Legalization of Marijuana?

[BugI02]

In the same vein that I would advise you that laetrile won't cure your cancer or that you shouldn't consider an R1 for your first ever motorcycle, I would advise anyone not to go there

Any desire to build some level of escapism into your life through drugs or alcohol should make you cautious and concerned. I and my contemporaries sound hypocritical because we nearly all flirted with drugs as undergrads; and, hey, we came through it fine. But we concluded, correctly and quickly, that drugs make you lazy and stupid - and we have seen and known the people that cratered along the way, which you have not

Experience is a harsh teacher, she gives the test first and the lessons after. Right or wrong, someone who wishes to give you the benefits of their experience should get credit for caring about you enough to try

 

[Trigger Time]

Someone just needs to invent a product that 100% masks the use of pot from a drug test. That mofo would be the richest man in America

 

[Trigger Time]

Jury nullification.
Put me on a jury for a drug or gun charge of an average citizen that wasn't using it to commit a crime and I'm going to vote not guilty period.
People need to start fighting these unjust laws made by the elite to control the masses.

 

[Jludo]

Stanhope has a good jury nullification bit.

[video=youtube_share;1-HLNotKZpg]https://youtu.be/1-HLNotKZpg[/video]

 

[churchmouse]

Which what? What are the positives of drugs?

OK I understand and agree. But that should be obvious in my response. Laws are only followed by the lawful. Murder/theft/mayhem in general. All against some law or rule but yet many partake. If we remove all law then brother it would be the wild wild west again. I live it. There are more than a few people I would seriously love to smack in the mouth and trust e they deserve it. What stops me...????....Yup, the obvious legal issues that would follow. So I do not partake of that (anymore) to keep myself out of trouble. It is a choice I make under the societal rules/laws we all have to live by.

As I stated, what you do to yourself is your business and no concern of mine until those choices and activity's cross over into my life and cause me issues. Beyond that I could not care less. But there has to be boundary's set. With out clearly drawn lines we would implode upon ourselves.

Again, if you do yourself in with a lifestyle please do not tell me I am to fund bailing your dim bulb butt out of a mess. You put yourself there. Now figure it out. That is the consequence of poor choices.

 

[wmbraswell2]

Spot on. It's a trap of words and laws between state and federal.

 

[ATOMonkey]

What I find fascinating is that prohibition, (outside of religions), is a relatively new idea for any culture.

 

[ATOMonkey]

In the same vein that I would advise you that laetrile won't cure your cancer or that you shouldn't consider an R1 for your first ever motorcycle, I would advise anyone not to go there

Any desire to build some level of escapism into your life through drugs or alcohol should make you cautious and concerned. I and my contemporaries sound hypocritical because we nearly all flirted with drugs as undergrads; and, hey, we came through it fine. But we concluded, correctly and quickly, that drugs make you lazy and stupid - and we have seen and known the people that cratered along the way, which you have not

Experience is a harsh teacher, she gives the test first and the lessons after. Right or wrong, someone who wishes to give you the benefits of their experience should get credit for caring about you enough to try

Absolutely, which is why I have enough wisdom to learn from the experiences of others. I do not partake of anything besides beer and coffee. However, I know more than a few who toke the reefer as a recreation rather than as a lifestyle, and live very productive lives.

The funny thing is that we don't have an aversion to taking mind and mood altering drugs in our society, hell it's big business! We just have an issue with people self medicating.

You can't smoke opium!! Here take a Vicodin.

You can't smoke pot!! Here have a Valium.

You can't chew coca leaves!! Why don't you have an Espresso.

Prohibition isn't about living a better life, it's about the illusion of control. The unintended consequence is organized violent crime on an international level.

 

[BugI02]

Jury nullification.
Put me on a jury for a drug or gun charge of an average citizen that wasn't using it to commit a crime and I'm going to vote not guilty period.
People need to start fighting these unjust laws made by the elite to control the masses.

Voir dire. The prosecuting attorney spends a great deal of time and effort trying to assure people who have already made up their mind about innocence are not empaneled, just as the defense attorney puts similar effort into winnowing out those who have already made up their mind about guilt

 

[Lex Concord]

Absolutely, which is why I have enough wisdom to learn from the experiences of others. I do not partake of anything besides beer and coffee. However, I know more than a few who toke the reefer as a recreation rather than as a lifestyle, and live very productive lives.

The funny thing is that we don't have an aversion to taking mind and mood altering drugs in our society, hell it's big business! We just have an issue with people self medicating.

You can't smoke opium!! Here take a Vicodin.

You can't smoke pot!! Here have a Valium.

You can't chew coca leaves!! Why don't you have an Espresso.

Prohibition isn't about living a better life, it's about the illusion of control. The unintended consequence is organized violent crime on an international level.

Some pretty basic economic principles at work that proponents of prohibition continue to ignore.

Marijuana prohibition started as yet another set of racist laws (just like gun control)

Lawrence Vance had the following piece on LewRockwell.com today: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/laurence-m-vance/so-lets-ban-marijuana/

Some of his comments seemed germane to the conversation here.

 

[Lex Concord]

Comparing apples and oranges.

More like Red Delicious and McIntosh... but you don't like Red Delicious because they are grainy, so you're okay with preventing others from enjoying them.

 

[Trigger Time]

More like Red Delicious and McIntosh... but you don't like Red Delicious because they are grainy, so you're okay with preventing others from enjoying them.

Are we talking about making an weed pipe out of a big apple or are we really talking about eating apples or apple metaphors? I really need to write this **** down so I dont forget it. This is mindblowing insight

Im kidding. Not really high, just makig a joke about all of that for those qho dont know me

 

[jamil]

Comparing apples and oranges.

More like comparing tangerines to oranges. No, guns aren’t weed. But abstractly the logic for banning one is very similar to the other.

 

[wtburnette]

But they dont breathalize me unless they have suspicion. If I dont come to work high, they shouldn't care what I do on my time (lunch break aside).

That's the way I feel. If I want to partake in order to find a bit of pain relief, or just to relax after work or on the weekend, it shouldn't matter to my employer, the government or anyone else. I wouldn't drive after doing so, no more than I would do so after having more than 2 beers. I understand that not everyone has my discipline for such things, but why should I be impacted for the stupidity of others? Instead of it being prohibited, it should just be regulated similarly to alcohol....

 

[jamil]

Well, one is protected by the Constitution, the other isn't, so one legally one can be banned, the other can't. There is a difference.

The issue is the wisdom of the ban which is legal.

Oh and the alcohol prohibition versus pot is inapposite as well, but closer.

Make your case for pot. Period. The metaphors and comparisons are all assailable.

Just make the case for legal pot and we'll go from there.

Oh and "I think government should stay out of people's lives" me too....but that isn't going to win the day either. Make the case for legal pot.

I hate that I’m getting into these discussions late. Undoubtedly the conversation has moved elsewhere or the points I’m going to make have been made. But I have to say some things.

I agree that the guns vs pot isn’t a great argument, but if you’re making essentially the same argument to ban MJ as the other side makes to ban guns, it’s a fair comparison because it’s the rationale being challenged, and they are similar. And that it’s unconstitutional for the one isn’t all that relevant when the government can and does ban some firearms for some of the same reasons that government bans weed.

About the comparison with alcohol. You’re constraining the conversation to arbitrary boundaries. The rationale for prohibition of alcohol was pretty much the same as it is for MJ. It is the rationale on trial here. If you can make the case that there is something much worse for society about MJ than alcohol, that society can legally have one but not the other, that’s YOUR case to make.

Both are drugs that impair abilities and alter consciousness temporarily. Both have an individual and collective negative impact. Both, when prohibited, created new harmful effects through the prohibition itself: it created a black market and the accompanying organized crime, and the wars between competing gangs. I could go on, but you get the point.

I think you have the harder challenge making the case there should be no comparison. The reason to make MJ legal is the same as it was to make alcohol legal. People do it anyway, so whatever harmful effects it has on people and society are happening anyway, but especially are made worse by the harmful effects of the prohibition itself.

 

[KLB]

I want them legalized because I am so tired of the "war on drugs". So much money spent, so much intrusion into our lives, so much control exerted. It all needs to end.

 

[jamil]

I want them legalized because I am so tired of the "war on drugs". So much money spent, so much intrusion into our lives, so much control exerted. It all needs to end.

That’s pretty much where I’m at. I don’t use either drugs or alcohol, and personally I think the world would probably be better off without either. Society doesn’t agree. Prohibition didn’t contribute much to people not consuming alcohol during prohibition. It exploded the reach of organized crime. Same with drugs. Its not stopping people from smoking weed. All it’s doing is creating a black market, the corresponding organized crime to supply it, and a reason to incarcerate people who wouldn’t otherwise need incarcerating.

 

[KLB]

That’s pretty much where I’m at. I don’t use either drugs or alcohol, and personally I think the world would probably be better off without either. Society doesn’t agree. Prohibition didn’t contribute much to people not consuming alcohol during prohibition. It exploded the reach of organized crime. Same with drugs. Its not stopping people from smoking weed. All it’s doing is creating a black market, the corresponding organized crime to supply it, and a reason to incarcerate people who wouldn’t otherwise need incarcerating.

Plus causing more militarization of police, causing more intrusions into regular citizens lives as they hunt for drugs, and putting stupid controls around what people can do with their money.

 

[BugI02]

That’s pretty much where I’m at. I don’t use either drugs or alcohol, and personally I think the world would probably be better off without either. Society doesn’t agree. Prohibition didn’t contribute much to people not consuming alcohol during prohibition. It exploded the reach of organized crime. Same with drugs. Its not stopping people from smoking weed. All it’s doing is creating a black market, the corresponding organized crime to supply it, and a reason to incarcerate people who wouldn’t otherwise need incarcerating.

If you are going with the delusion that simply legalizing weed will end the problem of criminality/black market, please cite your evidence that the 21st amendment alone ended the power of the mob (rather than that they simply used their power and reach to maintain the cash flows by other extra-legal means). The cartels are not werewolves and legalization is not a silver bullet

Every libertarian seems to think that legalization solves all problems, when in reality it doesn't even solve their own

 

[BugI02]

I hate that I’m getting into these discussions late. Undoubtedly the conversation has moved elsewhere or the points I’m going to make have been made. But I have to say some things.

I agree that the guns vs pot isn’t a great argument, but if you’re making essentially the same argument to ban MJ as the other side makes to ban guns, it’s a fair comparison because it’s the rationale being challenged, and they are similar. And that it’s unconstitutional for the one isn’t all that relevant when the government can and does ban some firearms for some of the same reasons that government bans weed.

About the comparison with alcohol. You’re constraining the conversation to arbitrary boundaries. The rationale for prohibition of alcohol was pretty much the same as it is for MJ. It is the rationale on trial here. If you can make the case that there is something much worse for society about MJ than alcohol, that society can legally have one but not the other, that’s YOUR case to make.

Both are drugs that impair abilities and alter consciousness temporarily. Both have an individual and collective negative impact. Both, when prohibited, created new harmful effects through the prohibition itself: it created a black market and the accompanying organized crime, and the wars between competing gangs. I could go on, but you get the point.

I think you have the harder challenge making the case there should be no comparison. The reason to make MJ legal is the same as it was to make alcohol legal. People do it anyway, so whatever harmful effects it has on people and society are happening anyway, but especially are made worse by the harmful effects of the prohibition itself.

I think you have overstated the amount of thought going into some of these positions

The feel I get is that many arguments devolve to the law is widely ignored and many people violate the law with apparently no lasting consequences, so basede on anecdotal evidence the law is bad/untenable

You could say the same for speed limits. The question is whether that should encourage one to eliminate them altogether or just adjust them closer to reality. The choice seems to be between chaos and some semblance of order