[Ansceniiiic]

I don't smoke Marijuana, but I don't see why it's banned, the fact alcohol is legal while marijuana isn't is retarded. Netherlands seems to do alright with their coffeeshops.

[Goat]

leon the pig farmer, on 18 June 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

NO GOVERNMENT has the right to tell you what you can and cannot put into your body in the privacy of your own home or on public property or in/on someone else's property.

I kinda sorta agree with this much.  

Just  because of the amount of nonviolent drug users in prison.  While I  definitely don't think it should be legal to distribute narcotics, I've  always had problems with people getting prison sentences for personal  use.  If you have a crack rock in your pocket, a small enough amount  that you're obviously not a crack dealer, I don't see any reason under  the sun why it should be legal to give you a couple years in  prison.  The crack dealer's a completely different story, though....  :/

[leon the pig farmer]

Alcohol causes more death and destruction than drugs, do your research.
The UK is like a war zone after 11pm on a Friday/Saturday night.

My mate's an ex cop, worked in Nottingham, he literally described it as a "war zone" at night.

So by your logic your government IS NOT keeping you safe because they ALLOW alcohol to be freely available knowing the harm it causes to society.

Rumiel, on 18 June 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

Actually, yes, we do see people running around stealing booze.. I don't know about the US or in other countries; but in the UK it's not uncommon for shoplifting to occur and a lot of the time they go for the booze and the cigarettes; what is to say they wouldn't do the same with marijuana?

And I do think that the government has the right to keep us safe; and that's by making sure that we do not harm others due to our actions. Sure, we are allowed to drink as much alcohol and smoke as much as we want, but once the boundary is crossed and our actions start harming other people, they have to put a stop to it. You smoking marijuana in a friend's house might not cause any trouble, but that that doesn't mean that other people wouldn't smoke marijuana at the park or at parties where all hell could break loose.

It'd be a struggle for the police as well as the government if they had to control the use of marijuana as well as the already challenging control over tobacco and alcohol.

[leon the pig farmer]

wow, my mistake....

Edited by leon the pig farmer, 18 June 2012 - 06:31 PM.

[leon the pig farmer]

sorry i got confused with posts.

i'll + some of your others.

Serenity@sea, on 18 June 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

I don''t know why you would neg me for showing you what the Admin stated on this thread. Their rules, we follow them. I was actually trying to help you out before this thread got closed or you got a warning.

[Rumiel]

leon the pig farmer, on 18 June 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

Alcohol causes more death and destruction than drugs, do your research.
The UK is like a war zone after 11pm on a Friday/Saturday night.

My mate's an ex cop, worked in Nottingham, he literally described it as a "war zone" at night.

So by your logic your government IS NOT keeping you safe because they ALLOW alcohol to be freely available knowing the harm it causes to society.

To be fair England is a warzone after 11 pm everyday of the week haha

But the thing is, marijuana would also cause conflict. Maybe not as much as alcohol.. but it'd add on to the conflict we already get due to alcohol. Replacing alcohol for marijuana would be pointless since a lot of people would prefer alcohol rather than marijuana and they'd protest.

The only option would be legalising marijuana and allowing alcohol as they always have done; but more destruction- even if it's less than the legal drugs we have now will still add to the problems we have, and that's not something that should be promoted in my opinion.

Edited by Rumiel, 18 June 2012 - 06:35 PM.

[leon the pig farmer]

BUT, my point is, people are already using illegal drugs, millions in fact.  It's a multi billion pound/euro/dollar industry.

Why continue this charade?

Even US politicians are calling for it to be legal.

US Presidents have smoked illegal drugs, Clinton and Obama.

US Presidents and Vice Presidents have also been arrested for driving drunk, Bush and Dick Cheney.

Rumiel, on 18 June 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

To be fair England is a warzone after 11 pm everyday of the week haha

But the thing is, marijuana would also cause conflict. Maybe not as much as alcohol.. but it'd add on to the conflict we already get due to alcohol. Replacing alcohol for marijuana would be pointless since a lot of people would prefer alcohol rather than marijuana and they'd protest.

The only option would be legalising marijuana and allowing alcohol as they always have done; but more destruction- even if it's less is not something that should be promoted in my opinion.

[Sweetsister]

oops dbl post  

Edited by Sweetsister, 18 June 2012 - 06:44 PM.

[Ryan_Dead]

leon the pig farmer, on 18 June 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

And you think people don't die from these drugs now they are illegal?

The death rate would drop if these drugs became legal, you wouldn't be buying rat poison.

How can you know for sure the death rates would drop. If it was legal, I imagine people would still be making and selling fake Heroin or whatever with Rat poison. People would still die from that. Then more people would die because it would be legal and they can take it when they want and how ever much they want. Therefore, most likely leading to more overdoses. If anything I think the death rate would increase

[Sweetsister]

[Barry Cade]

The issue is, as touched on by an earlier poster (Goat I think) that users are criminalised, and add to the weight placed upon the judicial system, for small amounts for personal use; this, in my opinion is the wrong. Dealers and pushers should be pursued and one way in which we can limit their influence (and that of all those lunatics in Mexico for instance) is by regulating the sale and use of marijuana in the same way as alcohol is regulated.

[Barry Cade]

Ryan_Dead, on 18 June 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

How can you know for sure the death rates would drop. If it was legal, I imagine people would still be making and selling fake Heroin or whatever with Rat poison. People would still die from that. Then more people would die because it would be legal and they can take it when they want and how ever much they want. Therefore, most likely leading to more overdoses. If anything I think the death rate would increase

The attached pic is a scale showing the relationship between dependence on drugs against the potential physical harm of those drugs; evidence such as this should be used by governments to try and have a sensible discussion about decriminalising or legalising drugs, for example ecstasy. Unfortunately it's not used in favour of the usual shrill Daily-Mailisms and also, sorry about this Leon, people stating that Heroin and Cocaine should be legalised.

I don't believe these 'harmful/ high dependecy-causing' drugs should be legalised, but the use of these more harmful drugs should be decriminalised in favour of offering support to people hooked on them.

Leon's point about the safety and purity of drugs is correct, however if people got access to them through their doctors, and also rings true for more widespread access to the 'safer' drugs such as GHB, cannaboids and ecstasy.

Edited by Barry Cade, 18 June 2012 - 06:54 PM.

[Goat]

I went to the trouble of finding it, so you're getting a random hijack.

[Mary Mayhem]

I'll tell you exactly why it's ilegal.

If they legalized it, everyone would grow their own, and the government wouldn't be able to tax that. The government doesn't like that, so instead they decide to withhold a natural herb that helps with NUMEROUS diseases/disorders/illnesses...

And yet things such as Oxycontin, Percocet, Vicodin, Vicodin/APAP, Xanax, Adderall... those are all just fine and dandy with the government, even though marijuana would take care of every single problem that would cause you to take one of the medications above (probably another reason they don't want to legalize marijuana, they'd lose so much money!! oh noez!!)  Despite the fact that we've become a pill addicted nation (and I live in the pill popper state...), the governemt doesn't mind, because that makes the government PLENTY of money. Even though people die from these addictions.

Sick world we live in... absolutely sick.


By the way, I take Adderall for my ADHD and it has been a GODsend... up until recently when there started being a shortage, because so many asshole addicts and dealers go to their doctor and memorize all the symptoms of ADHD that they read about online so they can get a prescription... and guess what? these doctors hand them out as if they're autographs. Disgusting.

[Rumiel]

Mary Mayhem, on 18 June 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:

I'll tell you exactly why it's ilegal.

If they legalized it, everyone would grow their own, and the government wouldn't be able to tax that. The government doesn't like that, so instead they decide to withhold a natural herb that helps with NUMEROUS diseases/disorders/illnesses...

And yet things such as Oxycontin, Percocet, Vicodin, Vicodin/APAP, Xanax, Adderall... those are all just fine and dandy with the government, even though marijuana would take care of every single problem that would cause you to take one of the medications above (probably another reason they don't want to legalize marijuana, they'd lose so much money!! oh noez!!)  Despite the fact that we've become a pill addicted nation (and I live in the pill popper state...), the governemt doesn't mind, because that makes the government PLENTY of money. Even though people die from these addictions.

Sick world we live in... absolutely sick.


By the way, I take Adderall for my ADHD and it has been a GODsend... up until recently when there started being a shortage, because so many asshole addicts and dealers go to their doctor and memorize all the symptoms of ADHD that they read about online so they can get a prescription... and guess what? these doctors hand them out as if they're autographs. Disgusting.

I don't see a problem if it's prescribed by a doctor. It has been proven that it can help with diseases and all, but once it gets to the counter, people will just buy it for any excuse such as stress. And once they have it once due to stress, things that aren't even very stressful will give them an excuse to have another smoke until the point where they have it for any tiny thing.

But if you're on your deathbed or have a serious disease/condition that can be treated with marijuana, it should be legalised for doctors to prescribe and that's it.

[Serenity@sea]

We cannot legalize Meth. Breaking Bad would be a whole 'nother show.

[BeardedOne]

My experience and knowledge of cannabis is limited to the days long ago when I was a teen.  We used it as a social drug among friends, and it was a "spice" of life, but not a main course.  Alcohol, on the other hand, was used much more heavily, and with far more detrimental consequences.

IMO, THE single biggest issue with drug policy is the inability to view the issue in an objective manner, and based on the facts.  I don't believe the broad brush criminalization approach is either effective, or appropriate, and this approach is often times a bigger detriment to the individual, and society as a whole, than the controlled substances ever prove to be.  I believe this is especially true concerning cannabis.

IMO, Portugal and the Netherlands have a far more effective approach in terms of cost, justice, and the over all well being of their society as a whole.

Just because a citizen advocates for the decriminalization of drugs does NOT mean that the citizen advocates for the USE of drugs.  I wouldn't advocate skydiving, MMA, or any other dangerous event for everyone, but I sure as hell wouldn't want them to be criminalized.

I hold the opinion that addiction should be treated with a medical approach, rather than a criminal approach, as this approach seems to be far more effective at treating the core issue, is more cost effective, and far more just for the user in the end.  Alcoholics need treatment, not incarceration, and I feel the same way about any other substance abuse.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't care what other citizens do, as long as their behavior doesn't  threaten me or mine.  What they do, or use, in a responsible manner in the privacy of their own home is their business.  It makes me very angry knowing my tax dollars are wasted policing, prosecuting, and incarcerating citizens who's only crime is possession of a substance I simply choose not to use.

[Trippy]

I think it should be legalized just for the fact that the police would spend less time trying to bust stoners, and maybe spend their time working towards more important cases: murder, rape, theft, etc.

Other than that, I think drugs are fairly stupid. I mean really, if you have to take something to be happy or to have a good time, something's messed up in your head. Just my opinion, though.* Drugs shouldn't be someone's life.

*No need to go spreading it around. See ya, Commander. >swivels around in chair<

Edited by Trippy, 18 June 2012 - 07:25 PM.

[RickGrimeyGrimes]

Ryan_Dead, on 18 June 2012 - 04:40 PM, said:

I don't understand why anybody would pick it up in the first place. It stinks so much. The smell of it is horrible.

I actually think it smells rather lovely but I wouldn't smoke it.

Edited by RickGrimeyGrimes, 18 June 2012 - 07:28 PM.

[Jon W]

Sorry, folks, hot button got pushed.

  

  (for sake of reference, I do not use any recreational chemicals, and my alcohol intake is limited to one glass of wine or mixed drink on rare occasions)

  

  We should decriminalize “all” “recreational chemicals” because Prohibition DOESN’T WORK (look at America during the Prohibition era – the major change to come out of Prohibition is Organized Crime, as opposed to the local, more disorganized crime that existed before Prohibition.  Compare this to the current drug cartels….)

  

  Prohibition is the best case study for decriminalizing the various ‘street drugs’ (as opposed to prescription medications – I won’t open that can of worms here).  

  

  During Prohibition, you had “bathtub gin” and bootleggers running moonshine around.  Once Prohibition was repealed, quality control immediately came back in place on alcohol.  Just about anybody can get their ‘fix’ without having to worry about being poisoned by the lead in the booze or whatever (some people still are, but that is their choice for drinking black market moonshine – they could buy beer, wine or whiskey with reasonable quality control).

  

  If half the money that is currently spent on “the War on Drugs” was spent on education and rehabilitation, our situation would probably be much better.

  

  As well, taxes on the drugs would be a significant source of revenue…. and growing pot is already a major industry in America.


  

  And when is the last time a gang killed people for control of the liquor rights to a city block (as routinely happens with illegal drugs)?  Answer:  during Prohibition.

  

  Will people die from overdoses?  Of course.  Do people currently die from ‘overdoses’ of alcohol?  Every day.  What is the particular difference?  Do people die from cigarettes?  Again, every day.  But if you want to see what difference a single person can make by taking a stand about something, look at Koop (former Surgeon General) and cigarettes.  It used to be socially acceptable to “light up” pretty much everywhere.  After Koop took his stand, *everybody* knew that cigarettes were bad for you, and that you were making a personal choice if you smoked.  The same could occur for drugs.

  

  The above being stated (i.e. decriminalize ALL of the various drugs, following the example of the drug alcohol), I think there should be SEVERE penalties for such activities as Driving Under the Influence or Child Neglect because of a drug.

  

  But if you, personally, want to go out and smoke the stuff (or shoot it up) and you don’t drive under the influence or neglect your kids, etc, what do I care?

  

  I DO care if some gangster is going to shoot people for the privilege of selling you your drug of choice.  I’m a believer in the free market system:  competition is a good thing.  Look at the Marijuana dispensaries in California:  healthy competition there for people’s money for a specific product.

  

  Military officers are taught not to give orders that they know won’t be obeyed.  It’s a shame politicians aren’t taught not to pass laws that they know won’t be obeyed and can’t be enforced.

  

  Sorry for the rant, but people that don’t look at history are doomed to repeat it, and we’ve done that (Prohibition for Alcohol, the “War on Drugs” for drugs)….

[Living Dead Grrrl]

Closing this for now because its sliding into becoming too political.

[Texaxile]

Ironically alot of painkilling drugs and anti anxiety drugs are opiates (morpiha right up to Xanax), derived from the same kind of source as heroin, which many see as the extreme end of the narcotic scale.

My brother works in the tobacco industry and has said that each of the large companies have a cannabis product waiting to hit the shelves in the event of legalisation (Philip Morris, BAT, Imperial - one company that manufactures King size Rizla papers specifically for making reefers with - they will just use the demographic data from the sales of the papers in their marketing of the cannabis product I would assume). On a commercial basis at least the target audience for such a product would be middle class recreational smokers and possibly try to tempt exsisting users with a superior product.


I won't comment on the political gains to be had. Maybe this is a "generational" thing, people of my generation perhaps are not as sold on the idea of legalisation as those 20 years younger. Perhaps in the future it will become more acceptable to the populous and might well be used as a vote winner.

Commercially, it might put a few Pharmas on edge. A legal natural product which relieves certain symptoms for a fraction of the price and relatively few side effects versus their over the counter/ prescribed product which makes the billions of $$ each year over the tax gains and revenues for the Tobacco giants - unless the pharmas market their own product? - could happen. Who knows.

Socially, again only time will tell but historical evidence suggests it might do some good. Truthfully, I think it's so widespread and commonly used, the social impact will be minimal.

My question to anyone would be:

What would you rather your teenager came home as: Stoned, or drunk?.

Cheers
Tex

[Babs Bladdyblah]

[That Guy]

Babs Bladdyblah, on 19 June 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

I know someone who does.

[Babs Bladdyblah]

Do they stay in hostels?