Political Discussions:Legalization of Marijuana?

[Lt.Col.DaV3]

you guys said a lot of good points..
I say legalization has to come!
- To take what you like means freedom of beeing and that's it what every man should achieve. (As long as you do not disturb s.o. elses freedom)
- There would be lower drug crime because dealing and smuggling wouldn't be that profitable any longer.
- The taxes they make out off it could be used for education or sth. like that.
- Marijuana wouldn't be counted as THE starter drug no more because why is it a starter drug? right! because the dealers you get it from often are dealing with other drugs and offer them to you..
- Clean Weed without any dirt in it like plumb,brix,sugar or bird sand etc. which are the real threat to health
- Hemp in general is a very good agricultural crop, much more economical and resistant than most of the crops grown nowadays

Those are just some points and there are some more..
when you ask me there are no acceptable reasons why weed should not be legalized...alkohol and a whole bunch of other "drugs" are legal, accepted by society and even subsidized by the government since..I don't know how long.

It is an incapaciation by the government to tell a man what he is allowed to do/use with/on himself.
it is like the child-proof locked lighters: fire can burn you when it is used without caution and knowlegde...but when used right it is one source of life...

peace!

[Col.Brandon_ha]

Very well said Dave.

Unfortunately I feel that we have all reached an impasse. Those who have grown up with the indoctrination of racist policies and have accepted these bias "facts" as being gospel can not be convinced otherwise; and those of us who have looked at things objectively can not tow the line because it is morally reprehensible.

[Lt.Col.DaV3]

"No one has ever had the munchies THAT bad."

I laughed my ass off!!

[Col. Communicator]

Good points Dave. I agree with you Dave. Brandon-Really? Racist policies? What are you smoking? Oh wait, WEED ! Who is the government being racist against? The young?, the stoned? Your problem is that you can't see it anyway but your way. You are not open to any LOGICAL debate because you are close minded. Maybe your cognitive senses are being affected by the weed. (Your source said it not mine) You're right we may be at a impasse. But at least I'm open to hearing both sides of the argument and even open to changing my opinion, you my friend are not. Dave made some very good points, At least he's not trying to sell the fact that there are no ill effects from weed. Your own sources confirmed that there were. But you didn't respond to my post using them. These "biased facts" as you call them come from your own Scientific source with no political ties.(That we know of)

[Col.Brandon_ha]

Yea, it is racist, the numbers of people searched in NYC alone proves that. 87% of the stop and frisks in NYC were against spanish or black people. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/fe ... ecord-high

“With an overall marijuana incarceration rate that has doubled since 1991, at last national count in 2007 whites were arrested at 195 per 100,000 while blacks are at 598 per 100,000 for possession of marijuana. In general, youths age15 to 24 made up over half of all possession arrests.

Blacks account for 12% of the population, 14% of annual marijuana users, and 31% of marijuana possession arrests,” the report states. “While these are national survey figures it is unlikely that local variances in the prevalence of marijuana use among blacks and whites account for the tremendous disparities in arrest rates.”"

"Whites in America, just by virtue of their numbers, make up about six times more than the black population and majority of drug users. However, black males were jailed six times more than white males as of 2007, and black men are 11.8 times more likely than white men to be incarcerated for drug use or possession"

http://www.precinctreporter.com/communi ... ng-to-race

"Most of those arrested [for marijuana offenses] today are held for arraignment and can spend 16 to 36 hours in custody before being released, in sharp contrast to the past, when those arrested on low-level possession charges were often given a summons and not taken into custody. … First offenders … are eligible for a probation program known as adjournment contemplating dismissal in which charges are dismissed if a defendant stays out of trouble for a set period of time.… ‘We call that doing your jail time up front,’ said Tony Elitcher, a staff lawyer with the Legal Aid Society’ criminal defense division. ‘You are doing your sentence before you ever get in front of the judge.’"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2561263/

"...Adult African Americans were arrested on drug charges at rates that were 2.8 to 5.5 times as high as those of white adults in every year from 1980 through 2007, the last year for which complete data were available. About one in three of the more than 25.4 million adult drug arrestees during that period was African American.

"Jim Crow may be dead, but the drug war has never been color-blind," said Jamie Fellner, senior counsel with Human Rights Watch's US Program and author of the report. "Although whites and blacks use and sell drugs, the heavy hand of the law is more likely to fall on black shoulders."

The report also says that arrests for drug possession have greatly exceeded arrests for drug sales every year since 1980. Indeed, the proportion of drug arrests for possession has been increasing, amounting to 80 percent or more annually since 1999. Marijuana possession accounts for a large proportion of drug arrests: in the years 2000 through 2007, the proportion of all drug arrests that was for marijuana possession ranged from 37.7 percent to 42.1 percent. The report today is the latest by Human Rights Watch exploring human rights violations, including racial discrimination, in the context of the "war on drugs".

"Hauling hundreds of thousands of people down to the station house each year because they have some weed or a rock of crack cocaine in their pocket has had little impact on drug use," said Fellner. "But the stigma of a drug arrest, especially if followed by a conviction, limits employment, education and housing opportunities. A more effective, less destructive drug policy would prioritize treatment, education, and positive social investments in poor communities over arrest and incarceration.""

http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/03/02/us-d ... kewed-race

[Brig.Gen.X-Mas]

I have been following this thread and it's quite entertaining watching you guys debating about this but I just felt I should contribute with something I came to think of when KittyAmazing mentioned that 4/20 rule.
Catnip has about the same effect on cats that Marijuana has on people. The thing is that after cats have been high on catnip they can't become high on it for some time and you have to wait a couple of weeks or they won't get as high as before, much like what Kitty is doing to prevent that "stepping up"-effect.

I almost forgot why I wanted to write this, because catnip is like marijuana for cats and that's legal then why isn't marijuana also legal?
I should add that it would be unwise to let a cat high on catnip outside but so is it too with people high on marijuana. If you smoke your marijuana at home in peace there can't become any public disorder from it.

If Marijuana becomes legal there could be the same kind of restrictions as with alcohol and tobacco instead of for example with chewing gum like most people think will happen.

[Col. Communicator]

lolol X-MAS...Did you ever see a cat drive when he's high on the nip? It's hysterical. Only problem with that is the same as for alcohol. People make poor decisions especially AFTER they're drunk or high.

[DominusEtDeus]

California, USA here.

I 100% completely support the legalization and decriminalization of Marijuana. It really doesn't make sense to keep alcohol legal but forbid marijuana. Plus marijuana can be taxed!

Eventually marijuana will be legalized, if Washington and Colorado are any indication. I don't personally smoke the stuff, but our laws would be a great deal more consistent if we legalized it.

[Col. Communicator]

Bottom line:

I am not totally against legalizing marijuana. I have some concerns mostly due to the fact that I have 2 small children and I am concerned at how it may effect them in the future. I do believe pot is a stepping stone drug, and if it becomes legal then access to it and exposure to it will be a lot easier. The dealers that supply pot will move on to selling coke, heroin, meth, etc... It's what they do. They don't sell pot out of the goodness of their heart, they sell it for profit. Once the money flow stops they will move onto other things like, cocaine, heroin, meth, etc...I would like to bet that most of the dealers are also getting public assistance at the same time, and that won't change either.(But that's a whole different argument. # posts that really raised my concerns during this debate, yes BRANDON_HA this is a debate.

1)

I almost forgot why I wanted to write this, because catnip is like marijuana for cats and that's legal then why isn't marijuana also legal?
I should add that it would be unwise to let a cat high on catnip outside but so is it too with people high on marijuana. If you smoke your marijuana at home in peace there can't become any public disorder from it.

If Marijuana becomes legal there could be the same kind of restrictions as with alcohol and tobacco instead of for example with chewing gum like most people think will happen.

Really? Comparing cats and catnip to people and pot? LOLOL FUNNY but not comparable by any stretch.

2)

no sir. its called the 4/20 rule. smoke for 20 days, dont smoke for 4, and bam your tolerance stays low. of course i have done some blow before. thats only because i was curious lol. only once.

Really? does this work? And I give you credit for having tried coke only once, but why did you try it? Was it because the "high" from marijuana was so good that you thought the coke "high" would be even better? How many people have "tried coke for the same reasons and either stayed on it or then tried heroin, etc...?

3)

Very well said Dave.
Unfortunately I feel that we have all reached an impasse. Those who have grown up with the indoctrination of racist policies and have accepted these bias "facts" as being gospel can not be convinced otherwise; and those of us who have looked at things objectively can not tow the line because it is morally reprehensible.

Again, racist policies? NO! Racially applied sentences possibly, maybe even probably. Racial profiling by authorities, maybe as well. But what you're implying is that the laws are written just to effect African Americans. That's ridiculous. Your trying to convince me your looking at things objectively but that is not even close to accurate Brandon. You are the closed minded person. I have cited your own sources that supported your argument AND my argument. So what does that say about these sources. They are ALL money driven. They are like the medical examiners in murder cases. The DA hires one that agrees with his theory and the defense hires one that agrees with his theory. In the end the truth is somewhere in the middle.
All this bonding has made me feel all warm and cozy inside. Jeesh, I need a beer. LOLOLOLOLOL

[Col.Brandon_ha]

"I need a beer."

And yet you judge us for how we relax.

"if it becomes legal then access to it and exposure to it will be a lot easier."

If it's legalized it gets sold in a controlled manner, like cigarettes and alcohol, not openly by dealers. You have linked to sources that complain that it is easier for kids to get weed than tobacco or alcohol; well why do you think that is? The tobacco and alcohol have someone checking ID.