Decrim is up again

[ThePixelGuru]

I know this thread is going straight towards lockville, but I gotta call you out on this. The pro-pot lobby loves to jump all over the "harmful" and "gateway drug" arguments, but roll out their own tired arguments (racism, big pharma, etc etc) again and again. You can't have it both ways. I'm sure that there is some substance to your arguments, but there is also substance to the arguments that it's harmful and is a gateway drug.

But, in actuality, no one is going to convince anyone to change their mind. Another pointless argument (not discussion) thread.

Yeah, it is a gateway drug. I know tons of people who started out smoking weed and then moved on to drugs that could actually hurt them, like alcohol and tobacco.

And I'm not saying weed isn't harmful, I'm just saying it's less harmful than alcohol or tobacco.

Also, it's a fact that weed was banned for political reasons and not medical ones.

Whatever. Next stop, Lockville!

[Hexis]

my 2 cents (usually i dont type well so deal ) someone who is high on pot will usually make bad decisions like stealing to get more weed or robbing someone or one of the many other stupid things to do.. you want it legal tax the crap outta it and make money but your going to be in the decline of the structure of the nation I hope thats what your looking for . shall we have blood tests on the side of the road or piss tests to see how high someone is like the blow test for drinking >? every pothead i know is a moron and i have never met one who isnt just because it doesnt have an effect on you doesnt mean the rest of the people are not EFFECTED "sharks are like dogs they only bite you when you touch thier private parts " smoke another one bro (anyone get who that is???) now for medical use i semi agree but even that is abused .... i have had freinds who died because of stupidity when they were high now fix that issue with legalizing something that impeeds judgement thats stupid (insert beer fight here) besides that make it legal because of this thing is legal :P lol okie i have vented now discuss

Are you high? There is no way a sober person wrote that.

[Hilltop Customs]

my 2 cents (usually i dont type well so deal ) someone who is high on pot will usually makes bad decisions like stealing to get more weed or robbing someone or one of the many other stupid things to do.. you want it legal tax the crap outta it and make money but your going to be in the decline of the structure of the nation I hope thats what your looking for . shall we have blood tests on the side of the road or piss tests to see how high someone is like the blow test for drinking >? every pothead i know is a moron and i have never met one who isnt just because it doesnt have an effect on you doesnt mean the rest of the people are not EFFECTED "sharks are like dogs they only bite you when you touch thier private parts " smoke another one bro (anyone get who that is???) now for medical use i semi agree but even that is abused .... i have had freinds who died because of stupidity when they were high now fix that issue with legalizing something that impeeds judgement thats stupid (insert beer fight here) besides that make it legal because of this thing is legal :P lol okie i have vented now discuss

holy generalizations batman!

Bad decisions are the responsibility of the person who commits them, Ive made many bad decisions and I have never tried to claim it was pot's fault. I'm sure you have also made some bad decisions too, but that has nothing to do with weed right?

I do agree with you, impaired driving is a huge hurdle. IMO a general reaction time/imparment test for ANY drug should be implemented, since there are so many drugs out there that can have detrimental effects to a persons ability to drive, hell driving tired is dangerous. I also agree about taxing the hell out of it, but that is because we will have to make up for the huge amt of money lost from fines and seizures more so than making money.

On the other hand I dont understand how legalization would create "the decline of the structure of the nation"(at least thats what I think you meant?) its already widely used, and if anything the people who are using this drug currently have a mistrust for our law system and our government....which is detrimental to our society. Now I can understand the logic behind it being detrimental to our society if you believe that everyone is going to run out and become potheads the moment it becomes legal, but I dont believe there is a snowballs chance in hell that will happen. Could u explain this more if you get a chance? I'd like to know where your coming from here.

I also agree with you that anything that slows judgment can be dangerous, that is why it is the responsibility of the people using the drugs to determine when, or when not to use the drug. If that responsibility is granted to people with the use of alcohol, sleeping pills, or anything else that is legal and effects judgment, then what makes marijuana different enough to be outlawed for use? Impairment of the user is a GREAT argument for the illegalization(or at least tight restrictions) of all drugs, but by differentiating between one drug and another that have similar effects....the argument is completely negated. If you want to use that argument you have to approve of tight restrictions of ALL drugs(including alcohol) that can cause impairment.

I'm sorry for your loss of friends, but it was their choice to smoke, and it was their choice to conduct an activity that could be dangerous while impaired.....the drug didnt make the choice for them.

[Sumthinwicked]

yea you get the gist of my thoughts on the matter ...
just a few points to think on

i see the thoughts of legalisation of one drug whats to prevent the lobby of more

as to the decline : it would make weed easily accessible to the public which isnt a good idea( you know why)
when your party'in people like to try new things that are illegal or stupid that they usually wouldnt have tryed like : the driving thing, hookin up on other drugs, and the such that is far to much discussed on that matter

they do have legal pot shops somewhere i forget ??? where they have a system that allows pot if you like it so much and America isnt good enough for you the way it is GO THERE

and what would all the pot dealers do your putting 100000s of people out of buisiness

farmers making legal pot availible to the world ( yea the world gets alot of stuff from our farmers)

when the drinking age was dropped below 21 there were alot of kids drinking which = stupid things happening which equaled alot of deaths which is why its back up to 21 in most places

take all of the neg and stack them against the posititive and the neg outway the positives far to much i dont ever see it becoming legal here.... there are many more things of importance that we need to deal with than the legalities of weed LOL

[cdacda13]

yea you get the gist of my thoughts on the matter ...
just a few points to think on

i see the thoughts of legalisation of one drug whats to prevent the lobby of more

You're arguing the snowball effect? So, if weed becomes legal, then heroin is next?
Marijuana is a Schedule one drug.
Schedule I

* The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
* The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
* There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Examples: Heroin, LSD, Marijuana, MDMA (Ecstasy), methaqualone (Quaalude).
Not a terrible argument. But, since not many government funded, non-slanted, current tests(supposed to be confusing, I promised ) have been done on marijuana, the government refuses to change marjiuana to a schedule 4 or 5.

as to the decline : it would make weed easily accessible to the public which isnt a good idea( you know why)
when your party'in people like to try new things that are illegal or stupid that they usually wouldnt have tryed like : the driving thing, hookin up on other drugs, and the such that is far to much discussed on that matter

An easier access leads to more users argument eh?
Well, Alcohol is extremely easy for teens, pre-teens, and even kids to get. Hell, I remember stealing whiskey from my parents when I was 14. (Don't remember much after that though)
Just cause something is illegal doesn't mean its unatainable, and just because somethings legal doesn't mean everyone is doing it.

they do have legal pot shops somewhere i forget ??? where they have a system that allows pot if you like it so much and America isnt good enough for you the way it is GO THERE

If you don't love it, leave it. Fine. But the differences of every citizen is what makes America the greatest place to live. How many other countries can you have this argument, or even challenge the government in any way, shape, or form and not get shot? (Rhetorical question)

and what would all the pot dealers do your putting 100000s of people out of buisiness

Funny. But you can't tax dealers of illegal substances, so what does the government care. By legalizing it, numerous tax-able jobs will be created, which should make the government happy.

farmers making legal pot availible to the world ( yea the world gets alot of stuff from our farmers)

Hm, what now?

when the drinking age was dropped below 21 there were alot of kids drinking which = stupid things happening which equaled alot of deaths which is why its back up to 21 in most places

The drinking age never went down from 21, it when up to 21. In 1984, Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. This act removed highway funding to any state that didn't have a 21 year old drinking age. I've seen 21 year old men act like 14 year old girls when alcohol is involved.(Granted, it takes a lot more alcohol for a 21 year man to get drunk then a 14 year old girl, but they still hit the same place.) But why not let these young adults learn how to drink at 18, instead of making them go though the underground to purchase, steal, obtain, alcohol? (Kind of mirrors the statements of the decriminalization crowd, doesn't it.)
t

ake all of the neg and stack them against the posititive and the neg outway the positives far to much i dont ever see it becoming legal here.... there are many more things of importance that we need to deal with than the legalities of weed LOL

So, stack the negatives and the positives of legalizing marijuana, and the negatives win? Depends on your beliefs.
I completely agree with you on the last point. But remember, its congress, the important stuff never gets done.

[Sumthinwicked]

as to the hmmm we as a country sell everything to others we love to export and flooding the market with pot if its legalized here would not help things in hte world in general ( unless everyone was to stoned to want to fight ) on second thought maybe we should drop lots of dimebags over THERE to end the war everyone would be to stoned to wanna fight LOL

[cdacda13]

as to the hmmm we as a country sell everything to others we love to export and flooding the market with pot if its legalized here would not help things in hte world in general ( unless everyone was to stoned to want to fight )

That's the wonderful thing about capitalism and a free market economy. Farmers will figure out at some point where supply meets demand. This is called the equilibrium.

on second thought maybe we should drop lots of dimebags over THERE to end the war everyone would be to stoned to wanna fight LOL

Hashish is a common drug is most middle eastern countries.
And again with the sweeping generalizations that all everyone who smokes marijuana is lazy.

[Lohman446]

There is a fatal logical flaw in the gateway argument. First, let me clarify something, I think smoking pot is a poor decision, and in my opinion those who have convinced themselves that it is harmless are idiots. That being said I have a problem with federal regulation of it (and most other drugs).

The gateway argument uses vague information to support itself. Those who are doing "harder" drugs started with marijuana. This is statistically true, but horribly controlled. It automatically makes the assumption that these people would not have done the harder drugs without the stepping stone of pot. There is no control groupd to it

Its wrong. People have done harder drugs without ever touching pot. I know this for 100% certainty.

There are a lot of bad arguments on both sides, and thats why the debate is able to circle for so long. There are very few strong, good arguments on either side of the issue.

[Steelrat]

I'd love for someone to show me a debate about legalizing pot where someone has said "Gee, you're right, I'm going to change my mind on the subject."

NEVER HAPPENS.

The internet has produced a whole generation of opinionated people. Seriously, how oftern do you see someone back down in an argument on any forum?

[skife]

Originally Posted by Sumthinwicked as to the decline : it would make weed easily accessible to the public which isnt a good idea( you know why)

so ummmm, weed isn't easily accessible huh?

Its very very easy to get weed, it just depends on who you know, and i'd bet you know where to get some weed, or know someone that could get you some.


its a very common thing.

my argument is why should this be illegal? really, i thought this was a free country.
If i want to sit around with my friends and get high and watch the labyrinth, why shouldn't I be able to?

[billybob_81067]

so ummmm, weed isn't easily accessible huh?

Its very very easy to get weed, it just depends on who you know, and i'd bet you know where to get some weed, or know someone that could get you some.


its a very common thing.

my argument is why should this be illegal? really, i thought this was a free country.
If i want to sit around with my friends and get high and watch the labyrinth, why shouldn't I be able to?

Because if you're doing that then you're not being productive... and if you're not being productive then you are dragging this country down.

[Hexis]

Because if you're doing that then you're not being productive... and if you're not being productive then you are dragging this country down.

So sitting around and watching sports while drinking beer is different how?

[Steelrat]

my argument is why should this be illegal? really, i thought this was a free country.
If i want to sit around with my friends and get high and watch the labyrinth, why shouldn't I be able to?

So if I want to own a machinegun and snort coke, I should be able to, right? I mean, it's a free country.

[Lohman446]

So if I want to own a machinegun and snort coke, I should be able to, right? I mean, it's a free country.

Yes.

As long as you do both responsibly in a way that does not harm anyone else and are of age to be considered an adult yes you should be able to.

[SCpoloRicker]

Lohman: ding, ding, ding!

As for the premise that noone ever changes their mind on positions, I have a counter-example. Albinonewt and I went back and forth for a month on Commerce Clause as it relates to Roe v. Wade, and he managed to convince me of the validity of his argument. I'm still pro-choice, but I understand his position of how the ruling as it is written is a poor one.