General [M]ayhem

General [M]ayhem (http://www.genmay.com/index.php)
-   The Pit (http://www.genmay.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Reasons Marijuana should be legal. (http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=552600)

Kato 08-14-2005 04:39 AM

Go ahead, prohibitionists, lets hear your best argument.

Oh, wait, it will probably be a poorly constructed string of premises based on government lies, racial stereotypes, and religious propaganda :rolleyes:

/evil/bin 08-15-2005 07:17 AM

"Spontaneous combustion" :lol:

andrew 08-15-2005 03:18 PM

[QUOTE=Crass]....I know that :confused: :confused:
[/QUOTE]
So then your point is? :confused: Why aren't people already running around killing people and causing general mayhem already? Datura/belladonna is quite possibly the worst example you could have used in regards to the problem of people knowing about a drug, most people just get scared/sick/pass out/die from it's use than anything enjoyable, it's pretty far removed from common recreational circles.

Illegalization & denial-of-information are pretty irrelevant/useless when it comes to people's desire to fuck themselves up on substances. Just look at the commonality of homebrew amphetamine labs and how meth use has skyrocketed in the past years. Word of mouth is capable of quite a lot in these circumstances. All of this without a government standardized, easy-to-access resource of information (ie not erowid). I think the government's role in, well, [i]governing[/i] our own chemistry is supply information, and regulate use (ie driving while intoxicated, public intoxication, etc). But to simply turn a blind eye (or worse, exaggerate or decieve) to these substances only hurts potential users & keeps current users very ignorant to safety concerns. I doubt most people would want to try meth if they knew how damaging it was in the long term. Dexedrine is a much better choice :D

This thread just makes me laugh. Pot = evil but alcohol = okay, according to our beloved government. Yeesh.

Kato 08-15-2005 05:43 PM

[QUOTE=andrew]Illegalization & denial-of-information are pretty irrelevant/useless when it comes to people's desire to fuck themselves up on substances. Just look at the commonality of homebrew amphetamine labs and how meth use has skyrocketed in the past years. Word of mouth is capable of quite a lot in these circumstances. All of this without a government standardized, easy-to-access resource of information (ie not erowid). I think the government's role in, well, [i]governing[/i] our own chemistry is supply information, and regulate use (ie driving while intoxicated, public intoxication, etc). But to simply turn a blind eye (or worse, exaggerate or decieve) to these substances only hurts potential users & keeps current users very ignorant to safety concerns. I doubt most people would want to try meth if they knew how damaging it was in the long term. Dexedrine is a much better choice :D[/QUOTE]
Exactly.

Prohibition forces a substance underground, and at the same time, forces addicts underground. People who conceal their habits at all cost are much harder to offer addiction treatment resources to.

jackercr 08-15-2005 07:29 PM

[QUOTE=Heinrich Himmler]I'm up for outlawing cigarettes and booze, myself. Because all they do is kill.

snip

Fine, just blow your brains out.[/QUOTE]

Careful there, guns were MADE to kill. You might not be able to blow your brains out if the world adopts your New World Order.

Crass 08-15-2005 10:05 PM

[QUOTE=andrew]So then your point is? :confused: [b]Why aren't people already running around killing people and causing general mayhem already?[/b] Datura/belladonna is quite possibly the worst example you could have used in regards to the problem of people knowing about a drug, most people just get scared/sick/pass out/die from it's use than anything enjoyable, [b][size=3]it's pretty far removed from common recreational circles.[/size][/b][/QUOTE]

... you answered your own question. I'd dare to say that ~2% of the population even knows what Datura is, let alone the effects of it. That's why millions of people aren't running around all crazed on datura..

andrew 08-16-2005 08:21 PM

Uh, you aren't understanding what I am saying. If datura was an attractive, enjoyable psychoactive, more people would be using it (like amphetamine, heroin, ecstasy, mushrooms, weed, etc), since the word on the street would be a positive reaction. The fact of the matter is datura isn't much fun (been there, done that, not interested again), and therefore doesn't get much in the way of positive marketing. Legality has nothing to do with it's lack of popularity, the fact that datura sucks does.

Quinine 08-16-2005 11:12 PM

[QUOTE=Crass]... you answered your own question. I'd dare to say that ~2% of the population even knows what Datura is, let alone the effects of it. That's why millions of people aren't running around all crazed on datura..[/QUOTE]
Your argument for prohibition is based on the idea that you are better than other people.

mathlete 08-16-2005 11:57 PM

god I wish I could smoke a fucking joint right about now.

Cigarettes are a little relaxing, but it's not enough. I don't want to deal with hangovers either. But I'm too chickenshit to get pot anyway.

Hurry up and legalize it.

Kato 08-17-2005 12:02 AM

[QUOTE=mathlete]god I wish I could smoke a fucking joint right about now.

Cigarettes are a little relaxing, but it's not enough. I don't want to deal with hangovers either. But I'm too chickenshit to get pot anyway.

Hurry up and legalize it.[/QUOTE]
Step one is to decriminalize it. American society, at this point, is too nervous about condoning marijuana, which is what the masses perceive legalization to be.

The first step in a sensible cannabis policy is decriminalization - this allows politicians and citizens to still retain an anti-drug view, while understanding that marijuana is not a sufficient threat to warrant police action. Deciding to condone a substance through legalization is far beyond what is socially possible at the moment - the first step is convincing the masses that potsmokers aren't worth the police funds used to harrass them. British Coloumbia (Canada), as well as the Netherlands, have set a good example which the US should follow.

Change must be gradual ;)

elmo909 08-17-2005 03:34 AM

[QUOTE=g]Step one is to decriminalize it. American society, at this point, is too nervous about condoning marijuana, which is what the masses perceive legalization to be.

The first step in a sensible cannabis policy is decriminalization - this allows politicians and citizens to still retain an anti-drug view, while understanding that marijuana is not a sufficient threat to warrant police action. Deciding to condone a substance through legalization is far beyond what is socially possible at the moment - the first step is convincing the masses that potsmokers aren't worth the police funds used to harrass them. British Coloumbia (Canada), as well as the Netherlands, have set a good example which the US should follow.

Change must be gradual ;)[/QUOTE]
I agree with you.
I just skimmed over this thread but I thought I would add my two cents. You know, I have thought about this topic quite a bit. There is no logical reason why marijuana is illegal. The harm society faces trying to prohibit it far surpass any gain that society achieves, if any. In my province of Alberta they recently made a few drug busts of a sizeable measure, and they recovered something in the range of 30 guns and enough ammunition to fight a war. Why should our society accept a system that allows the money from the proceeds of drugs to go to criminals and fund criminal organizations, while costing an inane amount of money and placing unneeded stresses on our law enforcement and judicial system. Why shouldn't our society produce, tax, and distribute marijuana while distributing profits to rehab facilities that would take care of addictions? Am I missing something? How does our society benefit from marijuana being illegal? Do you people understand the economics of drug dealing? If a substance, such as marijuana, is illegal the price increases as a result of the supply decreasing. This makes it an extremely attractive business for criminals to be associated with. If marijuana were legal there would simply be no business in such a system. What incentive is there for people to illegaly produce marijuana on a large scale?

Also, In British Columbia marijuana is still illegal. Marijuana is not legal in any Canadian city, province, or region. Hopefully this will change though, but the American pressure on implementing such changes is the most inhibiting factor.

TheMorlock 08-17-2005 08:08 AM

[QUOTE=keer sucking gewk]how the hell is candy, sports, books, soda going to harm my child?

are you retarded, if he were addicted to marijuana, he could possibly go driving and kill himself, or maybe even commit crimes for money to get his drugs... and once he sees how amazing marijuana is, he will go get OTHER drugs that are worse!!!

p.s.... im not a parent, im just speaking hypothetically heer[/QUOTE]

candy/soda rots the teeth and causes diabetes, sports causes bone growth plate damage and can lead to crippling dissabilities and the riots at games are getting more common.
The psychological pressure from peers and family to Win at all costs is mentally deformative

BTW
why is commiting crimes to get drugs worse than commiting crimes to get hockey gear?

Crass 08-17-2005 10:02 PM

[QUOTE=Quinine]Your argument for prohibition is based on the idea that you are better than other people.[/QUOTE]

my argument is against ALL drugs being legalized, not pot, if you'd read the thread, you would see that I support the legalization of marijuana.

TheMorlock 08-18-2005 02:04 AM

[QUOTE=Crass]my argument is against ALL drugs being legalized, not pot, if you'd read the thread, you would see that I support the legalization of marijuana.[/QUOTE]

So?

Quinine 08-18-2005 07:02 AM

[QUOTE=Crass]my argument is against ALL drugs being legalized, not pot, if you'd read the thread, you would see that I support the legalization of marijuana.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Crass]Honestly, until people can get properly educated on drugs, and take responsibility for their actions while on drugs, I think the way the system is now is OK. Or at least, we could have a commune where people could be distributed drugs under the circumstances that they had to do it within the confines of the commune, and ensured that they didn't go nuts and had a controlled trip and fully understood the drug(s). I still stand by the fact that they should properly educate kids on drug effects, however, but legalizing EVERYTHING all at once is definitely not the answer. But I fully do agree with you that the current state of drug prohibition is an infringement on your freedoms, I just don't know how to remedy it without giving drugs an even worse reputation (because if you legalized everything, people would abuse the hell out of them all).[/QUOTE]
You assume that most people have rationalizing skills below you. In fact, many people do this. Ask someone what would happen if drugs were legalized, and they'll say "Everyone will start using drugs recklessly and horribly". Ask them if they would start doing this, and they'll say "No, I know better. Other people don't."

It is arrogance of the highest order.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2002-2015 CrowdGather, Inc.