• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Cannabis

#381
we should take baby steps starting with decriminalization

if we should allow people the choice to use tobacco, consume alcohol, eat whatever food they please, the choice to consume(notice i did not say smoke) cannabis should be there as well

it will also be necessary for advocate groups to become very active in the community in the coming months/years to prove to the general public that cannabis users aren't the people they are thought to be.
 
#382
blackriverstan said:
we should take baby steps starting with decriminalization...
Click to expand...



No, we shouldn't... Decriminalization sends a mixed message of "well, it's okay, but it's not". It keeps it illegal, while simply lowering the penalties for it. It does nothing to get rid of the criminal elements dealing it, and does nothing to keep it out of the hands of children. Decriminalization is a joke IMO. If there is no penalty for simply possessing far more harmful substances like tobacco and booze, then there shouldn't be any for marijuana.
 
#386
Metal Matt said:
No, we shouldn't... Decriminalization sends a mixed message of "well, it's okay, but it's not". It keeps it illegal, while simply lowering the penalties for it. It does nothing to get rid of the criminal elements dealing it, and does nothing to keep it out of the hands of children. Decriminalization is a joke IMO. If there is no penalty for simply possessing far more harmful substances like tobacco and booze, then there shouldn't be any for marijuana.
Click to expand...
To throw out a recently repopularized platitude:

Don't let great be the enemy of good.

In other words, a step in the right direction, is still a step in the right direction even if it's not your end goal.
 
#387
I believe all drugs should be legalized.

Of course they would come with proper warning and instructions on the packets, and would only be available for over 18s, but I think we would be better off for it. At least if you are meth addict, you are getting clean meth that is regulated by government standards.

In my opinion it being legal and educating people on the dangers would work a lot better than just saying "Drugs R bad, don't do them" and the other anti-drug propaganda that you see everywhere nowadays. People will always do drugs, and you will never stamp the problem out entirely, so why not let people do them safely rather than putting them at risk?

I just saw this the other day, a pretty interesting read:

Link Removed
 
#388
Simo98 said:
I believe all drugs should be legalized.

Of course they would come with proper warning and instructions on the packets, and would only be available for over 18s, but I think we would be better off for it. At least if you are meth addict, you are getting clean meth that is regulated by government standards.

In my opinion it being legal and educating people on the dangers would work a lot better than just saying "Drugs R bad, don't do them" and the other anti-drug propaganda that you see everywhere nowadays. People will always do drugs, and you will never stamp the problem out entirely, so why not let people do them safely rather than putting them at risk?

I just saw this the other day, a pretty interesting read:

Link Removed
Click to expand...

This. Please. Sanity, for once. Pretty please.
 
#393
totallyfrozen said:
There's no such thing. I know you didn't come up with that silly idea yourself. You're repeating what someone dumber than you said once. Don't fall for it.

P.S. Not calling you dumb.
Click to expand...
criminal prosecutions for offenses like pot and prostitution create far more victims than legalization.....legal hookers do not fear pimps as they are able to go to the cops.....concentrating police resources on dope dealers means there are fewer cops available when junkies are breaking in to your home....the real silliness comes from those who think that violent crime ,and property crimes are not related to drug prohibition
 
#394
Ziltoid said:
It's not dumb. It's all about the criminalization of deviance, just take homosexuality per example, it was, and probably is in some place, considered as a crime, yet I don't see no victims.
Click to expand...

Right dude. I totally forgot about all the violence that goes on and all the innocent people who are killed every year due to drugs. Even if you legalize, let's say cocaine, do you really think there won't be junkies who might resort to mugging an innocent by-stander for another 15-20 to go help score again? Same with Heroin and a whole slew of other stuff.
 
#395
sloasdaylight said:
Right dude. I totally forgot about all the violence that goes on and all the innocent people who are killed every year due to drugs. Even if you legalize, let's say cocaine, do you really think there won't be junkies who might resort to mugging an innocent by-stander for another 15-20 to go help score again? Same with Heroin and a whole slew of other stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the junkies will be jumping the innocent bystanders whether or not the drugs are legal. If the drugs are legal, at least the government can regulate them and collect sales taxes. As it is right now, that guy's still gonna jump the bystander, and all we have are a big variety of legal costs associated with the drug. This argument is pretty weak. There's a whole lot of conjecture on both sides, and they both have decent points, but this wouldn't be one of them.

BTW, I'm not for legalization of cocaine, heroin and other drugs. I'm just playing devil's advocate.
 
#396
Ubersheist said:
I'm pretty sure that the junkies will be jumping the innocent bystanders whether or not the drugs are legal. If the drugs are legal, at least the government can regulate them and collect sales taxes. As it is right now, that guy's still gonna jump the bystander, and all we have are a big variety of legal costs associated with the drug. This argument is pretty weak. There's a whole lot of conjecture on both sides, and they both have decent points, but this wouldn't be one of them.

BTW, I'm not for legalization of cocaine, heroin and other drugs. I'm just playing devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. I was arguing that the notion that drug use is a "Victimless crime" was false. I don't see how anything you said refutes that. If junkies are still gonna jump people, then are there or are there not still victims of drug use?
 
#397
sloasdaylight said:
I think you missed my point. I was arguing that the notion that drug use is a "Victimless crime" was false. I don't see how anything you said refutes that. If junkies are still gonna jump people, then are there or are there not still victims of drug use?
Click to expand...
junkies rob and steal for money to buy dope...dope is expensive only because the risks involved drive prices up....when the percentage of police resources now focused on drug interdiction is available to combat street crime,our streets will be much safer....i doubt if the cartels in mexico would exist if the potential for profits were not so great.....and those profits are only possible if dope remains illegal

it is said that insanity is defined by repeating the same action and expecting a different result....we have been waging the war on drugs for generations,and though the results of that war have been a disaster we remain on that path....
 
#398
Jim Campbell said:
junkies rob and steal for money to buy dope...dope is expensive only because the risks involved drive prices up....when the percentage of police resources now focused on drug interdiction is available to combat street crime,our streets will be much safer....i doubt if the cartels in mexico would exist if the potential for profits were not so great.....and those profits are only possible if dope remains illegal

it is said that insanity is defined by repeating the same action and expecting a different result....we have been waging the war on drugs for generations,and though the results of that war have been a disaster we remain on that path....
Click to expand...

How exactly does that work?

Do you really think that the price for government dope will be less than that of cartel dope? I don't. Government has oversight groups, purity testing, regulations, has to pay living wages to the people who supply and manufacture it, etc etc. Meanwhile, the Cartels kill/steal/cheat/etc their way to cheap dope. This idea that the Government will be able to provide dope cheaper than the cartels is, to me, asinine.
 
#399
sloasdaylight said:
How exactly does that work?

Do you really think that the price for government dope will be less than that of cartel dope? I don't. Government has oversight groups, purity testing, regulations, has to pay living wages to the people who supply and manufacture it, etc etc. Meanwhile, the Cartels kill/steal/cheat/etc their way to cheap dope. This idea that the Government will be able to provide dope cheaper than the cartels is, to me, asinine.
Click to expand...
so is the distribution of alcohol these days comparable to the prohibition years,when gangsters controlled it.....have you seen anyone blinded by illegal wood alcohol recently.....aside from liquor stores robbed for money to buy drugs,legality has been a success.....it only appears asinine to those whose minds are made up and refuse to look at the real damage drug prohibition has wrought
 
#400
Jim Campbell said:
so is the distribution of alcohol these days comparable to the prohibition years,when gangsters controlled it.....have you seen anyone blinded by illegal wood alcohol recently.....aside from liquor stores robbed for money to buy drugs,legality has been a success.....it only appears asinine to those whose minds are made up and refuse to look at the real damage drug prohibition has wrought
Click to expand...

Prohibition and what's going on now are so completely different it's not even funny. For one, prohibition was a change from the status quo, that did not last very long (33 years) compared to the century or more at least of people running dope into the States. Second, the infrastructure to brew booze in the States was already set up, so that when it was rescinded, the plants could hire people back, start buying the necessary materials again, and get to work. Everything was already in place to start up booze production again after prohibition was over, and while the gangsters were a menace, which they no doubt were, they did not have the history and the infrastructure of their own that the modern day drug cartels have. Legalizing dope and smack and coke isn't going to put the cartels out of business here in the States.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back