Tae Kwon Do wrote: Counterquestion. Why are tobacco and alcohol legal?

Counter-Counterquestion.

When something is illegal, why do people start it, continue to embrace or embellish it and even glorify the act?

I think it should be legalized. I don't smoke pot-but I don't care if you do. Doesn't affect me at all. The problem isn't with conspiracies, or weird taxation policies, in my opinion, it's with societies view of pot in general. What lawmaker is going to stand up for someone's right to smoke pot? That person is therefore deemed as a pothead, or a radical left-wing nutjob and will lose alot of political points in the arena.

As for the cartel comments, in my opinion that's kind of a mute point. You don't need marijuana cartels-you can grow it in your own home. I don't see why a cartel would waste it's time with it. Besides, more innocent women and children will die in this country (please read that statement-THIS COUNTRY) from drunk drivers than drug cartel related deaths. But I don't see anyone clamoring to start up prohibition.

Besides all of that, our current system isn't stopping most people from smoking it. If they want it, they buy and smoke it. And it will be legalized at some point.

Linus wrote: Strato.. people can make meph in their houses too.. yet a lot more people buy it. Hmmm....

reminds me of tom clancys clear and present danger, im reading it right now, its pretty good....for those who dont know it actually breaks from the cold war thing and goes into the columbian drug stuff, its pretty interesting, even though its fiction

Benjichang wrote: Cedric wrote: Jim Paint wrote: Cedric wrote: There aren't many Marijuana cartels. You get that with harder drugs. Like tylenol.  Those tylenol rings get pretty crazy. Dudes get shoot over the non-drowzy stuff. Acetameniphine messes you up hardcore.

there was a girl when i went to middle school who drank a bottle of cough syrup, she ended up in the hospital obviously, i dont remember how long though

then this year in school some kid died from an od on oxycottin

Apu wrote: druidsdecendant wrote: Tae Kwon Do wrote: Counterquestion. Why are tobacco and alcohol legal? Counter-Counterquestion. When something is illegal, why do people start it, continue to embrace or embellish it and even glorify the act? Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong. Mostly in the case of marijuana at least.

If everything about it were "right," it wouldn't be illegal. Since it is, then it's wrong. Let's not mince words here...what you consider 'right,' others won't. And here's the real kick in the pants for you...Laws are written with the intention of protecting society as a whole...not succomb to the whims of a few. Your personal freedoms don't include draining society of it's resources because you'd rather stone yourself into a purple haze than get a job. (not YOU personally, you as in 'the general populace') It doesn't matter what you and I think...it only matters what the government says...and they say it's illegal and if you get caught, _____ happens to you. Period. All the belly-aching in the world isn't going to change it.

Here's another thing to consider...there are way too many people NOW - that are dumb as a brick while running around SOBER...now we should support them when they are dumbed-down even further? No way. I already pay out 28% in taxes to support all the government entitlements...like welfare, food stamps, CHIP (medical stuff like welfare), the estranged-institutional-bound (mental issue), the 500+ lb, obesemonstrosity that can't even get out of bed to urinate, let alone work. You all are not my responsibility. Me and my family are. That's it. I will support the anti-drug laws until my death.

There are way too many goof-off-juveniles that can't behave themselves WITHOUT drugs/narcotics...now give them a reason to be more stupid? I don't think so. There's only one good thing about this whole mess...job security for me.

so take your chances then...but then don't cry about it when you do. (not you trog, "all-you that don't get caught"-you). Remember to blame yourselves too.

I had 4 people arrested at the field for smoking it.

Apu wrote: PlentifulBalls wrote: Is it just me, or does Linus sound like an anti-drug TV commercial? Full of biased propaganda? Yep. And Druid, I suggest you as well stay out of debates that you know nothing about. I'm almost embarassed for you over the straight up rediculousness of your post. But if you would like to continue to spout out your uneducated opinions on a subject you obviously know very little about be my guest, but I can promise you that if you continue to debate me in this subject, you will lose.

yeah that's right...I don't work in a prison or anythng so what would I know?  I don't use them. If I find out my kids did, they'd be kicked out and never to return.

I could out think you in my sleep. My so-called 'uneducated opinions' are the law. There's no debate for this useless topic because your opinions mean **edited**.

IT'S ILLEGAL. YOU WILL BE ARRESTED IF CAUGHT. END OF STORY.

If you think I'm going to be punked by some jerk-off, wannabe druglord/ACLU freedom fighter that supports an illegal act...YOU WILL lose. I hope I get to see any one of you locked in my facility for possession/intent to use/distribute...we'll see how much I 'lose'. You can puff you 'educated theory' all you want. Economics drives the sales based upon supply and demand...pft...I learned that 19 years ago in 9th grade. big deal...nice to see you learned it too. It's too bad your ideals are misplaced.

here's a challenge...use your u83r!337 oratory skills at oral fertilizer distribution and get them to legalize it. Until then, all the bull you spout is pointless. You'll never change my mind no matter how smart you think you are or how much you try to flame me.

EDIT: I just saw that brihard's from Canada...that explains a whole lot...since alot of the seeds/seedbeds come from canadian suppliers, he's only interested in his own country/economic well-being.

Do us all a favor...stay north of the border where your health-care system allows the old to die off for being 'incurably aged'....

Gatyr wrote: druidsdecendant wrote: I had 4 people arrested at the field for smoking it. Am I seeing this correctly? You called the cops on people that were smoking?

yes i did. My code of ethics folows me where ever my badge goes. Since I'm required to carry it at all times, that's where I'm at. You don't have to like it or me. I'm not here to win a popularity contest like some people on this forum. I'm here because I own a tippmann and enjoy the sport...but don't commit an illegal act in front of me either...because YOU will lose. I WILL go to court to testify against you...been there, done that and will continue as long as humanly possible.

druidsdecendant wrote: yeah that's right...I don't work in a prison or anythng so what would I know?  I don't use them. If I find out my kids did, they'd be kicked out and never to return.

I could out think you in my sleep. My so-called 'uneducated opinions' are the law. There's no debate for this useless topic because your opinions mean **edited**.

Apparently you have proved you cant, because based on your skewed view of canadians, your inability to accept anything you think is wrong, and various other points of ignorance shown in this thread, you can only spout off what your superiors say you should think.

IT'S ILLEGAL. YOU WILL BE ARRESTED IF CAUGHT. END OF STORY.

No, not really. Bunkered can back me up on this, because he gave me some useful insight to this one night in chat, but he and I have both either been a part of or witnessed(respectively(maybe, cant remember what happened on his part)) someone getting caught with the substance, and not be arrested.It has happened to a fellow screw fan and friend of mine here in houston, and it has happened around him as well.

So, regardless of what was done wrong on the officers part, or what you may have done in their place, they didnt get arrested, and you are WRONG.

If you think I'm going to be punked by some jerk-off, wannabe druglord/ACLU freedom fighter that supports an illegal act...YOU WILL lose. I hope I get to see any one of you locked in my facility for possession/intent to use/distribute...we'll see how much I 'lose'. You can puff you 'educated theory' all you want. Economics drives the sales based upon supply and demand...pft...I learned that 19 years ago in 9th grade. big deal...nice to see you learned it too. It's too bad your ideals are misplaced.

And its to bad you dont think for yourself.

here's a challenge...use your u83r!337 oratory skills at oral fertilizer distribution and get them to legalize it. Until then, all the bull you spout is pointless. You'll never change my mind no matter how smart you think you are or how much you try to flame me.

So no matter what the medicinal uses it has, no matter how beneficial it may be for users, and no matter what anyone says, it will be morally wrong, and is such because it is illegal?

If that is the case, then I reply to you with the ever prevalent

"..."

Because that is what goes on in my mind when someone is so blindly ignorant to what is presented to them.  

EDIT: I just saw that brihard's from Canada...that explains a whole lot...since alot of the seeds/seedbeds come from canadian suppliers, he's only interested in his own country/economic well-being. Do us all a favor...stay north of the border where your health-care system allows the old to die off for being 'incurably aged'....

hmmm.

druidsdecendant wrote: yes i did. My code of ethics folows me where ever my badge goes. Since I'm required to carry it at all times, that's where I'm at. You don't have to like it or me. I'm not here to win a popularity contest like some people on this forum. I'm here because I own a tippmann and enjoy the sport...but don't commit an illegal act in front of me either...because YOU will lose. I WILL go to court to testify against you...been there, done that and will continue as long as humanly possible.

Oh so you are a cop. That makes a WHOLE LOT of sense....seeing as how most cops are blindly ignorant about the morality of such things and would rather beat someone down and imprison them than think about something logically.

Do us all a favor, and leave. Unless you can stick to topics that doesnt involve thinking or accepting what other people might think.

(maybe that makes you realize the lack of credibility an argument has when you choose to group someone with something much larger than themselves, i.e. stereotype)

-------------

Druid: I will not flame you; I do not descend to the level of attacking another's character, beliefs, or nationality. I leave that to those less capable of articulating an argument than I am. Reasoning, rationality, and common sense remain true regardless of their country of origin, so long as they're properly adapted to the current context.

I have never used any illegal drugs. I never will. I have no interest in them personally whatsoever. I discourage my friends and acquaintances from doing so. I do not smoke, either, I drink occasionally, rarely do I get drunk. The thought of using drugs frankly frightens me; I do not like the thought of not being in control of myself. Given that I occasionally indulge in alcohol this may seem hypocrisy; so be it- I do drink responsibly, for what it's worth, and I will admit that I am subject to certain social biases...I believe drugs are 'wrong' or 'bad', but I will not allow that prejudice to overrule reason.

My career ambition is to be a law enforcement officer. As such, I WILL uphold the laws as necessary. Currently I'm a university student on the way to a degree in criminology. I have some basis for what I argue. Incidentally, as was already mentioned by another I am also a serving member of the Canadian Forces army reserves- as if my sheer lack of interest weren't enough, you wouldn't find me touching the stuff anyway out of sheer devotion to my duty.

You make several fallacious statements.

First, you allege that people would drive chemical trucks high on drugs, as if there were no debilitating substances already legally allowed and regulated. You, sir, with your professional experience ought to know better- Alcohol is legal in and of itself, subject to certain age restrictions, but strict lines are drawn with regards to the responsible use thereof. Alcohol is no different in essence from driving a vehicle, or using a firearm, in taht it must at all times be done responsibly and safely, and there are potentially serious health, safety and legal ramifications if one does not. My position is basd on a foundation of assumption that the average human being is a rational and reasoning person, capable, by and large, of making their own autonomous decisions with regards to their personal safety.

Second, you argue that The Law Is The Law. While I'm all for rule of law, you discount the concept of evolutionary nature of law itself. Judicial supremacy of the legal system coupled with case law and principles of stare decisis ensure that as society evolves, laws change to suit it. This allowed blacks to sit wherever they wanted to on the bus, for women to vote, for homosexuals to marry in some jurisdictions, for a woman to use lethal force in self defense in an otherwise ambiguous situation. Social progress is dependant upon an evolutionary system of law that takes into account the shedding of cultural inhibitions in the face of objective reality.

Your strictly authoritatian standpoint has no basis in reality. Yes, in the context of your work in prison it's necessary- you MUST maintain ABSOLUTE authority over the inmates, subject only to the guaranteed protection of the human rights they retain. But in the outside world in hypothetical situations your approach has no merit whatsoever.

Without questioning the law, change is never accomplished. A law is not right merely because it is the law- that kind of thinking has supported totalitarian and dictatorial regimes for millennia. Witness fundamentalist Islamic Shari'ah law for an idea of what a stagnant law system accomplishes.

Law is supposed to be a codification of justice. If there is no judicial merit to a law, it has no place in the books. For a government to restrict anything must be weighed with the gravest of concern, for expansion of governmental authority and control must always be viewed with suspicion. The corollary is that any law that no longer demonstrates efficiency or worth must be abandoned and stricken from the books.

Current drug laws DO NOT WORK. The war on drugs is being lost, profits are being amassed by the cartels, and people like you are being grossly overworked for the predominance of people in prison whose only infraction was indulging in a chemical different only in its actual makeup from other legal ones with similar debilitating effects.

I do not advocate the excusal of those who break current trafficking laws. The law does have to be enforced so long as it is in power, however the law must also adapt to changing conditions. By and large a lot of drugs and being concretely shown to have no worse an effect than alcohol, tobacco, or other legal chemicals.

Every law must have a strict moral founding, and that morality can only be derived from a strictly utilitarian standpoint. I'm not interested in biblical justifications against various laws, nor am I interested in your personal beliefs of right and wrong. I want to know what solution will have a CONCRETE POSITIVE IMPACT on whatever situations are deemed largely undesirable. As it stands, a great many people no longer see the mere use of drugs as inherently wrong- as they shouldn't! Who are we to tell others what they may and may not do so long as others are not unnecessarily harmed?

The only harm that results from drugs in excess of any other human activity is from the criminal activity that supports the economy of drugs, and that activity is only criminal because legislative inertia has always kept it that way. Progressive legislation would legitimize and regulate what is merely a business to those involved, and allow them to conduct that business legally and without harming others. The criminals would have no more incentive to commit crime.

So I ask you; as one whose career revolves around the enforcement of the law, would you rather see people caught for violating the law, or rather see them not violate it in the first place? If the former, I regard you as dangerously zealous and unprofessional. If the latter, you perhaps need to think over your position and apply some logic independent of your blind faith in a static system of law.