BQueezy

Prop 19: Legalize it?!

114 posts in this topic

the base, brute fact is that marijuana is a mind and mood-altering drug: that's why you like to use it. to what extent this is the case varies wildly, but its physiological effects in general are relatively serious. it is not difficult to see how a massive increase in the use (and thus abuse) of such a drug would have adverse social effects; unless you're prepared to also argue that more stoned people is a net plus for society [note: doing so might get you cheers from users, but will get you nowhere among neutrals]?

so can any of you outline a compelling argument why we should legalize such a drug, or are you going to continue throwing tantrums? can any of you answer my question from 2 pages ago?

I don't know why it's so hard for you to differentiate marijuana from cocaine, heroin, meth and any other illegal drug.

if you're not capable of understanding the difference between talking about a thing and talking about arguments for a thing, please don't respond to my future posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why it's so hard for you to differentiate marijuana from cocaine, heroin, meth and any other illegal drug.

if you're not capable of understanding the difference between talking about a thing and talking about arguments for a thing, please don't respond to my future posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you can say you've countered any argument when all you've done is compared the notion of legalizing marijuana to legalizing cocaine and murder. Please, counter my cartel argument with actual facts and logic.

And please, elaborate on the physiological affects of marijuana that you're an expert on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you can say you've countered any argument when all you've done is compared the notion of legalizing marijuana to legalizing cocaine and murder. Please, counter my cartel argument with actual facts and logic.

And please, elaborate on the physiological affects of marijuana that you're an expert on.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how could you answer my questions with "sound logic" if you don't understand that i wasn't comparing marijuana to murder, but rather pointing out that that sort of argument could just as easily be applied to any current crime with the same "conclusion", via a reductio ad absurdum. i seem to recall a similar misunderstanding on the previous boards.

Except reductio ad absurdums are idiotic when you utilize them incorrectly.

It's about coming to an absurd consequence using LOGIC.

Now ask yourself, with the legalization of marijuana, is cocaine a logical stepping stone? How about murder?

You came to an absurd conclusion using non-existant logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

given that we have such a problem already in this country with alcohol abuse, why should we willingly allow another easily-abused mood and mind-altering drug into wider, legal circulation?

In the end buddy people are going to abuse illegal substances

prohibition will never work..

remember prohibition of alcohol?

look at the Netherlands

http://www.drugwarfa...org/cms/node/67

for the most part narcotics use was at times 1/5 of what it was in the US.

you're going to keep trolling

so listen

because of people like you

we have military in Afghanistan protecting opium and hashish farmers

who export these drugs that end up coming into our country for our citizens to be arrested

so thanks to this current system we're supporting terrorism over seas while fighting against the same thing here.

how about the costs it puts on our legal system

arresting and prosecuting these minor drug offenders who are only harming themselves

the war on drugs is a failure

so thanks to people like you

50% of my taxes goes to war

and check this out

http://www.drugsense.org/cms/wodclock

this is how much money is wasted on arresting drug offenders and putting them in privately owned prisons

mind altering is a very broad term

you need to acknowledge that using marijuana cannot be compared to the effects of alcohol or any of those more harmful narcotics.

like I said before I could face a quarter and you could get wasted off booze

we could both go for a drive and see who wrecks first

If nothing were to happen to either of us, we lucked out.

but I guarantee I would be more coherent.

when you say mind altering do you think those who use this plant are on fucking mars or something?

trust me its nothing like fear and loathing in las vegas

can alcohol be used as clothing, paper, fuel etc etc etc?

can you make a car body out of alcohol?

can alcohol easily be grown in your back yard and used for all of these great things?

should everything that causes a chemical reaction in your brain be illegal? (music, food, etc etc)

we have economists hyper inflating the economy

companies making sugar water that costs $5

any other retarded bullshit I could list here that's worth listing****

and while you're going on about how bad minor mind altering substances are

you could give a damn or just not understand the major issues with this country

and why we are in these fucked up situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the base, brute fact is that marijuana is a mind and mood-altering drug: that's why you like to use it. to what extent this is the case varies wildly, but its physiological effects in general are relatively serious. it is not difficult to see how a massive increase in the use (and thus abuse) of such a drug would have adverse social effects; unless you're prepared to also argue that more stoned people is a net plus for society [note: doing so might get you cheers from users, but will get you nowhere among neutrals

Relatively serious? Excellent description; you sold me!

Have you ever smoked pot more than once or twice? Your description of the effects sounds like a 25 year old virgin trying to describe the feeling of putting your penis in a vag, trying to explain the feeling in poorly worded descriptions that aren't applicable in reality.

The state of this country right now is so completely fucked, I'd think it would do wonders if more people would get high, become introspective about what's going on in their lives and the situation around them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you can say you've countered any argument when all you've done is compared the notion of legalizing marijuana to legalizing cocaine and murder. Please, counter my cartel argument with actual facts and logic.

picard-facepalm.jpg

Except reductio ad absurdums are idiotic when you utilize them incorrectly.

It's about coming to an absurd consequence using LOGIC.

Now ask yourself, with the legalization of marijuana, is cocaine a logical stepping stone? How about murder?

You came to an absurd conclusion using non-existant logic.

i think you need to reread the Wikipedia description.

In the end buddy people are going to abuse illegal substances

so your response to my question is: "too bad, there's nothing we can do about it so why bother"? no wonder Prop 19 failed.

i'm still not seeing any real answers to this question.

Relatively serious? Excellent description; you sold me!

yes, physiologically speaking; THC is a very complicated and wide-reaching substance, it acts on multiple systems in the human body, and in some ways that are not fully understood. it's effects on the body are generally serious enough (varying in intensity from person to person) to influence a person's behavior, perception, and memory. that's a relatively serious drug.

Have you ever smoked pot more than once or twice?

yes, but whether one has or hasn't is completely irrelevant to this subject.

Your description of the effects sounds like a 25 year old virgin trying to describe the feeling of putting your penis in a vag, trying to explain the feeling in poorly worded descriptions that aren't applicable in reality.

these are the actual physiological effects, described by researchers from clinical studies. what do you want me to say? "it gets you fucking high, man"?

and are all you people that are neg-repping lashing out via some "reputation" ticker over the internet because you don't like my position in an argument and are incapable of defending yourselves? and people wonder why there aren't any interesting discussions in the Issues forum anymore....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blackstar--c'mon bud. You're not providing any FACTS. You're using logic games, and when we counter with FACTS you refuse to refute them.

Edit: And again--I don't even smoke pot. Haven't in several months and probably won't be for awhile. And if I do again it will be in small amounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

picard-facepalm.jpg

you're not trying to have a discussion you keep ignoring/not responding to our questions and trolling

no wonder Prop 19 failed.

prop 19 most likely failed because of the growers who are making

massive amounts of money off of the quote on quote "non profits"

if people can grow freely there's no money to be made anymore

in the end everything's always about the money and not whats good for the people

so your response to my question is: "too bad, there's nothing we can do about it so why bother"?

no

I'm saying prohibition causes more harm than good.

instead of educating people about the harmful effects of abusing a substance and giving treatment for substance abusers

you get propaganda and lies

if anyone knows where I can find the talking to my dog shit PM me lol

if anyone is around someone who has smoked weed and they deflate

you should probably call 911

that bitch just sat and complained about the situation like you blackstar

her friend is probably dead now all deflated n shit

what you seem to ignore is this drug war has caused a massive black market

that our own country wont even deal with and actually supports.

I've given you multiply examples and if you really felt like it you could find all of this information yourself.

Have you ever smoked pot more than once or twice?

yes, but whether one has or hasn't is completely irrelevant to this subject.

its not irrelevant if one thinks a substance should be illegal.

and I bet you think its illegal because you get high from it right?

I bet you haven't researched what can be made from hemp and what industries would be shut down because of hemp.

you could replace so many useful things from a plant that can be grown in your back yard.

you can find youtube videos of people curing their skin cancer with hemp oil illegally

just remember that people who can't use marijuana for medicinal purposes

are in jail or dying because of people like you

say you had an illness and

the only cure was marijuana

but the state you live in prohibits it

you use it anyway because its life or death

I'm a cop and I arrest you

would it be a different story blackstar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how increased tax revenue and less stretched penal system aren't a real answer to your questions.

If you approached this subject without being a pompous asshole, maybe some of us would listen to you.

Instead, you inflate your "argument" with logic games, all while avoiding facts, figures, and common sense.

And seriously, just because I have access to wikipedia doesn't mean I looked up a latin logic term. You're not the only person in the world that's taken a philosophy course.

To summarize, fuck you for coming in here and not refuting anything, and masking your bias and stubbornness with ethereal notions.

And finally, it's obvious you know nothing about THC, or the human body as a whole.

Fuck off, you intolerable troll.

EDIT: And once again, COFFEE. Refute that, shit-balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how increased tax revenue and less stretched penal system aren't a real answer to your questions.

because drug regulation is a social issue, not an economic issue. as i said before.

i've posed 2 major questions:

the base, brute fact is that marijuana is a mind and mood-altering drug: that's why you like to use it. to what extent this is the case varies wildly, but its physiological effects in general are relatively serious. it is not difficult to see how a massive increase in the use (and thus abuse) of such a drug would have adverse social effects; unless you're prepared to also argue that more stoned people is a net plus for society [note: doing so might get you cheers from users, but will get you nowhere among neutrals]?

and

given that we have such a problem already in this country with alcohol abuse, why should we willingly allow another easily-abused mood and mind-altering drug into wider, legal circulation?

until someone attempts to address either of these questions in a serious manner, this will be my last post in this thread. anything less is a waste of my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, but whether one has or hasn't is completely irrelevant to this subject.

I disagree. And from the way you have been describing the vast mood and perception altering qualities to it, I think it's fair to assume that you have either

A. Smoked once or twice

B. Smoked angeldust and it fucked your world up.

And it was in the old thread as well, I wish we had the backlog of posts from there, I distinctly remembered being baffled by your general overstatement of the effects. It's not LSD or heroin, these mood/perception altering effects are not nearly as pronounced as you seem to believe.

Which is why so many of us have been adamant in trying to get you to understand that there are huge differences between marijuana and all other illegal drugs. You keep building it up to some huge, society crushing force if it was legalized, turning people into worthless zombies that care nothing for the world other than getting high and ignoring their children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're kidding me. Drug regulation is an economic issue as well as a social issue. I'm not even going to argue that.

We've posted the benefits:

Tax revenue.

Kids getting government funding to go to college, not having their future decided by an innocuous and HARMLESS substance.

Decreased power of drug cartels.

Less stretched penal system.

It's illogical for you to refute the presence of these things by saying, "drugs are only a social problem." Not only are you fucking wrong, but you sound like an idiot.

Also, just because something is legal, doesn't mean you'll see a huge increase in it's use. You've posted no facts, no studies, no previous cases where legalization of a substance exponentially increased it's usage.

And you, once again, have no idea what you're talking about when it concerns the effect of THC in your body. It's the equivalent of coffee. It's nonlethal and nonaddictive. You say it has "relatively serious effects," but you've posted none.

So go ahead, think what you want to think, just know that everyone on this board thinks you're an asshole. Not because you're playing the devil's advocate, but because you're not fucking listening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The available evidence indicates that the decriminalization of marijuana possession had little or no impact on rates of use. Although rates of marijuana use increased in those U.S. states [that] reduced maximum penalties for possession to a fine, the prevalence of use increased at similar or higher rates in those states [that] retained more severe penalties. There were also no discernible impacts on the health care systems. On the other hand, the so-called 'decriminalization' measures did result in substantial savings in the criminal justice system."

- E. Single. 1989. The Impact of Marijuana Decriminalization: An Update. Journal of Public Health 10: 456-466.

"Overall, the preponderance of the evidence which we have gathered and examined points to the conclusion that decriminalization has had virtually no effect either on the marijuana use or on related attitudes and beliefs about marijuana use among American young people. The data show no evidence of any increase, relative to the control states, in the proportion of the age group who ever tried marijuana. In fact, both groups of experimental states showed a small, cumulative net decline in annual prevalence after decriminalization."

- L. Johnson et al. 1981. Marijuana Decriminalization: The Impact on Youth 1975-1980. Monitoring the Future, Occasional Paper Series, paper 13, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan: Ann Arbor.

"In sum, there is little evidence that decriminalization of marijuana use necessarily leads to a substantial increase in marijuana use." - National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine (IOM). 1999. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C., 102.

"Levels of use tended to be higher in the decriminalization states both before and after the changes in law. tates which moderated penalties after 1974 (essentially a group of decriminalization states) did indeed experience an increase in rates of marijuana use, among both adolescents (age 12-17) and adults (18 or older). However, the increase in marijuana use was even greater in other states and the largest proportionate increase occurred in those states with the most severe penalties."

"While the Dutch case and other analogies have flaws, they appear to converge in suggesting that reductions in criminal penalties have limited effects on drug use, at least for marijuana." - R. MacCoun and P. Reuter. 1997. Interpreting Dutch cannabis policy: Reasoning by analogy in the legalization debate. Science 278: 47-52.

"It has been demonstrated that the more or less free sale of [marijuana] for personal use in the Netherlands has not given rise to levels of use significantly higher than in countries which pursue a highly repressive policy."

- Netherlands Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. 1995. Drugs: Policy in the Netherlands: Continuity and Change. The Hague.

You were saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

important point: decriminalization does not equate to legalization. the former doesn't permit commercialization, it only removes penalties associated with possession and/or use. and it would be commercialization that radically increases use.

so those relevant cited studies are probably accurate; they just don't reflect what this topic is about.

You're kidding me. Drug regulation is an economic issue as well as a social issue. I'm not even going to argue that.

social, or moral, issues take precedence over economic issues. this is an fundamental truth in modern society.

I disagree.

ad hominem. a person's personal experiences have zero bearing on the validity of their argument(s).

Which is why so many of us have been adamant in trying to get you to understand that there are huge differences between marijuana and all other illegal drugs.

i am well aware of the differences in substance between marijuana and other drugs, like alcohol or cocaine. i'm not sure you're all aware of the difference between talking about a thing and talking about an argument for a thing. i have at no point in this thread said anything that is factually even in dispute as relates to marijuana; only that the arguments you've all been proposing in favour of marijuana thus far are bad ones. i've taken a set of clinical descriptions of marijuana's effects on humans, the most value-neutral descriptions possible, and inferred that, if we make an elementary assumption that once legalized the use of marijuana will increase, the number of people who experience these effects will grow dramatically. i am of the opinion (and it is only an opinion) that this isn't a good thing; you're perfectly free to disagree. we could have a discussion about that disagreement; but that's not what is happening here. your inability to follow me through these simple inferences has resulted in alot of misplaced frustration and tantrum-throwing. frankly, that's tedious to read. i've now asked 2 salient major questions (not, you might note, made 2 unjustified assertions).

either answer them, or continue talking amongst yourselves in a hazy little bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the base, brute fact is that marijuana is a mind and mood-altering drug: that's why you like to use it. to what extent this is the case varies wildly, but its physiological effects in general are relatively serious. it is not difficult to see how a massive increase in the use (and thus abuse) of such a drug would have adverse social effects; unless you're prepared to also argue that more stoned people is a net plus for society [note: doing so might get you cheers from users, but will get you nowhere among neutrals]?

Well then I will have to disagree with your assertion on principle. I don't think that there would be a huge adverse social effect to the society in general if marijuana use was increased. There is no basis for your logic in this, other than your personal beliefs or ideas of what might happen. Again, it's just what you think is right, not necessarily what would happen if legalization were to be in effect.

and

given that we have such a problem already in this country with alcohol abuse, why should we willingly allow another easily-abused mood and mind-altering drug into wider, legal circulation?

Because the legalization of said drug would impact our country on more than a social level. You might disagree that our social norms were possess right now would be better than post-legalization, I would disagree on principle. I think you have to take in effect the moral and economic considerations that come up when you deal with the criminalization of marijuana, of which the argument has been made pretty clearly in the last couple of posts. To deny those facts is ignoring the central part of our argument, of which you have yet to comment on.

important point: decriminalization does not equate to legalization. the former doesn't permit commercialization, it only removes penalties associated with possession and/or use. and it would be commercialization that radically increases use.

so those relevant cited studies are probably accurate; they just don't reflect what this topic is about.

social, or moral, issues take precedence over economic issues. this is an fundamental truth in modern society.

No, it's a fundamental truth in your eyes; you don't speak for society as a whole. I would say the inverse is true, that an economic issue, like this, would take precedence, considering the state of our economy. The morality of the issue can also be argued, how moral is it to subvert so much funding/time into the war on marijuana when those assests could be spent better elsewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blackstar you're the only one with the inability to follow

why do you care more about prohibition than helping people?

what have I not answered? you said my answers weren't real enough? wtf is that bullshit

read my information, go to my links, and watch all the videos I have posted in this thread

you skip over all of my questions while I answer yours

and continue to troll your nonsense

marijuana cures illnesses

and can replace paper fuel clothing etc etc

I could keep listing things if you'd like but its probably just a big waste of time

but that's still not a good enough legalization argument for you, is it?

alcohol is legal and its effects are far worse

but it stays legal because prohibition failed

and like other mind altering substances, alcohol has no benefits like cannabis provides

its sad that you wont acknowledge how much good this plant can do for us.

By your logic

people dying of illnesses

and lives being ruined because of prohibition is acceptable

because hey at least those people aren't getting high

what the fuck sense does that make?

which is worse?

getting high

or

dying from an illness that could have been prevented/cured by using cannabis

being incarcerated because of cannabis use

if you were dying from an illness and marijuana was the only medicine that provided a cure

this conversation would be totally different

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in a perfect world? yes. as should alcohol. but these are practical impossibilities, given the cultural significance attained by these drugs over human history and their subsequent widespread use. the focus therefore should be on managing the difficulties these drugs already pose, rather than adding to their huge social cost with yet another "legal" drug that's a sort of midway point between the 2.

Blackstar you disappoint me.:( Isn't this country supposed to be the land of the free? You think that I should not be able to enjoy a glass of wine with my meal? I hate getting drunk but I love wine with my dinner. Why should that be illegal? Did you know wine is considered a food?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those citing information on decriminalization and using it for legalization,

As Blackstar already stated, the two are very different. Decriminalization would not make marijuana legal. It no longer makes it a criminal offense that is put on your record. Instead, someone in possession of a small amount of marijuana is only given a ticket. It's still illegal to distribute and to have possession over a certain amount. Therefore any countries with statistics on how decriminalization did not add to drug use in their country is irrelevant.

To suggest that Amsterdam would sell less marijuana if it were illegal is an absurd argument. Which is basically the argument of anyone saying marijuana sales would not go up in the US if it were made legal.

As for law enforcement, I think that argument is a bit misleading as well. The price tag for the war on drugs isn't about marijuana. It's about cocaine, heroine and other illegal drugs. For police officers, marijuana is an easy ticket. It's an easy statistic for their job performance. It isn't eating up city budgets like cocaine and heroine. If you really want to make a case about getting law enforcement out of the war on drugs, you have to argue for the decriminalization or legalization of cocaine and heroine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now