Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
jord
Member
+2,382|5850|The North, beyond the wall.
Actually britain took a step in the wrong direction a couple of years ago and changed cannabis to a class B drug, from class C.
-CARNIFEX-[LOC]
Da Blooze
+111|5825

Turquoise wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

You can decriminalize something without making it legal.

Is that not Britains policy?
Basically, all drugs in Portugal are decriminalized.  The U.K. decriminalized certain substances, but they still have a War on Drugs of their own.

Portugal is closer to the ideal, and as a result, drug-related crime is very low.  People don't tend to kill each other as much over drugs when possession of them isn't penalized heavily.
Decriminalize some drugs, keep others the way they are...the class system of ranking drugs is a joke, and whether or not something has "medical use" is largely determined by government agencies that aren't necessarily loaded with MD's to make such decisions.

I can only imagine the influx of cash from making pot possession a ticketable, but not jail-worthy (unless you've got illegal warehouse-sized grow ops going) offense...go from spending tens of thousands per year to have someone locked up, versus actually making several hundred dollars off of their "offense". Even though plenty of potheads would love to see it completely legalized, I'm sure they'd happily accept such a change if it meant they didn't have to fear actual jailtime.

Given that alcohol and cigarettes are legal, it's pretty hard to mount a convincing argument against weed. Not enough "science" to back legalization or decriminalization? Look at how much research exists on the damage caused by alcohol and tobacco, and their continued legality, and tell me that this is anything other than bending over backwards to accomodate select special interest groups and government agencies... (not directed towards Turq, I'm just throwing it out there...)

Last edited by -CARNIFEX-[LOC] (2012-01-19 10:20:08)

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/12516/Bitch%20Hunter%20Sig.jpg
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|5577|North Carolina

-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

You can decriminalize something without making it legal.

Is that not Britains policy?
Basically, all drugs in Portugal are decriminalized.  The U.K. decriminalized certain substances, but they still have a War on Drugs of their own.

Portugal is closer to the ideal, and as a result, drug-related crime is very low.  People don't tend to kill each other as much over drugs when possession of them isn't penalized heavily.
Decriminalize some drugs, keep others the way they are...the class system of ranking drugs is a joke, and whether or not something has "medical use" is largely determined by government agencies that aren't necessarily loaded with MD's to make such decisions.

I can only imagine the influx of cash from making pot possession a ticketable, but not jail-worthy (unless you've got illegal warehouse-sized grow ops going) offense...go from spending tens of thousands per year to have someone locked up, versus actually making several hundred dollars off of their "offense". Even though plenty of potheads would love to see it completely legalized, I'm sure they'd happily accept such a change if it meant they didn't have to fear actual jailtime.

Given that alcohol and cigarettes are legal, it's pretty hard to mount a convincing argument against weed. Not enough "science" to back legalization or decriminalization? Look at how much research exists on the damage caused by alcohol and tobacco, and their continued legality, and tell me that this is anything other than bending over backwards to accomodate select special interest groups and government agencies... (not directed towards Turq, I'm just throwing it out there...)
Decriminalization of weed is a step in the right direction, but legalization should be the ultimate result in the long term.

As you said, it's plainly apparent that alcohol and tobacco cause plenty of damage themselves, so having a product that causes less damage while still being illegal is just silly.

The law should be consistent in how it deals with substances.  A less dangerous substance than ones already legally available should no longer be prohibited.

Granted, I can understand why people would rather decriminalize heroin than legalize it.

Last edited by Turquoise (2012-01-19 11:05:30)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5861|Tampa Bay Florida

-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:

Decriminalize some drugs, keep others the way they are...the class system of ranking drugs is a joke, and whether or not something has "medical use" is largely determined by government agencies that aren't necessarily loaded with MD's to make such decisions.

I can only imagine the influx of cash from making pot possession a ticketable, but not jail-worthy (unless you've got illegal warehouse-sized grow ops going) offense...go from spending tens of thousands per year to have someone locked up, versus actually making several hundred dollars off of their "offense". Even though plenty of potheads would love to see it completely legalized, I'm sure they'd happily accept such a change if it meant they didn't have to fear actual jailtime.

Given that alcohol and cigarettes are legal, it's pretty hard to mount a convincing argument against weed. Not enough "science" to back legalization or decriminalization? Look at how much research exists on the damage caused by alcohol and tobacco, and their continued legality, and tell me that this is anything other than bending over backwards to accomodate select special interest groups and government agencies... (not directed towards Turq, I'm just throwing it out there...)
Exactly.  A significant amount (not sure the percentage but it'd be interesting to see it) of "legal" drugs, produced in the billions, just end up on the black market. 

Strung-out addicts may be the face of Florida's prescription drug abuse crisis, but doctors are key figures in a scourge that kills seven Floridians a day. While only a tiny number of doctors cause problems, one doctor seeing 80 patients -- not uncommon in pain mills -- can put 20,000 pills a day in the hands of drug abusers and traffickers.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/med … 123881.ece

I am fucking tired of hearing the "oh stupid pothead" argument when this kind of activity is allowed to happen.  I'd much rather ban that chemically altered poison and give people a joint instead.  And I'm not a pothead.

Last edited by Spearhead (2012-01-19 11:23:12)

KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5803|949

I remember watching a documentary about Florida pill mills. They prescribe pills at something like 5x the national rate. Why is that?

I also remember hearing a stat that had some absurd number of people dying per day from prescription overdoses
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5861|Tampa Bay Florida

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I remember watching a documentary about Florida pill mills. They prescribe pills at something like 5x the national rate. Why is that?

I also remember hearing a stat that had some absurd number of people dying per day from prescription overdoses
Corruption and inefficiency at our notoriously pathetic state capitol.  Our high percentage of old people also might have something to with it (in terms of strengthening the power of insurance companies).  Our Governor was the CEO of the largest for-profit healthcare company in the US, plead the 5th and resigned after they caught stealing from Medicare. 

That, combined with the second worst housing market in the US, insanely high insurance rates (something like 1/4th of Floridians are uninsured drivers), and a shortage of even average-paying job opportunity for young people.  Of course these would not be as serious, were Florida not the 4th largest state by population in the US...

TBT wrote:

Even a prison sentence is no guarantee a doctor will lose his license. Some who committed criminal acts are still allowed to practice.

Last edited by Spearhead (2012-01-19 11:47:52)

BVC
Member
+325|5867

Turquoise wrote:

Portugal is closer to the ideal, and as a result, drug-related crime is very low.  People don't tend to kill each other as much over drugs when possession of them isn't penalized heavily.
This.  Apart from a small rise in cannabis usage among young males, usage and uptake rates for every drug declined across the board.  Fewer junkies, fewer meth-heads...  Real world evidence that loose policy = lower usage.  What I want to know is, why won't the naysayers accept this?
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|5886|US

Pubic wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Portugal is closer to the ideal, and as a result, drug-related crime is very low.  People don't tend to kill each other as much over drugs when possession of them isn't penalized heavily.
This.  Apart from a small rise in cannabis usage among young males, usage and uptake rates for every drug declined across the board.  Fewer junkies, fewer meth-heads...  Real world evidence that loose policy = lower usage.  What I want to know is, why won't the naysayers accept this?
"Drugs are bad...Mkay"
It's an emotional issue as much as a logical one to the prohibitionists.
I support legalizing marijuana because I want to see the Cartels and gangs undercut...
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX

Turquoise wrote:

The simplest and most pertinent argument is that we waste billions every year on the War on Drugs with no real benefit.

How is that not enough of a good argument?
Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
Birds Aren't Real
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|5577|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The simplest and most pertinent argument is that we waste billions every year on the War on Drugs with no real benefit.

How is that not enough of a good argument?
Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
See Portugal's policy and results.

Their economy might be crap right now, but they at least have low drug crime and addiction.

Besides, if you value "productivity" over rights, move to Singapore.  You'd love it there.

Last edited by Turquoise (2012-01-20 09:15:07)

KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5803|949

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The simplest and most pertinent argument is that we waste billions every year on the War on Drugs with no real benefit.

How is that not enough of a good argument?
Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX

Turquoise wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The simplest and most pertinent argument is that we waste billions every year on the War on Drugs with no real benefit.

How is that not enough of a good argument?
Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
See Portugal's policy and results.

Their economy might be crap right now, but they at least have low drug crime and addiction.

Besides, if you value "productivity" over rights, move to Singapore.  You'd love it there.
If you value freedom so much move to Somalia - no drug laws there.
Would be much quicker than getting the US laws changed.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-01-20 15:40:19)

Birds Aren't Real
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
The enforcement system isn't working well and could do with being adjusted, doesn't mean the laws need to be changed.
Birds Aren't Real
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5803|949

sure it does.  should people face mandatory minimum prison sentences for possession of small amounts of any drug?  That deals with laws and enforcement, no?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

sure it does.  should people face mandatory minimum prison sentences for possession of small amounts of any drug?  That deals with laws and enforcement, no?
Probably not no, but that would come under adjusting enforcement, not a fundamental change from drugs being illegal to legal.
Birds Aren't Real
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5803|949

so we should tell law enforcement what laws to heavily enforce and what laws to relax on instead of changing the laws?  that doesn't seem like the proper approach.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX
The fuzz over-enforce various laws because the make for easy collars, certain drug laws and traffic offences for example, again, doesn't mean the law is wrong.
If its right to tinker with the punishment thats not really a law change.
Birds Aren't Real
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California
drugs are bad mkay
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5582|'Murka

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The simplest and most pertinent argument is that we waste billions every year on the War on Drugs with no real benefit.

How is that not enough of a good argument?
Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
One could easily make the same argument for "the War on Poverty." Are you advocating that we eliminate that, as well? Something like 2 trillion dollars since it's launch, with no significant change in the poverty level in this country.

Probably ought to scrap it and invest the money elsewhere.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5277|eXtreme to the maX
War on terror is going awesome at least.
Birds Aren't Real
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5803|949

FEOS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
One could easily make the same argument for "the War on Poverty." Are you advocating that we eliminate that, as well? Something like 2 trillion dollars since it's launch, with no significant change in the poverty level in this country.

Probably ought to scrap it and invest the money elsewhere.
the war on poverty could use a reallocation of funds as well. Notice I never mentioned scrapping it altogether.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5582|'Murka

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:


Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
One could easily make the same argument for "the War on Poverty." Are you advocating that we eliminate that, as well? Something like 2 trillion dollars since it's launch, with no significant change in the poverty level in this country.

Probably ought to scrap it and invest the money elsewhere.
the war on poverty could use a reallocation of funds as well. Notice I never mentioned scrapping it altogether.
You're essentially calling for treating it as an actual war, then: interdicting the problem at the source (demand) so you can starve off the army in the field (cartels, gangs, et al).
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|5577|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:


Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
See Portugal's policy and results.

Their economy might be crap right now, but they at least have low drug crime and addiction.

Besides, if you value "productivity" over rights, move to Singapore.  You'd love it there.
If you value freedom so much move to Somalia - no drug laws there.
Would be much quicker than getting the US laws changed.
I'm arguing for drug legalization, not anarchy.

You're right that changing US laws does take forever though -- at least when it comes to making positive changes.

We're much more likely to restrict freedoms than expand them.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|5577|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Who says it wasted and of no real benefit?

Compared with, say, that great engine of productivity that is Holland.
Well the fact that we throw billions of dollars at it (the war on drugs) and the statistics show it hasn't directly correlated to either reducing supply/availability and use is enough for me to say its wasted. I wonder what kind of impact there would be if half the money dumped into fighting the war on drugs was funneled to drug education and rehabilitation. Not to say there isn't money dumped into those to things, but maybe there needs to be an adjustment
One could easily make the same argument for "the War on Poverty." Are you advocating that we eliminate that, as well? Something like 2 trillion dollars since it's launch, with no significant change in the poverty level in this country.

Probably ought to scrap it and invest the money elsewhere.
The Wars on Poverty, Drugs, and Terror are all a waste.

Scrapping welfare would be harder to deal with than being less interventionist and decriminalizing/legalizing drugs, but we could work towards it, at least.

Last edited by Turquoise (2012-01-23 09:47:21)

Flawless
Rage
+7|3827|North Carolina
Marijuana should be legal just because of the sole fact that you can make over 20,000 products from it.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard