utulsa.edu/collegian/article … ticle=2418
I like the economic POV of this “problem.”
Kids in particular are much better educated about the adverse effects of alcohol and tabacky BECAUSE they are legal. Perhaps maryjane needs a bit of demystification too (in the US).
If they can ban pot, why can’t they do something about hip-hop paraphenalia? I hate that.
I personally favor the decriminalization, legalization and taxation of marijuana in the USA.
I also recommend this same policy for all currently illegal substances, excepting bio-toxins and chemical warfare items, in the USA.
Let Darwin thin the herd.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]I personally favor the decriminalization, legalization and taxation of marijuana in the USA.
I also recommend this same policy for all currently illegal substances, excepting bio-toxins and chemical warfare items, in the USA.
Let Darwin thin the herd.[/quote]
Did someone call for me?
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]I personally favor the decriminalization, legalization and taxation of marijuana in the USA.
I also recommend this same policy for all currently illegal substances, excepting bio-toxins and chemical warfare items, in the USA.
Let Darwin thin the herd.[/quote]
If you really believe in Darwinism, perhaps its also best to ban insulin for diabetics and associated equipment / drugs for asthma sufferers. By extending the lives of these obviously genetically inferior humans, we simply weaken the genes of the race as a whole.
Then we can give financial incentives to more successful and intelligent people by providing tax incentives for them to have children. Heck, lets pay them!
As for those 'tards that didn’t get past high school, those that too dumb to educate themselves and too fat to work a labourer’s job…in fact why don’t we increase that list to all those on some form of social / disability welfare, and make it a condition of their dependence that they don’t pass on their genes. (We could have them ‘fixed’ like pets for breaking the rules, along with felons).
Pretty soon we’ll have the master race you’re looking for TainanCowboy. Of course it all starts with National Identity Cards and someone who clearly falls into the second category for a President.
Could it be argued that it is only through evolution that humans have developed the capacity to create these drugs, and therefore insulin etc use still fits into the Darwinian model?
The older I get the more I think its better to keep pot illegal. But it’s also time people started to learn facts about it.
I don’t care what ‘researchers’ say. I only listen to what actual pot smokers say about it. To say it isn’t addictive is to have no understanding of long term heavy use.
[quote=“Tyc00n”]As for those 'tards that didn’t get past high school, those that too dumb to educate themselves and too fat to work a labourer’s job…in fact why don’t we increase that list to all those on some form of social / disability welfare, and make it a condition of their dependence that they don’t pass on their genes. (We could have them ‘fixed’ like pets for breaking the rules, along with felons).
[/quote]
The children of worthless people aren’t necessarily the same; they learn a lot of lessons, young, and have stuff to kick against. Successful/productive people aren’t all nice kids from good homes…
edit Oop, T, I can’t read…
[quote=“Tyc00n”]If you really believe in Darwinism, perhaps its also best to ban insulin for diabetics and associated equipment / drugs for asthma sufferers. By extending the lives of these obviously genetically inferior humans, we simply weaken the genes of the race as a whole.[/quote]You are doing a bit of 'projecting here. I simply believe that what are commonly referred to as “recreational drugs” should be decriminalized, legalized and taxed. A certain percentage of people would then engage in the over-indulgence of these now legal substances and kill themselves. And unfortunately probably a few otherwise innocent people as well.
How you can extrapolate this into denial of medical pharmaceuticals is beyond me.
[quote=“Tyc00n”]Then we can give financial incentives to more successful and intelligent people by providing tax incentives for them to have children. Heck, lets pay them![/quote]Already done…its called 'JOBS."
And, by the way, I also believe people should not be allowed to have children unless they have been trained and licensed to care for them. But thats another matter for another thread.
[quote=“Tyc00n”]As for those 'tards that didn’t get past high school, those that too dumb to educate themselves and too fat to work a labourer’s job…in fact why don’t we increase that list to all those on some form of social / disability welfare, and make it a condition of their dependence that they don’t pass on their genes. (We could have them ‘fixed’ like pets for breaking the rules, along with felons).[/quote]Its a “Brave New World” you propose there Tyc00n. Kinda freaky sounding to me.
[quote=“Tyc00n”]Pretty soon we’ll have the master race you’re looking for TainanCowboy. Of course it all starts with National Identity Cards and someone who clearly falls into the second category for a President.[/quote]Not looking for any ‘master race’ there bubba. Again, you’re projecting.
And…oh yeah…Bush is evil…riiiiight… 
Tobacco use is a gateway drug to cannabis use. I have never smoked cannabis because, and only because, I never learned to smoke tobacco.
The main reason why cannabis is expensive is that it is illegal. Smugglers, corrupt officials, dealers and many others all take their cut before the stuff reaches the comsumer.
…
Excellent reference: The National Organisation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (New Zealand)
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party
MildGreens
Stop the Drug War
Dunno about that, Juba.
I never smoked tobacco cigs in my life. OK, I smoked one, and that was enough to inform me that I didn’t want to ever smoke another.
But, as a kid, I smoked pounds and pounds of weed. My gateway was curiosity.
But if you legalise the stuff then all the bad people currently making a fortune from it would have nothing to do all day. They’d start looking for new ways to cause trouble.
Also, alcohol and tobacco are heavily taxed in some countries. They are also smuggled into those countries, or produced illegally**, by people who don’t want to pay the taxes.
** In New Zealand, you can legally distill your own alcohol despite the loss to the government and natural assumption that everyone will turn into alcoholics overnight.
Cannabis is cheaper than alcohol for a similar effect and it hasn’t increased in price since I smoked it 16+years ago. If anything it has become cheaper.
If it was legalized then the taxman would just increase the cost every year as he does with tobacco and alcohol.
Amsterdam
the home of pot
I found it a very nice place to live. Nice that most things are de-criminalized. The coffee shops are civilized. They even have urinals outside for drunks, to piss in instead of on the streets. The cops even have roller skates and say “hi” !
Only annoying thing is the Iranians on every street corner saying
“hey man u need coke, u need coke, i got i got come on man you like, coke coke”
In general Amsterdam does not of seemed to have suffered much with its liberal drug laws.
However just because it seems to work in Amsterdam doesn’t mean it will work everywhere. Also it has now become a drug tourist destination in Europe, but that would probably fade away if everywhere in Europe had the same liberal approach. Personally i don’t indulge in it, i don’t even drink alcohol (rarely anyway) but if other people want to then it should be their free choice (as long as they are adults). None of my business unless they try to steal my TV.
[quote=“TomHill”]The older I get the more I think its better to keep pot illegal. But it’s also time people started to learn facts about it.
Wrong, some people become psychologically dependent on it but that’s not the same as addiction. I admit, for one jonesin’ badly for a hit the distinction makes no difference, but technically it is NOT addictive.
So can coffee, so can tobacco, so can cough syrup, so can spray paint, so can rock & roll. But, it’s absurd to suggest that use of marijuana makes one more likely to use harder drugs. Perhaps those who smoke dope are more likely to smoke crack or whatever than those who don’t, but its purely correlation not causation.
So what. So are CDs, beers, gucci bags, cars, ski trips, or whatever one chooses to spend money on. It’s no ones business but my wife’s how I spend my money. Besides, it’s really not all that expensive. No more than hitting the bars.
It may well be (certainly as much as a beer or a glass of wine may be). But in any event that’s an absurd argument against it. One can argue that myriad substances and activities aren’t answers to ones problems, but they’re perfectly valid, acceptable and enjoyable.
Ok, lets ban jogging, weightlifting, skiing, suntans, excessive use of a computer, and repetitive movements.
Lets ban university study as well. And marriage, childbirth and stable jobs.
No more TV either.
Ok, then don’t smoke it if you don’t like what actual pot smokers have to say about it. But plenty of actual pot smokers are perfectly happy smoking the stuff and would love to see it legalized. As for the adverse affects, I don’t think there can be any doubt that it’s infinitely less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. Would you like to see those banned as well?
Psychological addictions, and physical addictions are nonetheless addictions. One is more serious than the other, that’s all. Pot is addictive. Not as addictive as alcohol or tobacco, for example, but it sure is addictive. If one is psychologically dependent, he/she is addicted.
Nice rebuttals, MT.
The question of ethics or morality is irrelevant from a revenue point of view. I’m talking about federal gov’ts worldwide taxing marijuana. If it became legal the price would drop, quality would rise, and gov’t could tax it at rates of 25% and above easy.
It is evident from any visit to a Western city that marijuana use is far more prevalent than , yet often used in combination with alcohol.
Gov’t should tax it, much like booze & ciggies.
Just think of the variety offered by free & fair trade.
How many years would it take for protectionism to rear it’s ugly head?
“Our herb is better than yours!”.
That’s just a revenue bracket waiting to happen!
On one hand, I don’t care if you do crack. On the other hand, I don’t want a crack house in my neighborhood. I would like to see different regions have different laws about all this stuff, so the crackheads could go live in Washington DC, Mormons would have Utah, and half the states would allow gays.
Just saying the opposite is a nice re-buttal? Hardly.
I fail to see the point of legalizing something just because there are other things that are cheaper and more addictive already on the market. I fail to see how equating pot with TV or coffee or marriage are good rebuttals.
Pot is a drug, addiction or not. it is a narcotic that people take to become counter-productive. It is one of life’s more unnecessary things. And just cos a bunch of addicts want it legal is no argument at all. They don’t know what they want cos they are addicted to pot. Or to getting high, or whatever it is. Take away the pot and they will get high on something else.
Legalizing pot is a move to allow people more freedom to destroy their lives. Why bother with school, if life is all about doing what you want all the time?
I don’t know anyone who gets high on pot to become counter-productive. That’s not why people get high.
Well, so is your MP3 player or your double-latte everyday. In moderation, like anything else, a little pot is no big deal.