This is how you blow off my reply to your"question": "back it up". Typical of you in this thread. Toss out a bunch of insults and little to no real thaught or debate. This one pic (comment) shows exactly how little tolorence you have for others opinions, you have judged me and have given no good reason other than I disagree with legalizing drugs.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 04-29-2014).]
Blah blah blah blah blah blah.... You can't accept the fact that in countries that have tried it.. It works.
This is like saying that in other Countries communism works so we need to do it too? This is illogical nonsense. America is America and we dont work like other Countries. You lied about legalization on Portugal anyway. It is NOT legal there, it is still restricted and people are still prosicuted for drug crimes. If you had been honest and said they have greatly reduced the limitations I would have more respect for your agrgument. You chose to lie to make a point. Because of this I disregarded your argument for legalization in other Countries.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 04-29-2014).]
For those looking for clues about how the U.S. government can tackle its domestic drug problem, the figures are enticing. Following decriminalization, Portugal eventually found itself with the lowest rates of marijuana usage in people over 15 in the EU: about 10%. Compare this to the 40% of people over 12 who regularly smoke pot in the U.S., a country with some of the most punitive drugs laws in the developed world. Drug use of all kinds has declined in Portugal: Lifetime use among seventh to ninth graders fell from 14.01% to 10.6%. Lifetime heroin use among 16-18 year olds fell from 2.5% to 1.8%. And what about those horrific HIV infection rates that prompted the move in the first place? HIV infection rates among drug users fell by an incredible 17%, while drug related deaths were reduced by more than half. "There is no doubt that the phenomenon of addiction is in decline in Portugal," said Joao Goulao, President of the Institute of Drugs and Drugs Addiction, at a press conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the law.
Legalization..... decriminalization. It looks like it works better than what we have. Are you so brainwashed that don't realize most drugs cost what they do just there because it is illegal. Thanks for playing but I have to go...need to finish my growers permit
This is how you blow off my reply to your"question": "back it up". Typical of you in this thread. Toss out a bunch of insults and little to no real thaught or debate. This one pic (comment) shows exactly how little tolorence you have for others opinions, you have judged me and have given no good reason other than I disagree with legalizing drugs.
I'm not blowing anything off. You never answered and didn't back it up. You gave me some link about releasing peeps in Cali. Whoopie! While brushing off everything presented to you.
How do you have the nerve to say it is typical of me? You insult in the same sentence you accuse in. I feel comfortable saying that is typical of you.
Also I have not judged you. I have formed a working opinion of you. That opinion is based on your own admission and corresponding responses by the way.
Brutally honest I'll tell you I couldn't give a **** about your opinion once you made it clear you had no interest in anything other than your opinion. Since then I have just been hanging out watching incredulously.
I do keep in mind that meaning translates horribly sometimes and that the ten other peeps commenting just got you all wrong. I believe that is a possibility.
Are you so brainwashed that don't realize most drugs cost what they do just there because it is illegal.
Did alcohol use go down after prohibition,..HELL NO. Will drug use go down after "drug prohibition" HELL NO. Did pot use go down in the two States that legalized it? HELL NO, BUT it is a new thing so the newness could wear off with time. Then we will see if use is lower after than it was before legalization.
Cost? I hope the cost goes up to $1,000 per hit, but that has nothing to do with our argument. You may care about the cost, I dont? No matter what the legal shops sell it for, they will never be able to compete with gangs. They have a HUGE advantage by not having to comply with laws or tax. They have practically NO overhead. Legal shops will not be able to compete. Will the street cost come down? Maybe, will demand go up because some stigma of ilegality s lifted, NO.
YOU are the one brainwashed, go smoke a blunt and cloud it it some more. Maybe that will help
Did alcohol use go down after prohibition,..HELL NO. Will drug use go down after "drug prohibition" HELL NO. Did pot use go down in the two States that legalized it? HELL NO, BUT it is a new thing so the newness could wear off with time. Then we will see if use is lower after than it was before legalization.
Cost? I hope the cost goes up to $1,000 per hit, but that has nothing to do with our argument. You may care about the cost, I dont? No matter what the legal shops sell it for, they will never be able to compete with gangs. They have a HUGE advantage by not having to comply with laws or tax. They have practically NO overhead. Legal shops will not be able to compete. Will the street cost come down? Maybe, will demand go up because some stigma of ilegality s lifted, NO.
YOU are the one brainwashed, go smoke a blunt and cloud it it some more. Maybe that will help
Actually you are the one that is brain washed. Pot growers in California don't sell the vast majority in California. It goes to States that that have the strictest laws. It goes there because that's where they get the most money. Illegal= MORE MONEY. POT GROWERS DON"T WANT IT LEGAL.
Pot smokers do want it legal. Why? Legal=Less money
What are the gangs after oh freaking brilliant one? Could it be Money?
What created Al Capone?
How did the JFK's old man get rich?
How much money is funneled into police departments for the "War on Drugs" How much of a dent has that put on drug use?
SAy MONEY ten thousand times a day until you get it. Everything is Money.
You think in such simplistic terms that everything is a foreign insane concept to you so it seems.
The tighter one clenches their fist for control the more it will slip through their fingers. Control is not a solution it is an illusion. Only consequences are real and what the individual learns from them if they are smart or lucky.
Did alcohol use go down after prohibition,..HELL NO.
No, and no one expected it to.
quote
Did pot use go down in the two States that legalized it? HELL NO, BUT it is a new thing so the newness could wear off with time. Then we will see if use is lower after than it was before legalization.
Is there some train of thought that ever said it would?
quote
Cost? I hope the cost goes up to $1,000 per hit, but that has nothing to do with our argument. You may care about the cost, I dont?
We all care about the cost--the cost to the taxpayer. What drugs cost to the user is irrelevant to the discussion--a red herring.
quote
No matter what the legal shops sell it for, they will never be able to compete with gangs. They have a HUGE advantage by not having to comply with laws or tax. They have practically NO overhead. Legal shops will not be able to compete. Will the street cost come down? Maybe, will demand go up because some stigma of ilegality s lifted, NO.
I'm not a drug user, never have been, nor will I be, but your last assertion above is erroneous--relative to marijuana anyway. You can illegally buy almost any product on a black market today--anything. But given the choice, the majority of Americans will purchase the identical item from a legal source, provided the avenue is open for that legal purchase.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 04-30-2014).]
Pot growers in California don't sell the vast majority in California. It goes to States that that have the strictest laws. It goes there because that's where they get the most money. Illegal= MORE MONEY.
I agree
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
POT GROWERS DON"T WANT IT LEGAL.
This may be true, I dont know for sure. BUT I could see it going both ways. Some may not like hiding from the law and would rather it be legal and others just dont care about the law and want the money.
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
Pot smokers do want it legal. Why? Legal=Less money
We agree
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
What are the gangs after oh freaking brilliant one?
So now I can call you names and you wont get your feelings hurt?
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
(gangs want money) Could it be Money?
We agree
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
What created Al Capone?
How did the JFK's old man get rich?
Crime, drugs and booz, We agree
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
How much money is funneled into police departments for the "War on Drugs" How much of a dent has that put on drug use?
The "war" will never end, it will change battle grounds. We as Americans want this "war" on drugs, because voters believe it is better than legalization. "dent"? Hard to say. But I do believe tht litterally countless families are saved from the abusive nature of drugs. I also believe that COUNTLESS people were saved from drug adiction because the illegality of them. I understand you dont believe this,so I answered it so you dont acuse me of avoiding questions. We sould just call this point a draw, you wont back down and wont back down on this point. You have your reasons and I have mine. I understand this.
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
SAy MONEY ten thousand times a day until you get it. Everything is Money.
OK, I guess?
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
You think in such simplistic terms that everything is a foreign insane concept to you so it seems.
We diagreeon legalization of drugs. This IS a simple understanding of the facts. It is also "insane" to keep arguing this over and over expecting different results. BTW do you think you will change my mind? I know I wont change yours, we have been down this road before. All I have been doing is replying to comments. The insanity I not mine or from me, but it is definently in this thread.
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
The tighter one clenches their fist for control the more it will slip through their fingers. Control is not a solution it is an illusion. Only consequences are real and what the individual learns from them if they are smart or lucky.
And ther is another judgement from you. I dont want "control".I dont see drugs like you do. I dont see them as a right. I see them as a poison, a poison that is already regulated. I did not start the regulation, BUT I am cool with drugs being regulated. So I will fight deregulation of the poison. I also dont feel the "need" to stop a person from getting drunk, OR high. Believe it or not I have said it before, if a person wants to do it, it should be them that pays for it (side effects and cost). We have people that get high all around us every day, as long as they dont affect me or my family, its on them. I dont like it, and I dont agree with it. Where I step in is the FACT that people who do "hard drugs" cause damage to people around them. I want to keep the drugs illegal to protect those other people. NOT to stop people from doing harm to them selfs. I dont wat them to hurt them selfs, but some times you just got to let people screw up to learn the hard way. So do I advicate for legalization,.. NO I already know this is a screw up and I dont think that experament wil pan out for America. I dont like that people get adicted, but they know it can happen with some drugs EVEN legal pain pills (they could be just as bad). Calling me a control freak is like the liberals calling the Tea Party racist. It just is not true, but it sure makes people feel good to insult others with the accusation.
Any other questions?
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 04-30-2014).]
Just a question to those that want to legalize drugs:
1) Is pot the only drug you would like to see legalized? 2) Are there any drugs that should not be legalized? 3) Should perscription drugs be more or less regulated? Should some types of drugs be left out of the perscriptions?
Maybe some common ground would help?
1) pot is basically legal in Ca. And it does seem to have the least side affects maybe less than beer? Maybe more? Am I for it's legalization? No. 2) even if pot were legalized I would not get that bothered (I would still disagree with it, but if that is what he voters want) for the answer I gave to #1. BUT meth is a monster and should NEVER be played with. 3) I do think we should look into different pain killers. Some of the ones used today are VERY adicting.
Originally posted by maryjane: We all care about the cost--the cost to the taxpayer. What drugs cost to the user is irrelevant to the discussion--a red herring
I think when the costs are high do to it being illegal there is need to be concerned.
If the price of weed is high there might be a higher crime rate. I know people that would practically kill for a cigarette. I think mostly petty but just the same. The will be big crime even murder though amongst the players buying and selling but who the **** cares?
If the cost of hard super addicting drugs is high I guarantee they will get that money. With hard drugs they can only do so much and it does have its own safety. People use to much they die. So cheap is better all around. Less crime and more drug users will use too much. Win Win.
I don't think you could ever run out of hard drug addicts but just like mice once you get the initial population down it is easily manageable.
Just a question to those that want to legalize drugs:
1) Is pot the only drug you would like to see legalized? 2) Are there any drugs that should not be legalized? 3) Should perscription drugs be more or less regulated? Should some types of drugs be left out of the perscriptions?
Maybe some common ground would help?
1) pot is basically legal in Ca. And it does seem to have the least side affects maybe less than beer? Maybe more? Am I for it's legalization? No. 2) even if pot were legalized I would not get that bothered (I would still disagree with it, but if that is what he voters want) for the answer I gave to #1. BUT meth is a monster and should NEVER be played with. 3) I do think we should look into different pain killers. Some of the ones used today are VERY adicting.
Hard addicting narcotics should be available cheap if not free in some logically controlled environment. What that environment should be would require some serious consideration.
As far as pot goes even though it would be a huge financial blow to me personally I see no reason it isn't regulated like cigs,booze or other things ingested into our bodies. Mostly though in regulated I mean taxed and laws enforcing disclosure and safety standards
Concerning pain killers. I should probably use weed myself but I don't. Not exactly sure what I have against it other than the smell.
I have a number of serious probs and my docs give me any multitude of painkillers. Being a zero addictive personality so it isn't a problem for me. We end up throwing out 90% of the pain killers cause they expire. I just don't like the feeling. I like the pain relief though so when I got to I do. Dilaudid works fine for me. Morphine lasts 15 minutes and leaves me sick for hours.
A lot of peeps get stuck on prescription drugs. I have seen it. Most try and **** with the system to get more and some go to illegal street drugs. Can't be a hero and save everyone from themselves you know. My personal drug of choice is Ativan. Makes me completely unfrustrated or troubled. Never had an urge to take it though but it is the only way to get me into an MRI without damaging the hospital and staff.
[This message has been edited by pokeyfiero (edited 04-30-2014).]
My feeling don't get hurt Rick you ought to know that. I do get frustrated though. Often.
My simple mind understands this, EVERY ONE gets frustrated. How we deal with it can earn us a great deal of respect or,.. the flipside, not so much respect.
I know where I stand on this topic, as well as other topics. I dont believe I earned the negative respect for doing what every body else in this thread has been doing= Standing up for what we believe. Sticking to our guns. Not compromizing. This is all good and fine till people on the other side of your argument do it to???? I think it hypicritical for people to call me close minded because I wont consider legalization, BUT they them selfs wont consider the continued criminalization. The mind set that it is wrong for me to apose legalization BUT OK for them to apose criminalizaton (the oposite side of the coin) Is hypocritical. I even admit that I wont change my mind and IF that is close minded then so be it BUT IF you wont consider the continued criminalization YOU are ALSO colse minded. If it is OK for ANY ONE to be close minded to criminalization of drugs then it is OK for others to be close minded to legalization. Other wise hypocracy abounds.
If you are for legalization and refuse to see it any other way,...OK, dont get upset with others who refuse to let it be legalized. I dont see myself as a hypocrit because I accept that others feel as strongly as I do for the oposite side. Can we dissagree, sure. Can we debate, sure. But I am OK with not seeing eye to eye with people on things.
I am OK with people having different views and opinions. Do I "like" that othes differ from my opinion, no. But I understand we are all diferent, so be it we are going to have different opinions.
I think when the costs are high do to it being illegal there is need to be concerned.
If the price of weed is high there might be a higher crime rate. I know people that would practically kill for a cigarette. I think mostly petty but just the same. The will be big crime even murder though amongst the players buying and selling but who the **** cares?
If the cost of hard super addicting drugs is high I guarantee they will get that money. With hard drugs they can only do so much and it does have its own safety. People use to much they die. So cheap is better all around. Less crime and more drug users will use too much. Win Win.
I don't think you could ever run out of hard drug addicts but just like mice once you get the initial population down it is easily manageable.
Good point and well said. Now that being true, if the "hard" drugs are cheaper, dont you think the crime could stay the same rate because the users would just do more of it? Or tat it being cheaper more people could be tempted to try it? "Oh it's only a few bucks, what do I have to loose?"
Good point and well said. Now that being true, if the "hard" drugs are cheaper, dont you think the crime could stay the same rate because the users would just do more of it? Or tat it being cheaper more people could be tempted to try it? "Oh it's only a few bucks, what do I have to loose?"
People get started on drugs for free. That is how it works. Some people stay on drugs for free.
The only people that will use more or would benifit is Rec users that do it when they do it and money is not an issue and hard users. Let the hard users stay ****ed up more sounds good to me. They won't last long.
Most likely they will be stupid and get caught committing a crime. Then he is your problem. Keep him as long as you want.
Could be some ups and downs on the stats but no i don't think crime would increase because they want to do more.
More is finite amount with hard drugs.
Now will people that may not have stayed on drugs now stay on them because they can afford it better? Probably. There are a lot of humane issues to deal with once you get into the scope of hard addicting drugs. Thats why I think they should be available in a controlled environment.
BTW I am not the one that is only one way. I don't have a problem with incarceration. I have a problem with its management and effectiveness,
For the record, I did not bring up racism, I just pointed it out. It was used in an argument to legalize drugs.
quote
Originally posted by DL10:
9. Arrests for marijuana possession disproportionately affect blacks and Hispanics and reinforce the perception that law enforcement is biased and prejudiced against minorities. African-Americans account for approximately 13% of the population of the United States and about 13.5% of annual marijuana users, however, blacks also account for 26% of all marijuana arrests. Recent studies have demonstrated that blacks and Hispanics account for the majority of marijuana possession arrests in New York City, primarily for smoking marijuana in public view. Law enforcement has failed to demonstrate that marijuana laws can be enforced fairly without regard to race; far too often minorities are arrested for marijuana use while white/non-Hispanic Americans face a much lower risk of arrest.
The age old "call them racest and scare them into submision" tactic.
I have a problem with its management and effectiveness,
YOU have a problem with management and effectiveness? How do you think I feel Believe me, I voice my opinion even at work. BUT I do admit face to face debates are MUCH better. Context and body language is a HUGE advantage over this screen and keys.
Another interesting story about prisons for profit.
After Judge Sentenced For Selling Kids to Prison System, How Much More Corruption Exists?
April 30, 2014 in Police State
Judge Mark Ciavarella Jr, a year ago, was sentenced to 28 years in prison for conspiring with private prison executives to jail teens with maximum sentences, to earn as much dirty money as possible.
I bring this up again, to draw much needed attention to the corrupt nature of the criminal ‘justice system’, often more accurately dubbed the ‘criminal punishment system’. Thumbnail credit: businessethicscases.blogspot.com
The idea I wish to present here is: how many more instances are there, of judges working with private prison executives.
Surely, this can’t be a single instance, and that’s it.
When a system is built to inherently welcome corruption and pay money based on teens being incarcerated, how can corruption not thrive?
I encourage others to look into the actions of judges and people in the system, question sentencing and the relationship between the so called justices and the private prisons.
How can we possibly have ‘justice’ when private prisons exist that use slave labor and incentivize judges to become corrupt?
How can it possibly ever be justice, when there is profit?
This corrupt man helped upwards of 5000 teens receive maximum sentences, often for victimless crimes, while he raked in millions of dollars.
Currently he is seeing the same fate that he condemned thousands of young men and women to. Not only is he facing up to 28 years in prison, he was also slapped with a $1.2 million dollar fine, which still doesn’t make up for the thousands of lives that this man and his corporate handlers ruined.
Please share this with as many people as possible, especially people who don’t understand that this is the nature of the ‘injustice system’.
This article is free to republish under a Creative Commons license with attribution to TheAntiMedia.org
[This message has been edited by DL10 (edited 05-01-2014).]
American law enforcement is really having a meltdown when it comes to accepting the growing momentum of legalized medical marijuana. Los Angeles county prosecutors have accused two former sheriff’s deputies of planting weapons at a legal pot dispensary in an attempt to establish grounds for arrest. Thumbnail credit: northcoastjournal.com
According to an article in the LA Times, the district attorney’s office has charged Julio Cesar Martinez and Anthony Manuel Paez with multiple offenses, ranging in severity from obstruction of justice to perjury and tampering with evidence. These ex cops are joined with other dinosaurs who oppose marijuana in the name of the ‘drug war’ which has wasted billions in tax payer money, and incarcerated people for no more than carrying a few ounces of weed.
Police chiefs , and DEA officials have been trying to derail the legalization of marijuana for decades. After four presidents have tried to wage the war against drugs, our own CIA and other government agencies have been caught smuggling much worse drugs than marijuana across our borders.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) is already rife with controversy over other indiscretions, and has a reputation for corruption. It has even been the center of recent federal investigations. Officer Martinez, of the LACSD, filed a report stating that he witnessed a man conducting a drug deal while armed with a gun tucked into he front of his shorts. He also accused the man of dumping the firearm in the trash at which time he found a second firearm next to some ecstasy.
This was enough to give the police an opportunity to arrest one men for possession and an unregistered gun, and a second ‘accomplice’ with charges of possession of a controlled substance while armed. Later, an internal investigation found that this cop was planting evidence, and caught on video doing it. Martinez is now unemployed and faces seven years in prison.
Another police chief from Annapolis recently apologized for promoting a hoax story about marijuana legalization that painted it as a devil’s work, stating falsely that 37 people had died the first day marijuana was legalized in Colorado. This was verified as a lie.
You would think that law enforcement would be happy to use their resources to fight other, more serious crimes, rather than rail against marijuana use. It’s high time that the police state gets a grip on its outdated views on legal medical marijuana and starts fighting the real bad guys.
I've always been pro mj and pro choice but I'm not unconcerned about two mj related deaths in Colorado. Still never been an overdose death from mj but apparently edible mj has more danger connected with it than I realized. Edibles have some advantages over smoking or vaping but There need to be some regulation of the strength of edibles and some education on how and how much to take. The couple of times that I ate brownies I overdid it because I kept eating to get the effect and by the time the effect started I had already consumed too much. So strength and instruction on how to administrate mj edibles is just as important as other prescription drugs. Legal mj is going to be a learning process.
I've always been pro mj and pro choice but I'm not unconcerned about two mj related deaths in Colorado. Still never been an overdose death from mj but apparently edible mj has more danger connected with it than I realized. Edibles have some advantages over smoking or vaping but There need to be some regulation of the strength of edibles and some education on how and how much to take. The couple of times that I ate brownies I overdid it because I kept eating to get the effect and by the time the effect started I had already consumed too much. So strength and instruction on how to administrate mj edibles is just as important as other prescription drugs. Legal mj is going to be a learning process.
I have a friend whose girlfriend slammed a bunch of strong brownies and did go to the hospital because she was high for like 20 hours. She got paranoid and freaked out a bit. She ate a bunch. From my understanding you only need eat half of one of just one depending on stength. It get absorbed in you intestine and can last a long time so packing yourself full of them is not a good idea if you don't want to be ****ed up for a whole day while yo digest.
I would think the very fact that they are brownies might cause one to overdo it.
Tasty goodies might end up being a problem where children are concerned. I chomped down a bottle of orange Asprigum when I was a kid, got pretty sick. But I suppose kids eat Draino and paint too.
People involved with this stuff are going to need to practice due diligence. I suspect some child endangerment cases in the future, but there always are.
