BEARS AND WEED: NEW IMPORTS FROM CANADA?

Cracked Insight

Here is another freakishly bizarre occurrance has happened and everyone
most definitely needs to hear about. Apparently, there was an attempt to
smuggle 166 pounds of marijuana into the states last January.

That isn't where the bizarre part of the story comes into play though.

Along with his precious illegal cargo, Duane Christopher Bradley, the
perpetrator who is now serving a three-year sentence in prison, was
bringing two black bears into the states with him as well. These were not
just any black bears, folks. It just so turns out that they were ballooned
to over a hundred pounds higher than their normal weight because they had
been fed whole turkeys as meals.

Both bears, named Corky and Pumpkin, now reside in an animal sanctuary in
San Antonio, where they have been nursed back to a healthy body weight.
Their teeth and claws, which had been broken, have been treated as well.

What caught my attention about this story, however, was not how Bradley
claimed to be taking the bears to Hollywood for a movie or the fact that he
was trying to get marijuana into the country illegally.

What really drew me in was the fact that, despite his crimes, what got the
most attention in the press were the bears, not the criminal's wrongdoings
or ensuing trial. It almost seemed as if the fact that he was smuggling
drugs was considered a moot point in the story.

If the American media and the people of our country seem to care so little
about the entrance of marijuana into our country, why then, I must ask, is
it still illegal? I know the argument has been had over and over and must
seem tired by now to nearly everyone who hears it. But how can something
like that be ignored?

The substance's advocates make claims that the immediate effects of it are
less than that of alcohol and the harmful effects of its use are less than
that of tobacco. If these notions are true, then is it not a feasible
argument that the government continues to keep marijuana's use illegal for
the reason that it is profitable? I have no idea how many people are given
tickets and arrested each year for possession of marijuana or use of
marijuana but I will make up a scenario.

Let's say that there are 10,000 people arrested every year for possession
of marijuana - I'm sure the number is higher than that but we'll go with
it. If they are each given a ticket as low as $100, which I'm sure is an
understatement, $1,000,000 has already been raised. With that kind of
money, the government could employ at least nine more useless officials. In
fact, they are probably using the money to fund a position that is solely
responsible for enforcing anti-marijuana laws in the United States.

Now, I'm not saying that smoking weed is a good thing and that everyone
should go out and start doing it immediately. I don't smoke pot and don't
plan on starting.

Nevertheless, isn't it interesting that cigarettes continue to remain legal
in this situation? I wonder if that has anything to do with tobacco having
a gigantic tax rate on it?

I couldn't believe the government would allow something like that to keep
being used just because it was profitable. Could any of you?

This has to be put down as one of those all-or-nothing situations that I
mentioned in the Roy Horn column. Either marijuana should be as legal as
alcohol and tobacco, or we should ban all three together and thrust
ourselves into a new age of prohibition.That's just the way I see things.