Ace_O_Spades

*sigh*

more rhetoric... "Pot users are losers!!"

Tell that to my 4.0 GPA, and I'm a regular user. Not everyone who smokes weed will be a ditch digger, or the occupational equivalent. I don't even know why I bother replying to Ustwo posts really... I'd be better suited banging my head against a wall.

Ignorance breeds contempt though... and I see nothing but ignorance over the control of a substance that is far, FAR less dangerous/addictive than some legal substances.

__________________
Feh.

stevo

and lobbyists from the beer companies and companies like Dupont and 3M.

I think it should be legalized only because the problems prohibition creates. I think one of the biggest problems of prohibition is the misinformation campaign. If we had honest messages about pot. messages that talk about the consequences like lack of motivation/desire, an increase in procrastination, depression etc. Instead we have commercials showing girls getting pregnant and kids shooting eachother with guns. Then some kid smokes pot and realizes he didn't go crazy nor did he get pregnant so he stops listening to any anti-drug message. I also don't think there will be more pot-heads in the world if its leaglized, just less criminals.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

roachboy

i dont see the issue here.
legalize marijuana....why not? i have never seen a single coherent argument against doing so and i certainly havent in this thread.

most of what i would say has already been said, so i'lllimit myself to a couple remarks:

i have been around alot more university-aged students than ustwo has, and this in the past decade...
if you--or anyone---thinks that marijuana use amongst college-aged kids is problematic--particularly when it is compared with alcohol----i would then respectfully submit that you do not know what you are talking about.


the "winners at life" vs. "alfred e. newman" dichotomy that ustwo has repeated and apparently is sticking to is so thoroughly stupid that i have to assume that he wrote the initial post over his third highball, thought it witty at the time, and now repeats it just to yank the chain of those who would be offended by it.


all this is predictable enough--but what made me laugh, however, was the extension of the "winners at life" vs. "losers" to "winners at life" vs. artists----and the argument (implicitur) that artists can be stoners because they require "an entirely different skill set"....

i would be curious for a bit more of an explanation of what, if anything, was meant by that.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

Being in the business of drug abuse and addiction, I have to laugh at people who feel that alcohol is ok but weed is going to destroy society and people.

Alcohol turns into adelhyde in your body, it is extremely toxic, from the first drink you ever take your body builds a physical tolerence (it takes more and more to achieve desired affect) and the brain chemistry starts to change negatively. Basically, alcohol fucks with your body and changes not only your chemistry but it also changes cell structure. You want a drink every night to relax after work, your tolerence will go up, and you will find yourself drinking more and more to get that desired effect (won't happen overnight, but it will happen).

Marijuana does not do any of the above. Physical tolerence to marijuana never changes. You never have to smoke more than the first time to achieve desired results. Psychologically, depends on the person. Basically, smoking one joint when getting off work to relax will give you pretty much the same effect every night for 50 years. Psychologically, that's up to the person, but in most cases, they never feel a need to increase. Those who do need more, usually, are searching for that zing and will find a drug that will give it to them.

There are only 2 drugs that a cold turkey withdrawal will kill an otherwise healthy person: benzodiazipines (valium, xanax, klonipine, etc) and alcohol. Opiates you may wish you could die, cocaine, meth and others are basically pschological with very limited physical withdrawal.

An alcoholic must maintain a certain BAC in their body at all times, when that drops below what the body needs, withdrawal symptoms start (the shakes, blood pressure skyrockets, DT's, etc).

For marijuana none of this happens.

Those are the facts, alcohol is by far the worst drug out there, as far as what it does physically.

So for those who wish to argue alcohol is ok and marijuana isn't.... look at the facts and do some true research.

I see alcoholics and their lives destroyed very effectively by alcohol, everyday, I have yet to see someone who has had their life destroyed as effectively because all they did was smoke weed.

Should weed be legal? Yes.

I think the numbers of those using it will actually decrease within 10 years. I would much rather see a regulated, taxed controlled product out then to see people helping organized crime and terrorist cells and not knowing what they are truly getting. A lot of the street weed today is being mixed with opiates, crack, meth, or you name it.

In the end if you are going to become addicted to something in life, you'll find what zings you, legal or not.

If in your opinion you can handle a drug in moderation and be ok..... then go for it.

Making something illegal because someone may use it and get hurt or hurt society, is a lame excuse.... if that is the case one could argue for making guns illegal, cars illegal, and the list could go on.

By the way, do you wish to keep marijauna illegal because you fear what it will do to society, knowing people will find it anyway, or just go to worse drugs....... thus you are stating your morals and your beliefs are far more important than someone else's.............................

or the truer question:

do you wish to keep pot illegal because you are afraid you may try it or have and like it to where it may negatively affect YOUR own life and thus you must keep it illegal?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

djtestudo

Unless I'm missing something, would the fact that there is a price despite the illegality of the product mean that it is presently part of a "black market"?

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Paq

you should read, "T'aint nobody's business if you do"

or something like that, after the 1920's blues song. Good stuff,has a LOT of great info on why the gov't will keep most drugs illegal bc it's just good for business. The millions raised from taxing pot would not even come close to the billions made from keeping it illegal.

purely ..profit..driven..war..on..drugs.

nuff said

__________________
Live.

Chris

Rekna

Another thing that is messed up is you can go to prison for 20+ years for carrying an ounce of pot, but rape, molest, and kill a little girl and you will walk in 5.....

matthew330

Once all the regulations and taxes are in place, who can I sue once I get some "bad shit" and flip out? Who's gonna be responsible for my lung cancer 30 years down the road? If i smoke cigarettes as well will it be a shared responsibility and I get to sue more than one? Will the pot producers be more responsible because it seems as though the trend is "look how safe this is in comparison". Can I use this thought process to advertise my product?Will there be warnings accompanying the sale of it?

What happens to the Pot producers/sellers now? Will they just stop, or go get a business degree? Can I target new high school graduates when promoting my product? How can I differentiate the grade of it. Can government intervene if my "red hairs" aren't as powerful as I suggest? Can I call the less powerfull "light weed"?

What if my neighbors five year old gets a contact high cause my windows are open while smoking it. Is there a law for how long I need to keep my windows shut after smoking? Can I be arrested for unwittingly getting others high?

kutulu

Your response varies from being uninformed to outright trolling.

There is no such thing as 'bad shit'. Besides, if there were it would be like any other tainted consumable, the manufacturer is responsible and possibly the seller.

How about the person who made a concious decision to use a substance that may be hazardous and that's it?

Alcohol is dangerous yet advertising for it is everywhere.

Sure, why not, we do so with booze.

Who really cares? Growing for sale would be regulated just like any other agricultural product.

How about applying the same standards as booze?

In case you don't know, the THC level CAN be measured.

I have NEVER experienced a 'contact high' despite being in close proximity of other people smoking.

stevo

Dude, I think you're grasping at straws here. - contact high because your windows are open? i don't think anyone would agree thats possible. "bad shit" and flip out? its not LSD.

IF, and thats a big IF, mj was ever made legal - it would never have the same status as alcohol. It would be "decriminalized." With no penalty for posession, but I can't imagine an industry like big tobacco springing up from the decriminalization of pot. There's too much stigma attached and almost a century of anti-pot messages for there to be a complete 180 in regards to how the gov't views it.

I think just about everyone on this board would agree that pot should be legalized for the same reason - its your body and you should be able to do what you want with it. The government shouldn't be able to.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

silent_jay

Do you need a bigger brush to paint us pot smokers with or is the 'losers' one enough? Although did anyone really expect anything else from ustwo?

What you see in marijuana users really isn't a proper comment as you are only going by the ones who you have seen, thats a pretty small percentage of the people who smoke pot. Not all people who smoke weed are 'ditch diggers', let's see I used to play pro hockey for example, doesn't seem like a ditch digger to me.

Just because someone doesn't fit into your narrow view of what a decent human being is doesn't mean they are a loser, but I doubt you'll listen to anything anyone else has to say.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

matthew330

Is it possible for me to say anything without some uptight lib accusing me of trolling and being uniformed?

"Your response varies from being uninformed to outright trolling."

Please explain how it's trolling, just because it's me, doesn't mean it's trolling. There's more to think about than just making it legal, these are just questions that went a different path than your "Hey, look how bad alcohol is". If your serious about making it legal, you should start thinking about the implications of it, and how much gov involvment would be required in this tax cesspool your so anxious to create.

"There is no such thing as 'bad shit'. Besides, if there were it would be like any other tainted consumable, the manufacturer is responsible and possibly the seller."

Apparently I've had more experience with pot than you, there is "bad shit". How's it feel to be "uninformed"? (shit, that's gonna come back to bite me in the ass)

"How about the person who made a concious decision to use a substance that may be hazardous and that's it?"

I couldn't agree with you more. I assume you disagree with all the tobacco lawsuits in recent years? Funny how the dangers of smoking pot is all about personal responsibility (cause they're real responsible people), and McDonalds now has quite the salad selection.

"Who really cares? Growing for sale would be regulated just like any other agricultural product."

It's been argued here there won't be a black market for it. Do you think these guys are gonna up and quit? Do you think these guys are gonna be "regulated"?

"In case you don't know, the THC level CAN be measured."

By who? You gonna leave that up to the government, they certainly have nothing better to do? Are you gonna trust those already in control of the industry?

"I have NEVER experienced a 'contact high' despite being in close proximity of other people smoking."

Congratulations, I have. And Stevo, we used to have fans turned backward blowing smoke out through paper towel roles filled with bounce out a crack in our window. You could smell that shit (and no, not the bounce), 2 blocks away if you were in the right place. I wouldn't want my kids playing next door to that.

And the "my body my choice thing" means nothing to me. I can't walk into a pharmacy, throw money on the table and point and say "give me that cause it's there, and i want it."

Maybe try dropping the attitude and getting off your high horse next time Kutulu.

Willravel

What do you mean by "bad shit"? Do you mean of poor quality, low THC levels, mostly sticks and seeds? Or do you mean laced with something dangerous? If you mean the former, I'm sure that regulated production, or even varied measurments of quality, could be arranged in order to inform the consumer of quality. If you mean the latter, no one is trying to legalize the stuff jays might be laced with now.
How much moonshine have you had lately? Not much? That's because once alcohol was produced legally by companies again, the need for dangerous, pricey, and low quality booze dissapeared. Pot farmers could move into the legal production industry, and distributers could work selling in Costco or Longs Drugs. If they didn't, they'd go broke.
The government uses breathalizers without any complains.
Then we should stop people from smoking cigaretts altogether, since second hand smoke is dangerous. We should also keep people from blaring idiotic rap music in their cars, as the noice polution it creates can be unbearable.

matthew330

Incidentally, I had moonshine just a couple of months ago.

Willravel

Seriously? Was it any good? What kind of alcohol was it? I was thinking about making some mead for Oktoberfest, but the fear of going blind changed my mind.

matthew330

friend of mine who's family is from North Carolina brought it up. And yeah - it wasn't bad. Liquor isn't my thing, but wasn't as bad as I would have thought. The other dude with us loved it.

n0nsensical

I'm genuinely curious: what is your definition of "a winner at life"?

iccky

So lets run some stats to see if, in fact, all pot heads are losers. Even this pothead knows that the crosstabs I'm presenting here aren't proof of causation. They are proof, however, that you can be a regular pot smoker a lead a successful life.

All data taken from the 2004 National Survey on drug use and health.

First, occupation. Loser pot smokers shouldn't have managerial or executive jobs, right? Actually, only 51% of people with these jobs have never smoked pot, compared to 60 percent in the population at large. 8.3 percent have smoked in the last month, more than the 6 percent in the general population. Do ditch diggers smoke pot at higher rates? In fact they do, as 57 percent of those working in "Construction Trades & Extraction Work" have smoked at least once and 20 percent have done so in the last month.

Education. Here the stats are limited since they the top category is a college degree (and apparently it isn't till grad/professional school that pot smokers really feel the pinch). Here 4.2 percent of people with college degrees report having smoked pot in the last month, compared to 6.2 percent of high school dropouts and 6.1 percent of those with only a high school degree. On the other hand, high school dropouts are the most likely to have never smoked pot (69 percent). Only 52.5 percent of college graduates have never tried pot.

How about income? Of those making $75,000 a year or more, 5 percent have smoked pot in the past month, slightly less than the national average of 6 percent. About 5.7 percent of those making between $75,000 and $20,000 a year smoked in the past month, roughly the national average. Pot usage goes up in the lowest income category to 8.4 percent. As with education, the chance that someone has ever tried pot increases with income, with 66 percent of those in the lowest income category having never smoked and 52 percent in the top income category having never smoked.

Conclusion? Pot use is associated with lower achievement in some, though not all categories. Interestingly, having tried pot at some point in your life is associated with higher achievement. Again, these are associations, not proof of causation. People might achieve less because they smoke, pot, might smoke pot because they achieve less, or there might be some outside factor at play (for instance, people who have been arrested for smoking pot might not be able to get good jobs/student loans).

Moreover, this association is fairly weak. Using a correlation here is statistically shady, but the correlation between pot use and income is -.04, compared to a correlation of .33 between income and education. (With income and pot use coded at 4 category ordinal variables, the pot use categories being smoked in last month/smoked 2-11 months ago/smoked over a year ago/never smoked)

What is clear is that pot-smoker doesn't equal loser, at least as defined by income, education or employment. High income earners smoke at only a slightly lower rate than the national average, managers and executives smoke at a slightly higher rate, college graduates smoke at a slightly lower rate. So Ustwo, maybe you just need to meet more people.

Willravel

Sticky-iccky just hit one out of the park. Well played.

pan6467

Yes, if you show other people respect for their opinions also.

How is it a tax cesspool, to regulate and tax a product? It is more of a tax burden now with us spending BILLIONS on trying to keep people from buying a product they want and that they can get fairly easily (though again, one must becareful with street weed, it is being mixed with harder shit.... and that is a huge reason in and of itself to to legalize it).

Nobody knows how their body will react to any drug, as everybody's body chemistry is slightly different. It doesn't stop the big pharmaceuticals from selling and pushing seriously fucked up drugs like Benzodiazipines down people's throats.

That said, I am 99.99% sure you are more likely to get "bad shit" on the street, than if it were legalized, regulated and you could buy it freely without having to go to some dope dealer who mixes the weed with some truly addictive drug so that you keep buying more from him.

It is about personal responsibility and whether you recognize it or not or whether you care to believe it or not, you are part of the problem in legislating freedoms.

I disagree with any lawsuit over a person's free choice. I feel the people suing are trying to find easy solutions for their lack of responsibility and trying to blame others for the condition they are in.

The government loves these lawsuits because they generate BILLIONS for them (i.e. tobacco settlements with states).

Plus, you have the hypocrasy of the government telling you, you can't smoke in public but if they lost cigarette tax money I guarantee they would either raise everyone's taxes much higher or start relaxing on the laws and promoting smoking again. In other words, government whether it be State, Local, or Federal, cannot live without the tax revenue generated by cigarettes.

Legalizing and taxing marijuana will open a new tax revenue and may in fact allow some localities, states and even maybe the federal government to lower taxes because of 2 reasons..... 1 being les money needed for the money pit we call "the War on Drugs" and the housing, rehabilitation, prison stays of these "criminals" and the other being the taxes collected on the sale of the product.

There will always be a black market. Yes, after Prohibition organized crime went into other vices, legalizing weed still leaves coke, meth, opiates, and so on, plus, they will do what the bootleggers did after Prohibition, find other vices to sell. Trust me they will find new products to sell.

The government can regulate THC much like they regulate the nicotine in cigarettes, the alcohol content in alcohol and so on.... this is the flimsiest of your pretty good points so far.


Well, people wouldn't have to go through such problems now if it were legal, would they? You're kids are probably playing next door or at the very least in a neighborhood where the smoking is going on, you just don't want to admit to it.

And if you could smell it at least 2 blocks away, you were either smoking a hell of a lot or there were a lot of other people in your neighborhood smoking it and doing the same thing as you.

I can state with certainty that your kids, you and any non-toking neighbors will not get a contact buzz from someone smoking in their house and some comes out the window.

Yes, there is a distinctive smell but it is no more distinctive or harmful than cigarettes, cigars, or a tobacco pipe smoker living next door.

What are you talking about here? It is a person's body, it is their choice and you're throwing away BILLIONS in taxes trying to stop something that people want.

In turn you are helping organized crime, terrorist cells, throwing money away when you could tax the product and bring money in.....


You shouldn't be throwing rocks at glass houses. While you brought about great points you, yourself did so in a very brash, accusatory and "better than thou" attitude.

To me I can tell this is a very hot topic for you and emotional for whatever reason and that's cool. I am not berating you, in fact Matthew, I gain a certain amount of respect for you because you did bring up legitimate points.

In the end though, if you expect respect for your opinions you must show respect for others...... took me a long time to learn that.


Again I state the following:

Making something illegal because someone may use it and get hurt or hurt society, is a lame excuse.... if that is the case one could argue for making guns illegal, cars illegal, and the list could go on.

By the way, do you wish to keep marijauna illegal because you fear what it will do to society, knowing people will find it anyway, or just go to worse drugs....... thus you are stating your morals and your beliefs are far more important than someone else's.............................

or the truer question:

do you wish to keep pot illegal because you are afraid you may try it or have and like it to where it may negatively affect YOUR own life and thus you must keep it illegal?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

kutulu

My response had nothing to do with who you are but if it makes you feel better that I'm out to get you than go right ahead and think it was all about me sticking it to you.

I smoked pot nearly every day from 1995-2003 and I never once had any so-called 'bad shit' and neither did any of the people I knew. Just what are you referring to? Laced weed? Laced weed is more of an urban legend than anything. On the rare occasion that another substance is added, the seller wants to take credit for it because it can sell for more. Is a corporation or a reputable grower going to lace a legal product with an illegal substance? I doubt that.

Damn right I disgree with it, although I could almost give a small pass at those who started smoking cigarettes before we all knew they were harmfull, still its their freaking fault for not quitting. With obesity, diet and lack of physical activity are choices. I'm not going to feel bad for someone who is having health problems because they are obese.

Furthermore, smokers can opt to use a vaporizer in lieu of traditional methods. A high quality vaporizer allows the user to get all of the effects while minimizing the inhalation of harmfull chemicals.

Initially, no, but that will change over time as long as commercial growing is allowed. Also, nothing prevents them for starting their own business growing and selling pot (hint, they might be doing that already).

Does it really matter who does it? Hell the THC content will be a marketting tool if anything so they will not understate the amount. If anything, stronger is less harmfull since you don't have to injest as many harmfull substances.

Please consider the physical laws that govern diffusion dynamics when talking out of your ass about being able to smell people smoking pot from two blocks away (about two football fields). Odor detection thresholds are on the order of a few parts per billion for most substances.

It's about intended use, risk of overdose, likelyhood of overdose, and possible negative effects of an overdose.

Infinite_Loser

So if I smoke some weed my GPA will rise to a 4.0? Sweet!

Seriously, though, there isn't any good reason not to legalize pot. It's negative effects on people are a lot more limited and less harmful than what some people would have you believe. I started to type out a lengthy response qualifying my statements, but I noticed that it's been done by at least four different people already.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Ustwo

Unless a hammer and sickle for your avatar is just because it looks nice or some joke, I'll stick with my assessment.

I think pot lowers ones potential in life. Some maybe be bright enough that they can still do ok, but they could have done better if they weren't getting stoned.

This is not to say alcohol doesn't have negative effects, or that pot smoking is going to give you refer maddness, or whatever. Just that it in my experiance it makes people lazy, and lowers ambition.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

I think being a republican lowers one's potential in life, but if I don't back it up somehow with facts or citing statisctics, it's a useless and meaningless opinion.

Useless and meaningless.

Painted

Maybe those people didn't want to do better. It wasn't pot, it was the person. I know many people, dopeheads and straight-edgers, who simply have lower expectations than me.

silent_jay

Yes because my avatar or my political leaning has anything to do with my argument, nice try Ustwo, brush aside someones opinion because of an avatar

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

dksuddeth

getting a bit off topic, can we get it back on track?

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

pan6467

Therein lies the rub, see people (especially today's environment) want to look for reasons why they do not advance or why others do not want to advance.

Everyone has differing goals in life, everyone has their own sense of what matters and what they want to achieve.

Me, I've had more money than I could ever want.... but it didn't make me happy. I had a future very bright and could have done anything, but I didn't like who I was. I found something that made me tolerate myself... gambling. When I hit my bottom, I realized what I wanted, happiness and to help others.... money was and is nothing more than a necessary evil to make sure I can live.

Did my addiction make me that way? NO, I did.

See this is where the GOP reasoning falls apart. They talk big about letting people decide things for themselves and that the weak will falter the strong will prevail..... but then they take away choices because they believe they know what is best for everyone. They pass judgement on people and believe that their vision of success should be everyone else's and if someone chooses not to have that same vision then it must be drugs, or laziness, or whatever. When in reality it just maybe someone is totally happy where they are in life at that moment.

The GOP (and we are or have seen proof of this in Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Bennett, Foley, Noe, and other GOP leaders and talking heads) talk about people needing to take responsibility for their actions but then when the scandals break on them it's because of "political witchhunts, addictions, and so on, they want to be victims..... and yet they criticize everyone else for claiming they are victims.

In the end what a person does with their own body is up to them, not society. As long as they know the consequences and don't hurt innocent people, it's noone else's business what they do.

If someone wants to load up a bong every night and get wiped out in their home.... big fucking deal.

Our country is falling apart, our children and their children are falling so far behind educationally, financially (the massive debts we are leaving them) and spiritually that the legality of drugs shouldn't even be on the radar.

Politicians and our government should be more worried about rebuilding America and getting the economy truly strong again and our asses out of debt than worrying about who is smoking a joint or buying a rock out on the street.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

frogza

Personally I think taking any nonpresecription drug is simply an act of foolishness. You can't tell me that a person can operate at 100% when under the influence of drugs like alchohol, pot, nicotine or any other drug out there. Making the choice to limit your faculties, even briefly, all for a temporary thrill or escape just doesn't make sense to me at all. Life is hard enough when operating at 100%, I won't cut my "making it" margin by using substances that cut my ability.

There are several arguments for legalization that have been and will be presented, from what I've seen and heard they boil down to:

1. Since marijuana isn't as harmful as Cigarettes or alchohol, it should be ok to do.

This argument is fundamentaly flawed. It simply can't be backed up by logic, but only by emotional thought. If you apply the "logic" of this statement to most anything else the silliness of it becomes apparent. For example, Since jumping off a 20 foot wall isn't as bad as jumping off a 50 foot wall, I should go ahead and jump off.

2. Legalizing would eliminate the black market for it and the associated crime.

People who have established a habit of working "behind the man's back" will continue to do so, until forced to quit. I realize that is a generality, I state it because it is the general pattern. There will be exceptions, but they will be just that, the exceptions. The price to purchase black market pot will likely be lower than purchasing the governmennt endorsed pot, simply because there will be lower overhead.

3. Our prisons are filled with drug users, and we're turning violent criminals loose since there isn't room for them in the prison system.

This is the only argument that resonates at all with me. I feel it is counter productive and counter intuitive to sentence a drug user to a longer term than say a rapist. It also seems counter productive to start eliminating laws to fix the prison cell shortage. Ideally we would eliminate the need for so many cells by getting people to stop doing illegal things. Unfortunately we don't live in the ideal world and I for one don't know how to get us there. The idea of eliminating laws seems like a slippery slope to me and therefore scares me.

Edit:
4. The government has no right to tell me what I can and can't do in my own home.

The government is called such because it's duty is to govern, or in other words, tell us what we can and can't do. We establish governments to tell our community what they can and can't do, even in their own homes. If the majority voice calls for limitations on what we can and can't do, then it is the duty of every government branch to enforce those limitations. There are some types of actions that, as a people, we have allowed full rein. In those situations the government does not have the right to influence us.

The_Dunedan

Hogwash. Governments are instituted among men to protect their unalienable Rights, remember?

Furthermore, your statements regarding Mobocracy are ill considered, given that under such a system the 51% or the 75% of the 99% can legally enact genocide ahainst the 49%, or the 25%, or the 1%.

You then go on to say that, in certain situations we remain Sovreign...after having stated immidiately prior that no such exceptions existed if the mandate decreed it to be so.


It comes down to self-ownership. If any person or group of people has the ability to force decisions upon me in regards to my own body or property, that person is my Master and I am a Slave. When someone, or a group of "someones" can say "Do X or I will beat you" or "Do Y or go to jail" in regards to a person's own body or property, they are Slaves, period.

If, however, no such force can be brought to bear, I am a free man.

frogza

I do remember, and my statement in no way advocates anything to the contrary. The US government is established by the people to insure that my rights or your rights are not trampled on by someone else. The bounds are set by those called on to represent us, they are put in place by majority vote. The laws they put in place to protect rights will inevitably include some "Thou shalt nots" Because the majority will have determined that they were encroachments on individual right.

Welcome to the basis of Republics

I'm having a hard time seeing where you are finding a contradiction. I'm guessing its with this phrase:

There are some types of actions that, as a people, we have allowed full rein. In those situations the government does not have the right to influence us.

Maybe I should have worded it like this:

There are some types of actions that, as a people, we have allowed ourselves full rein. In those situations the government does not have the right to influence us.

The power of the government is determined by the people. We decide on the laws and then pay people to see that they are enforced, those people we collectively call the government.

I agree that when we have no say on when and how forces are brought to bare on us, we can be called slaves. Fortunatly we have a say. We can try to influence people to vote along the lines we believe in. I think it is a bit of a black and white statement to say that limitations equals slavery.

pan6467

Such is your choice. There is nothing wrong with that and I respect your strong opinion. But YOU have no right to tell me what I can or cannot put into my body, especially if it is in no way hurting you.

Let's begin......

First, it isn't as harmful as alcohol. Alcohol is biochemically and physiologically the worst of the non-pharm drugs, and other than benzos I can't think of a drug that does nearly half the damage alcohol does to a body.

The rest of your argument you grasp for straws here. No one says just because marijuana is legal you should smoke it. People are saying they just don't want to be dubbed criminals for smoking it. And again, I believe that the number in usage would decrease within 10 years of it becoming legalized.

Where did I say that?

In fact I argued there will always be a black market, because there will always be something illegal that people want to get.

Hell, there's a black market for cigarettes because people don't want to pay the high taxes. There's a black market for some alcohol, porn, prostitution, script drugs, whatever.

As for purchasing pot off the black market instead of from a legal distributor, personally I wouldn't, 1) I would have no idea what it was mixed with and 2) by buying it and paying taxes for it I help society, and I know I support crime if I buy from the black market...... (I do the same with my cigarettes, in my line of work I can buy "black market" cigarettes for 75% less than what I pay at a store for them.... but I won't. I'm sure there will be a day when the legal price exceeds the point I am willing to pay and then I will hopefully quit.)

Well, we decriminalize drug use, we lose about 25-50% of the prison population. Unfortunately, private prisons are becoming a very fast, very profitable growing industry (one of the few industries, that actually creates jobs, left in the US), so the more we keep people in these places the more demand we have for this industry the more it grows.

Am I saying that is why drugs are illegal.... NO. But theoretically, it could be one of the reasons.

And why do we have to send these people straight to jail, with multityear sentences anyway, when rehabs can treat them and may change a few of them without the need for a criminal record hanging over their head. (Doesn't hurt that I'm in that industry and it would increase the job demand and thus my wages..... )


The government's primary duty is to protect, serve and make certain that even the hardest to hear voice can be heard and will recieve equality in justice, liberty and in society.

Now according to you (in the section of your quote I highlighted) if the community says weed is ok, then it should be ok.... am I reading that correctly? So then why did the Federal government go after communities that stated, BY MAJORITY VOTE, they wanted pot legal there?

The part right after that you state:

So what exactly do we have free rein in? We cannot marry people of the same sex, we cannot put into our bodies what we want, we have laws against prostitution so that someone who wants a one night stand and approaches the wrong person can get arrested, we have people now watching how we treat and punish our kids... heaven forbid little Johnny have a bruise, we regulate where people can and cannot smoke and drink yet those are legal substances that the governments cannot live without the tax money they generate...... shall I go on?

You do know why the vast majority of the above is illegal do you not?

$$...... more money for the government to regulate, criminalize and make laws on than to let people have freedom to choose.

And in the end the "War on Drugs" is all about the $$$ also. The government makes money from it coming in, from it being sold from the people who use it and we foolish taxpayers keep letting them throw billions upon billions away. People are still going to use, people are still going to live, die and kill for it.

But, I guess to some as long as it is "illegal" the feel morally vindicated when they read how some cop killed a drug dealer or how some dope dealer firebombs a house killing not just the kid who was doing business with them but the whole family.

But then again, it's ok when Rush Limbaugh does it..... "he has a disease" "it's a witchhunt", "it's politically motivated"...... forget the part he ILLEGALLY went doctor shopping for drugs.

Or it's ok when athlete's and celebrities do them..... we'll just slap them on the wrist make them do a commercial and everything is ok.

But if little Johnny gets caught with a pound of weed....... fuck him send him to jail for 25 years without any chance of parole. In the meantime, that guy that killed 3 in the liquor store holdup last year, he'll be out in 4 with good behaviour. It's all good, Johnny knew it was illegal, so fuck him. I'd rather pay for his imprisonment for the next 25 years, then to try to send him to a drug rehab and maybe change and better his life.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

dksuddeth

Frogza, I fail to see where you get your definition of a republic that lets you know that majority rules. It does not. A representative republic, which is what we are, has the constitution as the basis of the governments limits. No article or clause in the constitution gives congress the power to infringe on any inalienable right to you or I. Maybe the reason that you have this idea is that for over 100 years now we've had a judiciary that refuses to apply the constitution as the rule of law.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Sun Tzu

You've pretty much summed it up pan.

Or raise the age to go fight in war to 21.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Paq

just an aside, but i always thought that was an interesting age for the draft and for allowing people to go to war. I know there were massive arguments about sending people to war who couldn't vote and that lead to the 18 legal voting age...i just find 18 an odd age to say, "Ok, you can go die for your country now"

__________________
Live.

Chris

pan6467

I think it's 18 because that is the age when the average person graduates high school.


I have always found 18 to be too young, I truly believe (and this is just MY opinion) that 99% of the people have no idea what they want to be or who they are, yet we expect them to.

I like 21 far better, I think those 3 years add a lot to the maturity and mindset of a person. Let a person join the military at 18, but train them and give them better education and skills so that when you ship them out at 21 they are prepared and more apt to handle it because of the extra training.

//threadjack

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Painted

Both ballots lost. Colorado, 40% to 60%. Nevada, 44% to 56%. At least they gave it their best shot.

Nonetheless, voters in about half a dozen cities around the U.S. approved ballots that made marijuana possesion the lowest priority of their police. The cities are: Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and Santa Monica in California, Missoula, Montana, and Eureka Springs, Arkansas. Voters in the 1st and 12th Plymouth Representative Districts in Massachusetts approved ballots that lowered the fine of possesion of less than an ounce to $100. Voters in the 7th Norfolk Representative District and the 3rd Middlesex Senate District, both in Mass., approved medical marijuana ballots.

rofgilead

Ustwo: doing all drugs does not lead to a person being a loser later in life. The nobel prize winner for the development of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) that has revolutionized biology and even criminal investigations(DNA tests), the guy actually thought of the method while tripping on LSD and has publicly said such.

Having a closed mind, not trying new experiences, and generally being a boring conservative leads to being a loser in life.

Also - several research studies have found the amazing conclusion that many of the active substances in marijuana have anti-cancer activities, and may play a protective role in human health.

So - those loser potheads might out live you too...