With obesity putting such a strain on the medical system, people should advocate the idea of ​​forced eating plans for obese people. After all – it is for YOUR SAFETY!

Do you see where I’m going with this? For some reason society has accepted that “drugs need to be regulated” without considering the fact that The individual is always the highest authority over his own body. Everything else means that you live under the “illusion of freedom” and not under freedom itself.

Far more important than any potential risk of drug use could ever be – by giving the government the power to regulate our consumption habits – we’ve essentially reversed every revolution and opted for a new form of slavery – medical tyranny .

Ruberry vs Jones – the bottom line

This fight is not over yet. I am sure Jones will respond to Ruberry and the commitment will continue. Inside the chaos there is actually a lot of good information such as understanding a prohibitionist mind and knowing exactly how full of shit they really are.

While I still maintain that the risks associated with a consumable is an irrelevant view compared to the idea of ​​whether we are “free” or have actually been re-enslaved by politics. It’s still refreshing to read how other people crack down on the animal known as SAM, whose banned tentacles are trying to gain more support in Washington.

Your position has lost public favor, but that doesn’t make it any less dangerous. Where Ruberry tried to stick to the facts – I can say without turning an eye, “Go and fuck yourself, SAM!”







Post a comment:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *