BF2S Forums A question for non-cannabis users

True. Let's agree that 'hard drug' refers to things like PCP

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

True. Let's agree that 'hard drug' refers to things like PCP

Hey, I'll support the statement "it's stupid to use hard drugs."

OP wrote:

'cannibis debate'

what debate?

when generation y and younger reach positions of power, there will be no debate. legalization is already underway, it's only a matter of time before it spreads across the whole country.

most of europe has decriminalized long ago.

As long as it banned for everything baring home use I couldn't give a shit. And while you're at it, ban tobacco too.

DrunkFace wrote:

As long as it banned for everything baring home use I couldn't give a shit. And while you're at it, ban tobacco too.

And why should the government control what private establishments allow in terms of smoking?  Isn't that the call of the business owner him/herself?

No one forces you to enter a restaurant or other place of business.

DrunkFace wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

As long as it banned for everything baring home use I couldn't give a shit. And while you're at it, ban tobacco too.

And why should the government control what private establishments allow in terms of smoking?  Isn't that the call of the business owner him/herself?

No one forces you to enter a restaurant or other place of business.

Because businesses HAVE to provide a safe and healthy working place for both employees and customers.

Most of them already ban smoking. If they don't, they have smoking and non smoking sections, or just full on smoking. People will usually get it pretty quickly if smoking is allowed, and if they don't like it they leave.

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

And why should the government control what private establishments allow in terms of smoking?  Isn't that the call of the business owner him/herself?

No one forces you to enter a restaurant or other place of business.

Because businesses HAVE to provide a safe and healthy working place for both employees and customers.

Most of them already ban smoking. If they don't, they have smoking and non smoking sections, or just full on smoking. People will usually get it pretty quickly if smoking is allowed, and if they don't like it they leave.

Thats not the point. Employers must provide a healthy working environment by law. And once you acknowledge that smoking and second hand smoke is not healthy (which you almost certainly do), by already existing laws smoking must be banned in all business establishments.

Whatever anyone buys takes uses sells smells eats rubs or sees is no one's business as long as it doesn't harm another human being.

Hell No.  The stuff is more potent than cigarette smoke, or at least the fumes are.  All I know is, I've lived next to pot smokers, and the fumes made me sick.  If people would just keep it to themselves, it wouldn't be a problem, but they didn't even care when I called the cops, since they had a medical license to buy it.

Hakei wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Hakei wrote:

Whatever anyone buys takes uses sells smells eats rubs or sees is no one's business as long as it doesn't harm another human being.

Silly our lives are all connected. Everything you do affects me and likewise.

wat

Yeah, good call. Let's make doing anything illegal because eventually - down the road - it may lead to someone being hurt.

How far should we go with this? You know exactly what my point is.

As far as you want to go. I am just saying that all of our lives are connected in some way and everything you do affects me somehow later on. You'd be naive if you didn't think so.

GodFather wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Try me.  You usually bring up good food for thought.

Well, we're all aware that at this point in time there are already groups that distribute the drug and make a killing in profit, correct? It stands to reason that if legalized, they would still have access to this distribution ring. In order to turn a profit from taxation as well, the government would need taxable sources selling it like shops, etc. Those who have been selling it illegally in the past have little incentive to pay taxes when they can still make income by selling drugs to people without the sales tax as in the past. Meanwhile, I would imagine people would still be growing plants in their basement and hydroponic shit for personal use or distribution.
Long story short, those selling pot illegally are still able to make money and skirt the government, which would either have to undersell the dealers or control the means of production (which would be nigh impossible as it is practically what agencies are trying to now). That's one reason I don't buy into the "the government is missing out on a buttload of money from legalization/taxation" theory.

The reasons that we dont have hundred acre farms growing marijuana right now is because it's illegal.

If it were legal and large companies got into it, or started, they could grow it on a MASSIVE scale and they would end up reducing the price a hell of a lot

Bottom line: If large LEGAL operations were in place, they wouldn't be selling for street prices and then adding tax, they would be selling it for substantially low prices with tax on top of that but the overall price would still be less than street price.

Dealers have no incentive to make $2.50 for every gram they sell when they sell lets say 20 grams a week... Large operations would have incentive to make $2.50 for every gram they sell when they sell 900 grams a week - that is why I think that taxation would work



thoughts?

The book Freakonomics has a good section titled something like "Why do drug dealers still live with their mothers." you should read it, it would probably interest you.

I used to smoke it a lot, but haven't been a regular smoker since 2006.  These days I smoke it maybe once every 2-3 months, and thats always a quick social toke.  I don't smoke tobacco, but I do drink.

I am in favour of legalised marijuana, with similar controls to those placed on alcohol in my country - Drinking age is 18 (some bars have higher age limits), and you're free to brew whatever you want at home, though hardly anyone does - its cheap enough to buy it.  Making your own liquor here is more of a hobbyist thing.

My reasons for supporting legalisation include the following.  They are somewhat interrelated, and this list should by no means be taken as an exhaustive list of of my reasons for wanting marijuana laws to be changed.

1.PRICE & ECONOMICS
Once legalised, the price of marijuana will drop.  This will be for a variety of reasons;
- Reduced risks associated with production; you won't get arrested, nor will your crop be raided
- Reduced risks associated with distribution; no more dodgy dealers
- Reduced risk will lead to increased production, both on personal and commercial levels.  Increased supply means lower price.

2.CRIME
- People won't get locked up for selling/growing/using weed (duh)
- Because the police won't have to chase potheads, they will be able to spend more time chasing kiddyfiddlers and murderers.
- Criminal gangs and organisations will make less money from the sale of weed.
- Criminal gangs and organisations will make less money from the sale of other drugs; people won't be exposed to their networks so easily.
- Those who steal to buy weed won't have to; the price will drop, and their dollar will go further.  They will also be able to grow their own.
- Theft will fall, due to the above reason.

3.MISCELLANEOUS
- Less violence; due to fewer alcohol-fuelled assaults, and because users of marijuana are more chilled than boozers.
- Usage of marijuana will, in the long term, drop, due in part to the novelty factor.
- Those countries who have liberalised laws concerning marijuana and other drugs have seen nothing but positive effects as a result.
- Increased tax take through direct taxation, and increased tourism.
- Increased availability of easy pain-relief medication.

Reasons not to use drugs, and reasons not to legalise drugs aren't one and the same.  The are similar, but not the same, and many reasons not to use drugs simply do not apply to the legalisation debate.

Last edited by Pubic (2009-07-23 01:41:52)