Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Is This the End of the War on Drugs?


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#61    Orcseeker

Orcseeker

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,767 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 14 November 2012 - 11:53 PM

View PostDieChecker, on 14 November 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:


Sure. How could I be against one and not the other?


But you do recognise the greater amount of problems prohibition of alcohol has caused? There will always be problems, but it simply leaves us with what is the more sensible choice. Making something illegal won't get rid of it.

Quote


I think that the legalization itself would not stop anything. The same people would be using it. The same people would be trying to sell it. The same people would be driving under the influence. The only thing that might happen is instead of driving to a shady part of town, now you could go to a market and buy it. Certainly not everyone would be stoned 24-7, but I think that "experiments" would go through the roof, and possibly Cronic Users might increase. And with an increase in users, with the same percentages of bad drivers and those who are otherwise idiots, the rate of DUI and association to other crime, and those who have bad reactions would dramatically increase also.


Well it would certainly be a massive blow to the cartels. Less involvement of youths in crime. A lot less money to those who sell it illegally. Prohibition creates a criminal underworld, legalisation causes this criminal underworld to be impractical due to inability to compete with the industrial level production and price of Marijuana of legalised.

Like you said, the SAME people. Legalising or making something illegal won't matter to these people who would take this regardless. The same people wouldn't be trying to sell it because as outlined before it would be as practical as selling your own tobacco (arguably here in Australia that could make sense due to the massive taxes imposed) but still, on a large scale, very hard.

The illegality of a substance is not stopping a large majority of people, especially something like Marijuana.

Quote


I think people who think the War on Drugs is failing are those who are simply fooling themselves. If it is failing then why are so many young people in Jail/Prison for drug crimes? The war is successful, but it is not fixing the issues. I'd like to see a nation where people don't have to turn to pot, or drugs or drinking to make themselves feel better. I think it is that underlying issue that needs to be addressed in our society. Drug use is just a symptom.


I see that as a failure, is that how we solve problems? Throw people in jail? The amount of deaths caused by the war on drugs is huge. I said earlier, it is an endless cycle. The police will throw as many people as they can in jail, but you need to understand it will always be around. On top of that, the amount of tax money that goes towards this is quite a lot too. Does this seem more foolish?

A growing amount of deaths, no stop to crime, in fact the cartels are getting stronger, no end in sight etc. An absolute failure. You need to think realistically about these issues, they aren't going to go away.

Quote


Is that why Amsterdam in the Netherlands has stopped allowing its pot bars to serve tourists/foreigners?


The reason for that is, the fact people only simply go there to do just that. They find it as a negative attribute for people to simply visit their country just to smoke marijuana (though a lot are in support of it). Oh and believe it or not, there are many who have never even touched it over there. I think you have too little faith in humanity.

Quote


If we're going to do it, that is how I would like it done. Adults are fined if they buy for minors, yet minors always have liquor... I'd imagine the same would go for pot, except now it is going to be cheaper and easier to locate, and of a known quality. Yay!


Well tell me how that is worse than the current system then? One that is directly associated with crime and allows a face-to-face interaction with kids? Tell me that is better.

Quote


So what is it that is ten-fold worse? That pot is sold by dealers working for the cartels? Is it because money is going to criminals instead of the FedGov or LocalGov? Is it really so much more dangerous to buy pot, then to buy cigarettes or liquor... for a teenager?


A lot of youths I know who are even associate with crime are so due to the distribution of Marijuana. If this was legalised they probably would be associated with it at all. And yes, the huge amounts of money going to criminals is the top reason the war on drugs is failing. In turn, that only leads to more problems. Would not having that money instead going to businesses and governments be a better way to go?

On top of that, dealers often possess more than one drug to sell, this often leads to people trying a different drug.

Quote

I don't keep medication in my cupboards. I throw it out when I am done with it. Because my kids might get into it. And most of those medications I have a prescription for. As I said before... pot should be a prescription drug, even if all you want is recreation.


But you do store it somewhere don't you?

Marijuana would also have side effects listed on the side of the packet if it were to be legalised. Is that a worse off as well?

Making it a prescription drug doesn't stop the problems unfortunately which is why I ask again to think realistically about the problem.

Quote


That is true, but irrelevant. Just because some kind of substance is non-addicitive, or is less addictive then existing substances does not mean that it is OK to make legal. A gun or a knive can kill you a lot easier then a fist, but that does not mean that beating someone with your fist is any less an attack. Just as pot is not any less a mind/perception altering substance.

Video games are not physically addictive, yet people have died from mental addiction to them. Pot is not physically addictive, but is just as readliy mentally addictive as anything else, but has the modifier that it makes you feel good, and takes away your worrys. So, that state is a lot more desirable, and thus a LOT more likely to induce mental addiction. Like you said, your friend fairly easily got off pot, but I've known real pot-heads too, and they would steal, or beg, or sell off valuables in order to get their weed while they are regularly smoking it.

I didn't say it made it OK, just the fact that it meant control over ones actions. So the parent would be able to restrain themselves over smoking Marijuana in from of their kids moreso than tobacco.

And yes, anyone can be addicted to anything. My point still stands that Marijuana does not have any addictive properties which is the key difference between tobacco and video games, which do possess addictive properties. Those people who you knew who were seemingly addicted to pot, if it wasn't that, I can guarantee you they would be doing something else. Maybe even more dangerous.

Let me ask you this, if tobacco and alcohol were made illegal, do you think it would cause more problems or would the problems all simply dissipate?


#62    H.H. Holmes

H.H. Holmes

    Rebel Without A Cause

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,672 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indianapolis, Indiana

  • I'm going platinum...

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:24 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 13 November 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

Pot has been with us since the beginning of time - failure to acknowledge that is the crime here.
What I find most disturbing is that by leaving it to the criminals we have super skunk - which is dangerous.

Overall though, I find the prevalence of Cocaine use among the rich and influential far more disturbing. It has a corrupting influence on public life which I think is directly responsible for things like the celebrity culture and the financial crisis. Not only that, but it is also one of the most environmentally damaging things imaginable. Terrible on every level.

Br Cornelius

I agree, powdered cocaine was a well accepted illicit substance throughout the 80's and early 90's in general. You would be hard pressed not to find some cocaine in a nightclub or hangout spot, especially among the more affluent circles of people. Although use has shrunken among the lower class or middle class, mainly because of it's high price when compared to rock or freebase cocaine, it is still a drug of choice for those who have the means to afford it.

Cocaine is especially dangerous primarily because of the neurotoxic effects it has on dopamine recepters in the brain, which it can outright kill or cause the cells to autophage themselves. This leads to permanent coginitive deficits in those who were chronic users, more so if the use was started or extended in/into later life. People who used cocaine frequentley can suffer from a variety of impairments that affect mood, motivation, pleasure, and higher cognitive functioning. Depending on the user's age and the amount/frequency of use the impairments can range from mild to severe. Permanent or long-term cocaine induced psychosis is more prevalent among older users, since their brains do not have the neurogenerative capabilities of a younger person.

On that note, however, marijuana is also a neurotoxic drug to a much lesser degree. Frequent use during adolescence, the most important years for brain development, has been linked irreversible changes to the structure of the brain that can have a mild to moderate impact on intelligence and motivation. Use in later life, after the age of 18 or 21, has shown none or very little negative impact on cognitive functioning when not under the influence, of course.

Marijuana is no more dangerous or bad for you than alcohol, but it is not a harmless substance by any means.  

http://usatoday30.us...rugs22_ST_N.htm

http://www.scienceda...80602160845.htm

I will note that none of the studies are totally conclusive, these are just two studies that support the claim that marijuana is neurotoxic. A quick google search will also bring up quite comprehensive studies that tend to disprove that marijuana use after adolescence causes brain alterations that actually affect functioning, most light and moderate users of marijuana when examined in a meta study showed no cognitive deficits. Only the heaviest smokers showed a slight deficit in memory and decision making, but the negative effects usually disappeared after a month of abstinence.

There are some interesting questions regarding the conclusion of both studies, perhaps most importantly whether teenage marijuana users had the deficits before use or whether marijuana use caused them altogether. Someone who has deficits in decision making and impulse control is obviously more likey to indulge in drugs or other risky activity.

I know that I started smoking pot off and on around the age of 14 years old, with regular use happening around 17. I cannot accurately say whether, if I had not of smoked pot, that I would be any more intelligent or motivated. It is something that needs more research, but in the meantime the pro-prohibition crowd will latch on these studies as definitive proof that Marijuana is a menace, when it is far from it.

Edited by H.H. Holmes, 15 November 2012 - 12:33 AM.

Knowledge Speaks, Wisdom Listens- Jimi Hendrix
Admiration for a quality or an art can be so strong that it deters us from striving to possess it.-Friedrich Nietzsche
The day which we fear as our last is but the birthday of eternity.-Lucius Annaeus Seneca
You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.-Mohandas Gandhi

#63    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 18,661 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:32 AM

View PostMissMelsWell, on 14 November 2012 - 11:24 PM, said:

They haven't banned it. It was proposed, but so many people objected to the banning that they still serve to forigners, Pot tourism is alive and well in Amsterdam.

However, that being said, it's possible that come 1/1/2013 it COULD become illegal to sell to foreigners (although technically speaking it's illegal to sell to locals!) Don't expect too much to change in Amsterdam as to pot tourism. It could, but as of today, it's looking unlikely.

The reality is that in places where pot has been decriminalized, overall usage has gone down and the usage of other street drugs has remained unchanged.

It's also been long known that since Portugal decriminalized pot, usage has gone WAY down. Actually, the same is true for both Washington and Colorado as well.
You certainly make a good argument. :tu:

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#64    MissMelsWell

MissMelsWell

    Cosmic Baker

  • Member
  • 13,255 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:48 AM

Oh and because I've been watching the news stories about Washington and Colorado's initiatives very closely... guess who at this point is squealing the loudest about legalization? Oddly, the Feds have said next to nothing so far, but gee, how interesting, Mexico, Bolivia, Columbia, Honduras, Belize and Guatamala foreign dignitaries are having a damn cow! Hmmmm, why is that do you suppose? Could it be because their cartels will no longer be welcome in at least two states?

Edited by MissMelsWell, 15 November 2012 - 12:49 AM.

"It's time for the American people to stand up and shrug off the shackles of our government at TSA at the airport"  Ron Paul

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

#65    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 18,661 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:16 AM

View PostOrcseeker, on 14 November 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

But you do recognise the greater amount of problems prohibition of alcohol has caused? There will always be problems, but it simply leaves us with what is the more sensible choice. Making something illegal won't get rid of it.
Making something illegal won't get rid of it, that is why there is supposedly a War on Drugs. Supposedly the US government was going to go out and remove the sources of said drugs. But, as we all know, pot still is being grown pretty much openly in Mexico, cocaine in Columbia and Opium in Afghanistan and Malaysia. This is a pretty slow war.

Hitting the source would up the price and reduce the number of users (same as tobacco). This would be especially useful against the stronger drugs.

I also would say that here in Oregon we passed a Psueduphedrin law, where you had to have a prescription and could only get enough for personal use. This removed 90% of the Meth producers ready chemicals from the Oregon market and Meth labs dropped from 100 busted per year to 1. Meth also because much more expensive and for the most part faded into a background criminal drug. So... meth use was abated by criminalizing the resource it was made from. Making something illegal made a drug almost disappear off the criminal landscape. LOTS of people complained about having to get a prescription, but once the plague of meth addicts (Tweekers I believe they are called.) dried up, everyone thought it was a wonderful law.

Though I know the pot is basically an "indoor" drug, and that it is basically harmless long term, I would be in favor of the government doing something... maybe GMO... to wipe out pot plants and even hemp plants.

Making pot illegal will not get rid of pot, only getting rid of the plants will get rid of pot.

Quote

Well it would certainly be a massive blow to the cartels. Less involvement of youths in crime. A lot less money to those who sell it illegally. Prohibition creates a criminal underworld, legalisation causes this criminal underworld to be impractical due to inability to compete with the industrial level production and price of Marijuana of legalised.
I'm not sure that the government could/would sell below street prices, but if they did... it would reduce illegal sales. Depends on what is sold and what is available in the alley. If the stuff sold by the gov tastes like playdoe, it is not going to matter that it is cheap. If the only place to get the super-wazoo stuff is the alley, people are still going to go to the alley.

Quote

Like you said, the SAME people. Legalising or making something illegal won't matter to these people who would take this regardless. The same people wouldn't be trying to sell it because as outlined before it would be as practical as selling your own tobacco (arguably here in Australia that could make sense due to the massive taxes imposed) but still, on a large scale, very hard.

The illegality of a substance is not stopping a large majority of people, especially something like Marijuana.
The illegality of cheating on your taxes is not stopping a large majority of people from doing that. But that does not make it legal, ethical or right.

I think the right way to do it is to do what Washington did. Put it to a vote. I think just buckling over because some people are shouting at you that it is unfair is not the right reason to give over.

Just like when raising a kid. You don't give them a candy bar for screaming at you. You give them candy for following the rules. And if they want to change the rules, they need to ask and see if the parent thinks it is appropriate at that time. I feel that too many pro-pot people are screaming infants, rather then adults discussing an issue. And I don't feel like giving in to them.

Quote

I see that as a failure, is that how we solve problems? Throw people in jail? The amount of deaths caused by the war on drugs is huge. I said earlier, it is an endless cycle. The police will throw as many people as they can in jail, but you need to understand it will always be around. On top of that, the amount of tax money that goes towards this is quite a lot too. Does this seem more foolish?

A growing amount of deaths, no stop to crime, in fact the cartels are getting stronger, no end in sight etc. An absolute failure. You need to think realistically about these issues, they aren't going to go away.
I think I've already agreed that prison is not a good way of preventing anything. It usually actually makes people Better Criminals.

As in any War, the fault of loosing lies with the Generals, not with the troops. I blame the various Leaders in the failing War on Drugs. They could so easily have done so much more.

Quote

Well tell me how that is worse than the current system then? One that is directly associated with crime and allows a face-to-face interaction with kids? Tell me that is better.
I was agreeing that it would be better then the current system, but that I still don't like it and wanted to point out that just because pot would be sold only to adults and only in specialist shops, in no way means that it will not be commonly ending up in the hands of a significant percentage of young people.

Quote

A lot of youths I know who are even associate with crime are so due to the distribution of Marijuana. If this was legalised they probably would be associated with it at all. And yes, the huge amounts of money going to criminals is the top reason the war on drugs is failing. In turn, that only leads to more problems. Would not having that money instead going to businesses and governments be a better way to go?

On top of that, dealers often possess more than one drug to sell, this often leads to people trying a different drug.
So these kids that are associated with crime and make plenty of illegal money. Are they going to just turn away from crime and go work at CostCo, or WalMart? Or, will they turn to something else in the shadowy criminal world? It is hard to say, I guess. But, I would not be surprised if these kids do what they have to, to live the lifestyle they have got used to. And CostCo just is not going to cut it.

So, with that as an example, are you sure you are considering all the problems created on both sides of the equation?

Quote

But you do store it somewhere don't you?

Marijuana would also have side effects listed on the side of the packet if it were to be legalised. Is that a worse off as well?

Making it a prescription drug doesn't stop the problems unfortunately which is why I ask again to think realistically about the problem.

Making it prescription does make it controlled to an extent. You probably can't go buy enough for 200 kids to have at a party. You can't really buy enough to distrubute to any great effect. How much is sold where is tracked and statistics on use and any effects on society and healthcare can be tracked. I see lots of good reasons for prescriptions. Plus if parents have a prescription for say, 20 grams, just like parents that have only one good bottle of liquor, they are not going to let the kids have it.

Quote

I didn't say it made it OK, just the fact that it meant control over ones actions. So the parent would be able to restrain themselves over smoking Marijuana in from of their kids moreso than tobacco.

And yes, anyone can be addicted to anything. My point still stands that Marijuana does not have any addictive properties which is the key difference between tobacco and video games, which do possess addictive properties. Those people who you knew who were seemingly addicted to pot, if it wasn't that, I can guarantee you they would be doing something else. Maybe even more dangerous.

Let me ask you this, if tobacco and alcohol were made illegal, do you think it would cause more problems or would the problems all simply dissipate?
I think that if alcohol was made illegal it would cause lots of issues with people wanting their Mood Medicine. I think lots of people would try to get it illegally, and a large criminal network would spring up to feed that. I think most people would be too lazy to try to do it themselves, like people did 100 years ago, but that factorys for smuggling the stuff would pop up in Mexico. And then the War on Liquor would eventually fail, because the Federal Government would not have the guts to attack those liquor factories in Mexico, or Force Mexico to do it themselves.

It is all about the government having the stones to make the War work. Which they have not in a couple decades. Nixon would have simply fire bombed swaths of Columbian hillside. Today the US Army is effectively protecting the Afghan poppy fields from warlords, and making Afghanistan the number two exporter of opium.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#66    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,598 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:33 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 15 November 2012 - 01:16 AM, said:

Making something illegal won't get rid of it, that is why there is supposedly a War on Drugs. Supposedly the US government was going to go out and remove the sources of said drugs. But, as we all know, pot still is being grown pretty much openly in Mexico, cocaine in Columbia and Opium in Afghanistan and Malaysia. This is a pretty slow war.

I fail to see why me having a joint should be illegal. I work in a good job with a better than average salary, car and phone provided. I go home and have a joint most days. How does this make me a criminal? Why should i be in jail? Who have i wronged? Who is the victim?

I have found a place to buy my pot that is not associated with organized crime (i.e gangs) as my dealer is a 70 year old lady. Heck, if you put me in jail the tax man loses out on a large cut of my salary and you have to pay for me to be unproductive in jail.

Pot does not have a lethal dose. I read somewhere that the lethal dose in rats is 20 pounds...... dropped from a hieght of 6 feet.


#67    MissMelsWell

MissMelsWell

    Cosmic Baker

  • Member
  • 13,255 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:05 AM

Trust me dude, even though they've put pseudoephdrine behind the pharmacists counter, that hasn't slowed the meth labs down any... and the reason why is because meth lab incidents were already at a near 0 level when the law went into effect.  (look on page 8 for the easy yearly graph) http://cascadepolicy...on_Meth_Law.pdf

Meth lab incidents have been on sharp decline in the PNW and has been since 2004, BEFORE the law went into effect. Meth just isn't the attractive street drug it once was. It costs a lot to make, costs a lot ot distribute and its street vaule isn't great.

So, the restriction of ephdrine has had little to no impact, but some organizations will use an erroneous statistic for their own benefit.

Taking the cartels out of the equasion for pot would be a good thing. Pot is their cash cow. This is the reason the cartel countries are having a temper tantrum. They know that if more states jump on board, they're going to be out of business. That's a scary proposition for those countries. Although, I dont know how much out of state pot is in Washington these days. Ive always antedotally understood that most of the pot in the PNW is grown here anyway, or smuggled in from Canada. Very little of it come from south America.... but I don't have anything to back that up. I've just always heard that most of what's on the streets here is grown locally already and it's been that way since the 80s/90s.

Edited by MissMelsWell, 15 November 2012 - 02:07 AM.

"It's time for the American people to stand up and shrug off the shackles of our government at TSA at the airport"  Ron Paul

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

#68    Varelse

Varelse

    Unanimous Animous

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,209 posts
  • Joined:11 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Above the left and right.

  • The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles upon which it was founded. -Montesquieu

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:57 AM

One interesting outcome to the end of the war on booze was Las Vegas and Reno. Without prohibition Nevada's great gambling scene and legalized prostitution would have never sprang up out of the desert when the syndicates needed to do something new with those mountains and mountains of cash.  

I guess can thank the Christians who shoved The Volstead Act down America's throat for legalized prostitution and gambling in Nevada. :clap:

God is neither a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim or any other 'self ordained' entity.
We hold these truths to be self-evident.

#69    Orcseeker

Orcseeker

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,767 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:15 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 15 November 2012 - 01:16 AM, said:


Making something illegal won't get rid of it, that is why there is supposedly a War on Drugs. Supposedly the US government was going to go out and remove the sources of said drugs. But, as we all know, pot still is being grown pretty much openly in Mexico, cocaine in Columbia and Opium in Afghanistan and Malaysia. This is a pretty slow war.

Hitting the source would up the price and reduce the number of users (same as tobacco). This would be especially useful against the stronger drugs.

I also would say that here in Oregon we passed a Psueduphedrin law, where you had to have a prescription and could only get enough for personal use. This removed 90% of the Meth producers ready chemicals from the Oregon market and Meth labs dropped from 100 busted per year to 1. Meth also because much more expensive and for the most part faded into a background criminal drug. So... meth use was abated by criminalizing the resource it was made from. Making something illegal made a drug almost disappear off the criminal landscape. LOTS of people complained about having to get a prescription, but once the plague of meth addicts (Tweekers I believe they are called.) dried up, everyone thought it was a wonderful law.

Though I know the pot is basically an "indoor" drug, and that it is basically harmless long term, I would be in favor of the government doing something... maybe GMO... to wipe out pot plants and even hemp plants.

Making pot illegal will not get rid of pot, only getting rid of the plants will get rid of pot.


I don't deny that drugs like methamphetamines and such should be eliminated due to their addictive properties and I'm all for that.

I wouldn't stand for illegality alcohol though, I take it responsibly and don't hurt anyone, why should everyone be punished simply due to the few that don't drink responsibly and hurt other people. Even with smoking Marijuana, why should anyone at all be punished for smoking it, like doing so responsibly. Who are they hurting?

You realise one the reasons they made Marijuana illegal in America was because it was "making African Americans and Latin Americans rape white women". The scientific tests that supported this included testing on monkies. Where, apparently, the smoking of marijuana caused death of brains cells. But this was due to the fact brain cells die when you are being suffocated. Because they were pumping in more smoke than oxygen in which the monkies suffocated to death.

Quote


I'm not sure that the government could/would sell below street prices, but if they did... it would reduce illegal sales. Depends on what is sold and what is available in the alley. If the stuff sold by the gov tastes like playdoe, it is not going to matter that it is cheap. If the only place to get the super-wazoo stuff is the alley, people are still going to go to the alley.


Well they are going to have to. If drug dealers can set up their own hydroponic setups in their own houses then if legalised, companies would have huge square miles of ground to work with and an increased yield at that for square meter. I'm quite sure they can beat the street prices.

I believe people should be able to grow it in their backyard like any vegetable they have today and only have it for personal use, nothing more.

Quote


The illegality of cheating on your taxes is not stopping a large majority of people from doing that. But that does not make it legal, ethical or right.

I think the right way to do it is to do what Washington did. Put it to a vote. I think just buckling over because some people are shouting at you that it is unfair is not the right reason to give over.

Just like when raising a kid. You don't give them a candy bar for screaming at you. You give them candy for following the rules. And if they want to change the rules, they need to ask and see if the parent thinks it is appropriate at that time. I feel that too many pro-pot people are screaming infants, rather then adults discussing an issue. And I don't feel like giving in to them.


Making Marijuana illegal based on what I have outlined before and other "facts" that support this revolve around discrimination, misinformation and a level of racism. That doesn't make it right at all.

We need to approach this sensibly, sure Washington can put it to a vote but the federal control is still prominent. We need to reduce the federal control over states and keep it to a necessary minimum.

Quote


I think I've already agreed that prison is not a good way of preventing anything. It usually actually makes people Better Criminals.

As in any War, the fault of loosing lies with the Generals, not with the troops. I blame the various Leaders in the failing War on Drugs. They could so easily have done so much more.


The corruption over the entire war is incredible. Even large parts the Mexican government is trying to take control over the cartels in the drug trade. This is an endless cycle and only damaging or societies, nothing is getting any better.

Quote


I was agreeing that it would be better then the current system, but that I still don't like it and wanted to point out that just because pot would be sold only to adults and only in specialist shops, in no way means that it will not be commonly ending up in the hands of a significant percentage of young people.


Still it would probably reduce the chance of that than in the current system. This problem is unavoidable. You talked about meth before and the significant drop in use after the drop of labs is because that is addictive, but like responsible use of alcohol, people may wish to smoke Marijuana from time to time as well. I do enjoy a drink every now and then and would hate to have my right for that taken away.

Quote


So these kids that are associated with crime and make plenty of illegal money. Are they going to just turn away from crime and go work at CostCo, or WalMart? Or, will they turn to something else in the shadowy criminal world? It is hard to say, I guess. But, I would not be surprised if these kids do what they have to, to live the lifestyle they have got used to. And CostCo just is not going to cut it.

So, with that as an example, are you sure you are considering all the problems created on both sides of the equation?


I don't live in an impoverished area and I'm quite sure most of these kids are well off. Most come from wealthy families and really have no reason to participate in such activities. But mainly do so for the image. In the end however, they lose, these people aren't good people. Some have glassed people in the face and leave permanent damage. All in the name of image and making a name for themselves.

This is all revolving around the use and distribution of illegal drugs. If legalised, we wouldn't have any of these little hard nuts who think they are al Capone or something going around hurting innocents. I also know because of their age, they are able to distribute to younger people and know that they do.

Quote


Making it prescription does make it controlled to an extent. You probably can't go buy enough for 200 kids to have at a party. You can't really buy enough to distrubute to any great effect. How much is sold where is tracked and statistics on use and any effects on society and healthcare can be tracked. I see lots of good reasons for prescriptions. Plus if parents have a prescription for say, 20 grams, just like parents that have only one good bottle of liquor, they are not going to let the kids have it.


Yes but is it right for this substance to be restricted to such? People who aren't able to get a prescription would turn to illegal alternatives anyway, and those are the majority of users.

Quote


I think that if alcohol was made illegal it would cause lots of issues with people wanting their Mood Medicine. I think lots of people would try to get it illegally, and a large criminal network would spring up to feed that. I think most people would be too lazy to try to do it themselves, like people did 100 years ago, but that factorys for smuggling the stuff would pop up in Mexico. And then the War on Liquor would eventually fail, because the Federal Government would not have the guts to attack those liquor factories in Mexico, or Force Mexico to do it themselves.


Alcohol does have positives as well as negatives. I myself can vouch that it has allowed me to express myself a lot more and come out of my shell a bit more after I first tried it in a reasonable amount. Yet, because some people who drink it shouldn't be ruin it for everyone and everyone gets punished because that is how society deals with things these days.

Quote


It is all about the government having the stones to make the War work. Which they have not in a couple decades. Nixon would have simply fire bombed swaths of Columbian hillside. Today the US Army is effectively protecting the Afghan poppy fields from warlords, and making Afghanistan the number two exporter of opium.

Why is the violent approach the best approach to stop problems. We see it doesn't work so why advocate going out there and destroying plants and everything. If we did that for everything on this planet that could endanger us, we'd have nothing left.

The opium fields in the hands of afghanistan is a hell of a lot better than in the hands of the warlords I'd say.


#70    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,523 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:41 PM

View PostMissMelsWell, on 15 November 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

Oh and because I've been watching the news stories about Washington and Colorado's initiatives very closely... guess who at this point is squealing the loudest about legalization? Oddly, the Feds have said next to nothing so far, but gee, how interesting, Mexico, Bolivia, Columbia, Honduras, Belize and Guatamala foreign dignitaries are having a damn cow! Hmmmm, why is that do you suppose? Could it be because their cartels will no longer be welcome in at least two states?

You might be misinterpreting the positions of the South American countries regarding drug legalization.

Government leaders in the South have espoused a reconsideration of drug policy for quite a number of years now.  Their people pay a much higher price in social pathologies than does the US.

The Andean people have been using coca leaf for many many centuries, long before the US even existed as a political entity.

It is true that some of the dishonest members of those governments play both sides--accepting US dollars and equipment in the drug war AND accepting bribes from the cartel members, but for the last decade or so many if not most of those governments favor some sort of legalization scheme.


#71    ColoradoParanormal

ColoradoParanormal

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,313 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado

  • 'Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.'

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:03 PM

View PostMissMelsWell, on 14 November 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Medical marijuana has been legal In Washington for years as well. We've seen a few Federal raids but mostly because in those dispensaries, there were illegal activites going on (see Overswords post) and bank accounts for dispensaries have been closed down by even smaller local banks. The big problem with this is that some dispensaries are now running their money through personal bank accounts now to avoid getitng in trouble with the Feds. The feds are forcing what our state sees as a legitimate business, into money laundering more or less. Yea!

It's different though. It's not just medical Marijuana. The amount of dispensaries goes to show how recreational it is. We have "Doctors" that are setup in tents on street corners that ALL the do is write a prescription for MMJ. People walk in with "Head Aches," pay their fee and wham are on the MMJ list. This is a lot different than what other states have. MMJ has been prescribed to Cancer Patients everywhere for a very long time.


#72    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 13,406 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • When the power of love overcomes the love of power then humanity can evolve

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:43 PM

ColoradoParanormal, do you mind if I ask how you voted on the Colorado initiative?  I voted no on I-502 (WA), although I have nothing against pot I didn't feel that i-502 was the law I wanted.  I'm forseeing them requiring chemical preservatives and the like as well as regulations concerning potency.

Edited by OverSword, 15 November 2012 - 07:43 PM.


#73    MissMelsWell

MissMelsWell

    Cosmic Baker

  • Member
  • 13,255 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:25 PM

View PostColoradoParanormal, on 15 November 2012 - 07:03 PM, said:

It's different though. It's not just medical Marijuana. The amount of dispensaries goes to show how recreational it is. We have "Doctors" that are setup in tents on street corners that ALL the do is write a prescription for MMJ. People walk in with "Head Aches," pay their fee and wham are on the MMJ list. This is a lot different than what other states have. MMJ has been prescribed to Cancer Patients everywhere for a very long time.

There are THC tablets have been prescribed to cancer patients for decades, however, it's well known that they don't work.  I hold a Washington State Rx Technician A license and used to dispense the tablets very rarely... rarely  because no one wanted them, they were ineffective. MJ vapor, suspension and the raw materials are very effective as an antiemetic whereas the medical tablet form as produced by drug companies are not, so ineffective, I recall hearing they don't even make the tabs anymore.

In Washington, just about anyone with a stubbed toe can get a MMJ card and has been able to for a very long time.

Colorado's and Washington's history with low priority enforcement and prosecution and now full legalization are pretty similar. Look for Oregon and California to follow suit within the next two years when they model their initiatives after CO and WA's.

Edited by MissMelsWell, 15 November 2012 - 11:27 PM.

"It's time for the American people to stand up and shrug off the shackles of our government at TSA at the airport"  Ron Paul

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

#74    MissMelsWell

MissMelsWell

    Cosmic Baker

  • Member
  • 13,255 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 16 November 2012 - 07:56 AM

Well we in Washington State now know what our incoming govenor thinks about legalization....

http://www.komonews....-179588501.html

He hasn't even taken office yet and is telling the Feds to stand aside.

The Seattle Police seems to be backing him as well with this amusing (there's definitely an undercurrent of humor here! I found it enjoyable haha) FAQ from the Seattle Police:

http://spdblotter.se...use-in-seattle/

"It's time for the American people to stand up and shrug off the shackles of our government at TSA at the airport"  Ron Paul

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

#75    Orcseeker

Orcseeker

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,767 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:22 PM

Just started watching The Wire.

An interesting quote on the War on Drugs.

"You can't even call this **** a war"

"Why not?"

"Wars end"

On another note, the criminals themselves don't want drugs legalised. Is that not telling anyone anything?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users