News:

MysticWicks endorsement: ""Oooh, I'm a Discordian! I can do whatever I want! Which means I can just SAY I'm a pagan but I never bother doing rituals or studying any kind of sacred texts or developing a relationship with deity, etc! I can go around and not be Christian, but I won't quite be anything else either because I just can't commit and I can't be ARSED to commit!"

Main Menu

So, the economist and time agree: It's about fucking time to LEGALISE IT

Started by Lies, November 15, 2009, 06:13:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

East Coast Hustle

In my experience, many of the pot dealers in Maine also had various painkillers for sale, usually and unfortunately including OxyContin (which as RWHN can tell you is a MAJOR problem out there). Many of the dealers in Seattle would also have coke and/or ecstasy and/or pills. Nearly all of the dealers in St. Thomas also had coke/crack/guns/whores for sale. Nearly all of the dealers I encountered in my limited time in Michigan were coke dealers in equal or greater amounts than they were pot dealers, but that perception is almost certainly skewed by my time employed at a strip club that was a front/laundering operation for a coke dealer.

Especially with the ones that were also dealing coke, I saw alot of possibly underage girls and kids that should have been in high school hanging around.

I'm done weighing in on the argument, so I'll leave that anecdotal evidence to each of you to weigh and interpret.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞

Quote from: Requia ☣ on November 23, 2009, 06:06:28 PM
Trading the liberty of millions for safety of thousands isn't a gamble.  That's what really gets me, this isn't even a good trade.  If we could protect thousands at the cost of thousands, then that's a hard decision to make.  But in order to protect your 190,000 kids 4 million 800,000 from each year, 15-19, will go to jail.

THIS.

And what RWHN also has ignored is that many of the people who get incarcerated for pot are important providers for their family. Middle and upper class people can just shrug off the fines. For people barely making ends meet, that means they go without necessities, like food, medicine and shelter.

Considering how many people get fined or incarcerated, I'm sure that many more children are harmed through marijuana prohibition by losing parental support and stability in their life than would be by a questionable possibility that there would be increased access. That's a POSSIBILITY. Right now, many more people, including children, ARE FOR A FACT, getting their lives torn apart by the economic and social impacts of marijuana prohibition. Changing the laws would FOR SURE, end these severe injustices.

Trying to frame this like it's just a matter sacrificing children for adults ease in getting high makes it easy for you to stick with your current worldview. It's okay to sacrifice kids to poverty and extreme emotional hardship by ruining their parents lives for smoking, growing or selling pot, regardless of how decent and responsible their parents have been. Because why? Oh yes, because that's the price families and taxpayers have to pay to save the negligent parents from seeping weed into kids hands.

I think it's quite telling that RWHN has not remarked on the economic and social costs of marijuana prohibition besides something like, "I think those cases are overstated." How many innocent people and their families are worth ruining for each kid that is theoretically saved from decreased access to marijuana?
P E R   A S P E R A   A D   A S T R A

ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞

Quote from: Rip City Hustle on November 23, 2009, 07:38:56 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on November 23, 2009, 07:07:38 PM
Maybe it's just a Portland culture thing, but I've never met a pot dealer who sold anything besides pot. In fact, all the dealers I've ever known have been kind of your typical girl-or-guy-next-door type. They grow their own or buy from a grower and it's all pretty straightforward... no guns, no gangs, no hard drugs.

that is actually unusual, though it makes sense given what little I've learned so far about Portland's cultural quirks.

I've been made offers for all sorts of things by street kids, hookers and thugs in Chinatown and downtown and the majority of the time it was not exclusively pot.

It's not like I'm especially familiar with the seedy underbelly of Portland, but I've had very different experiences than Nigel. Especially since I was a kid here during a lot of my forays into drug use.
P E R   A S P E R A   A D   A S T R A

the last yatto

"The solution isn't to legalize the drugs, which would increase the access to minors"

stores and the like care about the rules, most drug dealers don't
THUS it was much easier to get drugs then booze when your a kid.


that said, i used to be for the legalization, but if Lysergic wants it, I suddenly dont
Look, asshole:  Your 'incomprehensible' act, your word-salad, your pinealism...It BORES ME.  I've been incomprehensible for so long, I TEACH IT TO MBA CANDIDATES.  So if you simply MUST talk about your pineal gland or happy children dancing in the wildflowers, go talk to Roger, because he digs that kind of shit

East Coast Hustle

to be fair, most of my time has been spend in South Tabor, Richmond, Foster-Powell, and a little bit of NoPo and a little bit of the yuppie part of downtown.

though, NE is much less ghetto than I remember from the 90's and outer SE seems much less shitty and seedy than everyone keeps suggesting to me that I should think it is.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Lies

Quote from: Yatto on November 24, 2009, 03:09:02 AM
"The solution isn't to legalize the drugs, which would increase the access to minors"

stores and the like care about the rules, most drug dealers don't
THUS it was much easier to get drugs then booze when your a kid.


that said, i used to be for the legalization, but if Lysergic wants it, I suddenly dont

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You know, I'm also in favor of education, free speech, liberty, freedom, thinking for yourself and the government staying out of peoples sex lives, does that mean you're no longer for those as well?
- So the New World Order does not actually exist?
- Oh it exists, and how!
Ask the slaves whose labour built the White House;
Ask the slaves of today tied down to sweatshops and brothels to escape hunger;
Ask most women, second class citizens, in a pervasive rape culture;
Ask the non-human creatures who inhabit the planet:
whales, bears, frogs, tuna, bees, slaughtered farm animals;
Ask the natives of the Americas and Australia on whose land
you live today, on whose graves your factories, farms and neighbourhoods stand;
ask any of them this, ask them if the New World Order is true;
they'll tell you plainly: the New World Order... is you!

ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞

Quote from: Lysergic on November 24, 2009, 04:22:58 AM
Quote from: Yatto on November 24, 2009, 03:09:02 AM
"The solution isn't to legalize the drugs, which would increase the access to minors"

stores and the like care about the rules, most drug dealers don't
THUS it was much easier to get drugs then booze when your a kid.


that said, i used to be for the legalization, but if Lysergic wants it, I suddenly dont

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You know, I'm also in favor education, free speech, liberty, freedom, thinking for yourself and the government staying out of peoples sex lives, does that mean you're no longer for those as well?

I read that as sarcasm.
P E R   A S P E R A   A D   A S T R A

Lies

Quote from: Ne+@uNGr0+ on November 24, 2009, 04:26:19 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on November 24, 2009, 04:22:58 AM
Quote from: Yatto on November 24, 2009, 03:09:02 AM
"The solution isn't to legalize the drugs, which would increase the access to minors"

stores and the like care about the rules, most drug dealers don't
THUS it was much easier to get drugs then booze when your a kid.


that said, i used to be for the legalization, but if Lysergic wants it, I suddenly dont

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You know, I'm also in favor education, free speech, liberty, freedom, thinking for yourself and the government staying out of peoples sex lives, does that mean you're no longer for those as well?

I read that as sarcasm.

So did I, I was just making a point.
- So the New World Order does not actually exist?
- Oh it exists, and how!
Ask the slaves whose labour built the White House;
Ask the slaves of today tied down to sweatshops and brothels to escape hunger;
Ask most women, second class citizens, in a pervasive rape culture;
Ask the non-human creatures who inhabit the planet:
whales, bears, frogs, tuna, bees, slaughtered farm animals;
Ask the natives of the Americas and Australia on whose land
you live today, on whose graves your factories, farms and neighbourhoods stand;
ask any of them this, ask them if the New World Order is true;
they'll tell you plainly: the New World Order... is you!

BabylonHoruv

Quote from: Requia ☣ on November 23, 2009, 12:08:00 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on November 22, 2009, 12:23:26 PM
umm...how does me smoking marijuana have a direct negative impact on another individual?

also, no one's arguing that marijuana should be legal for kids or that providing it to kids shouldn't come with huge penalties and/or jail time. You still haven't explained how it is philosophically justifiable for the government to pre-emptively restrict my rights based on what might happen. It is the EXACT same thing as if the government decided to legislatively prohibit driving a car because I might allow that car to fall into the hands of an unlicensed minor.

Not the exact same thing at all, for one cars kill or maim quite a bit more people than weed.

The effect they have on society is also far more negative than the effects of marijuana.  Cars pollute the air, cause a drastic increase in asthma and other respiratory illnesses, they are, along with TV, one of the major factors in the decline of the local community.

I think cars have been given a bit more stick than they deserve as far as their fault in causing global warming, but there is no doubt they are the primary cause of smog and a definite contributor to acid rain.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

BabylonHoruv

Quote from: FP on November 23, 2009, 02:51:06 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 11:08:44 AM
Quote from: FP on November 22, 2009, 07:54:47 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on November 22, 2009, 06:36:43 PM
here's another question: are you capable of viewing this issue outside of the very limited framework of your job? because this is an issue of personal liberty, and you seem to be saying that personal liberty isn't that important. I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but that's a frustrating attitude to see coming from someone here. Or, indeed, from anyone anywhere.

Remember the Rx Pill Party thread? It went on for six pages before RWHN could step out of his framework even slightly. I assume this dedication to that reality tunnel is part of what makes RWHN effective at his job, but when you start discarding "facts" for "what seems most beneficial to communicate given the circumstances", then there is no longer a rational debate happening, just politics.

Ooh, now we're getting passive aggressive with some backhanded insults thrown in.  Precious.  Get bent!
Which parts are inaccurate? I haven't seen you take your job-hat off in these discussions, or express any doubts you have, and that's primarily why I've stayed frustrated but silent in this thread. I'm sorry you feel insulted, but you did put "message control" before "facts" in the Rx thread and if I'm wrong in using that as a basis to assume the same pattern is unfolding here, then I apologise fully.

I have.  He takes his job hat off when he posts things that are not scrupulously researched.  Folks jumped all over him for that, which may be why he is a bit more cautio0us about taking his job hat off now.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

BabylonHoruv

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 04:50:42 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 23, 2009, 04:43:39 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 04:41:37 PM
But to use the malady metaphor, it is my contention that legalizing marijuana will only serve to aggravate the fever. 

Why?  Because we'll stop ruining the lives of people who choose to smoke it?

Anecdotally speaking, I don't know anyone who smokes that lets the law stop them, and I don't know anyone who doesn't smoke that would start if the law was repealed.  It's every bit as effective as the Volstead Act.

But the "ruining the lives of people" can be addressed without legalizing the substance.  I absolutely agree that some guy pulled over for speeding with a joint or two should not have his life turned inside out for that.  But I would argue that the solution is reform of the local or state code of law.  I absolutely agree that we don't want an agency like the DEA breaking in the door of an innocent family.  There should be very harsh penalties for those kinds of actions.  The problem isn't the stature of marijuana being illicit, it is the implementation of policies and the carrying out of laws that is the problem.  When innocent people are in the cross-hairs, something is wrong.  But that happens with other forms of law enforcement as well.  So you keep working on it. 

A lot of the problems aren't just from overzealous government though.  There is also the fact that the marijuana is being supplied through an organized crime apparatus.  The drug war is serving as a huge subsidy to organized crime to the point that they are now able to take on the government of Mexico in head to head military battles and often come out ahead.  That's NOT ok, and it is a much greater threat to us than 190k teenagers trying weed.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

BabylonHoruv

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 05:44:54 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 23, 2009, 05:00:11 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 04:50:42 PM
But the "ruining the lives of people" can be addressed without legalizing the substance.  I absolutely agree that some guy pulled over for speeding with a joint or two should not have his life turned inside out for that.  But I would argue that the solution is reform of the local or state code of law. 

So we'll just ruin their lives a little less?

I have alcohol in my house (though I myself do not drink (for medical reasons), others of age do).  Neither of my children have taken up drinking.  In fact, my son considers it a trap for fools.

So I fail to see why adults cannot use marijuana.  The law, at any level, is routinely ignored, just as the Volstead Act was, and that defiance makes a mockery of the rule of law (bad laws always do), but instead of repealing it (as in the case of the Volstead Act), our government has chosen to use that mockery as an excuse to generate loads of prison labor for Wackenhutt.  In fact, all laws in the USA are tending that way.

If you have a means to get around that psychology, I'd be interested in hearing it.

Well if the law is routinely ignored, I certainly don't want a law in place that allows adult marijuana use.  How confident should I be that the laws around furnishing minors would be any better enforced? 

If there are less stupid laws people are more likely to respect the ones that there are.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

BabylonHoruv

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 06:00:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 23, 2009, 05:56:55 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 23, 2009, 05:54:16 PM
Why are you stopping at marijuana?  

Just as you lectured some folks on not reading your posts, so shall I lecture you now:  I have already answered that question.

My apologies, I wasn't referring to you.  I meant others who have said they would not legalize all drugs. 

I tend not to worry about legalizing all drugs for the same reason I have seen you say you don't worry about making alcohol illegal again.  It's not worth the effort.

Making marijuana legal looks possible to me,  possibly some others such as psylocibe mushrooms and peyote, heroin becoming legal seems highly unlikely to me and the benefits don't seem as concrete because it is not pouring as much money into the criminal underworld (more per dealer yes, less overall)   That's why I have that line.  I don't want to waste my efforts agitating for drug legalization in general, marijuana legalization seems worth the effort.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

the last yatto

debate about if RWHN has the curse of greyface is a trap
so is blind the attitude of dont trust the government :fnord:or anybody for that matter


so heres my pention
something about deer protecting the kids
or
:?

quick understanding  laws have been reduced to
warning labels so the idiots of the world dont cause problems for the rest of us.
(example no text messages nor any drunking while driving)

"[pot] impedes development, stunts personal growth, and generally leaves them directionless and unproductive"
:cn:

many examples of how this sort of thing ends up going bad?
DARWIN AWARDS meet cheech and chong awards

after mary jane became legal, congress banned all advertising campaigns for its use,
it was a sad day that bob marley music may no longer be heard on the radio, but its FOR THE KIDS!  :roll:

is the Parent Teacher Association
pro or anti anarchist? or is it more commie
i mean sure there might be a mao or two but its pretty marxist no?




you have to respect the drugs, cause they sure as hell wont respect you
weed often slows you down, something not popular in a fast pace world?
and why should i pay a fine to do something that shouldnt be illegal, cant i do some community service... i already do that

isnt methadone legal for addicts? isnt that herion... and cant you get it for free by standing in the hell services line? sure you got 2 seek "HELP" and want to get better, but they give you a vial to go knock your brains out for a few hours

Quote from: Lysergic on November 24, 2009, 04:22:58 AM
Quote from: Yatto on November 24, 2009, 03:09:02 AM
that said, i used to be for the legalization, but if Lysergic wants it, I suddenly dont

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You know, I'm also in favor of education, free speech, liberty, freedom, thinking for yourself and the government staying out of peoples sex lives, does that mean you're no longer for those as well?
education, pfft highschool is a joke
free speech meh doesnt matter your black bagged eventually if you cant be controled by mockingbird
liberty for who? why does the average america dislike the french? wasnt it them who we entered this democracy with?
if you listen to rwhn & cram, adolescent cant think for themself
sex? Uncle BadTouch 'enough said ;)


"The solution to bad enforcement policies is not legalizing the substance.  It is advocating for better and more sensible enforcement policies. "
exbit A- Retired Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper thinks we should legalize drugs after what he witnessed

but i mean what i say, it shouldnt be just straight up legalized

id never want coffeeshops here, that just gives them a target...
to expand or limit as they see fit...
as if was their (government) decision to make

FIGHT ORGANIZED CRIME grow your own
if anything the only thing that should be legal to sell would be be seeds.
yep able to buy the seeds at state run stores
this way someone whos of legal age cant just buy it for the youngings, but has to take away from their own stash...
and if they are caught...
like a dwi, their right to grow would be revoked.

and of course then policy would fall towards either the home owners ass. or apartment management.
and laws could expand after the first wave, Regan be DAMNED!
would you buy at a membership costco or coop like operation?
rules effecting local business would then take effect just like people can reject a liquor lie-sense or rally against a walmart
this way utah and nevada could be sober states like some parts are dry counties

well unless you have the right to bear fARMS :lulz:
o wait we cant legalize it because it might become popular?
this seed path, would also once again legalize hemp production for fiber and other products.

decriminalization =/= legalization
"Kids getting hooked on marijuana and getting banned from HIGHer education impacts all of us."

Look, asshole:  Your 'incomprehensible' act, your word-salad, your pinealism...It BORES ME.  I've been incomprehensible for so long, I TEACH IT TO MBA CANDIDATES.  So if you simply MUST talk about your pineal gland or happy children dancing in the wildflowers, go talk to Roger, because he digs that kind of shit

The Johnny

<<My image in some places, is of a monster of some kind who wants to pull a string and manipulate people. Nothing could be further from the truth. People are manipulated; I just want them to be manipulated more effectively.>>

-B.F. Skinner