Should Marijuana be legalized?

[Fenrisúlfr]

All his generation did for ours is foul things up, and is not leaving us with a mountain of debt from such ill-fated endeavours like the Great Society, Vietnam, the Cold War, and the current brouhaha in Iraq. Thus let his words fall upon deaf ears.

 

[razoredge]

All his generation did for ours is foul things up, and is not leaving us with a mountain of debt from such ill-fated endeavours like the Great Society, Vietnam, the Cold War, and the current brouhaha in Iraq. Thus let his words fall upon deaf ears.

I'm well aware of what my generation and those previous and since have done that were mistakes. Im not sure where you feel I was a part of any of it... or that you said anything valuable in this post or any others I have read. Which could bring to question your generation but I sure wouldnt hold all accountable for what ever it is thats wrong with you.......

 

[razoredge]

Razoredge:
Seriously?....'the right to open this door of free drug trade to society and further capitalize on it'....Do you know the history of the war on drugs, and for the sake of the thread topic, particularly marijuana?

I'd suggest starting here, even if you've seen this before, in the following order. It'll shoot the better part of 50 minutes to shit, but is worth it.

I'm sorry if I missed it, but just what basis are you founding this statement on? Less discriminate than booze when it comes to grabbing people? Not to mention that you are trying to compare alcoholism to a wide range of chemicals under 'drugs', and even if you were only talking about cannabis, you are clearly uneducated and/or fairly inexperienced when it comes to either substance, and harder substances or have been seriously mislead regarding other substances than alcohol. I would assume as well, all that let alone abuse of said substances. Frankly, IF this is the case, imho you have no argument to begin with, as you are unequipped to provide certain accurate information or perhaps insight on the matter, which is not to say that it is due to some form of fault or err on your part. No offense is intended by my statements. Also, I hope those videos and articles have shed a bit of light for you on the subject, including but not limited to your questions, as some of your previous statements are clearly erroneous, and you don't seem to have all the information about the government you are telling people to learn about. Also if you didn't know that your government is already involved in 'drug pushing' then that's also something you should research.


Idealistic youth, we can either follow the old inefficient and outdated corners 'your generation'(?) has left behind, or we can make new corners. AKA Social Evolution

Also, on a note of this 'gateway drug' crap. This is another huge misconception that is just thrown around to 'scare' you. I know from a great deal of my own experience that marijuana is no more a gate than alcohol. In the case of marijuana users that go on to hard substances and get addicted and become 'public menaces', it is almost absolute that the 'gate' comes from the sort of characters that you have to deal with to get a bag of ganja. The people you meet. This does not include experimentation or people predisposed to addiction. On a quick note of addiction, marijuana is less addictive than coffee, and FAAAR less than alcohol. Actually, to be clear, there is NOTHING in D9THC that is addictive.

EDIT: Formatting

I must admit you totally lost me as to your point with any of this. I do know most of the stuff presented in that documentary. The part about getting rid of the Mexicans made me smile...... if only we could find something today. The machine gun thing came to mind... perhaps its time to start issuing those stamps, real Americans would answer the call by the hords.

Anyhow.... I believe you would have to address directly to what ever it is you have a problem with that I said. I only found your post to be like all others, full of personal attacks as to "who I am" and nothing substancial to the topic or questions I posed. Which suprised me coming from you.

The vids only comfirm everything I said about our government and what people needed to learn about when it comes to our government. The vids as well as Walters litle write up only confirm that NO money would be saved. Walter wants to spend it all on fixing addicts when legalization would only create more addicts. NO MONEY SAVED. The war on drugs is not working because everyone is pussy footing around working within the law.... against the lawless. Any enemy must be met on their own terms. AGAIN A REMINDER THAT IM NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST WEED.... AS WALTERS REPORT WAS NOT EITHER. GAWD!

Walter points out misjustices in our legal system regarding drugs. IMAGINE THAT..... . Point being there are many misjustices regarding other crimes, is there suggestion that we make these other crimes no longer illegal ? as some form of fix.... lol

Anyone notice many pre drug law users later became outspoken advocates on creating drug laws ? The one vid had a guy, I have read of others.

What information about the government is it "I dont have"... lol

What is it I was illequipped to speak about ?

What points did I bring forward that were not valid, so much so that not one person addressed them ?.... that is really funny

I expected some decent alternative responses on this topic but aside from idealistic dreams of "saving money" and "we have the rite to do as we please" got nothing but sticks thrown from behind bushes.

"Gateway drug" Im am split on this. It did not cause me to do anything but a bit of experimenting in the 70's, however I could not understand how others I knew just became druggies... perhaps too much experimenting until addiction began to have its effect ? Addictive personalities in the first place ?.... thus my reference to alcohol... of which I have no idea what your response is about, or your interpretation.

Actually weed is addictive, there is NO physical addiction, the body doesnt go through hell. The mind is another story, not hell but a desire not easy to resist occurs. I am placeing no emphisis on this just putting the rumor in its place.

Youth is blindly idealistic, just a fact, not a "generational critique" as the hurt have made it, I've been there done that.

"Old inefficiency", interesting thought, society would do well to get back to the efficiency of pre industrial revolution when men could really take care of themselves. I guess that sums up what I think of outdated corners and social evolution. It would take care of much needed natural selection as well.

 

[PhantoMPhones]

What points did I bring forward that were not valid

for starters how about this one;

addicts when legalization would only create more addicts

Please provide your sources of this information, as well as any scientific data or report to back it up.

The war on drugs is not working because everyone is pussy footing around working within the law.... against the lawless. Any enemy must be met on their own terms.

So, what you are saying is that police and other 'authorities' should have access to and make use of, 'any means necessary' to stamp out among others medicinal and recreational and/or self-medicating marijuana users? Doesn't this sound a little like, gee I dunno, totalitarianism? And what about the funding for this little crusade, where does that come from? And more than just 'i think alcohol should be illegal too' please enlighten me on the details and delicacies of the marijuana illegal-alcohol legal, state of affairs as it pertains to health issues, medicinal benefit, and the social and geopolitical issues surrounding said state of affairs.

AGAIN A REMINDER THAT IM NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST WEED.... AS WALTERS REPORT WAS NOT EITHER. GAWD!

Again a reminder that the subject of this thread is 'Should marijuana be legalized?', and that this gross generalization and tangent into legalization of other substances is moot, Mr. Cronkites report as well as the other general info regarding the war on drugs notwithstanding. Also, regarding Mr. Cronkite's report, you seem to have missed the point to his article G-O-D

"And I cannot help but wonder how many more lives, and how much more money, will be wasted before another Robert McNamara admits what is plain for all to see: the war on drugs is a failure." - Walter Cronkite

"The federal government has fought terminally ill patients whose doctors say medical marijuana could provide a modicum of relief from their suffering - as though a cancer patient who uses marijuana to relieve the wrenching nausea caused by chemotherapy is somehow a criminal who threatens the public.

People who do genuinely have a problem with drugs, meanwhile, are being imprisoned when what they really need is treatment.

And what is the impact of this policy?

It surely hasn't made our streets safer. Instead, we have locked up literally millions of people...disproportionately people of color...who have caused little or no harm to others - wasting resources that could be used for counter-terrorism, reducing violent crime, or catching white-collar criminals.

With police wielding unprecedented powers to invade privacy, tap phones and conduct searches seemingly at random, our civil liberties are in a very precarious condition.

Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on this effort - with no one held accountable for its failure.

Amid the clichés of the drug war, our country has lost sight of the scientific facts. Amid the frantic rhetoric of our leaders, we've become blind to reality: The war on drugs, as it is currently fought, is too expensive, and too inhumane." -Walter Cronkite

Actually weed is addictive, there is NO physical addiction, the body doesnt go through hell. The mind is another story, not hell but a desire not easy to resist occurs.

Yes and this can happen with any substance or non-substance, someone can be addicted to licking cinder blocks ffs, would you care to argue semantics further?

I am placeing no emphisis on this just putting the rumor in its place.

Ohhhh.... you mean rhetoric, propaganda.

I only found your post to be like all others, full of personal attacks as to "who I am"

Pardon me, I could have sworn you said something to the effect of;

Youth is blindly idealistic, just a fact...

Then again I am just a youth right?

Also, if you didn't catch it the first time;

Frankly, IF this is the case, imho you have no argument to begin with, as you are unequipped to provide certain accurate information or perhaps insight on the matter, which is not to say that it is due to some form of fault or err on your part. No offense is intended by my statements.

I thought the bold IF would have stood out better, not to mention my expression of non-hostility.

I expected some decent alternative responses on this topic but aside from idealistic dreams of "saving money" and "we have the rite to do as we please" got nothing but sticks thrown from behind bushes.

Idealistic dreams of saving money? How much is spent fighting MARIJUANA? You are trying to group all drugs together and say they are inexorably linked, I can't imagine what you think about prescriptions. And you are basing your OPINION (baseless as of yet) that legalization of MARIJUANA (or even 'other' substances) is going to create this new giant population of addicts that the state will have to care for. Once again I ask for your sources regarding this.

"Old inefficiency", interesting thought, society would do well to get back to the efficiency of pre industrial revolution when men could really take care of themselves. I guess that sums up what I think of outdated corners and social evolution. It would take care of much needed natural selection as well.

Awww, how nicely that wraps it all up in a neat little package, right? Pretty, idealistic if you ask me.

So what is your position, we should be stamping out these 'undesireables', or that we should be taking care of ourselves?

Speaking of natural selection, out of curiosity, if we are to stamp out anything that 'causes harm' how does this system of government 'protecting' the people from themselves in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM aid in natural selection?

 

[razoredge]

for starters how about this one;

Please provide your sources of this information, as well as any scientific data or report to back it up.

for starters depending on how on the ball anyone is in keeping up, this entire topic has jumped back and forth from weed to all drugs... BY EVERYONE. So by addicts Im obviously talking about other drugs. Sources of information and scientific data... eh ? Interesting that people need some scientist to point to the obvious. I would only suggest AGAIN, as I did before and you have questioned again in this nonsensical post....... lets take a look at alcoholism in this country. Make your determination yourself or do research if thats the only way your mind can grasp things.

So, what you are saying is that police and other 'authorities' should have access to and make use of, 'any means necessary' to stamp out among others medicinal and recreational and/or self-medicating marijuana users? Doesn't this sound a little like, gee I dunno, totalitarianism? And what about the funding for this little crusade, where does that come from? And more than just 'i think alcohol should be illegal too' please enlighten me on the details and delicacies of the marijuana illegal-alcohol legal, state of affairs as it pertains to health issues, medicinal benefit, and the social and geopolitical issues surrounding said state of affairs.

Wasnt I talking about Cronkites artical? I was refering to his talking about "THE WAR ON ******, NOT WEED!. I gave my opinion on how to deal with the war on drugs... PERIOD, wrap your head around whats being talked about would you. Your easily distracted then twist it to say something else.

The little crusade "WAR ON DRUGS" is already funded but has been mamzy pansying around.... PERIOD!

Alcohol illegal: its how I feel, deal with it. Its a real problem for many people and reaches down into familys, friends, work place, it is NOT just harmful to the user, apply this elsewhere in this topic. As well as how alcoholic parents/parent seem to raise future alcoholics becasue they are raised into a belief system that says its alright to be a drunk... apply that to useing drugs around your children and find the same results. Throws only brings harm to the user right down the toilet.

Health issues, I think your the first to mention this in this topic. most of its been about recreational use. Which I have not posed any problem with, only its legalization and for reasons I already went through SOOOO many times. For health it would have to be prescribed and I could care less either way. People suffering to death is a whole nother topic I wont get into.

Again a reminder that the subject of this thread is 'Should marijuana be legalized?', and that this gross generalization and tangent into legalization of other substances is moot, Mr. Cronkites report as well as the other general info regarding the war on drugs notwithstanding. Also, regarding Mr. Cronkite's report, you seem to have missed the point to his article G-O-D

I didnt miss any point of his artical, what is it that has you confused ? Because I dont agree with it ?

Yes and this can happen with any substance or non-substance, someone can be addicted to licking cinder blocks ffs, would you care to argue semantics further?


Ohhhh.... you mean rhetoric, propaganda.

No I just responded to your statement about it NOT being addictive... sweetpea

Pardon me, I could have sworn you said something to the effect of;

Then again I am just a youth right?

Also, if you didn't catch it the first time;
I thought the bold IF would have stood out better, not to mention my expression of non-hostility.

You said I was illequiped, clearly uneducated, fairly inexperienced, and attacked generations, at that point what ever you said about being non-effensive was moot. Should be easy for you to comprehend.

My statement about youth being blindly idealistic stands as well known fact, I make no appoligies. Everyone has been there. Its not an insult, just a burdon youth with all its "answers" has to deal with.

Idealistic dreams of saving money? How much is spent fighting MARIJUANA? You are trying to group all drugs together and say they are inexorably linked, I can't imagine what you think about prescriptions. And you are basing your OPINION (baseless as of yet) that legalization of MARIJUANA (or even 'other' substances) is going to create this new giant population of addicts that the state will have to care for. Once again I ask for your sources regarding this.

How much will be spent on its legalization and control ?

They are linked if legalization is based on "we should have the right to do as we please" and "we need to stop the war on drugs... because it costs money"

I despise the entire health care system, including drug companies and believe in live and let die, it is the ultimate expression of freedom to do as nature pleases.

Yes as I said Cronkites piece evolved around "helping" druggies rather than giving them crap. He felt this was the duty of the state, so whats your point ?

Alcoholism answers the rest of your question, its legal and its the widest spred and problematic substance abuse in this country.

Awww, how nicely that wraps it all up in a neat little package, right? Pretty, idealistic if you ask me.

I dont know if its idealistic or just a feeling that life and the world was far better without all the complications that followed. I'd have to check some scientific data probably but Im pretty sure I have the rite to feel this way.......

So what is your position, we should be stamping out these 'undesireables', or that we should be taking care of ourselves?

Yep, I think drug dealers should be shot on site, end of problem

Speaking of natural selection, out of curiosity, if we are to stamp out anything that 'causes harm' how does this system of government 'protecting' the people from themselves in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM aid in natural selection?

This is a good point in other fields, but I will stick with the basic topic of drugs... OK ? Sticking with that, would you or anyone like to suggest that drugs are discriminate to those of a lower mental capacity ?

 

[razoredge]

And yet you continually use the lack of a definite answer for this to leap to the conclusion that the government will just lock everyone up for having trace amounts of it in their system, which is absurd. They'll just come up with a cutoff point for concentration and test people on that basis, like they do with alcohol. What's so impossible about that?

I lack a definitive answer ? Where did you answer the questions ? Talk about lacking ! Where did I say the government was going to lock people up for trace amounts ? How are they going to test people ? Did you read anything about how durgs are tested ? Its not as simple as blowing into some apparatus, THAT IS WHAT IM SAYING. Hows it going to work? you tell me. How it going to work and not be discriminate ? Just answer the fucking question already or get the fuck off my back

This may come as a shock to you, but some of us don't fucking care if the government makes money off of weed.

I dont give a fuck who gives a fuck.... I give a fuck... OK ? Can you read and comprehend and respond to what you read. I have been through it over and over agian and you just avoid it. If the government taxs drugs they become drug dealers. A businsess they do not belong in.

It's better that they make money off of it,

Can you read and comprehend and respond to what you read. I have been through it over and over agian and you just avoid it. Any money they "make" will be spend controling it, THERE WILL BE NO MONEY "MADE".

thus creating a chance that the money will be put to good use in other parts of our government, than that they shit money down the toilet on raids, crop burnings and arrests.

Can you read and comprehend and respond to what you read. The key word you used here is "a chance". Then think about our government and spending abit would you ? Let say they do "make" money dealing drugs, are you going to try to hope they dont squander the money on some other fools boondoggle ?

Not to mention that legalising it is a step to building popular support,

We need popular support for getting fucked up ? Alrighty then....

which could lead to pressure on the government to ease off of the taxes.

"Government easing off on taxes", that is rich and brings more about your responses to question. Do you know anything about the taxes that are on tobacco and alcohol and proposed further taxes on alcohol ?

You seem to be completely oblivious to how much legalisation could affect public opinion on cannabis.

You seem oblivious to how many decades we are into use of "cannabis" and that nearly all living today have already formed their opinion on first hand experience ?

Something to think about? How about leaving them the fuck alone because they're not doing anything wrong? Do you honestly think people who smoke pot are all scumbags and lowlives?

Oblivious ? "All", I try not to generalize. I have found most that deal weed to be of a dirtbag frame of mind. As for users, I still smoke fairly regular and yes... Im a dirtbag...

Way to narrow-mindedly lump all 'drugs' together as being "known to be harmful, addictive, and typically negatively life altering".

No my point was... what bounds do you want to use to leaglise one drug that wont be able to be applied to another. Read, comprehend !

There are plenty of regular pot-smokers and hallucinogen-takers who do absolutely no harm to anyone, have no addictions, and benefit emotionally, creatively or spiritually because of drug use.

There are plenty who smoke so much weed they are burnt to the core. There are plenty that have taken the bad trip and never got back ahold of their facilities. I've seen that first hand.... so whats your point ?

You can be a D.A.R.E. parrot all day long if you want,

is that what I am... OK... I hate DARE, they tell our children beginning in grade school to have thier parents arrested, but that whole elementary school/liberal bullshit is a whole nother topic.

That does not change the reality that there are responsible drug users everywhere.

Nor does it change the reality that there are irresponsible drug users and people prone to abuse/addiction

Take salvia for instance. It's been legal forever, and governments are only recently beginning to crack down on it, probably mainly because all the Youtube videos of people on it are frightening paranoid mothers. You never hear mentions of salvia users turning into bums and degenerates, getting hooked on it for life, or causing mayhem in the streets. Many people who do it, in fact, have no desire to use it again any time soon because it's so damn powerful.

Parents have every rite to be concerned if their kids are getting all fucked up, that is an inate fact of life. Its also quite possible that they know a bit about getting all fucked up. Gee I cant imagine why someone might not want to do stuff like that again anytime soon... its gotta be some kind of great getting psychotic... hell why should a parent be concerned ? Here have some more.....

Interesting that you talked about legistration being worked on for legalizing weed when at the same time salvia is being criminalized, I suspect this is very personal to you.

This is basically how it goes with all psychedelics - moralistic idiots with knee-jerk reactions to people "acting crazy" or looking "possessed by the devil" rush to ban something without bothering to understand the first thing about the drug or what it's like for the person on it.

Is that how it is ? OK

Drugs haven't destroyed our fucking society, and they aren't going to whether they're legal or illegal.

"Destroyed" deteriorated yes

The only real difference is whether governments decide to demonise and persecute people for drug use

Again, drug users are harressed to get to the dealers and to get them (users) into rehab and straightened out... ala Cronkites artical and the liberal bleeding hearts save the world attitude...btw.... if stuff does get legalized it will be those bleeding heart save the world types that do it, so then they can get real close and mammy you... the drug user back into shape.

or actually try to educate people on it and reduce the harm that's done by general ignorance

Are you suggesting that there is not enough information about drugs now ? Cause I've been around along time and the education has been out there during all that time, DIDNT MAKE A DIFFERENCE... hello

as well as the black market.

See here you are definantly not talking about weed or trippin

Drugs aren't fucking going away,

Nope but we can bash the hell out of scumbag dealers and producers all we want and that in itself is worth it

and they shouldn't go away either.

That is only your opinion and you are but one person

 

[PhantoMPhones]

Look Razor, look at your bloody responses to what people are trying to tell you... ALL YOU ARE DOING IS GOING 'NUH -UH, thats not how it would be' and 'la la la im not listening'. Sounds like one other particular member around here. You have given NO actual answers to people. 'look at alcoholism' are you effing kidding me mate? When I have time after my shift I will take your bait and discuss this alcoholism crap as it pertains to being an indicator regarding other substances, and even debunk your alcoholism theory to start with.


PROVIDE SOMETHING TO BACKUP WHAT YOU ARE SAYING! Saying 'look to alcoholism for an indicator' is absolutely asinine. Saying 'deal with it' means absolutely FUCK ALL. I specifically asked you, your little nice 3 word opinion aside, to provide me with data that can support your claims. You have since yet to provide a SINGLE SCRAP of support. For myself, I have almost come to the conclusion that you watch way too much TV, have far too much faith in the 'facts' that DARE and the government (who are no less corrupt or untrustworthy than any other organized crime syndicate) are spoon feeding you, that you seem to regurgitate automatically, and it is ABUNDANTLY clear that you are seriously lacking in the experience department when it comes to this issue, that would give you the necessary insight into this complex SOCIAL issue. And yes, experience is a crucial factor when it comes to something like this. If you are trying to nicely group all substances together for any reason regarding this issue, then you have failed miserably at tackling the issue from a logical and common sense point of view.

 

[razoredge]

Look Razor, look at your bloody responses to what people are trying to tell you... ALL YOU ARE DOING IS GOING 'NUH -UH, thats not how it would be' and 'la la la im not listening'. Sounds like one other particular member around here. You have given NO actual answers to people. 'look at alcoholism' are you effing kidding me mate? When I have time after my shift I will..............discuss this alcoholism crap as it pertains to being an indicator regarding other substances, and even debunk your alcoholism theory to start with.

That would be nice and quite a change from the norm around here

PROVIDE SOMETHING TO BACKUP WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!

My conclusions are my own from EXPERIENCE, I dont do the one sided research thing. Im not one that needs to see something in someone else writing to believe or draw my own conclusion. I find it odd that some people do.

Saying 'look to alcoholism for an indicator' is absolutely asinine.

Alcohol is legal, addictive and highly abused, what is assinine about that example ?

Saying 'deal with it' means absolutely FUCK ALL.

Saying deal with it is FUCK ALL, its my conclusion about making drugs legal and having corporations and the government capitalize off it. It is my rite to this conclusion.... DEAL WITH IT

I specifically asked you, your little nice 3 word opinion aside, to provide me with data that can support your claims.

The only data for drugs being legal in the states is what transpired prior to its illegalization, the over view of alcoholism and abuse in the states. Your fixation on "data" is yours, I have no such fixation.

You have since yet to provide a SINGLE SCRAP of support.

I have explained how random drug testing works, I have explained why its in place, I have explained the complications surrounding any legalization and the principles people want to use to promote legalization.... You on the other hand have not givin any statements as to any answers to these complications.

For myself, I have almost come to the conclusion that you watch way too much TV, have far too much faith in the 'facts' that DARE and the government (who are no less corrupt or untrustworthy than any other organized crime syndicate) are spoon feeding you, that you seem to regurgitate automatically,

You regurgitate bullshit, I just covered this, its as if you cant read and comprehend... let alone respond directly with any reasonable rebuttal

Interesing you just said what I have been saying all along, our government... in your words is "corrupt", in my words are fuckheads and will make a bigger mess of legalized drugs than the war on drugs is, but I guess your comprehension skills failed to obsorb that.

and it is ABUNDANTLY clear that you are seriously lacking in the experience department when it comes to this issue, that would give you the necessary insight into this complex SOCIAL issue.

Again failing with comprehension, Im saying it will be equally complex if legalized and of very little benefit because of "regulation" and all that would still be illegal. varis's "black market would still exist. The people involved in "crime" surrounding the drug trade would still need another crime for existance... being as there is no work in this country for the masses. Anything I've seen provided to condone legalization of DRUGS, is nothing more than a pipe dream of "the perfect world"

And yes, experience is a crucial factor when it comes to something like this.

Agree, but how come the onle "experience" I have seen you produce is the one sided propaganda of the promotion side. Nothing from within your own mind. Thats failure to me, failure to reason out all the aspects in your own head.

If you are trying to nicely group all substances together for any reason regarding this issue, then you have failed miserably at tackling the issue from a logical and common sense point of view.

I'm not "trying" to do anything. I have explained the complications I see, I have not gotten a single worthy direct rebuttal to debunk or answer the complications I see. You want to give me something ? Thats what I want, not what I have recieved for pages and pages, immature ranting "because its just not right". The "things shouldnt be this way" attitude is NOT an answer, nothing but blind idealism.

Your up, make the best of it (THE ISSUE... NOT ME), its what I've been waiting for.

 

[Dak]

I find it amusing that you are getting bent out of shape for people not showing any "proof" when you seem to preface most of what you say with "I think", "I believe", etc.

You can't prove that government income from marijuana tax is bad, you can't prove that it's a gateway drug just because it's a drug, you can't prove that any government profit would just be spent on regulation (which still be a profit, since right now we have no income from drugs and we spend money on the "war on ******, marijuana being one).

It is however, a fact that the War on Drugs is failing (based on rising drug use levels), that we spend way too much just on marijuana alone, and that marijuana isn't very addictive.

When you lay out any proof for any of your points instead of just spouting off your opinion on what is best,I will be all ears.

 

[razoredge]

I find it amusing that you are getting bent out of shape for people not showing any "proof" when you seem to preface most of what you say with "I think", "I believe", etc.

You can't prove that government income from marijuana tax is bad, you can't prove that it's a gateway drug just because it's a drug, you can't prove that any government profit would just be spent on regulation (which still be a profit, since right now we have no income from drugs and we spend money on the "war on ******, marijuana being one).

It is however, a fact that the War on Drugs is failing (based on rising drug use levels), that we spend way too much just on marijuana alone, and that marijuana isn't very addictive.

When you lay out any proof for any of your points instead of just spouting off your opinion on what is best,I will be all ears.

Not bent out of sahpe over that, bent for concentrating on "whats wrong with me" rather than addressing the issue and problems I bring up. Strange way of debating an issue... No ?

Of course I cant "prove".... there is NO direct MODEL... DUH ! I can only go by what our government has done with everything else in the past, you know... all the bureacratic bullshit. I can only say they have no right profiteering from drug trade. I know its a gateway drug for many, but I never even talked about that, only the two principles everyone wants to legalize it by as a "gateway"(not my word) to fight for legalization of other drugs. I know what I know about drugs and alcohol from first hand experience of living in the party generation for 3.5 decades... thats from the age of 16... I just turned 51... so make that since I was 14, that what 3.6/3.7... I have seen those brought down badly from it. i have seen those totally fried from it. I have seen those that squandered fortunes on it and been addicted (no not weed), and I have seen those that used their head as I did. Early on it seemd like only fun and games until life became more important and focus set in and then you get a chance to watch others slip off the deep end.

I have not spouted about "whats best", I have questioned the process and how far will it will be taken. As I said so many times... until random drug testing took place around the mid 90's, I never had a problem with it being illegal. I never once felt I wanted the government involved in my smoking affairs or have their measly little paws on the money, and I have had decades to think about it. As it stands if legalized, I would still be "illegal" for growing it... unless they allow up to a certain amount as it is for making alcohol, its kind of limited with alcohol and I dont care enough to look up the details. I would still live in fear of how they would deal with subriety tests... because if its piss in a cup and you smoked 5 days ago your DONE !

Frankly I dont understand what you guys dont get about these issues. Perhaps its just lack of insite as to how our government functions and how drug testing is currently done. As well as not having the experience of having one of your friends take the drug or alcohol plunge, or a girlfriend or relative. I have had all three and they were all people... decent people... I partied with. Some pulled through, some just arent right anymore. I consider myself both smart(or non addictive oriented) and lucky.

 

[Dak]

Your issues have already been addressed, and since you even admit that you can't prove your opinions on how it would be handled (merely guessing) then they are relativily null and void vs easily proven arguements about the failure of the current standard.

As far as "protecting people from themselves" which is what most of your second paragraph is, I really wish I could scream this again, but since it's the internet I can't so I will just type it (and not even in caps): It is not the government's job to protect you from yourself. If I want to throw myself off a proverbial cliff, that is my right. So what if someone has to sell me the drug? I chose to buy.

I still can't figure out your aversion to the gov't profitting off marijuana. They already profit off a million things and this is where you draw the line? We don't even have to get into crooked cops profitting from putting siezed shit back on the streets.

Fearing a "sobriety" test that, to me, looks pretty obvious won't be used if marijuana is legalised is also a weak arguement.

I have no personal interest in doing marijuana. Never have. But it isn't for the gov't to tell me I can't. Just like I believe in wearing seat belts but seat belt laws piss me off. None of the gov'ts god damn business whether I or anyone else wants to wear one or not.

 

[razoredge]

But you are somewhat misinformed and also want to easily overlook things.

Show me where my concerns have been directly addressed, you cant and its a safe bet that you will totally ignore my request to do so. You just keep running your mouth about bullshit rather than addressing the topic.

By simply looking at history, more recent in this case, its easy to find the indications I'm pointing out. Saying I cant prove something by producing a pie chart is silly because those in favor cant produce a model example of success or positive effects either. So anyone involved in this discussion can only speculate, its a matter of what you present and "because thats how it should be" doesnt cut it.

You want to interpret my diversion to the gov being in the drug business as that I support their other pandering and squandering. When what Im really doing is saying, yes, look at all the bullshit, this is what they will do either way.

I cant think of one instance when the gov. had new found money that didnt open the door for them to find more ways to spend the money and more.

If I want to throw myself off a proverbial cliff, that is my right.

Yes it is and more people should do so to help reduce the surface population. However no one is selling you that cliff and profiteering from it.

No one gets hooked on addictive drugs by intention, well there may be those of extreme dysfunction that glorify it enough but typically those that do just went too far, too frequently. I have known many already showing signs of having problems that will sit there in complete denial that they rounded the corner. If you dont want to address this issue then dont bring up the "war on drugs isnt working" line. I was not the one that brought up the "war on ****** issue, but I will respond to anything one wants to bring up as a distraction.

Fearing a "sobriety" test that, to me, looks pretty obvious won't be used if marijuana is legalised is also a weak arguement.

This is not worded very well and a bit incomplete for me to tell what you are talking about. Are you suggesting sobriety testing will be dropped ? Urine testing wont be used ? Sorry I dont see what you are offering here. If you have something to say say it, put some effort into it. Provide your well thought scenerio... if you have one.

No it isnt for the government to tell you you could not smoke weed and it hasnt even changed a thing for those that would, but it may have made it so those like you steer away from it. Where as say Varis wants to promote use of drugs by changing social acceptence. This is why I have brought up alcohol... do you drink ? What the government can do I make a stand against those that would sell weed and anything else potentially harmful. Here you have a second party involved, removeing any validity of the posed no liability crutch some of you are leaning on. {I now expect to hear about the A-T-F issue, as if anyone cant reason out the wall that exists for the ATF issue }

Just like I believe in wearing seat belts but seat belt laws piss me off. None of the gov'ts god damn business whether I or anyone else wants to wear one or not.

I'll be nice and simply ask you.... have you thought out the reason behind the seatbelt law ? If so why do you think we have it ? Who do you think is behind it ?

 

[Cythraul]

Yes it is and more people should do so to help reduce the surface population. However no one is selling you that cliff and profiteering from it.

How exactly is that relevant?

 

[Fenrisúlfr]

How exactly is that relevant?

In his communitarian utopia, somehow it is morally reprehensible to make a profit off anything he does not like. Give him no heed.

 

[razoredge]

Wait.... I thought I heard that little chirpy squeaky noise again.....

 

[razoredge]

How exactly is that relevant?

maybe you should ask the guy that brought it up

 

[PhantoMPhones]

No he's asking you... how is it relevant, simple question... answer, or do not and admit you don't have an answer.

By simply looking at history, more recent in this case, its easy to find the indications I'm pointing out.

For the sake of the thread, please put in point form what indications you are referring to, even if you've clearly stated them before, at least quote them, because I'm not sure what you are talking about. You seem to talk in circles completely ignoring the facts in favour of 'your opinion'.

Saying I cant prove something by producing a pie chart is silly because those in favor cant produce a model example of success or positive effects either.

Are you talking about legalization or pot in general? Either way, your point here is moot. It doesn't matter if 'we' can produce a model of 'success or positive effects', the whole point is WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSE IT HAD THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE THIS RESTRICTION ON PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE? If you are talking success in terms of fighting drugs and solving the 'problem', perhaps you need to re-frame things. The 'problem' only became a 'problem' when the government decided it was a 'problem'. If you are talking weed or drugs in general with regards to positive effects, while they exist if you've been listening, is still in its basic form, ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT. Its NOT for the government to decide whether I can put something 'bad' (and I use the term loosely) in my body or not. You may chalk this up to a 'do what I want' form of 'whining', but its exactly whats at the heart of this issue. Not money, not addiction, not the health and safety of people... CONTROL. And then you respond with something like;

No it isnt for the government to tell you you could not smoke weed and it hasnt even changed a thing for those that would, but it may have made it so those like you steer away from it.

And then I pose to you the question; 'What does that have to do with anything? Why does the government have the right to steer me away from it to begin with?'

1.Then comes your argument on 'harm'... In the case of marijuana, completely 100% disproved. And when comparing with alcohol, which you have avoided addressing that particular issue HIDING behind 'i dont think alcohol should be legal either' in that you've completely overlooked and dismissed the legality of other drugs, regarding YOUR GOVERNMENT that you are defending, NOT YOU.. understand? NOT YOUR OPINION OF ONE VERSUS THE OTHER, ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF LEGALITY OF OTHER DRUGS VS MJ etc as it pertains to LAW and politics at this time.

2. Argument of addiction, not in terms of personal choice, but in terms of socioeconomic ramifications. ALSO COMPLETELY DEBUNKED.... ANYTHING can be addictive, the issue is PHYSICAL DEPENDENCE. It is PROVEN that d9thc contains NO chemically addictive properties. Any addiction occurring is due to psychological predisposition to addiction, in which case in place of MJ perhaps they became addicted to scat porn or McDonalds. Addiction argument is moot. I have already and can again provide statistical information that shows addiction levels do not significantly rise, and even fall given informed and TRUTHFUL education about drugs in unison with gradual decriminalization. Eg. Portugal, Canada, Netherlands.

3.Government peddling drugs. DEBUNKED. The government has been in the drug industry and weapons trade for decades. Prescription drugs? Cigarettes? Alcohol? Caffeine? Need I go on? In light of everything going on and public opinion etc etc, the government could do with some potential extra revenue.

4. The argument that the government would not profit..... SO WHAT? If they at least stop this stupid farce of a 'war' they would be saving a shit load of cash. The interjection that addicts taking the place of criminals would take as much resources is DEBUNKED as the supposition of a dramatic increase in the number of addicts is 100% ABSOLUTELY FALSE AND UNTRUTHFUL. Even IF it was true, is it not better to let a person fail on his/her own as a free citizen and then seek the help of others to rectify, mature and evolve through ones mistakes rather than calling these people 'criminals' deserving of some kind of punishment, especially in the case of marijuana, over a plant that grows naturally in every part of the world except the arctic and antarctic cirlces, NATURALLY? Where does your precious natural selection come into play with YOUR OPINION?

5. The 'you can't do whatever you want because what if you wanted to murder? There has to be a line with freedom' argument. Well let's just call this an absolutely moronic argument to start out with. If you want to go this route then we can pose questions such as 'why do half the people driving, possess a driving license, considering the manner in which they operate their vehicle, or for that matter why are people at ALL, trusted to operate their vehicle safely when every couple minutes there's a car crash somewhere? Why are people allowed to consume alcohol? Why can I handle my own gasoline or have campfires in my backyard? The point is, why is this the line when so many other FAR more dangerous activities that happen on a by the second basis are perfectly legal and commonplace? We need only to look at the facts to see that marijuana is INFINTELY LESS HARMFUL THAN GETTING IN YOUR CAR TO DRIVE TO WORK.

6. The 'you must follow the law no matter what' argument, for WHATEVER reason it may be... Well let's just say if we've come to that, then you are almost completely lost. And thats not a personal attack.

I cant think of one instance when the gov. had new found money that didnt open the door for them to find more ways to spend the money and more.

Then whats your point? If it happens over and over again then 1) we have a failed government and 2) Then this matter doesn't mean anything anyways, if its not this it will be something else and theres no reason for the government to control people in this manner. The only thing that would be at stake here is personal freedom.

Yes it is and more people should do so to help reduce the surface population. However no one is selling you that cliff and profiteering from it.

As posed by another poster, why is this relevant? Especially in today's economy?

No one gets hooked on addictive drugs by intention

cigarettes? alcohol? The point being that all this BS the government is throwing out is not working to deter people and may even prompt people to try drugs. Given proper education you would see a decline in addiction. PUNISHMENT IS NOT THE ANSWER. You want to take a look at history, look at any instance when the government tried to control people completely. Doesn't usually work out in the end.

well there may be those of extreme dysfunction that glorify it enough but typically those that do just went too far, too frequently. I have known many already showing signs of having problems that will sit there in complete denial that they rounded the corner.

And how do illicit drugs differ from legal and prescription drugs in this capacity? or infatuations and fetishes etc? How about TV, food, computers, gaming, adrenaline junkies etc etc?

I'll be nice and simply ask you.... have you thought out the reason behind the seatbelt law ? If so why do you think we have it ? Who do you think is behind it ?

Absolutely irrelevant. Its a question of freedom not 'whats good for you'. You seem to fall back on this 'government knows whats best' or at the very least 'i think this is for the best therefore in this issue i agree with the government' bullshit that is an absolute crock of fascist brainwashing. Do you like the fact that the government tells you what is good, bad, right and wrong, what you can and can't do, and in the manner which you do it? What to say, how to act? If so, then your production as a slave, robot, and expendable resource has been a complete success.

If you dont want to address this issue then dont bring up the "war on drugs isnt working" line. I was not the one that brought up the "war on ****** issue, but I will respond to anything one wants to bring up as a distraction.

As I recall any time someone wants to question your arguments and focus in on the issue of the legality of marijuana, you always abundantly state that you are not only talking about marijuana. YOU reference the war on drugs as a cop out to dealing with marijuana on its own, and then use the replies to the 'war on other drugs' as a distraction. Not the other way around.



Heres some facts/myths and resources for proof, please feel free to prove your case with substantiated evidence. Otherwise it seems you are floating dead in the water. Constantly talking in circles refusing any reasonable arguments simply because they do not fit with your model of 'reality'. Sorry bud, it would seem your 'reality' has been engineered.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/

 

[razoredge]

Well this is going to take awhile , not sure at this point whether I will take all the time now. But I would like to say as I resd this response and most others, everybdy is coming to the totally wrong conclusions about my points of view and why I have them. I read responses and its like "WTF are they talking about" or "What makes them think that"

No he's asking you... how is it relevant, simple question... answer, or do not and admit you don't have an answer.

how is it not relevent ? How does it apply to drugs only bring harm to ones self ? The producer is involved, its a second party, willfully profiting from that which brings harm. Dont bounce back and forth from hard drugs to weed as EVERYONE has done during this topic then jump down my throat about it when your crying about "the war on ****** and "we have the right to fuck ourselves up if we want".... when you say that or want to apply those principles you are talking about ALL recreational drugs. The above applies to much of what the rest of your post addresses. I WONT REPEAT IT AGAIN.... OK ?

For the sake of the thread, please put in point form what indications you are referring to, even if you've clearly stated them before, at least quote them, because I'm not sure what you are talking about. You seem to talk in circles completely ignoring the facts in favour of 'your opinion'.

for the sake of the thread, read it from the beginning and try to pay attention, dont keep making your confusion my problem... OK ?

Are you talking about legalization or pot in general? Either way, your point here is moot. It doesn't matter if 'we' can produce a model of 'success or positive effects',

Alrighty, but for some reason I need to produce a model or Im ALL FUCKED IN THE HEAD ???????? OooooK!

The whole point is WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSE IT HAD THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE THIS RESTRICTION ON PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE? If you are talking success in terms of fighting drugs and solving the 'problem', perhaps you need to re-frame things. The 'problem' only became a 'problem' when the government decided it was a 'problem'.

yes a one sided propaganda assult by the pro drug camp would indicate this, but if you look in history (U.S.) to the times leading to this you WILL find there WAS problems. Probably not weed, I cant say, there was alot of problems with the addictive stuff and thats IS what started it, that IS where the government felt the need to step in.... that is their rite and duty, serve and protect its citizens. Hopefull you realize you are talking about ALL drugs here....

If you are talking weed or drugs in general with regards to positive effects, while they exist if you've been listening, is still in its basic form, ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT.

Im lost here, have no ideal what you are talking about/regarding "positive effects" "Irrelevent".... whatt ?

Its NOT for the government to decide whether I can put something 'bad' (and I use the term loosely) in my body or not. You may chalk this up to a 'do what I want' form of 'whining', but its exactly whats at the heart of this issue. Not money, not addiction, not the health and safety of people... CONTROL. And then you respond with something like;

No it isnt for the government to tell you you could not smoke weed and it hasnt even changed a thing for those that would, but it may have made it so those like you steer away from it.

I guess I must remind again that your are obvioulsy talking about ALL drugs. If not, to bad, this principle applies to all, get it or get off my back about it. With drugs there is a producer, a second party, willfully profiting from that which brings harm. Dont blame me for the legal system, have you paid much attention to law suit issues the past 4 decades ? Things have gotten more intense not less. Far more intense than when they illegalized drugs. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH MY BASING MY VIEW ON THIS FROM WHAT I HAVE WITNESSED TRANSPIRE IN MY LIFE TIME.... GOT IT ?

You want to change a very base, minor issue based on principles. All fine and well, but Im saying there is a bigger monster that has become so boggled in bureacracy and ALL those that WHINE for THEIR SELF INTERESTS that this thing.... THIS ISSUE IS NOT AS CUT AND DRY AS "we should have the right"

And then I pose to you the question; 'What does that have to do with anything? Why does the government have the right to steer me away from it to begin with?'

I said that to give Dakyrn something to think about, if you would have avioded getting distracted in your pursuit you would have realized from what I wrote that we have another pro drug poster... Varis, who wants to promote drug use and make it totally socially acceptable, thus someone like Dakryn may have had an interest in being a smoker. Thus why I asked if he drank alcohol. Look either follow along and realize what Im refering to or quit wasting my time. It should have been clear what I was talking about.

1.Then comes your argument on 'harm'... In the case of marijuana, completely 100% disproved.

whats disproved... weed causing harm ? OK... Im sure there is only one side of the camp on that issue... right ? Sorry I know better, its not totally detrimental but long term effects and short term focus, is effected. I DO NOT NEED TO LOOK IT UP TO PROVE IT, you research junkies can do that for yourself, IF you are truely honest people you will find the evidence and accept it.

And when comparing with alcohol, which you have avoided addressing that particular issue HIDING behind 'i dont think alcohol should be legal either' in that you've completely overlooked and dismissed the legality of other drugs,

Hiding.... what !!!!! I refered to being discusted by the fact that I have first hand... personally... been let down by alcoholics and all the other problems revolving about booze and somehow Im hiding.... why are you beggin me to ask you if your retarded.... because you clearly are not so please stop !

regarding YOUR GOVERNMENT that you are defending

I FUCKING HATE MY GOVERNMENT AND ALL GOVERNMENTS WORLD WIDE, do NOT go here again (see the begging for retard comments again please) Difference here between myself and those worried about "if we have the right to do as we please for what ever our PERSONAL interests are" I'd rather straighten out the problems of bureacracy and human/government ignorance than worry about something as petty as sneaking around to smoke my weed.

NOT YOU.. understand?

yarite.... whatever

NOT YOUR OPINION OF ONE VERSUS THE OTHER, ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF LEGALITY OF OTHER DRUGS VS MJ etc as it pertains to LAW and politics at this time.

sorry lost, but Im sure all I have addressed above applies... over... and over... and over.... and over again........

2. Argument of addiction, not in terms of personal choice, but in terms of socioeconomic ramifications. ALSO COMPLETELY DEBUNKED.... ANYTHING can be addictive, the issue is PHYSICAL DEPENDENCE. It is PROVEN that d9thc contains NO chemically addictive properties. Any addiction occurring is due to psychological predisposition to addiction, in which case in place of MJ perhaps they became addicted to scat porn or McDonalds. Addiction argument is moot.

Who argued weed is addictive ? I only stated that is was addictive and if you reference said post you would see that I was talking psychological addicting... so tell me again what is moot ?

I have already and can again provide statistical information that shows addiction levels do not significantly rise, and even fall given informed and TRUTHFUL education about drugs in unison with gradual decriminalization. Eg. Portugal, Canada, Netherlands.

I have seen footage of the drug scene in Amsterdam, Im not impressed and wouldnt want that here (legal), neither would most of the American population.

It is good to see you stressed "significantly rise" I wouldnt know but would be sceptical of any studies that show either way. Im very leary of one sided views and prefer to use my own "vision".

Being as your talking addiction levels, once again I must assume your talking drugs, not weed... NO ? I'd have a hard time believing we'd be a better society if the hard drug users and dealers in jail were out on the street. Then no doubt if it were legal and we were saving all that money on drug enforcement.... lol.... we would be spending it on rehab, a nearly worthless venture. Got any HONEST stats on reformed druggies or alchys ?

We have a education system in this country that if you deal drugs and get caught you are going to jail, that has had a medium level effect as deterant. We have plenty of drug education in this country, for decades now, its effect ? probably middle of the road, that and illegalization has most likely kept Dyrkyn from becomeing a smoker, but he has yet to respond to that question, so I shouldnt assume but am useing it as a valid example regardless the person.

3.Government peddling drugs. DEBUNKED. The government has been in the drug industry and weapons trade for decades. Prescription drugs? Cigarettes? Alcohol? Caffeine? Need I go on?

I fail to see how you have debunked anything here. What you ARE doing is validating our fucked up government.... that you also want to condemn... all according to your needs at the time... interesting.

I dont want them further into the drug trade and think its totally fucked up to have the government profiting from "recreational" drugs that fuck people up. I dont see why its hard to understand that I cant wrap my head around that idea...

4. The argument that the government would not profit..... SO WHAT? If they at least stop this stupid farce of a 'war' they would be saving a shit load of cash. The interjection that addicts taking the place of criminals would take as much resources is DEBUNKED as the supposition of a dramatic increase in the number of addicts is 100% ABSOLUTELY FALSE AND UNTRUTHFUL.

I dont think its money the people of this country want saved. I did address how government wastes money earlier, I would personally focus here. I did address a cheaper, faster way to lower the scumbag ratio... but Im sure you support government control of these kinds of thing.... lol

if it was true, is it not better to let a person fail on his/her own as a free citizen and then seek the help of others to rectify, mature and evolve through ones mistakes rather than calling these people 'criminals' deserving of some kind of punishment,

They can do it that route now if they choose all the while knowing they are involved in an illegal activity, I am OK with that.

especially in the case of marijuana, over a plant that grows naturally in every part of the world except the arctic and antarctic cirlces, NATURALLY?

I have already addressed this issue, repeatedly, you are clueless as to my feeling on it because you are easily distracted and loose focus.

Where does your precious natural selection come into play with YOUR OPINION?

so we talking weed or hard drugs here ?

5. The 'you can't do whatever you want because what if you wanted to murder? There has to be a line with freedom' argument. Well let's just call this an absolutely moronic argument to start out with.

weed or hard drugs ? make the choice ! Hard drugs, the dealer becomes a muderer... any questions ?

If you want to go this route then we can pose questions such as 'why do half the people driving, possess a driving license, considering the manner in which they operate their vehicle, or for that matter why are people at ALL, trusted to operate their vehicle safely when every couple minutes there's a car crash somewhere?

Is not the automobile primarily a necessity to get to work ? Sorry but I think that is a totally irrevelent comparision... where jumping off cliffs specifically designed to jump off from is very relevent.

Why are people allowed to consume alcohol?

I question this everyday, however Im educated enough to know why they could not fight that battle.

Why can I handle my own gasoline or have campfires in my backyard?

your answer "There has to be a line with freedom'" Works for me

The point is, why is this the line when so many other FAR more dangerous activities that happen on a by the second basis are perfectly legal and commonplace?

Seems some intrusions are over the top, no ? Its a simple evaluation to me.

We need only to look at the facts to see that marijuana is INFINTELY LESS HARMFUL THAN GETTING IN YOUR CAR TO DRIVE TO WORK.

I have less concern over the personal harm of weed than the principles put forth about why it should be legal. {got it yet? }

As far as I know we need to drive to work, we dont need to smoke weed.

6. The 'you must follow the law no matter what' argument, for WHATEVER reason it may be... Well let's just say if we've come to that, then you are almost completely lost. And thats not a personal attack.

Did I say that ? ... Didnt think so !

Then whats your point? If it happens over and over again then 1) we have a failed government and

NO SHIT !

2) Then this matter doesn't mean anything anyways, if its not this it will be something else and theres no reason for the government to control people in this manner. The only thing that would be at stake here is personal freedom.

Personal freedom if anything more than the bullshit concept it is. Would allow me to put a bullit though the head of anyone that sells drugs to my people.

As posed by another poster, why is this relevant? Especially in today's economy?

I covered this already

cigarettes? alcohol? The point being that all this BS the government is throwing out is not working to deter people and may even prompt people to try drugs. Given proper education you would see a decline in addiction. PUNISHMENT IS NOT THE ANSWER.

"May even" thank you.

I cant understand how people dont think the education is out there, but guess what it doesnt even work as good as the drug laws. Even with the education of the drug laws in themeselves "your going to jail if busted" have a minimal effect. However all these combined have their effect. Perhaps people if that concerned could just stop being assholes.

You want to take a look at history, look at any instance when the government tried to control people completely. Doesn't usually work out in the end.

did they leave them living ? what could one expect then

And how do illicit drugs differ from legal and prescription drugs in this capacity?

Seems I covered my concern with this when I talked about the boondoggle that would be created with making "recreational ****** controled drugs. But again everyone is distracted and has avoided that subject.... go figure

or infatuations and fetishes etc? How about TV, food, computers, gaming, adrenaline junkies etc etc?

yes there are alot of problems concerning these issues

Absolutely irrelevant. Its a question of freedom not 'whats good for you'. You seem to fall back on this 'government knows whats best' or at the very least 'i think this is for the best therefore in this issue i agree with the government' bullshit that is an absolute crock of fascist brainwashing.

Sorry to tell you but your responce was a complete FAILURE, do you care to try to answer the seatbelt question again ? I'll leave it open, in good faith that someone is smart enough to know what the seatbelt law is about.

Do you like the fact that the government tells you what is good, bad, right and wrong, what you can and can't do, and in the manner which you do it? What to say, how to act? If so, then your production as a slave, robot, and expendable resource has been a complete success.

case you havent figured it out yet I dance to my own tune, dont assume my conclusions and deductions were based on any outside source, only my own experience.

As I recall any time someone wants to question your arguments and focus in on the issue of the legality of marijuana, you always abundantly state that you are not only talking about marijuana.

False, I have bounced back and forth depending on what I was addressing BY OTHERS

I focused on weed, I only want the random drug testing to stop. I'm happy to take my chances within the current laws and would stand my ground if busted. However I dont want to promote the smoking of weed, I simply have no shame for being a smoker. I see weed for what it is, its not a positive thing, it distracted me in high school(along with music, girls and cars), it toasted my short term memory, but its something I do... occasionally these days

YOU reference the war on drugs as a cop out to dealing with marijuana on its own, and then use the replies to the 'war on other drugs' as a distraction. Not the other way around.

False, I did not bring up the war on drugs, I did reply to it. In fact it was YOU that brought up the war on drugs (my short term memory is not that bad... lol) What I did say was the principles of legalizing weed based on "we have the right to do as we please" and "we will save money if we stop the drug investigations and drug busts" also apply to all recreational drugs.

My main concerns before this distraction of trying to get your head straight on my thoughts on this matter, WERE

1. How are they going to deal with drug testing ?
2. Sobriety tests?
3. Does the government have the rite to prosper from being drug dealers ? Because if they legalize for the purpose of "sin taxes" that is exactly what they are doing, becoming drug dealers.
4. Do we want corporations to be the new drug pushers ?
5. Do we want the government to know whos smoking weed ? because Im sure with a legal system, they will try to control it as a "controled substance". If its as simple as walking into the convient store and grabing a bag of weed and paying at the cash register as beer is, well thats one thing (excluding my above issues) but I doubt this would be the scenerio, as I know how governments function.

I think there was other valid concerns I brought up. But...

Heres some facts/myths and resources for proof, please feel free to prove your case with substantiated evidence. Otherwise it seems you are floating dead in the water. Constantly talking in circles refusing any reasonable arguments simply because they do not fit with your model of 'reality'. Sorry bud, it would seem your 'reality' has been engineered.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/

Yes, this is a one sided propaganda thingy that reeks as bad as a bong

Myth: Marijuana Can Cause Permanent Mental Illness.

Not to the degree of the other side of the propagana but not innocent as the other wants to make it. We are now into decades of my generation of smokers and the effects are becoming obvious. Your into research, check "the other sides" propaganda, and weed and sort it out for yourself, I dont have the time. I know, I see the results through experienced eyes.

Myth: Marijuana is Highly Addictive. Long term marijuana users experience physical dependence and withdrawal, and often need professional drug treatment to break their marijuana habits.

This proves the propaganda of this source because no one has had this opinion since the 60's except that generation (my parents/grandparents) that were exposed to the other propaganda. Why they even addressed it is laughable

Myth: Marijuana Is More Potent Today Than In The Past. Adults who used marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s fail to realize that when today's youth use marijuana they are using a much more dangerous drug.

Any good pothead knows this is total bullshit. We were smoking crap in the 70's. Even the good stuff "Columbian gold" "Panama Red" doesnt come close to what is grown in this country today

Myth: Marijuana Offenses Are Not Severely Punished. Few marijuana law violators are arrested and hardly anyone goes to prison. This lenient treatment is responsible for marijuana continued availability and use.

My experience with this seems contrary, so I may be wrong... or I may be right. I would look to the abundance of marijuana users as throwing the stats high for those that do get jail time. Most I would suspect is little more than a night in the county lock up, which throws the "jailed for weed" stats high as well because it doesnt specify. Then they might get some community service, probation and rehab... which as I recall you all support.

"This lenient treatment is responsible for marijuana continued availability and use."

I'm not experienced with anyone who wants more punishment for potheads. maybe they are out there, I cant say. Whatever the topic the countries population will always be mixed in its opinion. Meddling is something people do, check your local zoning boards, town boards, city governments, school boards, lobby groups... get the picture... its the human element rearing its ugly face.

Myth: Marijuana is More Damaging to the Lungs Than Tobacco. Marijuana smokers are at a high risk of developing lung cancer, bronchitis, and emphysema.

Dont see the point of this. Does anyone want to agrue that it has no ill effects on the lungs. There is a current train of thought amounst old potheads watching their friends die that maybe it does cause cancer, just a paranoia in my opinion. We are all going to die, but lets not deny the repulsive effect a nice long toke has on the lungs........ Paaaalease!

Well I made it that far.... have a good day.... lol

 

[PhantoMPhones]

So in the end you've said absolutely nothing once again, congratulations.

Asides from the fact that you yourself are saying you have NOTHING to back any of your 'claims' up asides from your own 'experience', 'eyes' as you are calling it... Try again. Btw refusing a completely legitimate request to clearly state your opinion or questions, is in itself admitting defeat. I have read your posts again and again and I can't pin down what it is exactly that you are trying to say, because you seem to do a lot of backtracking and blatant dismissal while making claims that seem to conflict with eachother, or because I am failing to comprehend. Thats why I asked for you to clarify, I didn't need some dick snide reply like you're fucking 14 or something. Here's the rest of my reply in a format that you seem to understand better;

I cant understand how people dont think the education is out there, but guess what it doesnt even work as good as the drug laws. Even with the education of the drug laws in themeselves "your going to jail if busted" have a minimal effect. However all these combined have their effect. Perhaps people if that concerned could just stop being assholes.

lol omfg, you fail. Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02.

1. How are they going to deal with drug testing ?
2. Sobriety tests?

You've missed the point, yet again. You're so worried about testing and rules and control. You place so called order/safety and BLIND FUCKING OBEDIENCE over human interest. You place your ideas of right, wrong, acceptable, unacceptable as the only reasonable answer, ('our position' on the other hand is being backed up by medical evidence) and for a person who doesn't want 'to go there' you seem to eat the feces your government is feeding you with a big smile on your face, not to mention seeming to lie back while the government fucks you from behind with laws that you can 'deal with' or 'take your chances with', despite their fascist nature. For someone who talks about personal experience you SEEM to have NO grasp on the issue of MJ legalization. imho. Perhaps it is an issue for you? Perhaps you are easily addicted and thusly have really only had limited exposure and have concluded the 'evils' of substances based on your own susceptibility or your observations in your small sample of the population, as there you have no evidence to support your claims being cogent and representative of the norm or majority. Then again perhaps this is completely untrue. I cannot say for certain thusly I can only make conjectures, nor do I believe it is a point worth dwelling on for obvious tangential reasons. Though I believe it is safe to assume that you aren't one to balk at a prescription painkiller (or local anesthetic) or otherwise prescribed medication....

3. Does the government have the rite to prosper from being drug dealers ?
Because if they legalize for the purpose of "sin taxes" that is exactly what they are doing, becoming drug dealers.
4. Do we want corporations to be the new drug pushers ?

Oh, you must be new here... Welcome to Earth.

5. Do we want the government to know whos smoking weed ? because Im sure with a legal system, they will try to control it as a "controled substance". If its as simple as walking into the convient store and grabing a bag of weed and paying at the cash register as beer is, well thats one thing (excluding my above issues) but I doubt this would be the scenerio, as I know how governments function.

lol....weak. You seriously wrote this, re-read it and decided to hit post?

and for the love of kittens;

Who argued weed is addictive ? I only stated that is was addictive and if you reference said post you would see that I was talking psychological addicting... so tell me again what is moot ?

Actually originally you did not make the distinction. You brought up addiction and referenced 'sucking in' and 'gateway' nonsense. This is an example of backtracking or at the least an example of where you tried to generalize the point, only stating the point in its most basic form hoping nobody would catch you on it. Do you seriously not understand why this is NOT A VALID ARGUMENT?

Finally, to repost what I have found to be the best post here yet;

Am I supposed to take this seriously? You've gone from flatly denying that legalising a drug would be of any benefit to its users, to suggesting that people who buy hard drugs deserve to die, to simply "nuh-uh"-ing the idea that weed could ever become legal, despite the fact that California and Massachusetts both have bills in the works for it. This is just pathetic dude.

If you want to keep bull-headedly presuming the worst about every possible aspect of drug legalisation while offering no evidence for your outlandish claims, this argument is just useless, and I'm not going to waste my time. You're clearly wrapped up in your own narrow opinions and unable to comprehend the bigger picture here.

-------------------------------------------



Look man, I'm not TRYING to offend you , and I've been rather couth up until now, I have indicated no offense intended and stated clearly that any conjectures about you are made as pure hypothesis as it might pertain to the root of your particular view(?), but YOU seem to be making personal insults for no other reason. If you would like to continue this as adults I'm game, but your condescending tone is absolutely immature and rather ignorant considering the short sightedness of your arguments and responses. As it has been said, your arguments have been addressed. If you disagree, I will ask once more for you to write out in point form your exact (alleged) questions, exactly as you would have them answered, because you seem to go 'well what about...X?' and then someone says 'well the thing about X is..' and then you say 'well thats not what I asked'. Which is not an accusation, in the best of circumstances this is a communication failure.

 

[razoredge]

So in the end you've said absolutely nothing once again, congratulations.

bullshit, its apparent to me now that you are retarded if you want to sit there and say I didnt say anything. I did notice your post offered nothing pertaining to the topic.... go figure

Asides from the fact that you yourself are saying you have NOTHING to back any of your 'claims' up asides from your own 'experience', 'eyes' as you are calling it... Try again./

I did not say I had nothing to back up my points. I said there was no model in a response to this

You can't prove that government income from marijuana tax is bad, you can't prove that it's a gateway drug just because it's a drug, you can't prove that any government profit would just be spent on regulation (which still be a profit, since right now we have no income from drugs and we spend money on the "war on ******, marijuana being one).

Why do I even have to prove that the government making money from marijuana is bad ? Aside from the fact that Im entitled to my opinion as anybody is... To me it is bad for a few reasons.

1. They have no honest rite for any "sin" taxes. They are unfair taxes because they discriminate, the excessive taxes on tobacco and alcohol are outragous, they have also been on a rapid rise, this rapid rise and the fact that they exist validates my concern, got it? Its my belief that nothing in this country should be subject to any tax outside of the standard sales tax.

The war with England for independence was in part fueled by this very kind of excessive tax and terriffs. So am I wrong there ? Address it directly or shut up

2. The government earning money from drug dealing makes them accessory and by law therefore liable for any harm.

I did not talk anywhere about gateway drugs, Dakryn and you were the first to go into that. Then I addressed it. Do I want to do some research to locate the evidence to prove to you children that its a "gateway" drug? nope! Its typically the first drug used by those that would venture down that road. Does that make it a gateway drug ? You choose. Can it be proven that it is NOT a gateway drug ? Why something so foolish would be addressed in the first place is beyond me, the entire "gateway" thing is no concern of mine.

I cant prove the government would go crazy regulating weed ? Are you kidding me? They have gone crazy regulating everything else, from the lenght of a sleeve on a Tee-shirt to how people raise their children, get a fucking clue... its a trend that has been on a steady rise. Hows abouts you prove they dont spend excessive amounts of money regulating petty things, let alone imagine how ape shit they would go with a drug.

Btw refusing a completely legitimate request to clearly state your opinion or questions, is in itself admitting defeat.

Defeat ? You are a child arent you? age ? So OK, let me make a legitimate request that you show me where I have not clearly stated my opinions and questions ?

I have read your posts again and again and I can't pin down what it is exactly that you are trying to say.

I cant help you with this, I feel I have made my views and concerns blantently obvious

because you seem to do a lot of backtracking

Show me the backtracking you are concerned about

and blatant dismissal

Show me the dismissal

while making claims that seem to conflict with eachother,

Show me the conflicting interests

or because I am failing to comprehend.

I am showing you your failure to comprehend

Thats why I asked for you to clarify,

I did clarify, over and over again

I didn't need some dick snide reply like you're fucking 14 or something.

You asked me to go back through 4 pages of this topic to sort out for you that which you are failing to comprehend... it deserved any kind of reply I gave and frankly I could have been much harsher

Here's the rest of my reply in a format that you seem to understand better;



lol omfg, you fail. Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02...Nice to meet you, 6902343123-02.

Get real, apparently you aim to prove your a retard

You've missed the point, yet again. You're so worried about testing and rules and control.

Yes I am for valid reasons. I have witnessed 35 years of steadily increasing regulations and controls as already mentioned above. Prove Im wrong !

I have a great concern for testing as I know first hand the failure and discrimination of urine testing. Its the one currently used because its the easiest, fastest and least expensive.

Comparing alcohol breath tests to determine current blood alcohol levels is easy.

It would now seem like an amazing feat if one of you know it alls addressed how employment drug testing and driving sobriety tests would be handled if weed was legalized. I have asked many times and all you guys have done is side step it.

You place so called order/safety and BLIND FUCKING OBEDIENCE over human interest.

Blind fucking obedience ? you sound to be getting desperate

Did you just put "order/safety" on the opposite side of the fence from human interest ? thats rich

You place your ideas of right, wrong, acceptable, unacceptable as the only reasonable answer,

You know it alls are basing your side of the picture on the same exact thing "it should be our rite" "it would save money", so whats your problem here ?

('our position' on the other hand is being backed up by medical evidence)

What medical evidence ? The stuff on that pro drug propaganda web site ?

and for a person who doesn't want 'to go there' you seem to eat the feces your government is feeding you with a big smile on your face,

Oh really? Man you are getting desperate

not to mention seeming to lie back while the government fucks you from behind with laws that you can 'deal with' or 'take your chances with', despite their fascist nature.

Are you suggesting that the institution of government has not been fucking people over since the beginning of human history ? Are you suggesting that I have not in this topic expressed my disgust with regulations. Sorry but you are the one throwing out the contradictions here.

"fascist nature" I have no use for political tags

For someone who talks about personal experience you SEEM to have NO grasp on the issue of MJ legalization. imho.

You key words here are "in my opinion". What I have done in this topic is address the complications and indications of marijuana legalization and requested that somebody offer solutions. 4 pages and still nothing... imagine that.

Perhaps it is an issue for you? Perhaps you are easily addicted and thusly have really only had limited exposure and have concluded the 'evils' of substances based on your own susceptibility or your observations in your small sample of the population,

Didnt I state I was lucky as not to have addictive problems ? Let me guess... ya want some proof, dontcha.... want me to go have a exam ? get involved in some survey... watchya need sonny ?

as there you have no evidence to support your claims being cogent and representative of the norm or majority.

Do I need evidence that weed is typically the first drug used by teens ? Perhaps this has changed as I know theres tons of pills out there today, many stolen or sold prescription drugs.

Do I need to prove our government has gone regulation crazy ?

Do I need to prove our government has gone tax crazy ?

Do I need to show you some "burnouts" to prove to you weed does have negative long and short term effects ?

DO I need to show that alcohol... a legal mind altering substance is the most abused subtance ?

Do I need to show you hundreds of liable law suits before you understand second party responsibility ? or third party accessary ?

Do I need to show you malpractice cases brought against Doctors ?

Do I need to show you that drugs are a controled substance... prescribed by Doctors and carefully controlled through the pharm industry ?

Do I need to do some research to show you cost numbers of the ATF ?

Do I need to do research to show you expense numbers of how much it costs the FDA to control and regulate individual items under its jurisdiction ?

Funny... an aspestos law suit commercial just came on the tube....

Then again perhaps this is completely untrue. I cannot say for certain thusly I can only make conjectures

Ahha.... now your on to something

nor do I believe it is a point worth dwelling on for obvious tangential reasons.

Whats the matter ? Are you admitting the subject is abit more complicated that "we should have the rite" ?

Though I believe it is safe to assume that you aren't one to balk at a prescription painkiller (or local anesthetic) or otherwise prescribed medication....

What are you saying here ? Whats the point of relevancy ?

Oh, you must be new here... Welcome to Earth.

Whats this supposed to mean, are you validating how things work ? Imagine that........

lol....weak. You seriously wrote this, re-read it and decided to hit post?

5. Do we want the government to know whos smoking weed ? because Im sure with a legal system, they will try to control it as a "controled substance". If its as simple as walking into the convient store and grabing a bag of weed and paying at the cash register as beer is, well thats one thing (excluding my above issues) but I doubt this would be the scenerio, as I know how governments function.

lol... weak... response... try again

and for the love of kittens;

Who argued weed is addictive ? I only stated that is was addictive and if you reference said post you would see that I was talking psychological addicting... so tell me again what is moot ?

Actually originally you did not make the distinction.

You brought up addiction and referenced 'sucking in' and 'gateway' nonsense.

Oh really ? I could swear it went something like this :

Actually weed is addictive, there is NO physical addiction, the body doesnt go through hell. The mind is another story, not hell but a desire not easy to resist occurs. I am placeing no emphisis on this just putting the rumor in its place.

This is an example of backtracking or at the least an example of where you tried to generalize the point, only stating the point in its most basic form hoping nobody would catch you on it. Do you seriously not understand why this is NOT A VALID ARGUMENT?

huh what ? :zombie:

Finally, to repost what I have found to be the best post here yet;

Am I supposed to take this seriously? You've gone from flatly denying that legalising a drug would be of any benefit to its users, to suggesting that people who buy hard drugs deserve to die, to simply "nuh-uh"-ing the idea that weed could ever become legal, despite the fact that California and Massachusetts both have bills in the works for it. This is just pathetic dude.

If you want to keep bull-headedly presuming the worst about every possible aspect of drug legalisation while offering no evidence for your outlandish claims, this argument is just useless, and I'm not going to waste my time. You're clearly wrapped up in your own narrow opinions and unable to comprehend the bigger picture here.

yes that was a Varis great cop out so as not to respond directly to my concerns. The best response to a concern I got from Varis was regarding how drug testing would be done and his reply was something along the lines of "they will come up with something" "they have tests for alcohol". I suppose I should be crying out for "proof"... lol


-------------------------------------------

Look man, I'm not TRYING to offend you , and I've been rather couth up until now, I have indicated no offense intended and stated clearly that any conjectures about you are made as pure hypothesis as it might pertain to the root of your particular view(?), but YOU seem to be making personal insults for no other reason.

No just like you I make them as pure hypothesis.

If you would like to continue this as adults I'm game, but your condescending tone is absolutely immature and rather ignorant considering the short sightedness of your arguments and responses. As it has been said, your arguments have been addressed. If you disagree, I will ask once more for you to write out in point form your exact (alleged) questions, exactly as you would have them answered, because you seem to go 'well what about...X?' and then someone says 'well the thing about X is..' and then you say 'well thats not what I asked'. Which is not an accusation, in the best of circumstances this is a communication failure.

Again very rich. As I look back to the quotes I have done of yours in this very post and I used your entire post... there is not one response to questions asked in the previous post you were responding too... let alone many others just since we have been talking. You didnt ever re-address the seat-belt issue... not origional brought up by me... but quite relevent in the legal extremes our society has come to. Face it your copping out, dont have the answers, dont have enough experience, get your information... selectively... from biased on line sources.

Sure boys "in a perfect world" it should be just one great big free for all, but guess what, its a human world and therefore FAR from perfect.

Its been all fucked up by those that abuse whatever it is that suits their greed and/or selfishness. I find it interesting that this word abuse in regards to having human rites is most found connected to drugs, violence and governmental powers. Combining these abuses its not hard for me to see how things came to be as they are today.

I have spent my life pondering what is it is mankind goes not get that would not cause them to pull their heads out of their ass and behave responsibly. But alas, I have to accept that it is the flaw of the human equation, so with that mankind has to accept their responsibility for things having become what they are.

Carry on, if you want to address my concerns with some viable theory as to how to get around them, I will show interest.

If you want to continue trying to cut me down, because you cant deal with these issues, I can play that game too.... its all about choices