Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Here's the problem we have. You confuse the drug trade with drug use. And, you make up stuff. Neither helps.

But, I'll try again. Drug PROHIBITION causes crime. Drug USE doesn't. If you need evidence of that, all you have to do is look back into our own history. When alcohol was illegal, there was a lot of crime surrounding it. Since it was made legal, that crime disappeared. There's a reason that happened.

So, let me be perfectly clear - alcohol use does not cause crime.

Please THINK about that for a minute. Read the WORDS, and don't make up stuff. No, I didn't say drunk driving is cool. No, I didn't say beating up your wife when you're drunk is ok. No, I didn't say being an alcoholic is just hunky dory. I didn't say ANY of those things. I said ONE thing, and one thing only. I'll say it again if you didn't understand it. Alcohol USE does not cause crime.

If you GET that, then you'd get that drug use doesn't cause crime either. But, I don't think you DO get that. I dunno why. I think you believe reefer madness sort of stuff, like snorting a line of coke COMPELS you to rob a 7/Eleven.

excon

---

There IS no drug use in this case without the Drug trade... they are tightly linked. If you grow your own you ARE part of the drug trade. Because you will be sharing it, selling it or giving it away to others. I've never known I single POT user who doest not participate in one or more of those three actions in my 49 years on this planet, and yes doing so makes you part of the drug trafficking problem. And yes I've had direct exposure to Pot users and dealers since I was in high school. I did not grow up in a vacuum.

If there was no Illegal drug use... there would be no Narcotrafficers. Their existence are tightly interlinked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBC

Alcohol sales are a direct contributor to crime(could be drunk driving,could be murder,could be rape)

Since alcohol sales have been made legal,you say that crime has lessened? And you are saying that the jails are fuller in the USA? And that the justice system is defective?

---

Hello again, KBC:

Please read the words carefully, because I CHOSE them carefully. I didn't say crime was LESSENED. I specifically said crime directly attributed to the PROHIBITION of alcohol - ENDED. It was OVER. FINISHED. Could I be more clear? Smuggling didn't LESSEN. It ENDED. Murders in the alcohol trade didn't LESSEN. They ENDED.

I AM saying the jails are fuller in the USA. That is an undeniable fact.

NO, I didn't say the justice system is DEFECTIVE. I said it needs reform. If you think that means I want to let murderers out of jail, you're mistaken. In fact, if we let the non violent drug offenders out, there would be PLENTY of room to keep murderers FOREVER.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

You mean..like all the dead non-victims of the drug trade?


Actually read back on many of my arguments....I don't actually think there are no victims in statutory rape. And statutory rape and pedophillia are not exactly the same thing even if that distinction is not clear as black and white.

Pedophillia is the far worse of the two.

---

No, I don't mean that, I mean what I said.

No pun witnessed, I don't get offended by the high(hi) stuff:)

It doesn't take abuse to cause someone to do a crime.

Either drugs or alcohol.. prescription medications or street drugs.

Use of alcohol,lets say,4 beers,in a 135 lb. female gets behind the wheel.BAC?Probably above the LEGAL limit.(contributes to crimes,, DUI is considered a crime where I am from)

Use of weed(or drug of choice) in anyone, heavy user would have higher 'tolerance',but that doesn't make it justifiable, it is still a crime(DUI,consumption,whatever it can be labeled as in whatever state,is still illegal)

So, no,there doesn't have to be abuse for use to be illegal or a contributor to crimes against man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

There IS no drug use in this case without the Drug trade....they are tightly linked.

---

Hello again, smoothy:

I knew you wouldn't get it. I thought you'd bring up the moonshiner in the Virginia hills to prove me wrong. That would have been a better than the drivel you just posted.

Actually, there IS drug use WITHOUT the drug trade. I grow my own marijuana and don't sell any. I smoke ALL of it. It's good too. I just took a hit.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, KBC:

Please read the words carefully, because I CHOSE them carefully. I didn't say crime was LESSENED. I specifically said crime directly attributed to the PROHIBITION of alcohol - ENDED. It was OVER. FINISHED. Could I be more clear? Smuggling didn't LESSON. It ENDED. Murders in the alcohol trade didn't LESSON. They ENDED.

I AM saying the jails are fuller in the USA. That is an undeniable fact.

NO, I didn't say the justice system is DEFECTIVE. I said it needs reform. If you think that means I want to let murderers out of jail, you're mistaken. In fact, if we let the non violent drug offenders out, there would be PLENTY of room to keep murderers FOREVER.

excon

---

Hi excon,

Naturally the actual CRIME of alcohol sales ended, that is a given,it was no longer a crime to sell it/distribute it,etc..

Just because there are people who want to 'take away the drug(weed) illegality and there will be no more crime?How is that going to happen?Because sales are going to be legal?Growing it will be legal?Use of it will be legal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBC

No pun witnessed,,I don't get offended by the high(hi) stuff:)

It doesn't take abuse to cause someone to do a crime.

either drugs or alcohol..prescription medications or street drugs.

Use of alcohol,lets say,4 beers,in a 135 lb. female gets behind the wheel.BAC?Probably above the LEGAL limit.(contributes to crimes,,,DUI is considered a crime where I am from)

Use of weed(or drug of choice) in anyone,,heavy user would have higher 'tolerance',but that doesn't make it justifiable,,it is still a crime(DUI,consumption,whatever it can be labeled as in whatever state,is still illegal)

So, no,there doesn't have to be abuse for use to be illegal or a contributor to crimes against man.

---

Well... tell that to the Kennedy Clan... who got their money breaking the law with illegal booze.

Besides... Stoners behind the wheel DO cause many crashes... and deaths every year... just as drunks do. ANd yes... Drunks do and should be arrested when caught. I wish they would extend that to people texting and yapping on their cell phones oblivious to what's going on around them on the highway. Just saw a VW passat rear end a BMW at a stop sign. Both had cell phones up to their left ears when it happened. AND the BMW driver... a young woman put her flashers on and drover off, damaged bumper and all... never put her cell phone down. What an idiot. The other driver was at fault but SHE drove off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

WHy don't you take up Defending NAMBLA.....Its no less deserving than drug addicts are to getting their fix is.


After all.....if they WEREN'T addicts...then why is getting stoned the Foremost item on their minds....hmmmmm... Lot like a Heroin addict...or a crank head...always looking ahead on how to get their next fix.

You know Pedophiles can seem to get over their problem either....perhaps if they make that legal the problem will disappear too.

---

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Clearly, you have something against users and that's okay because it's your opinion. But, to compare them to NAMBLA is out of line. NAMBLA destroys lives before they even begin, the stance you're taking says those children want to be molested, which couldn't be any more wrong, like a pot-head wants to get high. I don't even see where you make the correlation between the two. Explain it to me.

excon's dead-on, you're confusing drug trade with drug use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBC

Since alcohol sales have been made legal,you say that crime has lessened?And you are saying that the jails are fuller in the USA?And that the justice system is defective?

---

First, crime is a relative. If alcohol were illegal, crime syndicates would bootleg and start a whole new market called the alcohol trade, it would be profitable so everyone would want some of the pie, all of which is a crime. On top of that, where there's money there's blood and there would be turf wars and St. Valentine's Day massacres. Drug turf wars constitute for a good chunk of gang violence, and they only exist because drugs are illegal and thus a scarce resource.

And no, this is not a theory, it actually happened during Prohibition.

Second, alcohol doesn't make a rapists and murders, those people have something going on in their brain and will do it sober. There are millions of people out there who can drink themselves stupid and still not commit a crime if you can believe it. It is actually is the sinner and not the sin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBC

No pun witnessed,,I don't get offended by the high(hi) stuff

So, no,there doesn't have to be abuse for use to be illegal or a contributor to crimes against man.

---

I was trying to commit the pun.

It sounded(read) like you meant any use causes crimes. If that same 135# lady has three rumballs at a Christmas party, or one Eggnog, what harm is done?

Forgive me for harping on a small distinction, but there is a large group that claims any use is abuse, some 12 step programs included. That can be true for some addicts; there is no broad brush that covers all of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBC

Naturally the actual CRIME of alcohol sales ended,,that is a given,it was no longer a crime to sell it/distribute it,etc..

---

Hello again, KBC:

You're missing my POINT. I was NOT referring to the SALES of alcohol, as you implied. I was referring, primarily to MURDERS that the mob committed over their "turf". They ENDED. Just like the murders on our borders would END. Just like the war in Columbia and Mexico would END.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slapshot_oi

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Clearly, you have something against users and that's okay because it's your opinion. But, to compare them to NAMBLA is out of line. NAMBLA destroys lives before they even begin, the stance you're taking says those children want to be molested, which couldn't be any more wrong, like a pot-head wants to get high. I don't even see where you make the correlation between the two. Explain it to me.

excon's dead-on, you're confusing drug trade with drug use.


First, crime is a relative. If alcohol were illegal, crime syndicates would bootleg and start a whole new market called the alcohol trade, it would be profitable so everyone would want some of the pie, all of which is a crime. On top of that, where there's money there's blood and there would be turf wars and St. Valentine's Day massacres. Drug turf wars constitute for a good chunk of gang violence, and they only exist because drugs are illegal and thus a scarce resource.

Second, alcohol doesn't make a rapists and murders, those people have something going on in their brain and will do it sober. There are millions of people out there who can drink themselves stupid and still not commit a crime if you can believe it. It is actually is the sinner and not the sin.

---

So... I think we should be allowed to target drug users for assassination... because I feel the law preventing it is wrong.

So we should nullify the law and allow it. Because the net effect will a positive to society. Unlike making it easier for grug users to get their fix of choice.

Try and explain to ANY city dweller NOT addicted to something how THAT is going to NOT make drug related crime worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I knew you wouldn't get it. I thought you'd bring up the moonshiner in the Virginia hills to prove me wrong. That woulda been a better than the drivel you just posted.

Actually, there IS drug use WITHOUT the drug trade. I grow my own marijuana and don't sell any. I smoke ALL of it. It's good too. I just took a hit.

excon

---

Still part of the drug trade... YOu are producing a controlled substance.

No different than a meth head cooking up some crank in their kitchen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, KBC:

You're missing my POINT. I was NOT referring to the SALES of alcohol, as you implied. I was referring, primarily to MURDERS that the mob committed over their "turf". They ENDED. Just like the murders on our borders would END. Just like the war in Columbia and Mexico would END.

excon

---

Hi Ex,

This is the other extreme that doesn't work either. There are still moonshiners, and they do shoot people. Legalizing pot and blow wouldn't end the profits, they would simply be lessened dramatically. Lessened profits = lessened turf = lessened wars? Maybe.

Lessened SWAT Team dog murders for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

So....I think we should be allowed to target drug users for assasination.....because I feel the law preventing it is wrong.

Ignorance can be cured, but you can't fix stupid. -smoothy

---

Scary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Well....tell that to the Kennedy Clan....who got their money breaking the law with illegal booze.

Besides....Stoners behind the wheel DO cause many crashes...and deaths every year....just as drunks do. ANd yes....Drunks do and should be arrested when caught. I wish they would extend that to people texting and yapping on their cell phones oblivious to whats going on around them on the highway. Just saw a VW passat rear end a BMW at a stop sign. Both had cell phones up to their left ears when it happened. AND the BMW driver....a young woman put her flashers on and drover off, damaged bumper and all...never put her cell phone down. What an idiot. The other driver was at fault but SHE drove off.

---

Hi smoothy,

I see we are on the same page here,, it doesn't take a drunk to drink and drive, it takes USE of said products(weather it be drinking or drugs), I am TOTALLY GUILTY of doing this many times in my life,, I just never got pulled over,or killed someone else,or wrecked my vehicle,etc..

Today I am on medications, I am bipolar,I am on medications which the state of Illinois KNOWS I am on,they make sure I AM ON THEIR WATCH LIST(like those they are proposing be put on for PTSD), I have to have doctors(both medical and psychological) OK me for driving a vehicle safely in this state.

Would those who had weed approved submit to this in order to be able to drive?How about those who drink alcohol(of which the premise of prohibition was based on, sort-of, along with government want to control),, The state of Illinois CONTROLS ME!, why not the alcohol users, how would those who are weed smokers, who think they are justified in having their drug of choice put under the microscope?

AIN'T Going to HAPPEN!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thisisit

scary

---

Good example... none-the-less isn't it... and no less ridiculous.

Anything that will increase the levels of drug (or alohol too)use is NOT a good thing.

And yeah... I'd say the same thing about dropping any and all alcohol related laws as well. Really bad Idea.

Losers or addicts feel the NEED to get stoned, high or drunk because they can't deal with life on its terms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Good example...none-the-less isn't it....and no less ridiculous.

Anything that will increase the levels of drug (or alohol too)use is NOT a good thing.

And yeah...I'd say the same thing about dropping any and all alcohol related laws as well. Really bad Idea.

Losers or addicts feel the NEED to get stoned, high or drunk because they can't deal with life on its terms.

---

What about all the people in all those states who use marijuana as a legally prescribed medication? Is there a difference in someone who has a prescription to vicodin and a heroin addict?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Good example...none-the-less isn't it....and no less ridiculous.

Anything that will increase the levels of drug (or alohol too)use is NOT a good thing.

And yeah...I'd say the same thing about dropping any and all alcohol related laws as well. Really bad Idea.

Losers or addicts feel the NEED to get stoned, high or drunk because they can't deal with life on its terms.

---

So you're saying that everything needs a Doctor's supervision? Okay, finish that cup of coffee and we'll deliver these cigarettes to New Jersey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thisisit

Is there a difference in someone who has a prescription to vicodin and a heroin addict?

---

Heroin isn't quite as strong as vicodin.

:)