Tarja Halonen: Judge, Judy, and executioner?
When Bill Clinton pardoned people on his way out of the Oval Office, the nation went into a frenzy, as they should. When Finnish President Tarja Hanlonen pardons dozens of people each year, no one blinks an eye…
Over the past two years, President Halonen has granted pardons to a number of shoplifters and drunken drivers or to people whose unpaid fines have been converted into imprisonment. Typically, a pardon is not the same as the overruling of a fixed-term prison sentence, but it means that a prison sentence can be passed as conditional.
[...]In the majority of pardon cases, Halonen reached the same conclusion as the Supreme Court had done. The President cannot grant a pardon to a prisoner without a statement from the Supreme Court. The Ministry of Justice requests statements from the Supreme Court, while the President is entitled to an independent decision on the matter and is not forced to observe the recommendations made by the Supreme Court.
Incidentally, President Halonen has granted parole to some people who have been convicted of crimes pertaining to the refusal to perform military service or unarmed military service, even though the Supreme Court has given a negative statement on the issue. Only one in five parolees who had refused to perform military service had received a favourable opinion from the Supreme Court.
Moreover, two female murder convicts and one woman found guilty of attempted murder were granted parole by Halonen against the recommendation by the Supreme Court.
[...]The President does not give reasons for her pardon decisions, which are mainly confidential information.
Wow! Well fuck the judicial system and fuck democracy. Should judges and juries be making these important decisions?! Isn’t this all the qualities of a…dictator!?
Well, no one guilty of a victimless crime should ever be locked up. In that sense she’s doing ethically the right thing in pardoning them. About the murder convicts I do not know.
Comment by Liber Al — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
“Victimless crime?” Care to give a few examples please?
Comment by Punter — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
Dictatorship indeed. This is one of the remnants of Kekkoslovakia. It might be worth noting that Tarjah has been tougher on crime than her predecessors, being less inclined to pardon those serving life sentences.
Victimless crimes…now let’s see, who exactly is the victim of a drug deal - on any level?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
Punter, refusing military service is not something I would see to harm anyone directly.
Comment by Juho Salo — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:28 pm
And how does this differ from the State Governors in the USA? They sign or don’t to save the electricity bill don’t they?
Now if Tarja was allowed to send someone into jail…
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
Hank, you evil nationalist, you. How dare you make comparisons to the US? On a blog about politics and current events in Finland & the US no less.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:53 pm
#4: That’s a bit more complex issue. Much like with tax evasion, society might be seen as the victim. To those invoking the libertarian “I didn’t sign no steenkin’ social contract” argument I say that they are free to revoke their citizenship.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
Uh Phil, dig up some dirt about connections between the pardonees and the Prez, and maybe someone will blink an eye.
Comment by maissi — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
It’s good to be king.
Comment by Winter sucks — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
This is a privilege in the constitution written for the leader fo the nation. So not a dictatorship. If this was agreed upon and allowable by law I see no problem. The leaders just have to deal with the results if these freed criminals go out and do it again. Clinton’s pardoning was questionable because he was releasing friends and people that were still under investigation for other crimes pertaining to him but all Presidents do it Scooter Libby sentence was communicated by Bush and barely any one batted a eye.
Comment by Kourtney Williams — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
Well, no one guilty of a victimless crime should ever be locked up. In that sense she’s doing ethically the right thing in pardoning them.
Yeah good point, it seems like some of those pardons should be applauded. Drug offenses are good examples.
But if she’s only pardoning like 200 a year, what is the deciding factors in her pardons? Why pardon some murderers but not others.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
Uh Phil, dig up some dirt about connections between the pardonees and the Prez, and maybe someone will blink an eye.
Yeah, exactly. Shouldn’t the press be looking into each and every pardon and reporting on it?
Comment by Phil — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 2:31 pm
“Victimless crime?†Care to give a few examples please?
Use and sale of illegal drugs, inside information crimes, cartels, refusing military service, refusing to pay a fine, tax evasion, etc. Anything where the “victim” is the state.
“Victimless crimes…now let’s see, who exactly is the victim of a drug deal - on any level?”
No one. Except the state with its drug monopoly.
Comment by Liber Al — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
Anybody recall those pardoned by Reagan and Pa Bush?
Short memories, I see.
Walking the mean streets of Helsinki, the
only thinking I worry about is a drunk talking
my ear off.
I live in a democracy, where the cops leave me alone.
Whereas back in California, it was a crime to walk
home from a bar, according to the local authorities.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in Finland.
As long as this gray sleet can split town some day. . .
Comment by Ari Sawyer — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 3:35 pm
To those invoking the libertarian “I didn’t sign no steenkin’ social contract†argument I say that they are free to revoke their citizenship.
Freedom is a natural right. You don’t lose it by being born. Nor can it be implicitly exchanged for citizenship. A government that declares ownership to what you produce violates one of the most important principles of natural human rights.
Finland is not a free country.
Comment by Liber Al — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 3:38 pm
“Punter, refusing military service is not something I would see to harm anyone directly.”
- But the state offers alternatives to serving in the military. Only the real F-ups who are determined to go to jail end up there because they refuse to do anything.
Failing to pay taxes and fines do harm the people as a whole, not the Government. This is especially true in Finland with it’s publicly funded social welfare. If there is no penalty for not paying, then nobody will pay and there will be no money to pay. Or are you saying that those people who get the 300,000 Euro speeding tickets shouldn’t get any more punishment/or jail time if they refuse to pay? It sure sounded like you did. Right, their crime was victimless as well.
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
#13. So the victims of insider trading and cartels are not other investors and consumers? Think again.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 4:02 pm
Financial crimes indeed have victims everytime. From the investors to the public through missed taxation collection.
Drug dealing/transactions? Victimless? Won’t even grace that with an answer.
Skipping on military duty and refusing public duty/service. I think of the society and others in the military forced to pick up the additional workload. Not that I agree with National Service as a concept but indeed as long as it is in then yes there are victims when others refuse it.
Still failing to see a victimless crime.
Comment by Punter — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 4:20 pm
@15 Well said, Liber Al, well said:
“A government that declares ownership to what you produce violates one of the most important principles of natural human rights.”
Comment by Sirkus — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 4:30 pm
“Skipping on military duty and refusing public duty/service. I think of the society and others in the military forced to pick up the additional workload.”
Workload? It’s not like were in a war and the conscripts are actually doing something useful (unlike those in civilian service, or whateveritscalled). Besides, I think things would actually run more smoothly if the objectors were allowed to stay home.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 4:43 pm
But if she’s only pardoning like 200 a year
Considering theres 3800 prisoners in Finland, its what… 5%
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
“Workload? It’s not like were in a war and the conscripts are actually doing something useful”
- Ha! Good luck winning a war with a 1-day old army!
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 5:14 pm
There’s going to be a war? Sheesh, I’m getting out. You Fred have convinced me that this country is not worth dying for.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 5:30 pm
Drug dealing/transactions? Victimless? Won’t even grace that with an answer.
Voluntary seller, voluntary buyer. That’s as honest and fair as trade can get.
Comment by Liber Al — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
“Voluntary seller, voluntary buyer.”
- And whay about the people the buyers steal from?
- And what about the state aid wasted to treat addicts?
- And what about the cost from AIDS and other diseases spead through drug use?
- And what of the cost to jail these people when caught?
Just for starters.
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 5:52 pm
As you are all serious and stuff, I feel a need bring down the IQ…It’s a lovely picture of dear TarJa inadvertently showing her true self.*giggling* A little glimpse of Mrs Hyde…
Comment by MiniMe — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
Fred said: “- And what of the cost to jail these people when caught?”
Now that is a classic catch-22, if I ever saw one!
The so-called war on drugs and zero tolerance have done little to abate the problem of drug use. On the contrary, drug prices (and profits) are high because of it. Not to even mention the cost of drug-related crime, and the spread of HIV. A drug free world is a utopia, it’s never, ever going to happen. All we can do is minimize the damage.
Comment by aet75 — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
Freedom is a natural right. You don’t lose it by being born. Nor can it be implicitly exchanged for citizenship.
But you can exchange it if you choose to. Or your parents can do it for you when they are your guardians -> every Finnish citizen alive today became one this way.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 6:51 pm
^Or one of these two ways.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 6:58 pm
Dear Aet75,
Come on, legalization is not going to make the price of drugs in Finland any cheaper. The Government will tax the hell out of it, just like everything else. At least it will be more expensive in Finland than everywhere else so you will just change the type of crimes these people do, such as going on pot rallies to Estonia or wherever. Or if not tax than importing too much. Just saying to legalize it sold one problem but creates a dozon others.
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 7:15 pm
The legalization issue aside, prosecuting drug users/small time peddlers is ridiculous. It doesn’t accomplish anything, just creates more problems.
Comment by aet75 — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 7:31 pm
“Whereas back in California, it was a crime to walk home from a bar, according to the local authorities.”
Oh, bollocks. What you mean is that it was a crime to crawl home, vomiting on the sidewalk along the way as you might in Finland. Yes, public intoxication to the point of being unable to ambulate is a problem in most of the lower 48 states.
Comment by hfb — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 9:22 pm
Fred Fry: “- And whay about the people the buyers steal from?”
Good reason to give drugs away free. Here’s how Switzerland does it. The documentary is a bit old though (1997?). The program has been expanded since that time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-00kU4a4sc
Fred Fry: “- And what about the cost from AIDS and other diseases spead through drug use?”
As you’ve just seen, that’s why needle exchange programs are so important.
—
I think prison costs about 35K/year/inmate these days. Supporting an addict on the outside costs a few thousand, but it can be financed via charity organizations—e.g. Holland does it with protestant churches.
I’ve never heard of a charity prisons though. Only the kind that Fred pays for with his taxes. But I’m sure he would donate some extra if it were possible
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
Oh, and just as an aside… Having a few heroin addicts roaming around in conspicuous public places (as opposed to hanging out in ghettos and ’skid rows’ like in the US) serves a useful purpose:
It teaches children from a young age what they DON’T want to be when they grow up. That’s particularly relevant, when we consider the widespread use of OxyContin as a steppingstone to heroin, all throughout high schools in the United States. Kids only see the fun side until it’s too late.
Dutch, Swiss and German schools don’t have that problem—quite the contrary, in fact.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 11:10 pm
Fred:
“- And whay about the people the buyers steal from?”
People steal to buy all sorts of things. Instead of criminalising all these things, it has been found more practical to criminalise theft.
“Come on, legalization is not going to make the price of drugs in Finland any cheaper. The Government will tax the hell out of it, just like everything else.”
Ha! Good point. The state will even use the “child porn” filtering lists to protect citizens from the websites of foreign head/coffee shop websites as they are now proposing to do with online poker. I wonder when German car dealerships follow. It’s for the children!
“- And what of the cost to jail these people when caught?”
…and the first circular logic award of 2008 goes to Fred Fry for succesfully justifying any arbitrary law.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Jan 30th, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
“now let’s see, who exactly is the victim of a drug deal ”
yea, just ask my druged up neighbors and the drugs their kids now use. Yea, they did not get out of High School, they were to drugged up. Now one kid gets fired from every job she tries, the other almost killed a old lady (He tested positive for drugs) when driving, and is in jail for a year. Old lady is ok, just had 3 painfull operations.
No victim there. I must be smoking somthing to think there is something wrong with that. We should like, have a Nanny state give away free drug program comming next.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 3:28 am
ask my druged up neighbors
Do you live in a ghetto somewhere?
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 6:12 am
winter:
“Yea, they did not get out of High School, they were to drugged up.”
Is it possible to be too stoned to pass American high school and still be conscious? It is high school, for crying out loud!
Good to know that much like the French, you’re not vaywing the white flag on drugs. That war is just about to be won, just like Iraq.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 7:47 am
“Who’s the victim in a drug deal?”
Dad buys cocaine with family food money. He goes home and beats up Mom in a drugged up rage. Kids are terrified and hungry. He leaves and steals some electrics equipment from the neighbor so he can sell it on street to get money to support his habit.
Now Franky, can you identify any victims yet? or should I keep going.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 9:30 am
I was #39.
Saying there is no victims in a drug deal is just plain looney.
I can understand if you think the punishment should be different, but no victims?!! You’d have to be nuts to think that.
Comment by maakslaatikko — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 9:33 am
“Dad buys cocaine with family food money. He goes home and beats up Mom in a drugged up rage.”
I believe that assault and battery are crimes in most countries, certainly in Finland and all states of the US. And so is neglect of children. Why not punish for those crimes and leave those drug users, even addicts, who don’t beat up anyone and either don’t have children or don’t neglect the ones they have alone?
Regarding cocaine, the addict in Kristian’s YouTube flick mentioned that since she started in the program, she had quit the drug altogether in addition to reducing her heroin intake. Such things don’t matter in holy wars, I guess.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 9:42 am
“I can understand if you think the punishment should be different, but no victims?!”
Funny how all these free-marketers turn into welfare-statist zombies the second you mention currently illegal drugs.
I’d say it’s a pretty funny crime that also incriminates the supposed victim.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 9:47 am
Saying there is no victims in a drug deal is just plain looney.
Well, if the stuff is not what the seller promised, that, of course, is fraud. But how can a buyer who voluntarily pays for the merchandise, and ends up getting exactly what they wanted possibly be considered a victim?
This discussion is getting ridiculous. What kind of twisted “logic” does your mind operate on? Have you even attempted to think about these concepts, or are you just posting silly comments to see how people respond?
Comment by Liber Al — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 10:27 am
No problem in pardoning some minor offenses like refusing military service or smoking weed/growing weed for yourself.
Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, people guilty of brutal beatings etc. on the other hand should be locked up for good. It is ridiculous that here in Finland, we have people, who have committed several homicides, on the loose.
Politicians, get your act together!
Comment by Pekka — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 12:48 pm
“He goes home and beats up Mom in a drugged up rage.”
Sure, it’s been studied and proven. Apparently people on drugs go into rages all the time LOL!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1jB7RBGVGk
By the way, I’m glad we all support banning alcohol.
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 1:47 pm
So who’s the victim in privately growing a small supply of personal use only herb?
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
So it’s turned into a drug policy debate again! Well here we go:
#25:
- And whay about the people the buyers steal from?
People steal to buy all kinds of things - legal and illegal. Besides, it’s the logic of prohibition - the inflated prices on the illegal market - that drives people to steal in the first place.
- And what about the state aid wasted to treat addicts?
Treating them is much cheaper than not treating them.
- And what about the cost from AIDS and other diseases spead through drug use?
That applies to injected drugs, and with a harm reduction, rather than a prohibitionist approach, the problem can be controlled more easily. The timely establishment of needle exchange programs in Finland managed to nip that problem in the bud. Most HIV cases in Finland come from sex, not drugs (or rock and roll for that matter).
- And what of the cost to jail these people when caught?
Sounds like another argument for legalization.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
As for the actual topic of this thread, Phil once again acts as if he has stumbled on a dark dirty secret, noting that “no one bats an eye” when President Tarja Halonen grants pardons to convicts.
News Flash! ALL FINNISH PRESIDENTS DO IT!
“Well fuck the judicial system and fuck democracy. Should judges and juries be making these important decisions?! Isn’t this all the qualities of a…dictator!?”
No, it’s a check and a balance, in which the executive branch of government has been given a certain amount of leeway to second-guess a decision of the judicial branch.
Most countries in the free world have it, and so does the United States - on the federal and state levels. It is perhaps used less frequently in some places than in others: in Finland it seems to be more integrated into the justice system as some kind of an appeal of last resort.
Executive clemency decisions sometimes spark debate, and I suppose there are those who oppose the system. However, to suggest that exercising her powers (one of the few real discretionary powers that the Finnish President still has) to allow the early release of a convict makes her a dictator is ludicrous. If the President had the right to imprison innocent people - now, that would by tyrannical.
People who are opposed to the allowing the President the right to grant amnesty are free to start a political movement to promote the idea, and if enough elected members of Parliament agree, then that right can be abolished. The fact that this does not happen, indicates that there is no significant political pressure in that respect.
Of course if it really bothers him so much, Phil could try to start up a movement about this if he likes. By the way, how is the campaign to abolish maternity packages shaping up?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 3:58 pm
Does anyone know just one druggie who is not stealing, driving a car when all drugged up, etc? Just one? As the druggies I see in southern Maryland are up to their necks in ripping off everyone, including their own family.
Then again, I am smoking something to think these folks are contributing to society.
The again, I don’t want them to stay drugged up just so liberals can have a base to keep voting them into office.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 5:53 pm
Winter wrote: “yea, just ask my druged up neighbors and the drugs their kids now use. Yea, they did not get out of High School, they were to drugged up. Now one kid gets fired from every job she tries, the other almost killed a old lady (He tested positive for drugs) when driving, and is in jail for a year. Old lady is ok, just had 3 painfull operations.”
To me, all that is plain evidence that the current approach is not working.
Anonymous: “Dad buys cocaine etc etc…”
Was anyone else reminded of those 1950s marijuana fiend films?
Comment by aet75 — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 6:26 pm
Actually, I was reminded of Fleetwood Mac
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
“Does anyone know just one druggie who is not stealing, driving a car when all drugged up, etc?”
Come on winnie, are you seriously claiming your not on drugs when you post here? At least infinndel is more candid.
Kimmo W.:
“As for the actual topic of this thread, Phil once again acts as if he has stumbled on a dark dirty secret”
I still don’t know if Phil is for real or if he’s ROFLHAOing every time he posts these striking revelations…could just be that he has a thing for Tarjah. Who was that Swedish-Finnish psychofem she was obsessed about a couple of years ago?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Jan 31st, 2008 @ 8:52 pm
#49 “Does anyone know just one druggie who is not stealing, driving a car when all drugged up, etc? Just one?”
Depends on your definition. If a “drugie” is anyone who indulges in intoxicants that are defined as illegal, then I know many who do not steal, who refrain from driving while under the influence, and who lead very productive lives.
Furthermore, Winter, I suspect that you know such people too, but you just don’t know that you do. I would guess that most moderate drug users in your circle of acquaintances probably would not bring up the subject while you’re around.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 12:05 am
“I would guess that most moderate drug users in your circle of acquaintances probably would not bring up the subject while you’re around.”
True, but just look into the eyes. They don’t lie. Its really easy to find out, but some observation is required.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 1:55 am
winter: “just look into the eyes. They don’t lie.”
That’s probably true. On those rare occasions when I indulge, I instantly become Chinese
Rum drinkers are easy to spot too—just look for the distended belly and red nose. They don’t lie.
Comment by Kristian — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 6:16 am
#54 “…just look into the eyes. They don’t lie. Its really easy to find out…”
And has this druggie-detection talent of yours ever been empirically confirmed? Have the people you have judged to be drug users - on the basis of this eye test of yours - provided urine samples to confirm you hunch?
And more important, proving the thesis that looking in the eyes is a sure-fire way of detecting drug users would also require the piss-testing of the people you know whom you judge NOT to be users.
I would venture to say that there are people you know who use illegal drugs, whom you never suspected of doing so because they never talk about it with you, and because they never indulge while you’re around, and therefore, always pass your “look into their eyes” test.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 7:44 am
“Rum drinkers are easy to spot tooâ€â€just look for the distended belly and red nose. They don’t lie.”
Rum abusers are also easy to spot by the 30 drunken sailors that tend to accompany them everywhere.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 9:33 am
“Slik Willie” Clinton and George”the colorful” George Clinton,are HIP HOPING to the ATOMIC DOG dance down Manner-hymen-T,smoking Cuban cigars,as promised by slik Willie after their multi-culti “communication/dialogue”,with some smokin blonde interns…
BOW-WOW-WOW yippie-i yippie-aaaa is the rap song the colorful George Clinton is broadcasting in front of Finlandia Hall…
George looks across the street at the Finnish Parliament Funkadelic Mothership,engulfed in Laser light show with smoke emanating from the pillars..
George:”slik Willie,look there is smoke coming from Finnish Parliament Funkadelic Mothership…what they be smokin over der!?”
slik Willie:…snif snif…hmmmm…it dont smell like any dope i smelt before,…not Cuban cigar smoke either,…smells like wood burning in Sivu Sauna,POO-Lutin-de atmospheer…somebody do sumtin,WARN SOMEBODY,they be wastin energee,especially wit dem brite lights!..
George yells out! “Warning!..Warning!.. Will Robinson…
Slik Willie:”stop George,wrong TV show!”….
George:”Look ,slick Willie,der be a red haired women running out o’
de buildin’, I be warnin her about wasting energeeee!”
Slik Willie:”careful George,she don’t look too hip to da scene,know what I meeen,specially with her red wig…she scary stuff!!!
George:”HEY LADEEE!…waaatz smokin in der! …GOT WEEED to share wid
us HELLsinki homeys!?
slik Willie:”george,you got her pissed now,she be jumpin up and down yelling at us,giving us sign language…George what she mean by showing us the length of her middle,digit…yeow!?
Comment by infinndel — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 4:30 pm
“And has this druggie-detection talent of yours ever been empirically confirmed? Have the people you have judged to be drug users - on the basis of this eye test of yours - provided urine samples to confirm you hunch? ”
No sample required, just watch them go to the can, and throw up. Or even more telling are the blood shot eyes, covered up with sun glasses.
But then again that me on a sunday after a rum party with 30 drunkin sailors.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 6:03 pm
“So who’s the victim in privately growing a small supply of personal use only herb?”
Nobody. I’ve got no problem with herb. I wouldn’t hire someone who used it regularly, but I think it’s a waste of time and money for the government to bother going after herb.
Cocaine, meth, heroin, are much different and there are plenty of victims.
“I believe that assault and battery are crimes in most countries, certainly in Finland and all states of the US. And so is neglect of children. Why not punish for those crimes and leave those drug users, even addicts, who don’t beat up anyone and either don’t have children or don’t neglect the ones they have alone?”
Use of hard drugs is a crime catalyst. Eliminate the drug, eliminate all the crimes (w/plenty of victims) that happen as a result of the drugs use. You’d be hard pressed to find a cocaine, heroin or meth user that hasn’t committed a crime besides the use of the drug.
Comment by maksalaatikko — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 9:43 pm
maksalaatikko:
“Eliminate the drug, eliminate all the crimes (w/plenty of victims) that happen as a result of the drugs use.”
Eliminate cars and you eliminate DUI and reckless driving. See, there is wisdom in what the Finnish government is doing!
In 6 years, the Holy War on Drugs in the west celebrates its 100th anniversary, if you consider the Harrison Act as the starting point. You’d think that the drug(s) might have been eliminated by now.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 10:19 pm
Let’s take it the other way, Franky. Using your logic.
Let’s eliminate speed limits. After all if someone is merely speeding along at 150 clicks, they aren’t harming anyone. We already have reckless driving laws for people who cause accidents. Why put limitations on speeding, speeders aren’t hurting anybody.
Why, because speeding is a catalyst. Like cocaine use, it’s a reckless personal behavior that “may” not hurt the offender, but has consequences for everybody else.
That is a much more accurate analogy than your “eliminating cars” argument. Cars are a positive contributor to people and society. The positives far outweigh the risks. Hard drugs on the other hand, do not have any positives.
Comment by maksalaatikko — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 11:55 pm
“In 6 years, the Holy War on Drugs in the west celebrates its 100th anniversary, if you consider the Harrison Act as the starting point. You’d think that the drug(s) might have been eliminated by now.”
I don’t think anyone, no matter how anti-drug they are, has ever said they will be eliminated.
By the way, what did opium (a very tame drug by todays standards) do for China?
Comment by maksalaatikko — Fri, Feb 1st, 2008 @ 11:58 pm
I agree with Phil, but using the F-bomb a couple of times… That took my attention away from the moral of story…
Comment by Kalevi — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 4:01 am
maksalaatikko: “Let’s eliminate speed limits. After all if someone is merely speeding along at 150 clicks, they aren’t harming anyone.”
You’ve just described Germany’s autobahn. However, it doesn’t catalyze reckless driving, but rather it harnesses people’s natural driving behavior (and risk aversion) into a manageable condition—at least, relatively so. There’s a set protocol and no chaos. For example:
+ drivers turn-on their flasher lights in unison, reaching up to 10km before impending fog. You won’t even know why you turned-on your own flashers until you’ve actually reached the fog yourself.
+ passing on the right is illegal, and so is blocking traffic in the left lane. Trucks must always stay in the right lane.
There are a few other important things to remember, but the idea is that it keeps drivers focused on the important aspects of driving rather than watching their speedometers—or even worse: concentrating on avoiding police!
It works pretty well, especially compared to America’s system whereby cars and large trucks try to pass from any lane, left- or right-side, either full-gas or full-brake; but nobody gets anywhere fast and lots of accidents occur.
This driving comparison is closely analogous to Europe’s and America’s respective drug policies. In one case, you have a manageable condition that utilizes people’s natural instinct to avoid risk and damaging behavior once given the facts and perhaps seeing up-close what the consequences are. In the other case, you have recklessness and needless destruction of life due to policy being founded on an unnatural premise: that you can solve any problem with a large enough hammer (you’re a builder, right?). Well, if a fundy country like Iran couldn’t do it, then what makes you think you can?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fttlX9SpbZY
I suppose that’s why there’s so much resistance, in Europe, to the American approach of dealing with this issue. We see your results very clearly.
Comment by Kristian — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 5:25 am
“It works pretty well, especially compared to America’s system whereby cars and large trucks try to pass from any lane, left- or right-side, either full-gas or full-brake; but nobody gets anywhere fast and lots of accidents occur.”
I guess I’ve never been on that road yet in the US. Methinks, people like what they are used to. I hated Finnish roads until I drove on them for a year. I think American roads are better, but that’s my opinion. I’m sure the Autobahn is great (especially for those who drive it regularly), but it’s one amongst millions.
How about no speed limits everywhere, like freedom to use any drug anywhere. Speeding doesn’t hurt anybody. Right?
How many people spend their time driving concentrating on their speedometers and avoiding police? Give me a break.
Although I do think Finns and probably most other Europeans are generally better drivers than Americans. You have a much more responsible approach to driving. Driving is a privilege in Europe, to Americans it’s a right. The threshold to driving is very low here (any idiot can get a license and a car).
I think your drug policy is probably closer to American driving policy. Let anyone do it, anytime, anywhere. It’s their right!
Nobody thinks they can solve the drug problem. Where you got that idea from, I don’t know. Mitigate it, yes. Solve it, no.
By the way, I’m not a builder, but I occasionally act as one.
Comment by maksalaatikko — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 6:13 am
My hard line to drugs applies to hard drugs only, unlike your “drug war” people you love to talk about.
Have you ever seen someone’s heavy drug addiction destroy their lives and the lives of those around them?
Have you ever seen cocaine, meth or heroine? Youtube clips don’t count.
Do you think cocaine, heroin, and meth sales and use should be legal?
Have you used them yourself? Methinks your drug stance is like lily white Finlander preaching from the middle of his lily white neighborhod on how racist we Americans are and how accepting lily white Finlanders are. He’s got no clue, no experience, and doesn’t even know himself.
Also don’t forget, drugs came way before your “drug war”. You can’t have a drug war without drugs.
Comment by maksalaatikko — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 6:28 am
One of my good friends from days gone by, whose live was destroyed (along with a few others around him) by heroin and meth; now lives for free in a government sponsored apartment, takes free government methadone, on free government health care, and has an extremely low stress government sponsored job designed to give people like him a sense of fulfillment.
He’ll never be the same again, but he’s managed to make a life for himself with MAJOR help from the government.
How’s that for your government war on drugs?
You don’t know shit.
Comment by maksalaatikko — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 6:34 am
maksalaatikko: “I’m sure the Autobahn is great (especially for those who drive it regularly), but it’s one amongst millions.”
The autobahn is a system of roads, not a single road. It was originally Hitler’s idea, and America’s turnpike system was later based on it, albeit with much lower speeds.
Cruising speeds on the German one are usually over 100mph/160kmh, but the bigger Mercedes and BMW’s maintain well above 200kmh over long distances. Most have big-ass diesels with 6-speed stick shifts.’
If they flash their lights when approaching behind you, then you’d better get in the right lane or you’ll get a ticket. Sometimes they’ll flash when nearly 1km away. But the distance closes quickly at those speeds.
maksalaatikko: “How about no speed limits everywhere, like freedom to use any drug anywhere. Speeding doesn’t hurt anybody. Right?”
That’s a good point. Speeding can’t be unrestricted everywhere, and neither can drug or alcohol use. There’s a time and place for everything. Safe and somewhat structured environments are always best.
maksalaatikko: “Have you ever seen someone’s heavy drug addiction destroy their lives and the lives of those around them?”
Sure, I saw it in the US. The guy eventually sold everything he owned. He was addicted after the first snuffle. I never thought something like that could happen. He was a freak for about 2-years, then he got help. That was middle class drug addiction, so he had lots of support. I realize it can be worse.
Never knew anyone personally in Europe though. As I stated earlier, having a bunch of addicts hanging around public places acts as a good deterrent for young people. American kids only know that their rock idols do it.
That’s probably why recreational drugs are more widely accepted in the US than in Europe, despite the differing legal approaches. Many people in Europe still group heroin and pot together. I guess it’s all about what they see on the street.
maksalaatikko: “Have you ever seen cocaine, meth or heroine?”
More than just seen it. Not my type of fun these days though—but yes, it was fun back then. That was a long time ago. I was NEVER an addict. Never even craved it. I craved the taste of good beer and wine much more, and still do
However, I never did H recreationally. The closest I came was in the hospital as a child in the 70’s; they injected me with some opiate derivative (probably morphine) for appendicitis prior to the operation. Amazing.
That experience has stayed with me all this time. I can see why people get addicted to it. I’ll never do it again, unless I’m diagnosed with some illness and a short time to live; in that case I’ll become an insta-druggie for those last 6-months
maksalaatikko: “Methinks your drug stance is like lily white Finlander preaching from the middle of his lily white neighborhod”
Well, I’m probably more of an internationalist than a Finn, per se. I guess my influence on this topic is mostly c. European.
maksalaatikko: “he’s managed to make a life for himself with MAJOR help from the government.”
That’s good to hear. If government can help those that can’t help themselves, then I support it.
However, with total legalization of everything, charities and church organizations could take over these functions and possibly even help those who can’t quit, by providing them with drug maintenance.
Charities are less controversial in this regard, because there will always be people who don’t want their tax monies spent on giving addicts doses of heroin and other drugs, even if it makes their lives better.
Comment by Kristian — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 9:08 am
maksalaatikko:
“One of my good friends from days gone by, whose live was destroyed (along with a few others around him) by heroin and meth; now lives for free in a government sponsored apartment”
For what it’s worth, my cousin’s funeral was two weeks ago. Thanks to (mostly) state-supplied alcohol, he never saw his 40th birthday. I’m still not a prohibitionist, but I am wonder if I could have done something. Intervention does work in some cases. I wasn’t in contact with him for years.
Kristian, I find it very unrealistic to expect charities to provide all treatment, not to mention highly controversial Swiss-style maintenance programs. Especially as treatment is expensive as hell.
There’s a private, religiously based charity in my block that offers needle exchange and other counseling without any jesusing around or strings attached. The zombies that hang around the entrance to the place are the best drug education I’ve seen so far. I haven’t experienced any problems, though I wouldn’t park my car directly in front of the place. Since this is a “better” part of town, there’s some NIMBYing about the place, but I don’t think the movement is that strong. We’re still not the USA in all respects, thank God.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Considering the high standard of this blog, I’m sure people have already pointed out the true meaning of the pardoning system. No, just kidding. Probably not.
Anyway, any “oikeus” system (meaning a system that aims at something that is really right, ethical and not just considered right by this or that ruler) needs somebody who can pardon without giving a reason. Unless, of course, the law is mad by God and enforced by mullahs or what-not popes who know the TRUTH.
I think it’s nice that this person is democratically elected.
Is it possible that she makes mistakes? That’s not even a mildly interesting question, if you understand the context.
Comment by Anonymous — Sat, Feb 2nd, 2008 @ 4:42 pm
Do you notice that Tarja is using her middle finger to push up her glasses?
Comment by Howard — Tue, Jun 10th, 2008 @ 7:47 pm