Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/stashadm/public_html/wp-content/plugins/hybrid-hook/hybrid-hook.php on line 121
NORML’s Russ Belville vs. former ONDCP’s Dr. Kevin Sabet on Marijuana Legalization at James A. Baker Institute | The NORML Stash Blog

I am the producer of The NORML Network, the host of the NORML SHOW LIVE and The NORML Stash Blog, and NORML's Outreach Coordinator. I'm married, live in Portland, Oregon, and I am a registered medical marijuana caregiver in this state. I've worked days as an IT geek and nights as a professional musician. Previously, I have been the host of my own political talk radio show on satellite radio. I've been the High Times "Freedom Fighter of the Month" and I travel across the country to educate people on marijuana reform. I've dedicated my life to bringing an end to adult marijuana prohibition and re-legalizing cannabis hemp, and I'm honored to be chosen by NORML to give voice to the Marijuana Nation and to speak for those who can't speak up.

Warning: Illegal string offset 'echo' in /home/stashadm/public_html/wp-content/themes/hybrid/library/extensions/custom-field-series.php on line 82

8 responses to “NORML’s Russ Belville vs. former ONDCP’s Dr. Kevin Sabet on Marijuana Legalization at James A. Baker Institute”

  1. SpaceMace

    Russ, I’ve watched / listened to your speech for this conference at least 4 times and I must say that it is one of the most comprehensive, well written pieces on the drug war that I have ever encountered. Props to you!

    I am also very impressed with how well organized this conference appears and the fact that it took place in Texas is simply astounding. The support you received from the crowd must have been intimidating for Mr. Sabet.

    One thing I am curious about is the fact that Mr. Sabet was taking a position that conceded that the prohibition laws were broken. He stated that patients should be able to get their medicine and that incarceration rates need to go down, but he thinks regulation goes to far. So what’s the alternative? Changing small little laws state by state? How do we convince the federal government that cannabis is a helpful medicine when they have done EVERYTHING in their power to deny that it is? Changing small possession laws doesn’t allow people (specifically patients) to get what they need. A big movement is our only option.

    Again, great job Russ!

  2. ray christl cambodia medical kanja

    Thanks for letting me speak on Toker Talk…to finish my thought here. The “Attacking the Motive” is the subset of ad hominem that you must attack the argument because Capt Ed could present a cogent/sound conclusion from valid premises. The fact that the persons motivations may be biased is irrelevant to the proposition before you.

    The “Appeal to Jack Herer” occurs when an arguer states that “Jack Herer wouldn’t call that legalization & I don’t call that legal (a piddle 30 grams),so VOTE NO on I-502.

    The fallacy is that first jack is dead so nobody really knows for sure what he’ say…but it’s a red herring argument like one of your posters used today. It’s look over here at Jack,& that’s real legal & don’t think of I-502–in fact VOTE NO…Jack’s legal isn’t on the ballot so it’s a deliberate obfuscation,and another fallacy “burden of proof” that sets a standard that can’t be meet.

  3. ray christl cambodia medical kanja

    Did you notice that the moderator called you “”Livewire” ,which was nod to academic Dr Sabet & did his doctorate already–this nod is suggesting a fallacy of emotion to discredit you for not adhering to standards of stoic behavior& ONLY credentialed get consideration because of “appeal to false authority” ,but since you advanced that point Of being lay with “skin in the game” it was a weak gambit on his part.

    He took a jab at one of your fallacies in that he doesn’t smoke weed & you know each other. To score points at your overreach on “everyone I know smokes.’.. Sabet mentions your eloquence but yes a “Livewire”,are you starting to see the halls of academia & how you infer stoner emotion is suspect–their adept at using that on you.

    He didn’t mention the other fallacy you used without reviewing the session a second time. You mention that a city the size ?? was it San Antonio can’t be locked up for the crime of ‘marijuana” ? Well, If the crime was terrorism those FEMA camps would get some work. That’s an extreme example,so let’s take “Felony Thief” which is steal over $250…if you were omniscient and could catch each and every crime,and the FACT that 2.9 million were caught by your Godlike attribution,we’d have to lock them up & NOT change a law.

    The fallacy is called Argumentum ad populum–appeal to the people–it’s popular to steal & millions do it ,so it should be legal.

    You didn’t reply above & I challenge you to name the fallacy “I GOT MINE”,that I could have used against Ed Rosenthal as he flies to Jamaica,Hawai’i,Amsterdam taking above high THC & associated terpenoids,so if anyone is I got mine & is railing against legal pot it would be the elitist Capt Ed…it’s a logical fallacy & get your crew to name the particular fallacy. Call Dr Earleywine–Paul Armentano…

    We can create a fallacy–Appeal to Jack Herer– I’ll explain that new fallacy if you get Dr Mitch to correctly identify this “I got mine”,or “Tomato crowd” fallacy in relevance,and not insufficient evidence to narrow it down.

  4. Wil

    Was it warm in there or was that just Mr. Sabet up against Mr. Belville? Forget the hankie, give that man a towel!

  5. ray christl cambodia medical kanja

    Here is the weak argument (it’s an emotional non-argument),in the jumbled presentation from Dr Sabet. The slippery slope fallacy goes like this;
    If we have legal pot it will be sold (A)
    Then we will have legal commerce(B)
    Then we will have legal advertising (C)
    Then we will have ad propaganda (D)
    Then usage will rise esp.in youth (E)
    Then this will be “very troubling” (F)…classic slippery slope with the conclusion NOT heroin Like OMG we can’t have (F) instead it’s that we feel cognitive dissonance & politically it is ‘very troubling’.

    I look at the full moon ,and it’s so ‘very troubling’ as I pine for love…Appeal to emotion and appeal to ambiguity–THIS is the NEW Obama TRIANGULATION in the use of psephology to construct a “delay” scenario,& NOT a Drug Warrior abomination,yet nothing changes in the way of policy from the Obama Drug Czar office.

    There were some fallacies from you as well Russ,which i’ll discuss later with you,but as a primer your use of “I’ve Got Mine” is a logical fallacy & I’ll wait to explain that ,& get your entourage thinking about how that is ?

    In Closing,this fatally flawed argument style from a Harvard PhD scholar using a form of pseudoscience & fallacy can be used to end prohibition. The capitulation from our enemy in the drafting of I-502 should be embraced for creating a genesis of relegalization,and future business opportunities are immense.

    ONELOVE & see you all soon.

  6. Ryan

    Way to go Russ! Nice tie as well:)

Leave a Reply

:-) :-| :-( :-D :-o 8-) :-x :-P more »