REEFER MADNESS!!!!!!

[AFK]

So doesn't this run counter to the argument that has been given by some in this thread and others that the allure of marijuana is because it is illegal?  If that is the case then why does this "legal" version of marijuana, the Spice and K2 products, why is it alluring youth? 

Umm, because they already smoke pot but they can't but pot at 7-11?

No, because it's a shiny new drug for kids to try out.  And then it spreads through social networks. 

[AFK]

If you believe that the main measure of damage done by marijuana prohibition is prison sentences for marijuana then you haven't been paying attention. The point stands. You're ignoring quite a bit more of the story, in a manner that appears willful. I don't think you have a sincere interest in understanding the views you oppose, which would explain why you're continually destroying straw men.

Well, it seems to be one of the points you guys really like to harp on.  The overcrowded prisons and all of the money we are wasting keeping them in prison.  If you've actually been following along with all of the posts you know this has come up several times from several posters.  But please enlighten me as to the other social woes that I have "willfully" missed.   

How about the people that cannot get federal funds to go to school because of a pot conviction?

Who held the gun to their head and forced them to do whatever it was that lead them to the pot conviction?  Look, there are laws that I think are silly as well but at some point we do have responsibility for our actions.  If college is really important to a kid, they need to then decide just how important it is to them to engage in recreational drug use, knowing the laws are what they are. 

How about the kids that moved on to nastier substances because they found out that well-meaning lies about pot were lies and assumed  the nastier stuff was being lied about too?

What about the kids who were lied to on the internet about how awesome marijuana is for them and how much more awesome the harder stuff is? 

How about the youth that went into the justice system for pot and came out hardened criminals?

We've been over this before.  I agree that a kid should not be in prison for non-violent, non-dealer charges. 

How about the families that are affected by the thousands of people rotting in privatized prisons for simple possession?

Read above.

How about the emotional damage to children from cops violently bursting into their parents' home, shooting their dog, and arresting their father all over a small amount of marijuana?

How about the cop who had his leg busted by a bunch of stoned/drunk college students, breaking up a party where the partiers were physically preventing an ambulance from taking another ill college student to the hospital. 

How about the people who lost their job because of one of those arrest-and-releases that you so casually dismiss (after all, they didn't do any hard time)?

Did they not know that marijuana was illegal? 

How about the money spent on criminalizing people for marijuana that could have been spent on worthy pursuits?

Yeah, and the health care costs that come from kids and adults going into treatment for marijuana addiction. 

I'll tackle the other ones at another time.  Though it's a busy work week so I make no promises. 

[AFK]

I've also used peer-reviewed research to back up my points as well.  You conveniently leave those out.  But look, I put up evidence and you all are obviously free to counter it with counter information.  If you don't or can't, that's not on me.  If you think it's bogus, prove it.  Don't whine about my sources without actually lifting a finger to combat the information.  

But of course the flip side of this one is those of you arguing with me who deny information from those sources out of hand without even considering them simply because they come from those sources.

Copying and pasting large blocks of mostly irrelevant information isn't a "counter argument". It's a propaganda war. If that's what you want this to turn into, I can just go to NORML and grab some quotes and endlessly repost them when they're only tangentially related at best. Whoever reposts the most propaganda wins, eh?

Well I do want to address this one because it's a little interesting.  So when Telarus, or anyone else in this thread you agree with posts a bunch of links to articles, and large blocks of information it is okay but when I do it, it is "mostly irrelevant".  Look, you don't agree with me, I get it, but c'mon, if you are going to use arbitrarily different rules for different posters then what is the point of me even addressing you on this subject?  

BTW...please specifically explain to me how the information and sources I post are "mostly irrelevant".  I mean, besides the fact that you don't agree with them.  I mean, that's a very simple, general, and un-nuanced statement.  Surely you must have some specific reasoning for categorically rejecting every source I post.  Oh, I'm sorry, "mostly" everything I post.   

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I've also used peer-reviewed research to back up my points as well.  You conveniently leave those out.  But look, I put up evidence and you all are obviously free to counter it with counter information.  If you don't or can't, that's not on me.  If you think it's bogus, prove it.  Don't whine about my sources without actually lifting a finger to combat the information.  

But of course the flip side of this one is those of you arguing with me who deny information from those sources out of hand without even considering them simply because they come from those sources.

Copying and pasting large blocks of mostly irrelevant information isn't a "counter argument". It's a propaganda war. If that's what you want this to turn into, I can just go to NORML and grab some quotes and endlessly repost them when they're only tangentially related at best. Whoever reposts the most propaganda wins, eh?

Well I do want to address this one because it's a little interesting.  So when Telarus, or anyone else in this thread you agree with posts a bunch of links to articles, and large blocks of information it is okay but when I do it, it is "mostly irrelevant".  Look, you don't agree with me, I get it, but c'mon, if you are going to use arbitrarily different rules for different posters then what is the point of me even addressing you on this subject?  

BTW...please specifically explain to me how the information and sources I post are "mostly irrelevant".  I mean, besides the fact that you don't agree with them.  I mean, that's a very simple, general, and un-nuanced statement.  Surely you must have some specific reasoning for categorically rejecting every source I post.  Oh, I'm sorry, "mostly" everything I post.  

Telarus posts a lot of links once to show what he's talking about.

You repost the same information repeatedly.

I do not "categorically" reject every source you post, Mr. Nuance. Point out one example of me rejecting a single source you've posted.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

If you believe that the main measure of damage done by marijuana prohibition is prison sentences for marijuana then you haven't been paying attention. The point stands. You're ignoring quite a bit more of the story, in a manner that appears willful. I don't think you have a sincere interest in understanding the views you oppose, which would explain why you're continually destroying straw men.

Well, it seems to be one of the points you guys really like to harp on.  The overcrowded prisons and all of the money we are wasting keeping them in prison.  If you've actually been following along with all of the posts you know this has come up several times from several posters.  But please enlighten me as to the other social woes that I have "willfully" missed. 

It's a valid point, but it's one of many.

How about the people that cannot get federal funds to go to school because of a pot conviction?

Who held the gun to their head and forced them to do whatever it was that lead them to the pot conviction?  Look, there are laws that I think are silly as well but at some point we do have responsibility for our actions.  If college is really important to a kid, they need to then decide just how important it is to them to engage in recreational drug use, knowing the laws are what they are. 

I see, we should punish kids for being uneducated about our draconian marijuana laws.

HOW DARE THEY NOT KNOW?!

How about the kids that moved on to nastier substances because they found out that well-meaning lies about pot were lies and assumed  the nastier stuff was being lied about too?

What about the kids who were lied to on the internet about how awesome marijuana is for them and how much more awesome the harder stuff is?

The propaganda campaign that you embody is much more entrenched and "taught" under the guise of education. Lying on the internet is nowhere near equivalent to the corruption of institutions that should be presenting factual information.

How about the youth that went into the justice system for pot and came out hardened criminals?

We've been over this before.  I agree that a kid should not be in prison for non-violent, non-dealer charges.

However, you support federal drug scheduling that makes that possible.

How about the emotional damage to children from cops violently bursting into their parents' home, shooting their dog, and arresting their father all over a small amount of marijuana?

How about the cop who had his leg busted by a bunch of stoned/drunk college students, breaking up a party where the partiers were physically preventing an ambulance from taking another ill college student to the hospital. 

That's part of the fucking job description. Did the cops not know that they are putting their lives on the line when they applied?

How about the people who lost their job because of one of those arrest-and-releases that you so casually dismiss (after all, they didn't do any hard time)?

Did they not know that marijuana was illegal? 

Did you not know that marijuana has medical value? Are you going to stop taking medicine that makes your life livable if the government suddenly outlaws it for no good reason?

How about the money spent on criminalizing people for marijuana that could have been spent on worthy pursuits?

Yeah, and the health care costs that come from kids and adults going into treatment for marijuana addiction. 

[Salty]

Laws don't always make sense. Sometimes people break laws because they're doing something they consider natural, unharmful, maybe even an inaliable right. Laws are often made by idiots. If people are punished for breaking laws that we can agree are stupid (like not having the freedom to say FUCK THE POLICE) then we fight against the laws, lawmakers and social norms that allow such punishment. Whether using pot is such a right I can't really say,  but I think most of us can agree to the above.

[Salty]

My point is: yeah you can and should expect consequnces for your action especially when they're spelled out. But that doesn't come anywhere near making such punishment right.

[East Coast Hustle]

even in a world where pot is legal that these charges would still exist for selling and distributing to minors, correct?  I would be interested to see what the stats look like in terms of how many of those in jail for dealing were dealing to minors.  

If it were legal and sold out of state-run stores I bet the answer would be "zero".

You can't be serious.  Adults are regularly arrested and put in jail for furnishing alcohol to minors you really think that somehow legal marijuana is going to avoid that?  C'mon. 

Furnishing alcohol to a minor and trafficking illegal drugs are two VASTLY different charges with VASTLY different legal penalties. Someone going to the store to buy a bag of weed for a kid should be subject to the same level of punishment as someone who goes and gets the kid a 6-pack, not to being imprisoned and having their life ruined.

So yeah, the number of people in prison for DEALING pot to minors would probably be damn near zero.

[East Coast Hustle]

Waittagoddamn minute....


RWHN, are you REALLY saying that you think it's fair or right that a kid with a pot conviction can never get any federal aid for higher education for the rest of their life?

How the fuck is that being pro-children?

[East Coast Hustle]

So doesn't this run counter to the argument that has been given by some in this thread and others that the allure of marijuana is because it is illegal?  If that is the case then why does this "legal" version of marijuana, the Spice and K2 products, why is it alluring youth? 

Umm, because they already smoke pot but they can't but pot at 7-11?

No, because it's a shiny new drug for kids to try out.  And then it spreads through social networks. 

Kids can't legally enter smoke shops, so they're unlikely to even know about the stuff unless they already smoke weed. In Maine, Spice is (or was, I think it's been banned now?) only sold at head shops. You can't just go get it at CVS.

[East Coast Hustle]

I'd also like to go back to the part where you raise the (admittedly valid) point that many peoples' arguments ITT are based upon a presumption of rational action on the part of marijuana users and/or parents.

Funny, then, that most of your arguments as to why prohibition is a fair, just, and effective policy in the context of marijuana law depend upon a presumption of not only rational but compassionate action on the parts of the government and law enforcement communities.

Because, you know, they're known and noted for that sort of thing.

[AFK]

I'd also like to go back to the part where you raise the (admittedly valid) point that many peoples' arguments ITT are based upon a presumption of rational action on the part of marijuana users and/or parents.

Funny, then, that most of your arguments as to why prohibition is a fair, just, and effective policy in the context of marijuana law depend upon a presumption of not only rational but compassionate action on the parts of the government and law enforcement communities.

Because, you know, they're known and noted for that sort of thing.

They are in my community. 

[AFK]

I've also used peer-reviewed research to back up my points as well.  You conveniently leave those out.  But look, I put up evidence and you all are obviously free to counter it with counter information.  If you don't or can't, that's not on me.  If you think it's bogus, prove it.  Don't whine about my sources without actually lifting a finger to combat the information.  

But of course the flip side of this one is those of you arguing with me who deny information from those sources out of hand without even considering them simply because they come from those sources.

Copying and pasting large blocks of mostly irrelevant information isn't a "counter argument". It's a propaganda war. If that's what you want this to turn into, I can just go to NORML and grab some quotes and endlessly repost them when they're only tangentially related at best. Whoever reposts the most propaganda wins, eh?

Well I do want to address this one because it's a little interesting.  So when Telarus, or anyone else in this thread you agree with posts a bunch of links to articles, and large blocks of information it is okay but when I do it, it is "mostly irrelevant".  Look, you don't agree with me, I get it, but c'mon, if you are going to use arbitrarily different rules for different posters then what is the point of me even addressing you on this subject?  

BTW...please specifically explain to me how the information and sources I post are "mostly irrelevant".  I mean, besides the fact that you don't agree with them.  I mean, that's a very simple, general, and un-nuanced statement.  Surely you must have some specific reasoning for categorically rejecting every source I post.  Oh, I'm sorry, "mostly" everything I post.  

Telarus posts a lot of links once to show what he's talking about.

You repost the same information repeatedly.

I do not "categorically" reject every source you post, Mr. Nuance. Point out one example of me rejecting a single source you've posted.

Yes you do, and it is clear there are different rules for those you agree with and those you disagree with, so I'm done discussing this with you.  It's a waste of my time.  Besides that you generalize, for example when you say that every source I post is "mostly irrelevant"  I've posted many, many sources in the many, many threads.  It is very unthinking to just out of hand categorize all of them as irrelevant.  And now you are saying I post the same thing over and over again which is also a generalized and untrue summation of what I've been doing in this thread.

So when you are ready to debate this topic in good faith, we can resume, until then, I'm done with you. 

[AFK]

even in a world where pot is legal that these charges would still exist for selling and distributing to minors, correct?  I would be interested to see what the stats look like in terms of how many of those in jail for dealing were dealing to minors.  

If it were legal and sold out of state-run stores I bet the answer would be "zero".

You can't be serious.  Adults are regularly arrested and put in jail for furnishing alcohol to minors you really think that somehow legal marijuana is going to avoid that?  C'mon. 

Furnishing alcohol to a minor and trafficking illegal drugs are two VASTLY different charges with VASTLY different legal penalties. Someone going to the store to buy a bag of weed for a kid should be subject to the same level of punishment as someone who goes and gets the kid a 6-pack, not to being imprisoned and having their life ruined.

So yeah, the number of people in prison for DEALING pot to minors would probably be damn near zero.

Your optimism is noted. 

[AFK]

Waittagoddamn minute....


RWHN, are you REALLY saying that you think it's fair or right that a kid with a pot conviction can never get any federal aid for higher education for the rest of their life?

How the fuck is that being pro-children?

No, I didn't say that.  I would hope that there could be some leniency, especially if it is just one incident that didn't involve violence or trafficking.  But at some point we have to take some responsibility for our actions.