vicman Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by jroo r u guys really that stupid? i know about the prohibition. what was ur point vic? bootleggers is a cute term for the mafia and crime families. i know all about speak easy's and everything. if the prohibition is ur defense, then all drugs need to stay illegal. alcohol is the most abused drug in the world, and is a major leading cause in premature deaths world wide.what was ur point about the Prohibition Act of 1919 and i agree . . . same thing regarding tobacco. my point was when prohibition was passed, the amount of crimes, crime rates, violence etc. rose sharply and it was reduced sharply after prohibition was ended.maybe a good option would be to make pot legal and tax the hell out of it.btw, dont you think it's kind of a double standard that given all the cancer related deaths that tobacco causes it still remains legal? further more, while the US Government has sued the tobacco companies for billions of dollars for Medicair and Medicaid expenses to treating people with tobacco related cancer, the only reason it does not make it illegal here is because it is a product that is heavily taxed thus brings the goverment billions upon billions of dollars in revenue each and every year?and tobacco is more addictive than booze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by tinybutterfli I know how to use google too I never once said you were stupid, I was just providing you with some information about what Vic said in his post. Your previous post made it sound like you did not know that he was refering to the Prohibition Act. ok, now that we both know that i know what the prohib act was, can someone tell me how vic was using that as an arguement? i dont recall him saying if it were good, or bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by jroo a small amount of personal pot is only a misdeanor. its not that serious of a charge. the man typically goes after the dealers to cut off the supply. different states do different shit. anyway.. yeah. but i don't think a small amount of pot will fuck you up big time. while continuing to go after the high players a personal amount should be OK. they could sell pot in federal government controlled places, much like they do with liqour in some states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revaluation Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 I don't oppose the use of it for medicinal purposes....hell, you can't just buy codine or morphine without a serious problem, so why not regulate pot the same way. But the reality is that I very rarely see that those who would use it the most would be those who are sick. If legal, it would be just another drug, easily obtainable, that would fuck up more people's lives. So I'm against total legalization.The larger point is that those who obtain it and use it responsibly are in little danger of prosecution. If you pay your bills, show up to work on time, don't cheat on your wife, provide for you children, vote, and pay your taxes, then it's hard for me or anyone to say that a little smoke here and a sniff there makes you a bad person.It is usually, and appropriately, the numbnuts who go out all fucked up and endager the public that end up behind bars for "non-violent" drug offenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
layousugar Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 i'll get rammed for this, but i'm going to go out on a limb and say legalize it. and... it's not my job to set the regulations. but i'm sure they'd be way out there. cause it wouldn't be the same as drinking if underage kids did it. there's no 'breathalizer' for pot, and i'm sure they'd be a lot stricter if you were caught with it and underage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by layousugar i'll get rammed for this La la la la. Not gonna say it. Not gonna say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
layousugar Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by revaluation The larger point is that those who obtain it and use it responsibly are in little danger of prosecution. If you pay your bills, show up to work on time, don't cheat on your wife, provide for you children, vote, and pay your taxes, then it's hard for me or anyone to say that a little smoke here and a sniff there makes you a bad person.It is usually, and appropriately, the numbnuts who go out all fucked up and endager the public that end up behind bars for "non-violent" drug offenses. i still completely agree with this though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by vicman and i agree . . . same thing regarding tobacco. my point was when prohibition was passed, the amount of crimes, crime rates, violence etc. rose sharply and it was reduced sharply after prohibition was ended.maybe a good option would be to make pot legal and tax the hell out of it.btw, dont you think it's kind of a double standard that given all the cancer related deaths that tobacco causes it still remains legal? further more, while the US Government has sued the tobacco companies for billions of dollars for Medicair and Medicaid expenses to treating people with tobacco related cancer, the only reason it does not make it illegal here is because it is a product that is heavily taxed thus brings the goverment billions upon billions of dollars in revenue each and every year?and tobacco is more addictive than booze. about tobaco, isnt it more of the chemicals they use on it that makes it addictive and dangerous? i think it should all be banned, fuck it. but with tobaco, users dont really put other people at risk of harm, except by second hand smoke. well, and fires. but, u dont hear of smoking and driving fatalities.i agree with the tax, but that would only help the government pay for all of the programs that would need to be established to help users coup with losing their job, family, etc. drugs arent for everyone, and i dont want to pay more because now more people have access to them. and they cant handle them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kken Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 EVERYONE STFU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lena1279 Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 If they make it legal, then it can be used for medical purposes, so that may be the only advantage. Either way, pot will still be abused by the same people who abuse it now, just like any other legalized drugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by tinybutterfli He's refering to the Prohibition of Alcohol in the 20s. It was illegal during that time. Most people got their alcohol from Canada or bootleggers. That was actually when organized crime (what some would call the "mafia") really got a lot of their power. Al Capone being one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by teriaki That was actually when organized crime (what some would call the "mafia") really got a lot of their power. Al Capone being one. hey fucko R TM, i already said that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by jroo hey fucko R TM, i already said that in so many words or less Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by jroo hey fucko R TM, i already said that Why don't you get a real ™ and ® you no prohibition knowing mofo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinybutterfli Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by jroo hey fucko R TM, i already said that okay, fucko is ***officially*** uncool thanks guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by tinybutterfli okay, fucko is ***officially*** uncool thanks guys! tell me about it. everyone killed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinybutterfli Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by teriaki tell me about it. everyone killed it. well, you were the ring leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by tinybutterfli well, you were the ring leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Anybody ever think that it would actually help reduce crime? I'm going to expand this argument to include more recreational drugs; a large percent of people who die from ODs are people who injest stuff that is not really what they think it is (glaring example being ecstacy, and its look-alikes). Additionally, a lot of the crime is caused, not by actual users, but by dealers and the gang/turf fights between them. Taking out the illegality factor and regualating quality and quantity would greatly assist in reducing drug violence, and deaths related to bad drugs.It would also save a ton of $$, which could then be used to EDUCATE the public about drugs, and rehabilitate users who have gone the path of addiction. I dunno, it IS a tough call....reduce crime, violence, and death due to bad drugs, but increase the risk of addiction, and drug-related accidents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by teriaki Why don't you get a real ™ and ® you no prohibition knowing mofo? hey, assclown ® ™ bite me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinybutterfli Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by teriaki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nautilus60 Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 I say make it legal. Look at Holland - seems like its working there. It should be strictly regulated - something like gun sales. Collect tax money on it and use it to educate, treat people or fight illegal drug trade.Regulation is the key. If its regulated properly - the crime rate will go down. I mean why would people go buy it through illegal channel when they can purchase it at the store. The demand will drop and wont be profitable to sell drugs anymore....or something along those lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by raver_mania Anybody ever think that it would actually help reduce crime? I'm going to expand this argument to include more recreational drugs; a large percent of people who die from ODs are people who injest stuff that is not really what they think it is (glaring example being ecstacy, and its look-alikes). Additionally, a lot of the crime is caused, not by actual users, but by dealers and the gang/turf fights between them. Taking out the illegality factor and regualating quality and quantity would greatly assist in reducing drug violence, and deaths related to bad drugs.It would also save a ton of $$, which could then be used to EDUCATE the public about drugs, and rehabilitate users who have gone the path of addiction. I dunno, it IS a tough call....reduce crime, violence, and death due to bad drugs, but increase the risk of addiction, and drug-related accidents. i'm think along the lines w/ ravermania here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jroo Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 Originally posted by vicman i'm think along the lines w/ ravermania here. i go back and forth. ask me tomorrow and i may argue a different point."reality is a cruch for people who cant handle drugs" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted September 25 Report Share Posted September 25 and i'll expand a bit on the pot issue and also put a clear example of needle exchange laws. it's illegal in this country almost everywher you go to buy needles over the counter, you need a medical prescription for it, so what do IDU's (intravenous drug users) do? clean their works, and a lot of times they do it wrong, which increases the danger of contracting HIV and other diseases. there tons of literature on needle exchange and on how effective it is from practices in other countries (Netherlands especially ~~~> alot of this type of research is from there of course because of the drug related laws and because the health system in the Netherlands is very similar to the health systme in the US, btw) yet needle exchange remains illegal here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.