[Catsmine]

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

Then from the perspective of history you should favor the legalization of marijuana, since the analogous experience with alcohol would indicate a decrease in pot use if it became legal.

Mind you, I am not discussing any other drugs than marijuana. Lumping all illegal drugs together is great for Ex and Smoothy to make blanket statements with but doesn't, won't and hasn't made sense since Anthony Volstead had a bad reaction to cocaine flavored snake oil.

[KBC]

Are there still drunks? Yes, and more than before Prohibition but not as many (as a percentage of population) as there were during.

Now I have to go dig out those numbers before Ken and Smoothy ask.

Yes,please.

[excon]

Mind you, I am not discussing any other drugs than marijuana. Lumping all illegal drugs together is great for Ex and Smoothy to make blanket statements with but doesn't, won't and hasn't made sense since Anthony Volstead had a bad reaction to cocaine flavored snake oil.

Hello again, Cats:

If you believe that prohibition is the problem, then it makes all kinds of sense. This is a good time, though, to have that part of the conversation.

If your reasoning for banning harder drugs is that they really ARE as dangerous as advertised, then I understand, and agree. Nobody here, especially not me, has ever said that drugs are good, that they should be available to children, and that they're not dangerous. Hard drugs ARE as dangerous as they say.

But, they're not so dangerous to US, as a society, as in a drug addict is compelled to rob, rape and pillage because he got high. IF they DO rob to get high, that's a function of prohibition - not addiction. Don't believe that? How come alcoholics don't rob? In fact, I suggest that if drugs were CHEAP, and available at your local 7/Eleven, like booze is, nobody would rob to get them. Ok, some would. Like some steal beer today. But, THAT isn't what I'm talking about.

Drugs, and their administration should be HEALTH matter and not a criminal one. Therefore, concomitantly to legalization, we must offer treatment on demand.

If we did that, I believe we'd (1) REDUCE drug use, (2) empty the jails of people who shouldn't be there, leaving plenty of room for those who should, (3) end the horrendous activities of our cops as depicted in the video above, and restore our Constitution, (4) end the wars in Columbia, Mexico, and maybe Afghanistan, (5) and let our law enforcement go back to solving REAL crime. Oh, yeah - we'd save jillions and jillions of $$$'s too.

I say REDUCE drug use above, because I don't know anybody chomping at the bit to try drugs. Do you know some? I think that everybody who wants to use drugs, ARE using drugs. Ok, there'll be some. However, with treatment on demand, I suggest there will be a net reduction - not an increase... But, we're not going to wipe out drug addiction, just like we're not going wipe out alcoholism. That shouldn't be the job of government anyway.

Ok smoothy, KBC, Cats - let me have it

excon

[smoothy]

Then from the perspective of history you should favor the legalization of marijuana, since the analogous experience with alcohol would indicate a decrease in pot use if it became legal.

Mind you, I am not discussing any other drugs than marijuana. Lumping all illegal drugs together is great for Ex and Smoothy to make blanket statements with but doesn't, won't and hasn't made sense since Anthony Volstead had a bad reaction to cocaine flavored snake oil.

Drugs are drugs... make them as available as cigarettes and use will increase. Make them cheap and use wuill increase...


Nobody has presented one good reason why they HAVE to get stoned... other than to escape reality instead of dealing with reality.

And yes... that applies to drunks too.

And contrary to claims made by stoners... Pot is neither as safe as tap water... nor as benign.

Wait till a stoner kills one of their family when they fail to see a red light or respond fast enough when someone steps into a crosswalk...

[Catsmine]

Ok smoothy, KBC, Cats - lemme have it

excon

Can't. Away from the blanket statements I'm with you all the way on this one.

KBC, Mr. Mcwilliams has pretty definitive numbers on alcohol in that link. Pot is harder to find, but some of Clifford Schaeffer's research should help: Basic Facts About the War on Drugs

Edit: Smoothy, the blanket statements about "use will increase" needs some backup.

[KBC]

Ok smoothy, KBC, Cats - lemme have it

excon

Egads,I haven't had time to rehash the older threads yet, gimmie time,I'll get to this one eventually:p

[Synnen]

Smoothy--

Seriously--How many POT related accidents have you EVER heard about?

Harder drugs, yes. I've heard of meth addicts and crackheads that have done some pretty ludicrous things because they were high.

I seriously have NEVER heard of someone killing his family because he was smoking pot. Really--NEVER.

I hear about drunks killing people all the time, because they're operating machinery while inebriated. I don't even KNOW a pothead who even thinks about driving or going to work while altered.

Wait--I take that back. I used to go into my horrid McDonald's job high as a kite. Of course, the worst thing I could have done was goof up someone's order (I NEVER was high when working the grill; only when working the register).

I think you truly do not get that for every single ABUSER of drugs and alcohol, there are MILLIONS that just USE the drugs/alcohol.

There's nothing wrong with having a drink or passing a joint when you're sitting around at home, watching the game.

So... are you proposing that we go back to prohibition? Let's make MORE problems for law enforcement by making alcohol use illegal, too, since it's so dangerous?

Again, the cheapness will make the use increase for about a year--Maybe two. We actually have models to base this on, with both England and the Netherlands legalizing drugs and making TREATMENT available without stigma.

I don't HAVE to have a drink, you know. I just occasionally enjoy one. Do you never just have a beer while watching the game, or do you condemn your friends that go home and have a beer in the evening after work, sitting on their deck?

I'm at work, so am blocked from 99% of the sites out there that would give statistics on this. But honestly--I cannot imagine that it could get WORSE if we legalized pot and taxed it.

[KBC]

Or should we make alcohol illegal too?

I am for that, but it won't happen again,prohibition only brought out the true humans in all of us.

What about cigarettes? Someone's child dies from tobacco every day! Let's make THAT illegal, too, but hold responsible all those people who want it to stay legal (including me).

They are striving for this as we speak.

Frankly, you've been hanging around different stoners than I have, Smoothy...
I have also NEVER seen someone violent on marijuana. Ever.

I'm not sure you have been around too many people then,, in MY world,I have not only witnessed the fights while high, I have been the perp in many of them, what do you think drug wars are called drug wars for?

and frankly--nope. I don't really know any stoners that drive.

I am not sure you have any friends or relations who use drugs then, sorry to be so blunt,, but I and ALL my drug friends(Yes,even those in recovery) will readily admit to driving while high,, or on whatever drug of choice they were on.Do you really think I wouldn't smoke a joint with my dealer before I bought it?

PS--I'm a member of NORML, and haven't smoked pot in over 10 years.

I haven't smoked pot in many many years,, that doesn't mean I forgot what the culture did, and still does? Do you?

[excon]

Nobody has presented one good reason why they HAVE to get stoned...other than to escape reality instead of dealing with reality.

And yes.....that applies to drunks too.

And contrary to claims made by stoners.....Pot is neither as safe as tap water...nor as benign.

Hello again, smoothy:

They don't HAVE to get stoned... But, in a FREE society, which I THINK the tea partiers support, people should have that right.

Do you even read what I write?? Are we back to the "I said - no you didn't" STUPID fourth grade crap?? I'm the only stoner here making claims. This is the claim I made just above.

Nobody here, especially not me, has ever said that drugs are good, that they should be available to children, and that they're not dangerous.

I'd really RATHER keep the conversation on the subject instead of YOU. PLEASE help me do that.

excon

[Catsmine]

Thanks for the clue, Synnen. Here's some numbers regarding drug use in the Netherlands:
Worldandnation: Marijuana loses its appeal in Dutch 'coffee shop' culture

[KBC]

Yea I know a lot of people who smoke. Including my parents. Who happen to make a 6 figure income each, and are well respected in their community.

I would be willing to bet the farm if the community were to know that your parents smoke weed,the community would have a much different perspective of them, namely,they wouldn't be considered 'pillars' of the community any longer.

. Oh and you, the stats for drunk driving accidents ARE much higher than accidents reported from stoned (on pot) people.

This is only a stat, the reports are for driving while intoxicated, which could mean anything from alcohol to cocaine.

[smoothy]

Smoothy--

Seriously--How many POT related accidents have you EVER heard about?

Harder drugs, yes. I've heard of meth addicts and crackheads that have done some pretty ludicrous things because they were high.

I seriously have NEVER heard of someone killing his family because he was smoking pot. Really--NEVER.

I hear about drunks killing people all the time, because they're operating machinery while inebriated. I don't even KNOW a pothead who even thinks about driving or going to work while altered.

Wait--I take that back. I used to go into my horrid McDonald's job high as a kite. Of course, the worst thing I could have done was goof up someone's order (I NEVER was high when working the grill; only when working the register).

I think you truly do not get that for every single ABUSER of drugs and alcohol, there are MILLIONS that just USE the drugs/alcohol.

There's nothing wrong with having a drink or passing a joint when you're sitting around at home, watching the game.

So...are you proposing that we go back to prohibition? Let's make MORE problems for law enforcement by making alcohol use illegal, too, since it's so dangerous?

Again, the cheapness will make the use increase for about a year--Maybe two. We actually have models to base this on, with both England and the Netherlands legalizing drugs and making TREATMENT available without stigma.

I don't HAVE to have a drink, you know. I just occasionally enjoy one. Do you never just have a beer while watching the game, or do you condemn your friends that go home and have a beer in the evening after work, sitting on their deck?

I'm at work, so am blocked from 99% of the sites out there that would give statistics on this. But honestly--I cannot imagine that it could get WORSE if we legalized pot and taxed it.

Actually... a LOT. There are several Dozen serious accidents in the DC Metro area where DUI's are issued for reasons other than Alcohol that actually make the local news. If you live in or near a large city... ask a cop that's been on the force a long time. They will tell you.

Big difference between having a beer, and having a couple six packs. Nothing wrong with having a beer or two... but something VERY wrong with drinking half a case or more a night.

And alcohol clears your system a lot quicker than pot does, THAT is a big factor as well. Smoke it one night... its still in your system effecting you the next day... unlike a beer or two. Unless you get passing out drunk.

Make it legal and Tax it? THAt will work every bit as good if they decided to tax peoples gardens as if they purchaced that produce in the store. Meaning it would not work at all.

[KBC]

Obviously, I've been playing catch-up.

I would just like to say that my cigarettes (cloves) were made illegal this year. I LIKE my cigarettes. I now buy them from India, get them mailed to me, and pay less than 1/3 I used to pay at the tobacco shop. Would I still want them at the tobacco shop? HELL YES!! Waiting for customs once a month when I'm out of smokes sucks, because then i'm smoking the crappy non-flavored cigarettes. (yes, by the way, I am a smoking addict. See Dennis Leary's "No Cure for Cancer").

I'm not paying those taxes anymore. It freaking ROCKS. But--it's not illegal to BUY the flavored cigarettes, or to smoke them. Just illegal to sell them. So--I'm breaking no laws, but the ONLY people getting hurt by this are 1. the tobacco sellers in my state that have lost my business and 2. the people who would use my "sin-tax" on those smokes to do goody-goody things like build a stadium I can't smoke in. I don't feel bad for those people.

What's my point? My point is that I'm still gonna use my drug of choice: cigarettes. If I have to, I'll drive up to Canada and smuggle them in. And it's gotten VERY lucrative to have those smokes now that people can't buy them just anywhere. If they REALLY want one, people have been known to give me $5.00 for ONE cigarette.

Now look at drugs the EXACT same way. If people who want them can't get them relatively CHEAPLY and SAFELY from a store, they're going to get them anyway--it just might not be as cheap or as safe to do so. So...who's hurt by that? Well, the taxpayers! THINK of the money we could be making if we 1. Stop trying to fund the war on drugs and 2. tax the HELL out of them all and make them easy to get.

That will make it less seductive to those that start just to be rebels. It will also mean that it's no big deal. There would probably be a year or so where sales would SKYROCKET because of the novelty---then they'd drop, because people just wouldn't care anymore.

Imagine how many people you know that are addicted to their morning coffee! I know more people (including myself!) that can't FUNCTION without coffee in the morning. And yet--that's not regulated! Millions of addicts across the US! Then add in those people that just LIKE coffee, but don't NEED it! Millions more! Now make coffee illegal. Frankly, I'd probably KILL someone for a pound of good coffee if I couldn't just get it whenever I wanted.

My point: just because it's legal/illegal doesn't make a substance bad. The actions of the person using it make the person bad, not the substance bad.

So I can gather from this whole post that in the last sentence,you consider yourself a bad person.Buying a product which is not legal.Not having to pay taxes.

This is the same moral fiber missing during prohibition,the breaking down of society, just on a personal scale.

[Synnen]

Actually......a LOT. There are several Dozen serious accidents in the DC Metro area where DUI's are issued for reasons other than Alcohol that actually make the local news. If you live in or near a large city....ask a cop thats been on the force a long time. They will tell you.

Big difference between having a beer, and having a couple six packs.

And alcohol clears your sytem a lot quicker than pot does.

Make it legal and Tax it? THAt will work every bit as good if they decided to tax peoples gardens as if they purchaced that produce in the store. Meaning it would not work at all.

Yup. How many of those accidents are POT? Not coke, not meth, not heroin, nor any OTHER drug. Now how does that compare to alcohol overall?

Big difference between having a joint and doing absolutely nothing but smoking pot all day. There's also a HUGE difference between pot and, say, crystal meth.

And yeah--because it's still cheaper to brew your own booze too--and people EVERYWHERE are doing that to avoid the taxes. If you can get better for easier, then people will buy---which is what my point was about cigarettes. Yeah, I can grow my own tobacco, but it's a LOT easier, and I get a LOT better quality by just buying it.

And KBC--yup, they smoke with the dealer before buying. They're not stupid people. They also hang out for a while afterwards (like--a few hours) to sober up, or they manage to find another way (like walking, busing, or biking) than driving to get home.

[smoothy]

I would be willing to bet the farm if the community were to know that your parents smoke weed,the community would have a much different perspective of them,,namely,they wouldn't be considered 'pillars' of the community any longer.



This is only a stat,,the reports are for driving while intoxicated,,which could mean anything from alcohol to cocaine.

If a breatholizer (that checks for alcohol) is clean... how often to they run a full blood test? Certainly NOT as often as they check for alcohol, and certainly not every time. I've been through many sobriety checkpoints... not once have I ever had blood taken to check for drug use.

Many drug related accidents go undetected because there is NOT 100% blood test screening of involved operators, only when drugs are found by the responding police or clearly irratic behaviour indicates it.

[Catsmine]

If a breatholizer (that checks for alcohol) is clean....how often to they run a full blood test?

In cases of accidents with injuries, in Carolina it's every single time.

[KBC]

But, they're not so dangerous to US, as a society, as in a drug addict is compelled to rob, rape and pillage because he got high. IF they DO rob to get high, that's a function of prohibition - not addiction.

I don't understand that comment at all.. My addiction needed fed so I robbed,it wasn't prohibition that made me need to rob,it was my need to use.

Don't believe that? How come alcoholics don't rob?

I stole a lot in my past, especially beer from beer trucks, alcoholics/drug addicts,any one of the people using drugs who have a need to fill will rob,steal,cheat,con,pilfer,etc...

Drugs, and their administration should be HEALTH matter and not a criminal one.

In the link provided earlier about prohibition this was exactly what they did, doctors began to prescribe alcohol for medical treatments, and look where that went.

If we did that, I believe we'd (1) REDUCE drug use, (2) empty the jails of people who shouldn't be there, leaving plenty of room for those who should, (3) end the horrendous activities of our cops as depicted in the video above, and restore our Constitution, (4) end the wars in Columbia, Mexico, and maybe Afghanistan, (5) and let our law enforcement go back to solving REAL crime. Oh, yeah - we'd save jillions and jillions of $$$'s too.

All that just for stopping weed from being illegal?Somehow I don't think society feels the same way.

I say REDUCE drug use above, because I don't know anybody chomping at the bit to try drugs. Do you know some?

YES,ME!

I think that everybody who wants to use drugs, ARE using drugs.

Not even a concept a clear head would come up with, how do you think people begin using to begin with,, this statement is saying that there will be no more users beyond those using right now,, really?

Did I let you have it? :D

[excon]

Hello again,

If I wasn't clear before, let me be clear NOW. NOBODY is supporting driving while high. Drug USE, is NOT drugging and DRIVING. They are NOT the same thing.

I don't know how to make it plainer than that. I support the right of a person to get high in the privacy of his own home. I do NOT support his getting into a car.

Can we stay on point?

excon

[KBC]

Can't. Away from the blanket statements I'm with you all the way on this one.

KBC, Mr. Mcwilliams has pretty definitive numbers on alcohol in that link. Pot is harder to find, but some of Clifford Schaeffer's research should help: Basic Facts About the War on Drugs

Edit: Smoothy, the blanket statements about "use will increase" needs some backup.

I can't seem to find any numbers on that link, where are they?

[Catsmine]

I can't seem to find any numbers on that link,,where are they?

My post #150 has better. Schaeffer does ask you do infer a lot.