Well, the city of Denver already legalized it, and Las Vegas is already covered in security cameras, so I guess we're halfway there.¦TØP¦ Rommel1l wrote:
Ok its settled then.Turquoise wrote:
I suppose cameras are a more understandable government measure than most, but I can't say I'm a fan of banning recreational substances.konfusion wrote:
Being a control freak in my personal life (or relatively to the European standard anyway), I find it easier to understand and/or sympathise with other control freaks (aka the government).
At least that's how I justify it. I would like the footage to be released for rape and murder cases though... The cameras are probably one of the main reasons that the London Underground is one of the safer ones in comparison to other large subway services (ie you don't necessarily have to worry about being mugged... unless you go at midnight... wearing a lot of jewelry... looking like a douchebag who's spending his dad's money)
-kon
Lets install more security cameras around the US and legalize marijuana.
Whats next on the agenda?
To be honest, I wouldn't mind weed that much if people just ate/drank itTurquoise wrote:
I suppose cameras are a more understandable government measure than most, but I can't say I'm a fan of banning recreational substances.
-kon
9 pages is a lot to read but I kind of get sick of every time the debate for legalization comes up...the "1000's of other uses" argument comes up. Fuck that, you want it legal to SMOKE...you could give a shit about the other reasons....at least stand up and state that. Don't hide behind the rope, belts, shoes crap.
Me, I don't smoke it. My thoughts to those who do are mostly negative but that's because those I saw smoke more than the occasional experimentation have ended up being a waste of life. But I will concede that doesn't mean everyone does.
So my objection for legalization is based on the prohibition lesson of alcohol. Alcohol use results in more deaths than marijuana smoking. Proven fact. However, we tried making alcohol illegal once and that created even larger problems. So I say we should not legalize marijuana for the simple fact that if it goes horribly wrong...there is no un-doing it. Prohibition proved that. Keep it at medical use and in Amsterdam.
Me, I don't smoke it. My thoughts to those who do are mostly negative but that's because those I saw smoke more than the occasional experimentation have ended up being a waste of life. But I will concede that doesn't mean everyone does.
So my objection for legalization is based on the prohibition lesson of alcohol. Alcohol use results in more deaths than marijuana smoking. Proven fact. However, we tried making alcohol illegal once and that created even larger problems. So I say we should not legalize marijuana for the simple fact that if it goes horribly wrong...there is no un-doing it. Prohibition proved that. Keep it at medical use and in Amsterdam.
462nd, your objection makes absolutely no sense. You're saying weed should not be legalised because there were problems when alcohol was made illegal?
If anything, the prohibition example which you cite supports the case for legalisation - weed is currently prohibited, just as alcohol was for a time, and this prohibition is presently causing many of the same problems which were caused by alcohol prohibition.
If anything, the prohibition example which you cite supports the case for legalisation - weed is currently prohibited, just as alcohol was for a time, and this prohibition is presently causing many of the same problems which were caused by alcohol prohibition.
No...not when alcohol was made illegal. Rather the opposite.Pubic wrote:
462nd, your objection makes absolutely no sense. You're saying weed should not be legalised because there were problems when alcohol was made illegal?
If anything, the prohibition example which you cite supports the case for legalisation - weed is currently prohibited, just as alcohol was for a time, and this prohibition is presently causing many of the same problems which were caused by alcohol prohibition.
Let me try to explain where I was coming from. The prohibition of alcohol is not what caused or causes chronic health and social problems. Nor does it cause drunk driver fatalities, etc. My point was that the very legalization of alcohol exacerbates these problems. My opinion, before letting that genie out of the bottle....maybe look at past examples of how something similar backfired. Once alcohol was made legal or maybe even more appropriately...socially acceptable, it was near impossible to successfully reverse that.
Now, I'm no tea-toddler...I knock back more than a few myself so you can call my a hypocrite if you like. Of course there are plenty who can also argue that legalization of marijuana would never lead to increased health/social issues, etc. etc. Given your vernacular for marijuana, I will assume you share that option...and you may very well be right. But I do think you'd be foolish not to give any similar 'legalization' scenarios due consideration.
Alcohol has been with us for a long, long time, and barring periods of prohibition its pretty much always been legal and socially acceptable - there is no comparison with the push to legalise (the term "re-legalise" is more appropriate) marijuana.
You're right in assuming that I'm of the opinion that health/social issues would not increase, but this is a complex discussion - some problems will grow and some will shrink, but I believe that overall society will benefit. I'm going home from work now and haven't the time to elaborate, but for a start try and consider the effect of legalised marijuana on organised crime; in particular the destructive effect on criminal gangs' distribution networks - theres just one benefit for you.
You're right in assuming that I'm of the opinion that health/social issues would not increase, but this is a complex discussion - some problems will grow and some will shrink, but I believe that overall society will benefit. I'm going home from work now and haven't the time to elaborate, but for a start try and consider the effect of legalised marijuana on organised crime; in particular the destructive effect on criminal gangs' distribution networks - theres just one benefit for you.
Well, wouldn't it make more sense to legalize pot, since people are going to smoke it regardless of its legality? By keeping the ban in place, it just sucks money away from society. If you legalized it, you could tax it, which could then pay for the costs it brings to society.462nd NSP653 wrote:
No...not when alcohol was made illegal. Rather the opposite.Pubic wrote:
462nd, your objection makes absolutely no sense. You're saying weed should not be legalised because there were problems when alcohol was made illegal?
If anything, the prohibition example which you cite supports the case for legalisation - weed is currently prohibited, just as alcohol was for a time, and this prohibition is presently causing many of the same problems which were caused by alcohol prohibition.
Let me try to explain where I was coming from. The prohibition of alcohol is not what caused or causes chronic health and social problems. Nor does it cause drunk driver fatalities, etc. My point was that the very legalization of alcohol exacerbates these problems. My opinion, before letting that genie out of the bottle....maybe look at past examples of how something similar backfired. Once alcohol was made legal or maybe even more appropriately...socially acceptable, it was near impossible to successfully reverse that.
Now, I'm no tea-toddler...I knock back more than a few myself so you can call my a hypocrite if you like. Of course there are plenty who can also argue that legalization of marijuana would never lead to increased health/social issues, etc. etc. Given your vernacular for marijuana, I will assume you share that option...and you may very well be right. But I do think you'd be foolish not to give any similar 'legalization' scenarios due consideration.
Bans usually don't work from a cost-benefit analysis viewpoint except in the cases of really hard drugs like heroin and cocaine.
If it were legalized, the prices of illegal weed would drastically decrease. The price of legal weed would be relatively high, as there is no infrastructure for actual legal weed - in fact, all the plantations are genetically altered, and belong to drug lords. There are no means of producing legal weed - and I don't think you'd want the drug lords running the franchise, because that would be the same shit as before.Turquoise wrote:
Well, wouldn't it make more sense to legalize pot, since people are going to smoke it regardless of its legality? By keeping the ban in place, it just sucks money away from society. If you legalized it, you could tax it, which could then pay for the costs it brings to society.
Bans usually don't work from a cost-benefit analysis viewpoint except in the cases of really hard drugs like heroin and cocaine.
It would take at least a decade for the legalization of pot to actually make sense in a free and legal market, even if you do include taxation and everything. How do you propose to accelerate this process? What do you suggest the government does until the free market is ready for this?
-kon
Yes it should be legalized. I smoke far too much of it, so I could feel THAAAAATT much less guilty.
yaaaaaaay.
yaaaaaaay.
You're correct about pricing differences. However, weed is easy to grow. So, if it became legal, the one downside might be that individuals would grow it for their own use mostly without paying taxes. They could still be fined for selling it without adding taxes though.konfusion wrote:
If it were legalized, the prices of illegal weed would drastically decrease. The price of legal weed would be relatively high, as there is no infrastructure for actual legal weed - in fact, all the plantations are genetically altered, and belong to drug lords. There are no means of producing legal weed - and I don't think you'd want the drug lords running the franchise, because that would be the same shit as before.Turquoise wrote:
Well, wouldn't it make more sense to legalize pot, since people are going to smoke it regardless of its legality? By keeping the ban in place, it just sucks money away from society. If you legalized it, you could tax it, which could then pay for the costs it brings to society.
Bans usually don't work from a cost-benefit analysis viewpoint except in the cases of really hard drugs like heroin and cocaine.
Your assumption that drug lords would still hold the keys is wrong, however, because of the ease at which it can be grown.
Secondly, even if infrastructure is a problem, that can easily be solved by the institution of a permit system similar to the one used by tobacco. If RJR, for example, was one of the only companies with such a permit, then the infrastructure would fix itself due to RJR's own spending on it. Pot obviously is highly marketable, and RJR would definitely like to cash in on it.
Limiting permits down to the major tobacco companies would be the only governmental action needed. The rest would mostly fix itself.konfusion wrote:
It would take at least a decade for the legalization of pot to actually make sense in a free and legal market, even if you do include taxation and everything. How do you propose to accelerate this process? What do you suggest the government does until the free market is ready for this?
-kon
The permit system would lead to abuse, because of complication - the same way anything that's slightly complicated does. The same way health systems are abused. The question is whether you think it's worth it.
I, for one, don't. I don't think the government should subsidize this industry - something that would be required for rapid growth and adoption of the industry.
-kon
I, for one, don't. I don't think the government should subsidize this industry - something that would be required for rapid growth and adoption of the industry.
-kon
I have to say I totally disagree with this idea that in order to legalize pot, it would need government subsidy.
There's already an pot-industry waiting in the wings to set-up shop.
The current black-market - where do you think we all get our illegal pot from? Grow it ourselves?
No. It's grown in (variously sized) farms and private enterprises.
And, if you think that the current home-grown illegal supply chain wouldn't be sufficient, there's the Dutch pot industry - I'm sure they'd more than happy to set-up farms here, in the UK, or there, in the US - and they have more than enough financial clout to do it without any government subsidy.
There's already an pot-industry waiting in the wings to set-up shop.
The current black-market - where do you think we all get our illegal pot from? Grow it ourselves?
No. It's grown in (variously sized) farms and private enterprises.
And, if you think that the current home-grown illegal supply chain wouldn't be sufficient, there's the Dutch pot industry - I'm sure they'd more than happy to set-up farms here, in the UK, or there, in the US - and they have more than enough financial clout to do it without any government subsidy.
I think farmers would have to be notified before pot were to be made legal, to keep up with the demand. It's kinda like the Windows 7 Beta launch - you can't cope with the amount of people who would want it right away, you'd have to make a buffer.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I have to say I totally disagree with this idea that in order to legalize pot, it would need government subsidy.
There's already an pot-industry waiting in the wings to set-up shop.
The current black-market - where do you think we all get our illegal pot from? Grow it ourselves?
No. It's grown in (variously sized) farms and private enterprises.
And, if you think that the current home-grown illegal supply chain wouldn't be sufficient, there's the Dutch pot industry - I'm sure they'd more than happy to set-up farms here, in the UK, or there, in the US - and they have more than enough financial clout to do it without any government subsidy.
I still don't agree with legalization for various other reasons, but I decided not to be boring, and diversify the argument ^^
-kon
Scorpion's right though. No subsidy would be needed. The market for a technological product and that of weed aren't even comparable.konfusion wrote:
I think farmers would have to be notified before pot were to be made legal, to keep up with the demand. It's kinda like the Windows 7 Beta launch - you can't cope with the amount of people who would want it right away, you'd have to make a buffer.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I have to say I totally disagree with this idea that in order to legalize pot, it would need government subsidy.
There's already an pot-industry waiting in the wings to set-up shop.
The current black-market - where do you think we all get our illegal pot from? Grow it ourselves?
No. It's grown in (variously sized) farms and private enterprises.
And, if you think that the current home-grown illegal supply chain wouldn't be sufficient, there's the Dutch pot industry - I'm sure they'd more than happy to set-up farms here, in the UK, or there, in the US - and they have more than enough financial clout to do it without any government subsidy.
I still don't agree with legalization for various other reasons, but I decided not to be boring, and diversify the argument ^^
-kon
There are arguments against legalizing pot that hold weight, but not any with economic concerns.
The strongest arguments are generally based on things like social welfare.
The arguments against marijuana are very weak. The arguments are based on misinformation which shared with ignorance and denial makes up the basis of pro- illegal marijuana laws.Turquoise wrote:
.......The strongest arguments are generally based on things like social welfare.
People need to wake up and open their eyes to the real.
Pretty much... bans usually don't work out so well.¦TØP¦ Rommel1l wrote:
The arguments against marijuana are very weak. The arguments are based on misinformation which shared with ignorance and denial makes up the basis of pro- illegal marijuana laws.Turquoise wrote:
.......The strongest arguments are generally based on things like social welfare.
People need to wake up and open their eyes to the real.
Laid back Australians are against legalisation apparently, and support is dropping.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st … 89,00.htmlAUSTRALIAN attitudes to cannabis use have hardened dramatically over the past four years, and support for its legalisation has fallen away.
But people are increasingly looking to needle and syringe exchange programs and safe injecting rooms, rather than law and order crackdowns, to tackle the wider illegal drug problem, a new study has found.
The study, from the University of NSW Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, reviewed a series of survey results over time and reported a large drop in support for regular cannabis use to less than one in 10 Australians last year, compared with one in four in 2004.
Advocates of cannabis law reform also lost ground, with more than half the population in 2007 opposing legalising the drug, compared with 44.5 per cent almost a decade earlier.
Australians instead became more likely to back tougher penalties for the sale and supply of the drug, which in recent years has been increasingly linked to mental illness and other health problems.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Australia is also the same country that lets Stephen Fielding censor everything despite everyone outside of his party being against said policies.Dilbert_X wrote:
Laid back Australians are against legalisation apparently, and support is dropping.http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st … 89,00.htmlAUSTRALIAN attitudes to cannabis use have hardened dramatically over the past four years, and support for its legalisation has fallen away.
But people are increasingly looking to needle and syringe exchange programs and safe injecting rooms, rather than law and order crackdowns, to tackle the wider illegal drug problem, a new study has found.
The study, from the University of NSW Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, reviewed a series of survey results over time and reported a large drop in support for regular cannabis use to less than one in 10 Australians last year, compared with one in four in 2004.
Advocates of cannabis law reform also lost ground, with more than half the population in 2007 opposing legalising the drug, compared with 44.5 per cent almost a decade earlier.
Australians instead became more likely to back tougher penalties for the sale and supply of the drug, which in recent years has been increasingly linked to mental illness and other health problems.
You guys also seem to be moving toward an internet porn filter.
So, Australians might be too laid back for their own good when it comes to standing against government encroachment upon your rights.
Granted, Americans have the same problem with letting things like the Patriot Act get passed.
Last edited by Turquoise (2009-01-23 15:45:28)
Turquoise wrote:
So, Australians might be too laid back for their own good when it comes to standing against government encroachment upon your rights.
That wasn't the point, only one in ten think smoking the stuff regulalrly is a good thing.
Its not the govt ramming this down our throat, this is what people think - in a country where the police rarely bother users.
Its not the govt ramming this down our throat, this is what people think - in a country where the police rarely bother users.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I doubt most people believe alcohol or tobacco are good things either, but that doesn't make it logical to ban them.Dilbert_X wrote:
That wasn't the point, only one in ten think smoking the stuff regulalrly is a good thing.
Its not the govt ramming this down our throat, this is what people think - in a country where the police rarely bother users.
Propaganda gives ppl the idea they know...... experience is the proof they doo know.
Legalize.
I can´t beleive there still are soo many myths and "facts" about one of the most natural drugs we have.
Why do ppl still use drugs that we also use to sterilize wounds?
Legalize.
I can´t beleive there still are soo many myths and "facts" about one of the most natural drugs we have.
Why do ppl still use drugs that we also use to sterilize wounds?
Last edited by [F7F7]KiNG_KaDaFFHi (2009-01-24 22:38:51)