Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics

Notices

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-30-2009, 10:26 AM   #121 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Under federal law, marijuana is treated like every other controlled substance, such as cocaine and heroin. The federal government places every controlled substance in a schedule, in principle according to its relative potential for abuse and medicinal value. Under the CSA, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that the federal government views marijuana as highly addictive and having no medical value. Doctors may not "prescribe" marijuana for medical use under federal law, though they can "recommend" its use under the First Amendment.
anyone care to point out to me where the constitution gives this power to congress?
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 01:27 PM   #122 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
..
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

Last edited by timalkin; 12-20-2010 at 07:25 PM..
timalkin is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 02:18 PM   #123 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: Congress shall have the Power to...provide for the general welfare of the United States.
prohibiting the growth and consumption for personal uses of a naturally occurring weed is seriously stretching the definition of general welfare of the united states, don't you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce...among the several states.
do you see the personal growth and consumption of a weed as part of commerce among the several states without using the tortured definition given by the USSC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers...
how does allowing the growth and consumption of marijuana, for personal use, prevent the government from executing its foregoing powers?

That last one, by the way, is what Scalia used in the Raich opinion which pretty much gives congress the authority to tell you whether you can plant carrots, beans, or tomatoes in your garden.
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 03:03 PM   #124 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
..
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

Last edited by timalkin; 12-20-2010 at 07:25 PM..
timalkin is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 03:54 PM   #125 (permalink)
Junkie
 
biznatch's Avatar
 
Location: France
timalkin, you really believe that pot-consuming people would move to cocaine, or some other hard drug were pot to become legal?
__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread
biznatch is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 04:03 PM   #126 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
there's got to be some crazed out cracked up cocaine frenzied Rastafarians in Jamaica then....
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 04:15 PM   #127 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
..
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

Last edited by timalkin; 12-20-2010 at 07:24 PM..
timalkin is offline  
Old 03-30-2009, 05:42 PM   #128 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
I believe that increasing the availability of legal marijuana will lead to more cocaine/meth/heroine/pick your drug use. If marijuana is legalized, more people will use marijuana. Many people who use marijuana move to harder drugs. Why not, you're already consuming a mind-altering substance. What's the harm in a little harder? Not everyone will take that next step, but many will. Hell, many people who smoke marijuana started smoking cigarettes first.
I'd love to see where you got this from. I drink wine. So, by your theory, I should move on to hard liquor now. I have smoked pot and I rather enjoy it. Wish I could more often. I have NO desire to do any other drug, I don't know any pot smokers that have. And I didn't smoke weed because I smoked cigarettes-in fact, I was a casual non-inhaler of those back when I first toked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Drug traffickers who can't turn a profit selling marijuana will focus their efforts on pushing harder drugs that are still illegal. The supply of harder drugs will increase because that's all the dealers have to worry about.

Then the next pub discussion will turn to legalizing harder drugs. Think about how much money the government could save my just letting people do whatever hard drugs they want. Victimless crime, non-violent offender prison crowding, blah blah blah.
You do realize that you just made the argument FOR legalizing pot, right? You also agreed, by making that statement, that it is pushers that look for the bigger cash that make the harder drugs more available because pot is so mild in comparison, cheap and anyone can grow it.
People who smoke weed aren't looking necessarily for anything more that what pot offers. People who smoke cigarettes aren't necessarily looking for more than what those offer.
Your views are out of touch with reality, Sir.

Fact is, this country is losing its declared 'War on Drugs" because it invests too much time, manpower and money "fighting" something that doesn't warrant the fight it's in.
We are stuffing potheads into prisons and political leaders then make decisions to release prisoners because of overcrowding. Here's an idea-don't put pot users and growers and sellers in prison. Don't want to legalize it? Fine, give them a desk ticket and send them home. The average grower/user isn't involved in violent crime, doesn't belong to any drug cartels that kill for territory rights yet can be and has been sentenced to time that rivals murderers if not drunk drivers.
Which is the most threatening to civility? Pothead, drunk driver or murderer?
According to our courts system, they're equal.
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 03-31-2009, 06:00 AM   #129 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Congress has the authority and responsibility to limit the negative impact that drug abuse has on the United States. Marijuana's status as a naturally occuring plant is irrelevant.
This argument was made pre-prohibition, yet it took an actual constitutional amendment to make it legal. So why does it only take the commerce clause now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Marijuana is commerce. Billions of dollars are spent on it every year. When people grow their own marijuana, this impacts the supply and demand in a significant way, especially when you consider the aggregate and not just the myopic view of the individual grower.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is almost word for word the exact position of the government and the USSC in cases called Wickard v. Filburn and Gonzalez v. Raich. This is also the foundation that can allow the US congress to determine whether you can grow corn or tomatoes in a garden, petunias or daisies in your front yard. Now, It might just be me, but I'm pretty damned sure that the framers of the constitution did not believe they were giving that authority and power to the federal government. Do any of YOU here believe that's what the framers wrote when they made the commerce clause?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
Congress has the power to regulate marijuana based on the first two clauses cited. Therefore, they also have the power to make all necessary and proper laws to carry out their responsibility.

I'm assuming that we're talking about what the law is and not what the law should be. The current law allows Congress to regulate marijuana.
timalkin, didn't someone here earlier say that you were a libertarian?
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 03-31-2009, 08:35 AM   #130 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
i know the convention of a pub discussion militates against information being introduced...but this seems a good moment to break that rule.

there is a ton of money being made as a function of these draconian laws, including the absurd marijuana laws--but i don't believe that folk are looking in the right place to see where it's happening, who benefits from it. money is not made so much from the prohibitions--that is from what is prohibited---money, and a shitload of it, is made from the *fact* of prohibitions. it's made by those lovely people in what we call the prison-industrial complex, in political shorthand.

this gives a nice compact overview, tho it is 4 pages long:

The Phoenix > News Features > Freedom watch: Jailhouse bloc

the debate's been barking up the wrong tree.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 03-31-2009, 09:10 AM   #131 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
i know the convention of a pub discussion militates against information being introduced...but this seems a good moment to break that rule.

there is a ton of money being made as a function of these draconian laws, including the absurd marijuana laws--but i don't believe that folk are looking in the right place to see where it's happening, who benefits from it. money is not made so much from the prohibitions--that is from what is prohibited---money, and a shitload of it, is made from the *fact* of prohibitions. it's made by those lovely people in what we call the prison-industrial complex, in political shorthand.

this gives a nice compact overview, tho it is 4 pages long:

The Phoenix > News Features > Freedom watch: Jailhouse bloc

the debate's been barking up the wrong tree.
this is part of our problem also. When the government can make money on making criminals out of it's citizens (with little or no resistance) why should they stop?
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-01-2009, 12:55 AM   #132 (permalink)
Junkie
 
biznatch's Avatar
 
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
I believe that increasing the availability of legal marijuana will lead to more cocaine/meth/heroine/pick your drug use. If marijuana is legalized, more people will use marijuana. Many people who use marijuana move to harder drugs. Why not, you're already consuming a mind-altering substance. What's the harm in a little harder? Not everyone will take that next step, but many will. Hell, many people who smoke marijuana started smoking cigarettes first.

Drug traffickers who can't turn a profit selling marijuana will focus their efforts on pushing harder drugs that are still illegal. The supply of harder drugs will increase because that's all the dealers have to worry about.

Then the next pub discussion will turn to legalizing harder drugs. Think about how much money the government could save my just letting people do whatever hard drugs they want. Victimless crime, non-violent offender prison crowding, blah blah blah.
I started cigarettes after pot, and that is anecdotal, but no more than your "many people who smoke marijuana started smoking cigarettes first."
From the other MJ users I know: I'm French, so, smoking cigarettes is pretty much something that a lot of French people do, whether they smoke or not.
But in terms of the Americans I've befriended that did MJ, they often hated tobacco, couldn't even stand it in a spliff(Europeans often use tobacco to consume cannabis, for one of two reasons: to save money by rolling something not made entirely of cannabis, or because in Europe hash is the only form of cannabis available, and is not really smokable by itself).
The fact is, cigarettes and MJ have nothing to do with each other. You could argue that cigarettes are impairing, or have psychoactive effects, but you'd really be pushing it, ask any smoker.

Do you drink at all? I ask because you seem to distinguish alcohol from other drugs, while it is as much of a drug as the next thing. Why would alcohol be any less of a "gateway drug" than marijuana?
__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread
biznatch is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 01:03 AM   #133 (permalink)
Crazy
 
archetypal fool's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
timalkin, all you're doing is repeating phrases and talking points from people who are morally apposed to drug use - most of which, by the way, have never tried the substances they campaign against so passionately. You're completely ignoring the points and arguments given to you by actual people who partake in recreational drug use. Have you noticed how a lot of these accounts are similar? There's no group feeding these people phrases and talking points, these are all true accounts. After enough trials, anecdotal evidence can be regarded as factual evidence.

I know people who smoke and are "unproductive" - though they have a job, they spend their free time in the clouds, not really doing much. Who are you to say that this is wrong? So they don't live their lives to their full potentials. That's none of your concern, or anyone else's really. I know people who do the same with alcohol, with video games, with web browsing, with TV. It's no one's business but their own what they do in their free time to relax, so long as it doesn't harm anyone.

I also know people who are very intelligent, going to school full time and busting their asses. Some use drugs, some don't - some for fun, some for relaxation. I know people who are stressed by things that I can't even begin to comprehend - MJ helps them cope, and damn it, if there's anything out there that will help a person when they're down without extreme adverse health effects, then fuck it, why not? What's the harm?

Then there are other people who are incapable of connecting with others and opening up. You can call this social anxiety, depression, or just plain awkwardness. These are the kinds of things that can be treated with real powerful psychotropic drugs that can kill the user if the dosage is wrong; for some people (e.g., yours truly), these things can be treated with MJ, which is a relatively mild effect and impossible to die from.

You've asked for ways that recreational drug use can be beneficial to society. You've been given answers time and time again, but you've skimmed passed them all.

As for the impaired driving argument, it really is laughable. DUI is illegal, period. This doesn't stop people from DUI. Truth is, it never will, because there will always be irresponsible people around. That being said, I'd drive with someone who's high over someone who's drunk any day of the week. Though both are irresponsible beyond words, people who equate the two are simply ignorant of the effects. That's the real crime, if you ask me.

And the gateway argument? Ridiculous. People who want to try, or are very curious about the powerful narcotics (e.g., cocaine, meth, heroin, etc.) are going to try them, regardless of their previous experiences. Additionally, there is enough information out there for anyone with half a brain to understand that the powerful narcotics are the only drugs that can really ruin someone's life from the inside out. Generalities are worthless when describing human actions. I know people who enjoy hallucinogens, but won't touch MJ or narcotics. How does the gateway argument account for this?
__________________
I have my own particular sorrows, loves, delights; and you have yours. But sorrow, gladness, yearning, hope, love, belong to all of us, in all times and in all places. Music is the only means whereby we feel these emotions in their universality. ~H.A. Overstreet
archetypal fool is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 03:57 PM   #134 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
..
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

Last edited by timalkin; 12-20-2010 at 07:24 PM..
timalkin is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 04:06 PM   #135 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
wait... so it's okay when it's done by a pharmaceutical company manufactures it and makes money of it.

so if they made a THC pill, and the FDA approved it, it's totally fine

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 04:20 PM   #136 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
The only argument that has made any kind of sense on the pro-legalization side is that people should be able to get high if they want to. I don't agree. I don't think the enjoyment of getting high is a good enough reason to legalize marijuana. If we follow this logic, there would be no illegal drugs because people should be free to do whatever they want with their bodies. Cocaine, meth, heroin...why have anything illegal anymore? Would this be a good thing? I don't think so. Honestly, if you need drugs to function, you should probably see a doctor for help instead of self-medicating.

It's pretty well-known that marijuana is a gateway drug. A few personal stories from anonymous members of a forum don't quite overcome this fact. I'll never understand the human need to use chemicals to alter their minds for fun, but I guess that's another discussion entirely. I'm reminded of the laboratory experiments involving rats giving themselves doses of herion.
Yea, the stories do, because that statement is directly from the rampant propaganda of the 40's-60's. Hardcore addicts may have started using pot, but pot users don't always go to hardcore drugs, so it became the perfect catchphrase and it is old time believers of those kinds of overblown statements that keep nonviolent recreational tokers going to prison.

Do you drink? Beer on weekends, maybe a martini or two at parties?
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 04:23 PM   #137 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
..
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

Last edited by timalkin; 12-20-2010 at 07:23 PM..
timalkin is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 05:12 PM   #138 (permalink)
Banned
 
Yeah, alcoholics drive at 80 thinking they are doing 20, while potheads drive at 20 thinking they are doing 80. but no one has answered when it is safe for a pot smoker to be behind the wheel.

My wife was given hydrocodone recently for neck pain. She couldn't stand the spacy feeling on being on it. I know some people use it for recreational effects, but I don't like feeling altered.
new man is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 05:18 PM   #139 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
There's a huge difference between medicinal drug use prescribed by a doctor and abusing a drug just to have fun.

Medical use = good.
Recreational abuse = bad.

---------- Post added at 06:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 PM ----------




No.
Who are you answering?
No one is advocating abusing anything. Toking weed isn't abuse unless it interferes with daily living and that caveat could be used with anything.
You can repeat your fallacies over and over, that doesn't make them any more true, just makes you believe them more.
At this point, I think you're just making outlandish claims just to get a rise out of people. Ain't workin....


Do you drive a modded PT? I swear you're the same guy....lol
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 07:19 PM   #140 (permalink)
Fancy
 
shesus's Avatar
 
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
There's a huge difference between medicinal drug use prescribed by a doctor and abusing a drug just to have fun.

Medical use = good.
Recreational abuse = bad.

---------- Post added at 06:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 PM ----------




No.
Timalkin, you seem to put a lot of faith in doctors. Do you honestly believe that if a doctor prescribes something it is healthy? Have you read or listened to the side effects of numerous legal prescription drugs? They are far more dangerous than pot. Of course, I don't see how this goes with the discussion. Unless you want to go this way with it. Marijuana doesn't have many strange, fatal side effects like other man-made prescriptions do. Therefore, mj should be allowed to be sold OTC, which in turn would make it legal.


You have your opinion that people should not partake in mind altering substances. That is fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But this is a stand-still argument with people standing on the opposite side of the fence.

RB: Are you saying that there is more money made enforcing the prohibition of pot than would be made through taxing it? I was under the impression that the criminal circuit was overloaded and costing money. It seems that taxing pot would save money because even though the people busted for having pot are paying heavy fines, they are costing tax payers in court costs and paperwork. (I admit that I didn't read the compact 4-page article because since this is a pub discussion I want an overview. I could easily go on my own and research, but I do enough of that at work and enjoy discussing ideas with people over reading articles.) So I'm trying to get the gist of what you are saying.
__________________
Whatever did happen to your soul?
I heard you sold it


Choose Heaven for the weather and Hell for the company
shesus is offline  
Old 04-03-2009, 10:07 PM   #141 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: San Francisco
Anyone who supports drug prohibition inevitably has even bigger skeletons in their own closet or other vices that are just as potentially bad. Guns, drugs, sex, pick your poison. Nobody is a saint, everybody's got something. I just think it's so funny how you can't legally own marijuana, possibly the safest drug known to man, in this country, but if you want an assault rifle and bags of ammo, well we'll just hand those out to anyone over 18 who has the cash at Wal-Mart. I was just at a gun range today, 5 mins and a drivers license and you've got a gun in your hand and you're shooting. Why dont we just do the same thing with drugs, require some sort of 1 hour instructional course and give responsible people a license to use. If you demonstrate that you're not responsible, you lose the privilege. I don't support extreme gun control OR prohibition for largely the same reasons: yes they can be dangerous but this was supposed to be a free country and they can both be used responsibly without causing any harm to anyone.
__________________
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." --Abraham Lincoln
n0nsensical is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 06:55 AM   #142 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by n0nsensical View Post
Anyone who supports drug prohibition inevitably has even bigger skeletons in their own closet or other vices that are just as potentially bad. Guns, drugs, sex, pick your poison. Nobody is a saint, everybody's got something. I just think it's so funny how you can't legally own marijuana, possibly the safest drug known to man, in this country, but if you want an assault rifle and bags of ammo, well we'll just hand those out to anyone over 18 who has the cash at Wal-Mart. I was just at a gun range today, 5 mins and a drivers license and you've got a gun in your hand and you're shooting. Why dont we just do the same thing with drugs, require some sort of 1 hour instructional course and give responsible people a license to use. If you demonstrate that you're not responsible, you lose the privilege. I don't support extreme gun control OR prohibition for largely the same reasons: yes they can be dangerous but this was supposed to be a free country and they can both be used responsibly without causing any harm to anyone.
An attitude indicative of a society that once used to assume people were responsible, reduced to one making people prove they are responsible. why?
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 07:34 AM   #143 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksuddeth View Post
An attitude indicative of a society that once used to assume people were responsible, reduced to one making people prove they are responsible. why?
Because too many people have proven they aren't responsible? Sadly, the idiots spoil it for the rest of us.
Derwood is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 08:28 AM   #144 (permalink)
Master Thief. Master Criminal. Masturbator.
 
SSJTWIZTA's Avatar
 
Location: Windiwana
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
When someone claims that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew marijuana, so we should all be allowed to grow marijuana, this implies that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew marijuana to get high.
nah, but Franklin did


edit: as for the gateway argument, i know three people that started using meth first. ass backwards aye?
__________________
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for me And there was no one left to speak out for me.
-Pastor Martin Niemoller

Last edited by SSJTWIZTA; 04-04-2009 at 09:06 AM..
SSJTWIZTA is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 08:59 AM   #145 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
shesus---what i'm saying is that there is ALOT of money made from/through the prison-industrial system in the states.
to get your head around it, you need to get your head around how this prison-industrial complex is defined--it's more than prison buildings for example.
i put up the article because it has the virtue of running through the component parts in a quick and accessible way, and does it more efficiently than i could have.

so in this case, it's better to read the article.

after all, i've found myself sitting in pubs reading a newspaper before, haven't you? regularly at the map room back in the day.
and had we been sitting in, say, the map room and i had the article at hand, i would have slid it over at the same point.
there are lots of ways to be in a pub. just saying.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 09:00 AM   #146 (permalink)
Master Thief. Master Criminal. Masturbator.
 
SSJTWIZTA's Avatar
 
Location: Windiwana
Marijuana Legalization Bills Introduced In Massachusetts

Quote:
A pair of bills — House Bill 2929 and Senate Bill 1801 — seeking to “tax and regulate the cannabis industry” have just been introduced in the Massachusetts legislature.

These proposals seek to legally regulate the commercial production and distribution of marijuana for adults over 21 years of age. Like California’s proposal, they would impose licensing requirements and excise taxes on the retail sale of cannabis. By some estimates, these taxes could raise nearly $100 million in annual state revenue.

Adults who possess or grow marijuana for personal use, or who engage in the non-profit transfer of cannabis, would not be subject to taxation under the law.
__________________
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for me And there was no one left to speak out for me.
-Pastor Martin Niemoller
SSJTWIZTA is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 09:14 AM   #147 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
let's try looking at this from a different perspective, shall we?

How many people got angry or upset when you started having to show your ID and sign for cold/sinus/allergy products that contain pseudoephedrine?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
Because too many people have proven they aren't responsible? Sadly, the idiots spoil it for the rest of us.
in this country alone, we have 300 million people. Given the percentage of people that violate and abuse the laws, is it really 'that many'? or are we not giving ourselves enough credit?
__________________
"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."

Last edited by dksuddeth; 04-04-2009 at 09:16 AM..
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 02:47 PM   #148 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
dk---i don't mean to be obtuse, but i have no idea where you're heading with your question. could you make it clearer please?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 03:07 PM   #149 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksuddeth View Post
let's try looking at this from a different perspective, shall we?

How many people got angry or upset when you started having to show your ID and sign for cold/sinus/allergy products that contain pseudoephedrine?
Didn't upset me at all. I don't get mad at stuff like that; I know I'm doing nothing wrong, signing the page takes 5 seconds, and it's designed to help prevent abuse. Hardly a sacrifice
Derwood is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 03:07 PM   #150 (permalink)
Conspiracy Realist
 
Sun Tzu's Avatar
 
Location: The Event Horizon
Legalize all drugs. Make stiff penalities for anyone driving under the influence, or selling to a minor. What people do in the privacy of their own homes is their business. (unless you hear domestic vilolence or know animals are being abused)
__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking
Sun Tzu is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 04:02 PM   #151 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
Didn't upset me at all. I don't get mad at stuff like that; I know I'm doing nothing wrong, signing the page takes 5 seconds, and it's designed to help prevent abuse. Hardly a sacrifice
not after you spend 30 minutes looking up and down the cold aisle while you're absolutely miserable and just wanted to get your cold meds and get out having to interact with the least amount of human beings as possible.

Continuing with that same "sacrifice" who is to say that a large family purchase is "abuse"? or not?

I'm sorry it's quite a sacrifice. If that's the case because of a few, who is to say that it won't be because of RU486 one day? or some other future drug?

when I can go to Canada, Mexico and many other countries and get prescription strength meds without and prescription.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 04:26 PM   #152 (permalink)
Master Thief. Master Criminal. Masturbator.
 
SSJTWIZTA's Avatar
 
Location: Windiwana
both Sun Tzu and Cynthetiq get a +1 here.

*mutters something about this being uh-mer-uh-kuh, damnit*
__________________
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for me And there was no one left to speak out for me.
-Pastor Martin Niemoller
SSJTWIZTA is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 06:14 PM   #153 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
dk---i don't mean to be obtuse, but i have no idea where you're heading with your question. could you make it clearer please?
when congress makes a law that 'tightens' up controls on a certain substance, people look at it as a GREAT thing that our beloved government is doing something to make our lives better, but nobody ( and I really mean nobody) bothers to look at why are we letting a government abuse it's authority to make us feel like we're being protected.

Congress uses the commerce clause to make federal laws that they otherwise wouldn't have the constitutional authority to make. Most people don't give a damn about this overreach of authority because they have decided that the states governments are inadequate to deal with some crisis or another. The real truth to this is that most people are quite willing to scrap the constitution altogether in order to let the government make any laws that those particular people feel necessary to make society more 'orderly' or lawful.

The laws that now mandate people to show an ID and sign for purchasing medicines that contain the component pseudoephedrine are based on the commerce clause, that same clause that allows congress to make marijuana illegal.

many times in several posts about legalizing marijuana, i've tried to point out to people the absurdity of congressional power grabbing using the commerce clause and either people are too wary of restricting the federal governments power to make feel good laws, or they just really don't care about the constitution and would rather let the government make shit up on the fly.

---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
Didn't upset me at all. I don't get mad at stuff like that; I know I'm doing nothing wrong, signing the page takes 5 seconds, and it's designed to help prevent abuse. Hardly a sacrifice
case in point right here. Derwood doesn't feel affected by taking a few extra seconds to register his name in a federal database to show he's purchased a now controlled substance because a very small percentage figured out how to use a chemical in those cold products to make an illicit drug. So as long as he doesn't FEEL affected, he's willing to let congress do what they want.
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-04-2009, 07:26 PM   #154 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksuddeth View Post

case in point right here. Derwood doesn't feel affected by taking a few extra seconds to register his name in a federal database to show he's purchased a now controlled substance because a very small percentage figured out how to use a chemical in those cold products to make an illicit drug. So as long as he doesn't FEEL affected, he's willing to let congress do what they want.
Correct. I'm not doing anything wrong, they're not harassing me, so I personally don't care. It doesn't weigh on my mind.
Derwood is offline  
Old 04-05-2009, 11:49 AM   #155 (permalink)
Junkie
 
biznatch's Avatar
 
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by n0nsensical View Post
Anyone who supports drug prohibition inevitably has even bigger skeletons in their own closet or other vices that are just as potentially bad. Guns, drugs, sex, pick your poison. Nobody is a saint, everybody's got something. I just think it's so funny how you can't legally own marijuana, possibly the safest drug known to man, in this country, but if you want an assault rifle and bags of ammo, well we'll just hand those out to anyone over 18 who has the cash at Wal-Mart. I was just at a gun range today, 5 mins and a drivers license and you've got a gun in your hand and you're shooting. Why dont we just do the same thing with drugs, require some sort of 1 hour instructional course and give responsible people a license to use. If you demonstrate that you're not responsible, you lose the privilege. I don't support extreme gun control OR prohibition for largely the same reasons: yes they can be dangerous but this was supposed to be a free country and they can both be used responsibly without causing any harm to anyone.
Especially when in the past few months guns have caused more mass shootings in the US than before, and MJ remains mostly harmless.
One beneficial use: relaxation, tim. Some people have stress, pain, and need to relieve it, and most can't take a vacation to a sunny beach. What the hell is wrong with someone sitting on their porch and smoking a fatty, kicking back and watching TV, or play a video game?
What's the difference between doing that and enjoyable a couple beers?
You're being inconsistent, and aren't budging one bit. Where does this irrational fear of marijuana come from?
__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread
biznatch is offline  
Old 04-05-2009, 12:31 PM   #156 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
well, dk, there are a few issues that are mashed together in your post--maybe i'll get back to them later on (it's a nice day and i want to go outside and play for a while)...but i'll say it's obvious you haven't lived in france, where the question of identity registration and papers is much different than it is here--you end up having to use your identification papers for alot more things, alot more routinely, than you do in the states. when i first moved there, i found it really intrusive--but because i had not experienced that before.

on the other hand, i was in france to study left political culture, and found that in many ways france is more free than the united states because of its political culture--this even as power is much more centralized in the state.

and i don't recall anyone arguing: the state can regulate marijuana traffic yay!
i recall people describing it as a simple and easy way to integrate marijuana into the run of other, legal beverages--so into the systems that already exist. none of which existed in anything like the present form in 1788. they just didn't.

but it is still a nice day outside.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 04-07-2009, 04:02 AM   #157 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
Because too many people have proven they aren't responsible? Sadly, the idiots spoil it for the rest of us.
something about this set me on edge, but I couldn't quite figure it out until just now.

You say that the entire population must pay the price for the irresponsible or criminal acts of a few, but I call BS on your premise. You do not apply that same standard to the government or police.....why not?
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-07-2009, 05:18 AM   #158 (permalink)
MSD
The sky calls to us ...
 
MSD's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin View Post
It's pretty well-known that marijuana is a gateway drug.
People say this all the time, but nobody has any proof. Yes, it's likely that the most widely available illegal drug is the one that most people will try first, and people who use recreational drugs will most likely have tried the most common one first. Correlation is not causation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
Correct. I'm not doing anything wrong, they're not harassing me, so I personally don't care. It doesn't weigh on my mind.
It's a law that doesn't do anything. Most meth is produced outside the country and imported. As domestic production has decreased, imports increased, and that's where the violence comes in.
MSD is offline  
Old 04-07-2009, 06:00 AM   #159 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSD View Post
It's a law that doesn't do anything. Most meth is produced outside the country and imported. As domestic production has decreased, imports increased, and that's where the violence comes in.
not to mention that this law was introduced with great public fanfare about how this would put meth labs out of commission, but does anyone realize just how much damned cold/allergy medicine a person would have to buy to realistically produce enough meth to warrant building a lab? regulating how much pseudophedrine a person can buy in one month to avoid running a meth lab is only feeding the federal bureaucracy.
__________________
"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."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 04-07-2009, 09:52 AM   #160 (permalink)
MSD
The sky calls to us ...
 
MSD's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: CT
I think the statistic is that it takes 100 Sudafed pills to make one "dose" of meth, which I think they define as 50mg
MSD is offline  
 

Tags
pot


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:30 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360