Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Legalizing Marijuana


  • Please log in to reply
236 replies to this topic

#51 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:30 PM

How is it not? Human trafficking is a great source of money. I cant believe you really expect them to just go legit. Thats realllly close minded.

If it's such a great source of money, why isn't it as pervasive as the drug trade already?

#52 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:33 PM

If it's such a great source of money, why isn't it as pervasive as the drug trade already?


Because you can grow drugs. And its easier to move around. Why spend more work, for the same amount of money? There not that stupid.

#53 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:39 PM

Because you can grow drugs. And its easier to move around. Why spend more work, for the same amount of money? There not that stupid.

So, you're suggesting that kidnapping children is easier than getting a drug trading licence?

#54 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:43 PM

So, you're suggesting that kidnapping children is easier than getting a drug trading licence?


Your expecting the Government to allow anyone to sell drugs? Great control. And, if your suggesting letting the mass public have Crack, or Heroine. Then I'll never support it, but if you suggesting only a select amount, the black market will still be just as strong.

How do you plan on controlling it?

#55 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:11 PM

Your expecting the Government to allow anyone to sell drugs? Great control. And, if your suggesting letting the mass public have Crack, or Heroine. Then I'll never support it, but if you suggesting only a select amount, the black market will still be just as strong.

How do you plan on controlling it?

I know there will still be a black market. I have said this all along.

I'd control it carefully. I have no idea on the specifics of the situation, I'm in no position to know that. I don't see why it isn't possible, though.

#56 turdo

turdo
  • 126 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:36 PM

K i'm done arguing with this guy. He has no valid points. Neither can he prove that any of his claims of drug dealers going into child molestation or whatever are true.

Posted Image

#57 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 08:48 PM

I know there will still be a black market. I have said this all along.

I'd control it carefully. I have no idea on the specifics of the situation, I'm in no position to know that. I don't see why it isn't possible, though.


At what point is it okay to give someone Cocaine? Its only "Medical" Benefit is that for a while you have no strees. It's proven to be extremely harmful. Why would you openly let people have that. Or Heroine?

I can understand weed, because its effects are not as bad as Cocaine, but.... allowing the truly harmful drugs does not make any sense. And, the only way to control drug consumtion when its legal, is to require people to have proof that they can use it, an thusly, the majority that still cant get it, will turn to the drug dealers. That gives you both a huge drug problem, and dealing with legal drugs as well.

#58 jcrboy

jcrboy
  • Oh shit there's a thing here

  • 6,953 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 08:53 PM

Cocaine cures headaches/migraines... that's why it was part of the original Coca-Cola recipe

#59 xZel

xZel
  • 463 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 09:30 PM

At what point is it okay to give someone Cocaine? Its only "Medical" Benefit is that for a while you have no strees. It's proven to be extremely harmful. Why would you openly let people have that. Or Heroine?

I can understand weed, because its effects are not as bad as Cocaine, but.... allowing the truly harmful drugs does not make any sense. And, the only way to control drug consumtion when its legal, is to require people to have proof that they can use it, an thusly, the majority that still cant get it, will turn to the drug dealers. That gives you both a huge drug problem, and dealing with legal drugs as well.


But how is it the government's job to police what you consume. They haven't done that for more than a quarter of the time the U.S. has even existed.

#60 Mr. Hobo

Mr. Hobo
  • 8,152 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 09:39 PM

Cocaine cures headaches/migraines... that's why it was part of the original Coca-Cola recipe


Ya but I doubt a significant amount of people use cocaine for its medical benefits :p

#61 jcrboy

jcrboy
  • Oh shit there's a thing here

  • 6,953 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 August 2009 - 09:46 PM

Ya but I doubt a significant amount of people use cocaine for its medical benefits :p


Devil's advocate, of course... I'd prefer some good old aspirin or acetaminophen... but cocaine is good for migraines... just not my first choice :p

#62 Bryan

Bryan
  • 4,107 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 11:44 PM

I agree with Joe on the subject. As long as there are laws put into place that regulate the use of drugs, there should not be any truly illegal substances. Alcohol is socially acceptable and is legal because of the laws put in place to prevent harm to other human beings. There really isn't anything that you can get charged for if you drink yourself under the table. imo, all substances that can lead to harm if abused should be regulated. I think there should be stricter enforcement on cigarettes in public. I also think that the age of drinking should be lowered, while the age of smoking should be heightened. Cocaine, Meth, Heroin. All that shit is fine to be legal. We have alcoholics right now, people 'addicted' to a controlled substance. Legalizing the substance isn't going to make people go 'Ohh Meth is legal now, I want to try it' (I'm sure it will to some, but this should be a negligible minority). But legalizing it allows the public to more openly view the issues that coincide with the substance, and that in turn is better.

Also, your argument about drug dealers is stupid.
drug is defined as:

a substance used in dyeing or chemical operations b : a substance used as a medication or in the preparation of medication c according to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (1) : a substance recognized in an official pharmacopoeia or formulary (2) : a substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease (3) : a substance other than food intended to affect the structure or function of the body (4) : a substance intended for use as a component of a medicine but not a device or a component, part, or accessory of a device


dealer is :

3 a : sell <deals drugs> b : trade <deal a player to another team>


Therefore, a drug dealer can be construed as any store that sells liquor/salvia/tobacco products. What're the cartels going to do if the can't make money anymore? Probably find another job. I used to sell weed, I made mad money off of it. I can't find a job that makes as much money as I did when I was doing that. I'm also not kidnapping children.

#63 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 12:58 AM

At what point is it okay to give someone Cocaine? Its only "Medical" Benefit is that for a while you have no strees. It's proven to be extremely harmful. Why would you openly let people have that. Or Heroine?

I can understand weed, because its effects are not as bad as Cocaine, but.... allowing the truly harmful drugs does not make any sense. And, the only way to control drug consumtion when its legal, is to require people to have proof that they can use it, an thusly, the majority that still cant get it, will turn to the drug dealers. That gives you both a huge drug problem, and dealing with legal drugs as well.

You've got it backwards.
At what point is it ok for a government to tell you what you can or cannot consume?

(I'll tell you; it's when you lack the mental competence to decide for yourself).

#64 Nick

Nick
  • <img src="http://i29.tinypic.com/9iwl5w.jpg">

  • 6,051 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 04:04 AM

You've got it backwards.
At what point is it ok for a government to tell you what you can or cannot consume?

(I'll tell you; it's when you lack the mental competence to decide for yourself).


Do you consider an addiction as lacking mental competence?

#65 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 05:45 AM

Do you consider an addiction as lacking mental competence?

Duh.

#66 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 07:30 AM

But how is it the government's job to police what you consume. They haven't done that for more than a quarter of the time the U.S. has even existed.


Thats why Joe is suggesting. Controlling the substance. Unless he expects to do it another way then government involvement...

You've got it backwards.
At what point is it ok for a government to tell you what you can or cannot consume?

(I'll tell you; it's when you lack the mental competence to decide for yourself).


Woah. I thought your argument was for government control?

#67 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 12:44 PM

Thats why Joe is suggesting. Controlling the substance. Unless he expects to do it another way then government involvement...

Woah. I thought your argument was for government control?

You're a genuine imbecile, aren't you?
I'm pretty sure I've stated explicitly that control only applies in the case of diminished capacity.

#68 Nick

Nick
  • <img src="http://i29.tinypic.com/9iwl5w.jpg">

  • 6,051 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 05:42 PM

Duh.


I couldn't tell if you were being genuine or just coming up with a "clever" way of calling stupid people, well, stupid.

#69 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 06:25 PM

I'm pretty sure I've stated explicitly that control only applies in the case of diminished capacity.


Where did you state that? Explicitly.

#70 luvsmyncis

luvsmyncis
  • I have no friends.

  • 6,724 posts


Users Awards

Posted 01 September 2009 - 08:32 PM

Cocaine cures headaches/migraines... that's why it was part of the original Coca-Cola recipe


LMAO. OH SHIT. You know how much of that Santa drank?! So THAT'S how he gets all that work done in one night.

First off. I don't smoke pot. I just don't care for it.

I'm a certified pharmacy technician. LSD, Heroin, and (I think) good ol' MJ are CI, meaning there is no accepted medical use. Oddly, Cocaine is a CII drug, meaning it may be legally used as a local anesthetic. (Ritalin is also a CII. It's like cocaine, for kids!) Not that I like seeing people walk around all fucked up, but they're abusing their legal shit already on Codeine, Alprazolam, and whatever else crazy pills. I see people high as kites come in to have their fuckin' Vicodin refilled every. single. day. Why not pot?

I'm sure Cheech Marin agrees with me.


I don't know anything about all that prostitution stuff though. There was no chapter on Kidnapped Sex Slaves in my pharmacology book. :( But I'm sure it's not as fun as smoking pot.

#71 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 September 2009 - 02:43 AM

Where did you state that? Explicitly.

You've got it backwards.
At what point is it ok for a government to tell you what you can or cannot consume?

(I'll tell you; it's when you lack the mental competence to decide for yourself).

Something confusing about that, for you?

I couldn't tell if you were being genuine or just coming up with a "clever" way of calling stupid people, well, stupid.

Nah, stupid people have just as much right to destroy themselves as clever people :p

#72 Ennazus

Ennazus
  • 7 posts

Posted 02 September 2009 - 03:16 AM

Show them your 'rawr' Joe! :D



"I wish you peace!" said Mac the Rabbit. His friends gave him drugs now he can't kick the habit.

Nah, stupid people have just as much right to destroy themselves as clever people :p



There's a quote on bash.org somewhere that says if you just take the safety labels off everything, the problem will solve itself :p

Edited by Ennazus, 02 September 2009 - 03:15 AM.


#73 Ayami

Ayami
  • 268 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 September 2009 - 05:29 AM

Every argument for legalizing weed is illogical or stupid as hell, People who say 'weed' doesn't harm you, friend was a heavy smoker got a bubble in his lungs busted and collapsed his lungs, Its normally only pot smokers that say 'pot isn't harmful' just like every other drug users say other drugs don't hurt them at all, No there just blindly ignoring the truth.




All drugs are stupid.

Edited by Ayami, 02 September 2009 - 05:32 AM.


#74 Sweeney

Sweeney
  • 1,097 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 September 2009 - 06:47 AM

Every argument for legalizing weed is illogical or stupid as hell, People who say 'weed' doesn't harm you, friend was a heavy smoker got a bubble in his lungs busted and collapsed his lungs, Its normally only pot smokers that say 'pot isn't harmful' just like every other drug users say other drugs don't hurt them at all, No there just blindly ignoring the truth.

All drugs are stupid.

Weed is less dangerous than cars.
Your "argument" is fallacious.

#75 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 September 2009 - 08:41 AM

Something confusing about that, for you?


At that point you where talking about when the government can tell you what to do and what not to do. That would be Implying that your previous statements are under that assumption as well. Also, the usage of () makes it further from being an explicit statement.

Weed is less dangerous than cars.
Your "argument" is fallacious.


I dont see anyone getting addicted to cars.

http://archpsyc.ama-...tract/58/10/917

It also increases your heart rate rapidly upon taking the first hit, which gives a high chance for an heart attack in people with medical conditions.(While, on the other hand. We cant use Tasers on people because it kills some people.... Huh)

http://jcp.sagepub.c...42/11_suppl/58S

Including the causes for cancer.

http://cebp.aacrjour...tract/8/12/1071


There are surprisingly little studies on weed, considering that its excepted medically in several states. There are no 5-25 year studies to support the ideal that its perfectly safe, and from what I am seen as the effects of people under it. They have a higher chance to walk infront of a bus...


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users