News:

TESTEMONAIL:  Right and Discordianism allows room for personal interpretation. You have your theories and I have mine. Unlike Christianity, Discordia allows room for ideas and opinions, and mine is well-informed and based on ancient philosophy and theology, so, my neo-Discordian friends, open your minds to my interpretation and I will open my mind to yours. That's fair enough, right? Just claiming to be discordian should mean that your mind is open and willing to learn and share ideas. You guys are fucking bashing me and your laughing at my theologies and my friends know what's up and are laughing at you and honestly this is my last shot at putting a label on my belief structure and your making me lose all hope of ever finding a ideological group I can relate to because you don't even know what the fuck I'm talking about and everything I have said is based on the founding principals of real Discordianism. Expand your mind.

Main Menu

Trigger warning: Drugs

Started by LMNO, September 13, 2013, 05:49:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... 27
User actions

AFK

#210
September 19, 2013, 03:46:29 PM
But a new law isn't being created.  Marijuana has been illegal for quite awhile.  We aren't talking about a new law to ban marijuana.  We're talking about whether or not to unban, to basically repeal a law. 


So it is incorrect to couch it in a discussion of adding laws because no laws would be added if we don't un-ban marijuana.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

LMNO

#211
September 19, 2013, 03:49:05 PM
To be clear, no law has been created that relates to marijuana other than the initial ban in the 1930s?

AFK

#212
September 19, 2013, 03:51:41 PM
Actually laws have been added.  The ones that have made medical marijuana legal in many states.  And let me tell you, those laws have definitely been goddamned zoos, especially here in Maine.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

LMNO

#213
September 19, 2013, 03:55:42 PM
But no laws regarding the prohibition or illegality of marijuana have been created since the 1930s.


Just so I understand.

AFK

#214
September 19, 2013, 04:00:09 PM
This isn't 1930, it is 2013.  Not un-banning marijuana does not create a new law.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

The Good Reverend Roger

#215
September 19, 2013, 04:00:51 PM
Quote from: Be Kind, Please RWHNd on September 19, 2013, 04:00:09 PM
This isn't 1930, it is 2013.  Not un-banning marijuana does not create a new law.

You didn't answer the question.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

LMNO

#216
September 19, 2013, 04:01:45 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 19, 2013, 03:40:50 PM
Law of aneristic escalation?  Create a law, new stuff squishes out the sides in the face of wider public acceptance, new laws have to be made to deal with the stuff that squished out the side, lather, rinse, repeat?



Just thinking out loud here.

A reminder of what I'm trying to say.

AFK

#217
September 19, 2013, 04:07:38 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 19, 2013, 04:01:45 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 19, 2013, 03:40:50 PM
Law of aneristic escalation?  Create a law, new stuff squishes out the sides in the face of wider public acceptance, new laws have to be made to deal with the stuff that squished out the side, lather, rinse, repeat?



Just thinking out loud here.

A reminder of what I'm trying to say.


But a new law isn't being created.  We are talking about whether or not to undo a law that already exists.  Your starting point is incorrect.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Reginald Ret

#218
September 19, 2013, 04:11:02 PM
Quote from: Be Kind, Please RWHNd on September 19, 2013, 04:00:09 PM
This isn't 1930, it is 2013.  Not un-banning marijuana does not create a new law.
Correct.
What it does do is not reduce the number of laws.
If you look at the end result, not removing a law has the same effect on the total number of laws as adding a new one.
Since laws often criminalize behaviour, they create more criminals.
I do not like criminals so i think we should always strive to reduce the total number of laws.
Lord Byron: "Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves."

Nigel saying the wisest words ever uttered: "It's just a suffix."

"The worst forum ever" "The most mediocre forum on the internet" "The dumbest forum on the internet" "The most retarded forum on the internet" "The lamest forum on the internet" "The coolest forum on the internet"

LMNO

#219
September 19, 2013, 04:11:46 PM
The point is that new laws are created that relate to the original law.


If the original law is removed, new laws will not be created that relate to the repealed law.

AFK

#220
September 19, 2013, 04:26:19 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 19, 2013, 04:11:46 PM
The point is that new laws are created that relate to the original law.


If the original law is removed, new laws will not be created that relate to the repealed law.


Sure, adding laws adds laws.  But not removing a law in and of itself does not add new laws.


But with respect to marijuana legalization you are incorrect anyway.  Because unless you also make it legal for minors to use, you will still have laws being created that relates to marijuana regulation.  And it will include laws regulating behavior.


You will also have new laws to regulate where you can and cannot use marijuana.  To include housing, schools, etc.
New laws will have to be created to regulate it at the workplace.
New laws will be created to regulate composition, THC content, promotion and advertising, outlet density, etc., etc.


More laws will have to be created to regulate recreational marijuana than are being created to maintain the status quo.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

AFK

#221
September 19, 2013, 04:42:58 PM
So, in the end, we each have desired results, but neither one will be a result where absolutely no new laws are created to create and/or maintain our desired results.


Now, I imagine those who support legalization will say those new laws are okay because it supports their desired result of legalized marijuana.


Just as I would support, for example, a new law today that made it harder for youth to get marijuana. 


But in the end, neither side's desired result will mean no new laws created. 


So it's a rather meaningless and moot discussion.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

LMNO

#222
September 19, 2013, 04:45:36 PM
Oh.  Well, then.

The Good Reverend Roger

#223
September 19, 2013, 05:01:35 PM
Quote from: Be Kind, Please RWHNd on September 19, 2013, 04:26:19 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 19, 2013, 04:11:46 PM
The point is that new laws are created that relate to the original law.


If the original law is removed, new laws will not be created that relate to the repealed law.


Sure, adding laws adds laws.  But not removing a law in and of itself does not add new laws.

FFS.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Salty

#224
September 19, 2013, 05:06:13 PM
I am just shocked by how this thread turned out.

Shocked, i tell you.
The world is a car and you're the crash test dummy.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... 27
User actions