Freedom vs. Oppression – Judge Jim Gray vs. Dick Ackerman. Topic: Prop 19

Jim tells drug warriors: please extract craniums...
Dick parrots: "just say no."

On September 11th, the Orange County Lincoln Club will be hosting a debate on the initiatives that are on the November ballot, including Prop 19, the “legalize marijuana” initiative. The debate host is Clare Venegas.

The debate is open to Lincoln Club members who are in good standing, whatever that means. The event will feature a pro/con speaker for each side. On the Prop 19 pro side is probably the most knowledgeable man in the United States when it comes to drug policy – retired Judge Jim Gray. Judge Gray recently wrote a book titled Why our drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It.

On the con (pun intended) side is Mr. Dick Ackerman who’s wife recently ran for the  state assembly in the 72nd district while claiming she lived in a rented room at a friend’s house even though everyone knew she (and Dick) were living in a “top secret” gated community in Irvine. Carpetbaggin’ and lying to the public is just fine; smoking a joint is the devil’s work.

At the end of the debate, the club’s Legislative Committee will present their recommendations and any general member in good standing will be able to cast a vote on the Club’s position for each initiative on our ballot.

The Lincoln Club’s commitment to acting on shared principles of limiting government and expanding economic and personal freedoms is a breath of fresh air, if you can really believe it. Personal freedom means adults being able to do what they want so long as they aren’t bothering anybody. That means having a beer or taking a hit of some of California’s Gold. Or both.

Let’s hope the voting members who have committed to such principles don’t get cold feet on such a hot topic when it comes time to vote.

16 Replies to “Freedom vs. Oppression – Judge Jim Gray vs. Dick Ackerman. Topic: Prop 19”

  1. This is such an ill-advised issue to advocate. I am astonished at the blase naivety.

    May I invite my non-Lincoln Club member acquaintances who have suffered incomprehensible greivous destruction of their lives, children’s lives, families, as the “benefits” of this “not-dangerous” marijuana drug, so they can perhaps punch former Judge Jim Gray in the mouth and shove his teeth down his stupid throat (in his uniform – what’s that all about – was he a Navy judge)?

    1. Rain, you are not only a fool, I suspect you are a very old one. How many teeth do you have left, or do you only make violent comments anonymously?

      1. Joe, rain is the same guy who wants to outlaw tattoo parlors. And probably everything else that doesn’t fit his own narrow ethos. Would have made an excellent little gauleiter.

    2. Rain, hate to break it to you buddy but those of us who have suffered the ill affects of drugs on our families have done so during a “War on Drugs” that has now gone on for over 25 years.

      I know it is very hard to separate the issues but try to consider that Judge gray does not argue that drugs are good for peple, rather, the method of trying to enforce criminal sanctions against users has not produced results worth the cost. Alcohol is legal yet there is a thriving business for AAA and rehab clinics.

      Marital infidelity has destroyed countless lives, ruined falilies, left children scarred for life, etc. aTragic as the results often can be, we do not make it illegal in society even though it is morally wrong and can have serious consequences.

      Criminal statutes and police do not have the answer to the drug problem. It’s time to move our resources elsewhere.

    1. Thanks for asking this question which evidently needs to be examined for those who cannot differentiate between “legal alcohol” and “illegal drugs” (especially such “benign” varieties as some here advocate).

      The difference between the substances under discussion here and every other substance which can be injested is intoxication. Alcohol and illegal drugs are controlled because they can intoxicate and thus render an individual incapable of making normal decisions, reactions, etc. to dangerous conditions or situation.

      Alcoholic beverages have a wide range of uses and degrees which are beneficial (even medically beneficial) in a social-cultural context for all of human history. But, if used to excess alcohol can also render one intoxicated (and dangerous to himself or to others). Consequently, alcohol is “controlled” by society, i.e. restricted to adults (who are in fact legally responsible for their actions) and monitored by police regarding inappropriate use (e.g. driving a car) or by employers (e.g. operating dangerous equipment, etc.).

      Alcohol has a wide range and a long continuum of possible uses or degrees of use BEFORE one enters the arena of intoxication. Most people use alcohol without becoming intoxicated, and if they ever do become intoxicated in such normal uses, they may well be embarassed, and perhaps even rejected (immediately or in future) from the social setting in which they misused the alcohol.

      Conversely, with illegal drugs, their entire purpose is for the user to become intoxicated. The “quality” of the drugs is thus based on how quickly or thoroughly the drug intoxicates the user.

      An intoxicated person is the definition of impaired as to his judgment and his ability to control his own actions.

      Alcohol can in fact produce intoxication and so it is restricted controlled so that only adults can purchase (or manufacture) and use it. It is recognized that it can be misused and thus make one intoxicated and so minors are restricted entirely and adults are made aware of penalties for its misuse.

      Appropriate use of alcohol is generally harmless and beneficial over a wide range of possibilities and therefor it is legal but controlled to limit the dangers of misuse and any use by children.

      Illegal drugs have no use except to intoxicate, which is not beneficial to society in general and is in fact quite dangerous to the user and those impacted by him.

      In developing a rule or a law it is oftentimes easy to see or identify a “bright line” distinction between the good and the bad, and that is where society or cultures generally set their laws.

      The bright line with respect to alcohol and illegal drugs is the matter of intoxication. Drugs have no purpose except to intoxicate, so society (which among adults is ever mindful and protective of the incompetents, the non-adults, et al) makes intoxicating drugs illegal and controlled by police.

      Pretending that society cannot or should not establish and enforce rules and laws is the manner of children or incompetents, and such attitudes by adults makes society unsafe for children, and thus such societies disappear.

      1. Rain, marijuana is also prescribed by doctors for medical reasons. The issue is not “intoxication,” the issue is incapacity.

  2. Will the judge, taking the pro 19 side, address how the implementation of prop 19 will not violate the 5th amendment of the US Constitution?

    Since prop 19 will not make marijuana legal, because it does not change federal drug laws. The filing out of a California state marijuana tax form, would be the same as a signed confession. A clear problem to the validity of the prop 19 as it would violate peoples rights under the 5th amendment.

    Now I hope that the tossing of prop 19 by the courts, doesn’t remove the pop-head tax also.

    I am voting for prop 19 so the pot-heads can a lot more in taxes.

  3. Lincoln Club is inviting those in “good standing”? Oh Geez…What a bunch of snobs probably drinking wine on grapes they just stomped on!

    Dick Ackerman: Go away…Why does this guy have to hang around in politics?

    This is what happens when folks like Ackerman who claims to be “retired”, but have too much free time on their hands…perhaps he should be a WalMart greeter or work in a soup kitchen. Then, Dicky boy can get a feel of what life is like outside of his little colony world in Irvine!

  4. The Ackermans sure do take a lot of money from the ‘ol liquor biz. This is from last year alone:

    $1,500.00 CALIF. ASSOC. OF WINEGRAPE GROWERS STATE PAC
    $2,500.00 CALIF. BEER & BEVERAGE DISTRIBUTORS COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
    $3,000.00 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS OF AMERICA, INC.
    $5,600.00 WINE INSTITUTE FUND

    1. The dining hall filled up with celebrities, and the room quickly grew hot. Several senators came, along with a half-dozen assembly members and scores of illustrious folks from the state’s vineyards. Senator Dick Ackerman, R-Fullerton, arrived early in the night and began drinking enthusiastically at the Sierra Foothills tasting table. I asked if he was driving home. He didn’t laugh, just vibed me with a hard stare. I left him to his booze.
      http://www.bohemian.com/bohemian/08.16.06/food-0633.html

  5. RINO Dick is sticking its head back into Fullerton politics. I wonder how long until he makes another mess…

  6. The LC is so in bed with the GOP that the founders have to be spinning in their grave. The clubs vote on this is a joke.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.