Cheech's partner Chong gets 9 months for selling bongs

I might be wrong, but if it is illegal to sell these items, why are there dozens of head shops in Houston alone?

These things can be used for non-illegal activities...isnt that why they advertise them as for "tobacco use only"

Its seems to me that Asscroft is going WAY out of his way to nail people that sell freaking pipes...for what purpose? Does this serve the public good ?

Big corporations pollute our air and water everyday, but Asscroft has busted Tommy Chong for making glass pipes!

So with this same logic, Asscroft should be arresting the owners of all the GUN makers..since their product isnt illegal in and of itself, but it could be used for illegal activities...

 

Stupid laws are stupid laws. Just because the government says it's wrong doesn't mean it is.

What I do with my body in the privacy of my home is none of the government's business.

I realize this issue has been played in these forums, but I just wanted to interject my thoughts here. Carry on!

 

Bloody hell. This is just stupid and a waste of money.

Chong was pretty stupid to get involved in the business, but the whole thing is a waste of time and taxpayer dollars. Any chump could make one... why waste our tax dollars on sending Chong and his bongs to jail?

 

I just re-read the story. It doesn't mention Ashcroft anywhere. It's got nothing to do with him. You should go after the Judge or the DEA.

 

I see what you're saying, but the DEA is a division of the Department of Justice, which falls under Ashcroft's jurisdiction.

 

Federal authorities indicted 55 people and raided more than 100 homes and businesses including the residence of actor Tommy Chong - for allegedly selling glass pipes commonly associated with mar1juana smoking, the US Department of Justice announced on Monday.

The indictments and subsequent raids resulted from a pair of ongoing federal investigations dubbed "Operation Pipe Dreams" and "Operation Headhunter" targeting online sellers of glass tobacco pipes, which federal law enforcement officials allege are "primarily intended or designed to be used in ingesting, inhaling or otherwise using controlled substances." Storefronts in California, Pennsylvania, Iowa and other states that sold pipes and similar merchandise were also raided. Members of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), US Secret Service, US Marshals Service, US Customs Service, and the US Postal Inspection Service all participated in the federal investigation.

--
gee, isnt Asscroft in charge of the DEA, US Marshals, Customs, etc etc ?

 

that's where you're wrong, mister clutch

those of us who follow the news daily know that this was a juggernaut by Ashwipe, and this story has been out a long time, except the sentencing.


John Assmunch - making America safe one bong at a time




what next? outlaw coke cans?

 

Fine, let's say Ashcroft personally ordered this, which I doubt. Is he not just following the law as it is on the books?

 

that is what i would like to know

what exactly IS the law concerning this?

Should it even be a federal concern?

like i said, there are dozens of head shops in houston, hundreds across the state!

 

Absolutely. Nobody here is faulting him for enforcing the law. That's his job. What concerns most of us is that he is funneling tens of millions of dollars (and literally hundreds of federal agents) to track down glass pipes, which is akin to cracking down on wine glasses.

On Feb. 24, when 55 arrests were made, more than 1,200 federal, state and local officials were involved, according to the DEA. Among them were "easily hundreds" of U.S. agents.

Now, these 55 people face trial, 3-year prison terms and, later, probation and parole -- all of which taxpayers will have to pay for.

Is this *really* an efficient use of our resources?

 

You know there are a lot of laws on the books that are never enforced.

Unless maybe the agenda has changed.

Ashcroft sets the tone for enforcement.

 

A couple of years ago, when Ashcrap was early in the job, he started this project. Its purpose was to attack INTERNET sales of bongs. You have to remember that Assmaster wouldn't recognize a head shop if he drove past one. There are probably many head shops within 10 miles of his D.C. office, but he never sees them.


This is all about meeting the expectations of the rightwing base, a little window dressing to show that the WAR ON DRUGS is ongoing. Make an example of Tommy Chong and get media coverage.

Now, for Major's comments: John Azzcrunch is the head of the Justice Dept, and it was on his watch that the worst terror attack in history was committed, largely because an army of neo-cons was busy fighting bongs, abortion, stem cell research, and p*rnography. If he had been as worried about tracking down terrorists as he was the topless statue in his building, we might not have had a 9/11. Law enforcement has resources, and when it uses them unwisely, it is appropriate to say so.


Major, exactly what good is this attack on internet bong sellers?


This reminds me of a saying from about 30 years ago in Texas:

If anyone offers you a joint, shoot them. You'll get less time.

 

Well FF, all that pretty much applies to Clinton as well. If he hadn't been busy fighting the drug war, maybe he could have caught Osama bin Laden. I am sure he had his own programs similar to Ashcrofts.

 

yeah, I'm sure Clinton was after bong sellers on the internet


who said anything about catching Osama? Clinton caught and prosecuted those who committed terror acts here. the job is to protect the US, and Clinton did that.

 

Osama was behind the attack on the USS Cole and possibly behind the early 90's WTC bombing. Maybe if Clinton wasn't enforcing the drug laws on the books those things wouldn't have happened.

 

you know, now that i think about it the zig zag guy looks alot like Osama bin laden! its a conspiracy. pot heads are unknowingly funding the taliban. we must stop the terrorists who make zig zag papers.

 

Or maybe if those drug laws weren't on the books in the first place, those resources could have been redirected to finding people who do harm to other people (terrorist or not).

Seriously, the question we are asking here is not "are these the laws that are on the books," but "should these laws be on the books."

You always seem to jump in waving the "laws that are on the books" like that justifies that the law SHOULD be there in the first place. Do you think slavery should have been a law on the books, or Jim Crow laws, or red scare witch hunts? We are asking whether this action is justified, not whether Ashcroft was enforcing a law.

 

Actually, my point got off track. I was criticizing you guys for bashing Ashcroft when he was just doing his job, just like Clinton did. You guys should be criticizing the laws, NOT Ashcroft.

I am not defending the laws here. And you guys are not asking whether the laws should be justified, you guys are saying that Ashcroft is somehow doing something wrong.

 

Anytime you hear me make an argument about prohibition, you can be darned sure that I am criticising the law in question.