legalize pot?

dampainter · 06-30-2003, 10:33 AM

should the federal government legalize pot?

Jennie@ifish · 06-30-2003, 01:05 PM

Thank you to Geek for pulling this.
I have decided that it's OK to discuss this.
I do appreciate Geek's pulling it on my account, but I need to loosen up a bit, I guess. :smile:

I just don't want ifish known as promoting drug use... Personal problem, I guess.

Jen

Cool Texan · 06-30-2003, 01:09 PM

I even have glaucoma, but still voted no. I dont want a bunch of stoners on the highway. We have enough of them at the Rose Garden Arena. :grin:

06-30-2003, 01:43 PM

It would be a twofer.
Tax it and take the law enforcement effort and put it into fighting "Real Crime".

[ 06-30-2003, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

06-30-2003, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
I even have glaucoma, but still voted no. I dont want a bunch of stoners on the highway. We have enough of them at the Rose Garden Arena. :grin:

Yea, a bunch of drunks that beat their wives, kids and dog would be much better.

fish_on · 06-30-2003, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keta:
It would be a twofer.
Tax it and take the law enforcement effort and put it into fighting "Real Crime".

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

I would rather be in a bar with a bumch of people who have been smoking pot that in one where people are real drunk. People on pot are much less likley to get violent, the only thing you have to worry about is "where did all the food go"

RvW · 06-30-2003, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
I even have glaucoma, but still voted no. I dont want a bunch of stoners on the highway. We have enough of them at the Rose Garden Arena. :grin:

You'd be surprised at how many "stoners" you pass on the hiway CT, they're the ones who actually stay in the "safe" lane. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

Whether I smoke or not is none of anyones business but my own, but I will say this, NONE of the medications Ive been prescribed and paid out the nose for have been effective for symptoms of anxiety.

If there where a choice beteen alcohol and pot...I'd vote the pot in, and the alc out in a second. Too omany people destroying there lives, and the lives of others with Alcohol.

Ive got a lot to say not so much in the support of legalized marijuana, but for the rediculous fact that it isnt, and alcohol is.

Keta, our gov gets far more tax dollars straight from our pockets to combat the distribution of Marijuanna than it ever would taxing the sale of it. (funding the war on drugs comes out of everyones pockets now, VS only the people who use paying a tax if it where legal. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[ 06-30-2003, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

lost_sailor · 06-30-2003, 02:35 PM

There is no rational reason for it to be illegal. It was prohibited in 1937 to eliminate HEMP as competition for timber and petro-chemical industries.

Oh, and also to oppress black and Mexican people.

I've smoked weed, and I've drunk cheap tequila - - the DANGEROUS drug is the one you can buy at the state-franchise store.

This is a public discussion that needs to happen, but lawmakers are afraid of not being re-elected.

BrionLutz · 06-30-2003, 02:37 PM

cotr,

Quote:

Whether I smoke or not is none of anyones business but my own, but I will say this, NONE of the medications Ive been prescribed and paid out the nose for have been effective for symptoms of anxiety.

Interesting, I thought one of the possible side effects was mild paranoia...not the crazy kind, the funny "why is everybody look'in at me" kind.

I'm in the legalize it group, let farmers grow it, tax it and get on with real problems. Talk about misspent money, spending any law enforcement money on pot is crazy.

I've run into three pot "incidents" recently. One was out fishing with the kids and Larry Page for Springers and a "companion" boat pulls up to the boat next to us. Next thing we smell is pot smoke and Larry is totally busting'em...we were cracking up as much as the potheads.

Other one was a whole boat load of medical marijuana guys. Had the cards and gov't joints and everything...all kinds of reasons.

Third was one of the kid's girl friends (this in CA) has pot presription for treatment of multiple presonality or some such...never heard of that one before.

I didn't realize there was so much medical marijuana going around.

Brion

RvW · 06-30-2003, 02:37 PM

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

The Fishing Geek · 06-30-2003, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
I dont want a bunch of stoners on the highway.

I don't either. Driving under the influence would still be illegal, and there should be harsher penalties for DUI of any sort, for that matter.

Legalize it and tax it. I doubt that the problematic use rates would go up, as addictions are not due to the drug but instead due to the person. So, we treat the person. Easy.

Oh, and I've inhaled. Twice. Didn't like it either time.

RvW · 06-30-2003, 03:05 PM

Brion, Cirrhosis went fishing! :tongue:

Paranoia and anxiety are two very different things.

Paranoia IMHO comes with "guilt" or self consciousness among others. Never experienced it in any extreme sense.

Anxiety is often crippling and has nothing to do with human interaction. I am exciteable, and have had panic attacks more often with good news than bad. To self medicate in these not-so-frequent times, I have found a small dose of marijuana to be better than any medication professionally prescribed (and theres been many) And I will say this, Because of my silly nature, Ive been accused more times of being stoned when I am NOT than I have ever been when I am!

Excersise, healthy diet, and meditation have also helped tremendously, so theres no unhealthy dependancy on the substance in question..

Geek, CT, Keta. I think you folks may be a little naive thinking marijuana use is a "behind closed doors" "specific image required" practice and I must say that being at one time, very open about my use, and being exposed to many social groups (doctors, lawyers, businesspeople who use it too) You may want to remove your blinders and realize that the larger problem with pot is the fact that its illegal, and not the oodles of people who use it, which im sure you come in contact with every day not even knowing.

Pot isnt a multi billion dollar industry because low-income, treehugging, mother earth types sneak into the woodshed for a puff. Its everywhere you go.

The only socially unacceptable thing about marijuana use is that its believed to be socially unacceptable, and people actually think they are part of a more respectable society if they believe this. But in the circles of people Ive know who use it, these people tend to be more "social" than those in a bar gulping fermented fruit and grain spirits slobbering on themselves.

Freedom to chose!

"Live free or die" !!

[ 06-30-2003, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

24 on/ 48 off · 06-30-2003, 03:11 PM

Why promote more beaurocracy and more taxes?

--spud-- :smile:

RvW · 06-30-2003, 03:27 PM

24..isnt that what happened when it was prohibitted by law?

Question to the group:

Is it more shameful to use and HIDE your use, or use responsibly, and be honest about it.

"Illegal" doesnt change anyones mind to use or not use. Popular opinion shouldnt either.

dampainter · 06-30-2003, 03:45 PM

"illegal" can get you on an unemploynent line and in trouble with the law.

[ 06-30-2003, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: dampainter ]

06-30-2003, 03:58 PM

Pot is the bigest cash crop in both Oregon and California. Tax it.

:shocked: I can't believe BrionLutz and me agree on something :shocked:

Birdnest · 06-30-2003, 04:07 PM

It should be a crime that farmers can not produce hemp, it is incredibly strong, fast growing, natural resource that you would have to smoke a truck load to need the visine.

As far as the more potent verson, legalize it. It is silly the amount of money we spend on policing, prosecuting, and incarcerating people over this stuff.

We live in a society where a significant percentage of the population participate in unhealthy practices everyday. Alcohol is far more dangerous to both the user and the innocent bystanders. Cigarettes kill untold numbers of people and the ones that live in close proximity to them. Obesity related medical problems kills a whole lot of folks and costs us billions.

So why draw such a noble line in the sand with a realitively benign substance?

Joe

Silver Hilton · 06-30-2003, 04:18 PM

See this story.

To the person who doesn't want a bunch of stoned drivers, two points. First, you already have them. A lot of Americans smoke pot today, and there are those who will act irresponsibly, just as there are those who drink and drive irresponsibly. Second, and this is far more important, while no-one would suggest smoking a fat one and then getting behind the wheel, it is a fact that pot simply doesn't impair coordination to anywhere near the degree that alcohol, many prescription medicines, or a good healthy dose of cough medicine do. There have been several studies that support the assertion that pot smokers aren't a huge risk behind the wheel. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration did a study in 1993 that tested the coordination of pot smokers, and then tested their ability to keep pace with a test vehicle. The study concluded, "In summary, this program of research has shown that marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment which is related to the consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself mainly in the ability to maintain a steady lateral position on the road, but its magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain insight in their performance and will compensate where they can, for example, by slowing down or increasing effort. "

Read the entire study, Here

Needless to say, since this didn't prove that pot was the worst thing in history, it has been surbmerged.

Silver Hilton · 06-30-2003, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Birdnest:

So why draw such a noble line in the sand with a realitively benign substance?

I suspect that it is because there is a considerable prison industry that benefits from our current posture. Aside from the various governmental budgets at stake, prison and treatment programs are big bucks these days. Fun fact: the biggest financial contributor to the California three strikes initiative was the California Prison guards union. Second fun fact: there are more people in prison under California's three strikes law for pot than for murder, ****, and arson, combined.

OK, now everyone knows where I stand on the issue.

2LEYS · 06-30-2003, 04:40 PM

Quote:

There is no rational reason for it to be illegal. It was prohibited in 1937 to eliminate HEMP as competition for timber and petro-chemical industries.

Oh, and also to oppress black and Mexican people.

B.S.

I too think that it should be legal but totally disagree with the above statement. Also you guys say "TAX IT!!! TAX IT!!!" But when they do legalize it you will be crying "WHY DO THEY HAVE TO TAX IT???

Silver Hilton · 06-30-2003, 04:46 PM

2Leys, I don't fully agree with Lost Sailor, either, but there is some truth to what he says. Prior to the turn of the century, most paper was made from hemp. William Randolph Hearst had a lot of timber, and sold a lot of woodpulp based newsprint. He had a significant financial interest in seeing hemp eliminated as a competitor. Perhaps coincidently, or perhaps not, his newspapers were one of the major sources of 'reefer madness' publicity that led to the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act.

[ 06-30-2003, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: Silver Hilton ]

BrionLutz · 06-30-2003, 04:58 PM

Keta,

Quote:

I can't believe BrionLutz and me agree on something

Now that will sober you up in a hurry <grin>.

Brion

06-30-2003, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BrionLutz:
Keta,

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I can't believe BrionLutz and me agree on something

Now that will sober you up in a hurry <grin>.

Brion <hr /></blockquote>It did me too Keta.

The Fishing Geek · 06-30-2003, 05:21 PM

cotr:

I'm not sure where you got the impression that I thought that there was a specific subgroup of people who smoke pot

, because I'm certainly not so naive to believe that notion. I've known people from all walks of life who smoked the occasional grass, and I do recall that the vast majority of them weren't what anyone would call "addicts". They enjoyed lighting up, and I couldn't fault them for that.

My comment only addressed addicts. And, as with any addicts, they should get treatment for their addictive behavior.

1pump · 06-30-2003, 05:45 PM

I haven't smoked any in years, but I still think the current marijuana laws are ludicrous.
Why criminalize it? There's no shortage of controlled substances that are far more dangerous, both physically and socially. The DEA spends way to much money, time and energy flying around staring at trees while looking for weed while there's meth labs cooking everywhere, sight unseen. And don't even get me started on booze. And then there's the tobacco industry...... [img]graemlins/eek13.gif[/img]

06-30-2003, 06:39 PM

Link in support of LS

Straydog · 06-30-2003, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lost_sailor:
There is no rational reason for it to be illegal. It was prohibited in 1937 to eliminate HEMP as competition for timber and petro-chemical industries.

Oh, and also to oppress black and Mexican people.

I've smoked weed, and I've drunk cheap tequila - - the DANGEROUS drug is the one you can buy at the state-franchise store.

This is a public discussion that needs to happen, but lawmakers are afraid of not being re-elected.

Wasn't Dupont supposed to have had something to do with it being made illegal?

Keta,

I too agree with you............ your lucky night!! :grin:

Silver Hilton · 06-30-2003, 09:55 PM

Dupont was supposed to have been concerned about hemp fabric as being a competitor to nylon. Historically, while the Hearst and Dupont connections are interesting, they don't fit with the other facts. They probably had interests in the matter, but I suspect they opportunistically took advantage of what was presented to them legally.

The record is pretty clear about the flow of acts making pot illegal. It was a variety of state ordinances, being followed up on by Harry Anslinger's efforts at the federal level, which culminated in the act of 1937 which made pot illegal. Nylon came after that, I believe. The sad fact are that pot is illegal largely due to one man's desire to have an empire as big as J Edgar Hoover's. He needed a villain, and that villain was reefer.

[ 06-30-2003, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: Silver Hilton ]

Mr. Carp · 06-30-2003, 09:56 PM

I am sorry, but some will disagree with me, but I say it should be illegal unless for medical purposes. I have a friend who needs it for a serious medical disorder, but I think that medical use thing gets pushed a little too far.

As far as being impared while using it, I sure as heck don't need anymore people toking it up when it could endanger people. This will occur and I consider it just as bad as alcohol. In the summers I usually run heavy equipment like cats and backhoes and drive dump truck for road construction companies. The last thing we need is someone stoned out of their mind operating heavy equipment or any kind of vehicle for that matter.

I guess the only way I would maybe consider legalizing it is if someone was under the influence of it while operating a motor vehicle or something of that nature, the peanlty would be severe. I think the same should go with alcohol. The peanlties should be a heck of a lot stricter than they are currently. I mean get rid of this slap on the wrist garbage and really give them something to think about when they commit a crime that endangers innocent people.

drhall99 · 06-30-2003, 11:23 PM

Stoned people only kill Doritos and Pizza, not people. Check the statistics. I don't smoke myself but I think it's wrong to ciminalize pot while booze is legal.

jmo,
D.

wannacatchem · 07-01-2003, 02:44 AM

I havent smoked in years, but have never understood the rational behind putting people in jail for the stuff. I say leagalize it. It will create jobs (farming, packaging, marketing, etc) Fund state coffers thru taxes and lower some of the rehtoric on the other discussion board

Capin' Dan · 07-01-2003, 04:39 AM

Reason I feel it isn't legalized. Billions of tax payer dollars have been spent to stop the spread of it. The government can use this excuse to take more taxes and spend whereever to stop the flow of drugs. Do they really even make a dent in it. No not really but they can place a person on probabtion for several years and continue to get monthly checks for his probabtion officer. My .02 legalize it. Tax the heck out of it.

AtWorkALot · 07-01-2003, 05:16 AM

The U.S. is among the fattest, laziest, most addicted, most mentally ill nations in the world. Why legalize a drug that's only going to feed this? We allow ourselves to fail in life almost daily, legalizing pot will do nothing to take us off this path.

I'm not sure what the answer is. I know I don't want to see my nephews packing a tight bowl of "Jamaican Gold" that they bought from Phillip Morris via the local 7-11.

No thanks. There's already enough legal crap out there to help me feel sorry for myself and ruin my life.

Just my opinion on the matter. I have friends that smoke it. I don't get mad at them or hate them, I worry about them.

Straydog · 07-01-2003, 06:30 AM

The biggest crime surrounding pot is the fact that the Gov. leaves it illegal and spends billions on phoney "Just Say No to Drugs" campaigns while at the same time subsidizing pharmacuetical companies to advertise drugs every 15 minutes on television, or page after page in magazines.

They spend our tax dollars on phoney anti-drug campaigns that do little good while also spending our tax dollars promoting drugs to cure most any ill one can imagine.

Does it not seem more than a little sideways to expect our kids to "just say no" when we allow Phizer and other RX companies to put in our face constantly the notion that there is a drug that will cure what ailes you?????

We try to have it both ways and it is bogus and a huge waste of tax dollars.

Seefood Man · 07-01-2003, 06:34 AM

One hit :depressed:
too hits :grin:
tree hitts's [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

where is a pic of a cooking egg when I need one

Straydog · 07-01-2003, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AtWorkALot:
The U.S. is among the fattest, laziest, most addicted, most mentally ill nations in the world.

Yes, even more so than those countries that have no prohibition on pot.

We also have more sex crimes than countries where sex and nudity is more open and we have more booze related problems than where the drinking laws are more liberal........ hhmmm, might there be a trend here??? [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

Silver Hilton · 07-01-2003, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AtWorkALot:

I'm not sure what the answer is. I know I don't want to see my nephews packing a tight bowl of "Jamaican Gold" that they bought from Phillip Morris via the local 7-11.

The question is, do you want your nephews buying pot in the parking lot at the high school, or would we rather have them have to go to the store, where they will at least be checked to see if they are of age?

Legalization gives the opportunity for better control over access by kids, which is what we keep saying the War on Drugs is about.

07-01-2003, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Legalization gives the opportunity for better control over access by kids, which is what we keep saying the War on Drugs is about.

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

RvW · 07-01-2003, 07:06 AM

Hi Atwork...While I agree that marijuana use contributes to laziness and our nation is falling victim to the other symptoms you post, I seriously doubt the decriminalization of marijuana wouldnt change any of this. There are places in this world and even this country with perfect examples. A few counties in Califronia for example, have decriminalized it, most of Alaska its a mere infraction to posses it. While I am not a regular user, I know a lot of people who are, some regular, who dont fall into any category you mention and again, I dont think legalizing pot would promote anymore laziness, mental illness or obesety that presently exists.

The personal problems related to pot use are not any more prevalent while its illegal than they would be if it were not. Or are they? But the societal issues? IMHO there would be far less.

It is a point to mention those who are spending time in prisons as a result of marijuana, and though this seems to be sad, and a problem in itself, they are locked up as a result of their decision to ignore the law, right or wrong, its a law. But should the risk of jail, and a criminal record be the most unhealthy effect of smoking pot? No way.

If those who think the goverment is protecting us from ourselves refuse to consider and accept how many ways its serves its own interests while doing so, pot will allways be illegal but consider substances like tobacco (proven to be deadly), caffienne (not so much in coffee, but in all the drugs it comes in), and the poison we know as alcohol.

I dont want to post another novel but I think its important to say that alcoholism has been scientifically proven to be a disease.(which perfectly negates the misconception that alcohol addiction is a social disease) This disease is present in individuals who have never taken a drink! It involves a physiological imperfection that cannot be changed by anything other than complete abstinance) and believe it or not, it is one of the few diseases which will take every life it possibly can before it goes away. Now this isnt uncommon among diseases, but consider the idea that theres no effort for a "cure", AND our government leaves it up to the person inflicted to treat himself :shocked:

You be the judge. China, the most densely populated nation on earth has had alcohol present in thier society for 4000+ years yet less than 1% of its population is considerd to be an alcoholic. In contrast, native americans have been exposed to alcohol a mere 400 years yet it is believed that as many as 80% of these people are inflicted with the disease alcoholism (please remember, the disease does not require a person to DRINK to be present, the physical characteristics are there already, sort of like HIV, the antibody can be present in a body for decades yet has no effect on the body) Is this not clear evidence that alcohol will take every life it can before it goes away?

Ive never heard of "potism", I dont think Ive ever read a headline stating marijuana was involved when the story relates to domestic abuse, or any act of violence. What is the government protecting us from?

As far as the "tax it" suggestion. Unfortunately this isnt a monetarily feasable option while considering the fact that our "war on drugs" draws far more tax dollars from all working americans, when a simple sales tax paid by only users of the substance would be minescule by comparison. I think this is the ONLY reason the "war" has not, and never will be won. The government I know wants to keep every penny it gets its hands on.

Washington DC incorporated a wildly successful "experimental" drug war in the early 90s and literally killed its local economy. It was scrubbed and said to be too costly to the tax payers.

Since when did "too much tax" become an issue with our gov? What could be better than to get paid to FAIL?

[ 07-01-2003, 08:42 AM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

AtWorkALot · 07-01-2003, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Silver Hilton:

The question is, do you want your nephews buying pot in the parking lot at the high school, or would we rather have them have to go to the store, where they will at least be checked to see if they are of age?

Legalization gives the opportunity for better control over access by kids, which is what we keep saying the War on Drugs is about.

_______________________________________________

No. Do you really think that my twelve-year-old nephew would have any more trouble getting a 40oz. of malt liquor than he would a gram of pot? I'm not that dumb. To think that legalizing it would magically make it harder for a kid to obtain is silly.

Legalization might take some of the guilt away from those that choose to smoke, but that's about it.

Like I said, I don't know the right answer, I only know legalization is the wrong answer.

AtWorkALot · 07-01-2003, 07:13 AM

Hey COTR! How's life? I respect your opinion, let's go fishing.

dampainter · 07-01-2003, 08:06 AM

Atworkalot, that would be "columbian gold"...

:grin:

AtWorkALot · 07-01-2003, 08:11 AM

Boy do I feel stupid! :grin: What's your opinion dam painter?

reeldick · 07-01-2003, 08:45 AM

If you legalize pot, why stop there? Where would you draw the line? Coke may be OK in some peoples minds, how about the really hard stuff you inject?
Maybe if it was all legal and taxed, it could also be partially controlled. But then the question is, who should control the stuff?

RvW · 07-01-2003, 09:06 AM

Atwork.. life? uhh, been better!

Im buying the don hill drifter posted by Whopper, soon as he is home to take my money!anytime on the fishing, just drop a line.

lost_sailor · 07-01-2003, 09:13 AM

What we really need to do is work on figuring out why people are so miserable that crank or heroin seem like a good alternative.

We will NEVER control the drug problem by trying to restrict access to certain substances. If the demand exists, the marketplace will always respond - if law enforcement actually affects the supply, the price will go up (so crank-heads will need to steal more of your gear).

We need to work on reducing the demand. Why is Zoloft OK and God's own herb is illegal?

"Are YOU going to tell God it's illegal?" - Bob Marley

When I was underage, it was easier to get weed than beer. Pretty sure that's still true. Beer is regulated and available, I don't think there is much of a black market for alcohol. During Prohibition, there sure was!

RvW · 07-01-2003, 09:34 AM

To categorize pot with meth, heroin and crack is as unreasonable as placing alcohol in the same group, only alcohol is much closer, and yet legal.

snowball · 07-01-2003, 09:37 AM

I've always said, make it legal, and put the money made back into education. Lords knows there's serious shortage of funds--Those that smoke are going to regardless and those that don't won't. Simple enough.
at 40 dollars for 1/8oz, alot of books and paper could be purchased-heck even the books themselves could be printed on paper made from hemp- -- NO pot does not lead to other drugs. Curiousity does.

It still the big oil, textiles and unions that keep it illegle.

GutZ · 07-01-2003, 10:12 AM

Damn, I forgot what I was gonna post ...

RvW · 07-01-2003, 10:18 AM

:blush:

FrogPond · 07-01-2003, 01:36 PM

Underage people will still aquire pot in the same ways they aquire alcohol. If legalized, it would just become more readily available. (not that is that hard to come by already) Legalization will just increase the supply, thus bring the price down; and with cheaper, easier to aquire pot, more people will try/use it.

Just my .02

5-Cents · 07-01-2003, 01:43 PM

Crabbait & Straydog [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Crabbait you hit it on the nose with your post.

We are never going to stop the usage, people that use now will keep using if leagalized, people that dont use now wont. You would put a ton of crooks out of business and we would have a huge windfall of tax $$$$. Heck the price of dope would probably fall too. Sounds like a win, win, win to me!

DanS · 07-01-2003, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Do you really think that my twelve-year-old nephew would have any more trouble getting a 40oz. of malt liquor than he would a gram of pot? I'm not that dumb. To think that legalizing it would magically make it harder for a kid to obtain is silly.

Haven't been in school for a while, have you? When I was in HS, weed took 15 minutes to get, alcohol could take hours. Make it legal and it IS harder to get for the underage. There's nothing silly about it.

Miss B Haven · 07-01-2003, 02:34 PM

Crabbait- Ya, but what are all those Mafia, Druglord and Politicians going to do to make a living if you legalize the stuff? :whazzup:

Cna you imagine the unemployment that would result? :shocked: This countries econcomy would go down the tubes! :depressed:

Oh...wait.....too late! [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img]

07-01-2003, 02:49 PM

BAN ALL NETS! Ooops. Sorry wrong post. :tongue:

dampainter · 07-01-2003, 02:58 PM

I nominate crabbait for prez. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[ 07-01-2003, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: dampainter ]

RvW · 07-01-2003, 03:22 PM

Rick, the nets in question, are they made with hemp?

Painter: hes overqualified. Besides, who would be his running mate? Ralph Nader?

happybrew · 07-01-2003, 04:07 PM

A few points:

1. It's a myth that people don't ever get violent on pot. I've seen it.

2. Pot is a gateway drug.

3. If it were made legal, it would be subject to the same litigation as tobacco and guns, making it very expensive. Oh, I forgot. Pot is considered politically acceptable, so pot companies would never be sued, sort of like Planned Parenthood will never be sued for ignoring mandatory reporting laws. Never mind that point then. :depressed:

4. Our laws are an expression of our values. If we make pot legal, we're sending our children a message that getting stoned is perfectly acceptable. Oh, never mind this point also. 2/3 on the poll support legalization. So go ahead and tell MY kids all you want with a law like that that getting stoned is okay. You're already telling your kids. :depressed:

5. When the government becomes dependent upon revenue from pot taxes, it will become an incentive to promote it. Just look at gambling. Just look at tobacco and alcohol, which are the most frequently advertised products, and also the most heavily taxed. Look at how the Lottery is everywhere. Pot will be too because everyone wants in on the bucks. I will not live in a state that does that with pot. I will move elsewhere.

happybrew

Silver Hilton · 07-01-2003, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FrogPond:
Legalization will just increase the supply, thus bring the price down; and with cheaper, easier to aquire pot, more people will try/use it.

I disagree. Economics teaches us that if the price comes down, supplies of a good decrease. While people may want more at the cheaper price, suppliers are less interested in producing. When prices are increased, as by our current prohibition, supplies increase. In fact, when the price is pushed to the sky by illegalization, huge profits can be made, which entices people to produce who would never otherwise consider, say, growing pot. This is in fact what we see. That is the paradox of prohibition. Prohibition drives up the price of a good, which makes it more lucrative for people to produce. Capitalism being the invisible hand that it is, prohibition guarantees an increase of supply. And this is exactly what has happened anytime a government has banned a popular good.

Think about it for a second. Cocaine and sugar require similar skills and land to produce. Both are harvested using manual labor, and both are refined from the plant in a simple process. Sugar sells for 79 cents a lb, cocaine sells for what, $20,000 a pound? If cocaine is legalized, and sells for closed to it's true cost of production, what do you think the logical behavior for the current spuppliers would be? Answer, many of them will switch to some other crop.

A very similar comparison could be made between pot and tobacco.

Under legalization, it's unlikely that pot prices would descend to that of a pack of marlboros. Demand for pot would certainly increase to at least some degree (I know i'd buy some once in awhile

), So there would be some upward pressure on prices. But certainly the prohibition profit would be elimminated (or replaced with tax), so the income to producers would be much smaller than it is today.

On the harder drugs, there is actually considerable evidence that demand for things such as speed, heroin probably wouldn't change that much. Most people, given accurate information about these deadly drugs, would never think of trying them. Even if heroin was free, there is unlikely to be a line of new users trying to get some. Studies have shown that demand for them is relatively price inelastic, meaning that people's consumption tends to stay about the same even if price varies.

I think the main supply effect due to legalization would be simply mainstreaming it, so Joe and Zelda Suburbs could get a pack of Schwarzenegger Spliffs ("Ah'll be laid back...") on friday night.

Anyway, my 2 cents back atcha.

lost_sailor · 07-01-2003, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by happybrew:
A few points:

1. It's a myth that people don't ever get violent on pot. I've seen it.

2. Pot is a gateway drug.

Violent people will probably be violent under the influence of ... anything short of tranquilizers. Alcohol precipitates violent behavior by reducing inhibitions. I am not a violent person, and I can drink myself to unconciousness without ever exhibiting any violent behavior.

GATEWAY to the black market - because of its illegal status! No scientific evidence supports the "gateway" theory. The same logic suggests that drinking milk leads to heroin addiction. Nearly 99% of heroin users began as milk drinkers.

About the tax thing ... is your homebrew taxed? Mine isn't.

"Smokin' homegrown and drinkin' homebrew - sounds like paradise with an ocean view" - Country Joe

Hey did you know that cannabis(weed) and humulus(hops) are closely related? Sure you did.

[ 07-01-2003, 05:32 PM: Message edited by: lost_sailor ]