Documentary Review: a/k/a Tommy Chong

a/k/a Tommy Chong, written, produced, and directed by Josh Gilbert, is a documentary film that chronicles the Drug Enforcement Administration raid on comedian Tommy Chong’s house and his subsequent jail sentence for trafficking in illegal drug paraphernalia. Chong was sentenced to 9 months in federal prison. Here’s the trailer….Continue reading >>>

This entry was posted in drug war, gun control, original articles, police state / surveillance state, politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Documentary Review: a/k/a Tommy Chong

  1. Eric Bigelow says:

    I just watched AKA Tommy Chong on Netflix the other day!! What total hypocrisy we live under……Drug War pfft….. It’s a war on liberty.

    Afterward I watched another, The Cigarette Wars.

    This documentary tells the story of “illegal” tobacco smuggling.

    Basically individuals buy cigarettes from low tax states take them to higher tax states and sell them for a big profit.

    In this (The Cigarette Wars) documentary Politicians are interviewed (Bloomberg) about laws they have passed to ban smoking in public, bars, restraints etc….

    Teachers (if you want to call them that) have even formed a group to lobby to ban smoking in film. The eventual goal is to outlaw smoking tobacco all together.

    The reason: It kills people.

    Well, Marijuana has never killed anyone and it’s illegal……

    By this logic, weed should be legalized. Hooray! But…..that’s not the point.

    It’s time to abolish the assumption we have the right to dictate what the individual does with his or her bodies. Your body is your property. As long as you do not violate another individual with your habits/lifestyle you should be able to do what you wish with your property. The government did not bless you with your body, THEY DON’T OWN IT! Tommy wasn’t hurting anyone and in my opinion, he was helping them out. Giving them quality goods to pursue they’re happiness.

    The regulations on businesses are a property issue as well.

    The businessman should be able to cater to any group of individuals he wishes. If the individual desires to smoke while drinking they need to find an establishment that caters to that desire. If an individual does not like to smoke but likes to drink they need to do the same. If there is not a business that caters to that need eventually, the market will provide it if the demand is there. The government has no right to limit the business owner. It is the customer’s decision. If the society does not want to smoke while drinking they will not go to that specific establishment and it will shut its doors. It’s really rather simple.

    Did I seem long winded there?

    One more issue. Via Spooner.

    If a law is made and you personally did not sign a contract is it legally binding?
    I would say no……it is not.

  2. Eric Bigelow says:

    Just one more thing….(I apologize, I am brewing on this) The government regulation of activity is absurd. For instance above I mentioned Tobacco kills and Weed does not. Yet, Weed is illegal? An individual should the right to partake of both, by choice. Just sayin’ the thinking behind that is completely illogical.

    Same with prostitution.

    It’s illegal to sell your body (your property) but it’s perfectly legal to give it away. It’s legal to video tape it, sell it as a DVD or put it on the internet and sell subscriptions to viewers.

    It might be all about what they can trace and tax.

    • MagicKat says:

      Eric/Monica,

      Here’s something I never understood, but that could be because I’m tryng to make sense of the law, but if a woman’s right to choose is a federal law protecting her right to privacy (that is, to control her own body), wouldn’t the right to take drugs follow that constitutional logic? Or maybe I’m just not understanding the basic ruling of Roe v. Wade. What thinkest thou?

      • austrogirl says:

        I have always thought the exact same thing–my lungs have a right to privately absorb smoke if my uterus has a right to evict an unwanted tenant.

  3. Eric Bigelow says:

    I am of the opinion that no one should be able to tell you what to do with your body; it is your property and not property of the state. It is not property of any other person or group of people (society). You, as a free individual, should be able to do whatever you wish as long as it does not affect the rights of another individual.

    That being said, I struggle with the abortion issue. Maybe because I am a parent. But before I go any further……I think it is an irrelevant issue in the current political climate (there is so much more that needs to be discussed).

    Being an advocate for personal liberty and a believer in the non-aggression principle, I believe abortion is a complicated issue. Yes, it’s the woman’s body, thus her property and this property should be respected, no doubt.

    However, abortion is a death; it is the end of a life. The question is, should this be considered a violation of the child’s free-will? Is the mother violating the child’s rights? If you believe the fetus to be a person then I would say yes. The child did not voluntarily choose to be aborted.

    The next question would be is abortion considered aggression? Is it violent? Is it force? I would say yes to these. It is violent, it is force. For, the same reason listed above.

    Should then, violence and force only be considered a violation of natural rights after birth?

    Like I said I believe it to be an irrelevant issue, currently. I believe that the issue is used to divide and conquer us, much like racism is used against us.

    These are just some questions I hope will inspire some debate.

  4. MagicKAT says:

    I agree that abortion is a complicated issue, and I considered saying in my comment that we should put that issue aside for the sake of the question. What I am struggling with is, whether right or wrong, the Supreme Court said in Roe v. Wade that we have a right to privacy. I don’t know why people (the ACLU?) have not questioned that logic in relation to drug use, prostitution, etc. Just always found it curious….

  5. Eric Bigelow says:

    I think that is a very relevant question MagicKat. I think more and more people are beginning to “see”. In reality, it comes down to people such as us to bring those questions up to people. I believe that focusing on educating the public is a huge. I started with conversations with my mother and evolved from there (to friends etc….) If someone can’t “see”, don’t waste time and move on, maybe, come back to them later. However, I think you’ll find most people can connect the dots. The next step is to get them to act out. How do we do that after they “see”?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s