Congressman introduces bill to legalize low levels of marijuana

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: bamacre
Look at that video again, of the debates....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6fXpwp1bwQ

Would one of the Obama supporters like to explain to me, exactly, what Obama's actions were immediately following the question?
He was making sure that joint didn't slip out of his left jacket sleeve.

Considering the question it would have been unfortunate timing. ;)

Thanks, TLC, but my question was a serious one.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Currently the laws/penalties differentiate between posession and intent to sell based on volume of the substance.

What would happen if it was legalize for use, illegal to sell?

While I don't think that's sufficient, this is actually the solution that the drug subculture is pushing for. They're afraid that complete legalization (as with alcohol and cigarettes) will lead to corporatization and the destruction of their underground subculture. Making it illegal to use but illegal to sell though would only strengthen that culture.

BTW, this reminds me of something else, slightly off-topic. It's a favorite tactic among drug warriors of accusing anyone on the legalization/decriminalization side as being pot smokers just wanting to get high. The above is why that's not true. Potheads are not looking forward to the day when any adult can stop off at a 7-11 for a pack of tokes.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Ahh, the old "political suicide" defense.

Obama threw his integrity in the garbage because he figured doing so would help him win.

Doesn't sound like "change" to me. Sounds like the same shit America is handed every 4 years. Oh, unless he meant "change" as in "I'll change my stance if it means my poll numbers go up."

But its not his fault, like you said, Vic. I do agree with you.

It's his supporters' fault.

There's a reason Paul didn't the win the nomination, bamacre. The people aren't ready for drastic change like that. OTOH, a journey of 1000 miles begins with 1 step. If you insist on just teleporting that 1000 miles in an instant, you'll never go anywhere.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Vic
The people aren't ready for drastic change like that.

Actually, Vic, almost 40% of Americans support legalizing marijuana.

And, do you not find your statement above rather ironic? You know, considering this election is alllll about "change?"

;)
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
bamacre is a purest idealist, and tends to see things in absolutes, I think.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
One absolute is that drugs are evil so they can never be legalized. Another absolute is that the government has no right to tell you what you can eat drink or smoke. Once you are locked into absolutes all rational dialog ends. Sensible compromise goes out the window.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
BTW, no one cared to answer my question about Obama's actions in the video of that debate. Not surprised. If I were an Obama supporter, I wouldn't want to do so either.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
The argument does hold up. There's no argument that the potency has increased. The argument is whether or not the increase in potency makes it more harmful to users.

http://www.boston.com/news/hea...potency_sparks_debate/

No, it's bullshit. The same drug warrior interests spread the same FUD year after year, and the only thing they change is the dates. There were 'studies' claiming the exact same record THC numbers back when I was a teenager in the 80s. Hell, I remember one claiming 15%+ THC.
The truth is that what these 'studies' do is compare poor quality weed vs. high quality. Both have been available since the 60s, but they misrepresent that the high quality wasn't available then (even though it was).
Hell, anyone really concerned about having high THC content could just turn to hashish (edit: which ranges from 20% up to 40% THC, way more than any super-weed), and that's been around for 1000 years.

As to whether or not the increase in potency makes it more harmful to users, do you support outlawing hard alcohol then? No? Then shut up because it's no different. Potency, all by itself, is only more dangerous with drugs where there is the possibility of accidental overdose. Otherwise, the user just regulates their dosage accordingly, like how beer comes in pints and hard liquor comes in shots.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
bamacre is a purest idealist, and tends to see things in absolutes, I think.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater

Exactly, Barry Goldwater was totally insane. His approach almost lead to nuclear war but good old Ronald Reagan saw the light. He went from an absolutist idiot to a pragmatist when he realized that Gorbachev wanted to off communism and confrontation for real. Conservatives thought he was a traitor till they saw the politics possible with the fall of the Berlin wall. Even today the assholes of the world don't want to negotiate with Iran and North Korea because, you see, they are evil.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
BTW, no one cared to answer my question about Obama's actions in the video of that debate. Not surprised. If I were an Obama supporter, I wouldn't want to do so either.

Vic gave you a perfectly good answer.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Vic
The people aren't ready for drastic change like that.

Actually, Vic, almost 40% of Americans support legalizing marijuana.

And, do you not find your statement above rather ironic? You know, considering this election is alllll about "change?"

;)

Unfortunately, 40% doesn't make for a democratic majority.

And no, I don't, considering I also said that 'a journey of 1000 miles begins with 1 step.'

And as far as I'm concerned, the only thing 'change' meant was that I wouldn't have to vote for a Clinton or a Bush. That's a huge change as far as I'm concerned. Or have you not noticed that Obama toned that down after he won the primaries?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
BTW, no one cared to answer my question about Obama's actions in the video of that debate. Not surprised. If I were an Obama supporter, I wouldn't want to do so either.

Vic gave you a perfectly good answer.

He did? Have a gone blind? :confused:
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I bet you couldn't hold in half a one-hitter of the kronic I smoke. ;)
I thought I detected drug induced delusions in most of your posts.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
bamacre is a purest idealist, and tends to see things in absolutes, I think.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater

Exactly, Barry Goldwater was totally insane. His approach almost lead to nuclear war but good old Ronald Reagan saw the light. He went from an absolutist idiot to a pragmatist when he realized that Gorbachev wanted to off communism and confrontation for real. Conservatives thought he was a traitor till they saw the politics possible with the fall of the Berlin wall. Even today the assholes of the world don't want to negotiate with Iran and North Korea because, you see, they are evil.

The USSR failed because they went broke.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
BTW, no one cared to answer my question about Obama's actions in the video of that debate. Not surprised. If I were an Obama supporter, I wouldn't want to do so either.

Vic gave you a perfectly good answer.

He did? Have I gone blind? :confused:

Don't say you weren't warned. ;)
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
bamacre is a purest idealist, and tends to see things in absolutes, I think.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater

Exactly, Barry Goldwater was totally insane. His approach almost lead to nuclear war but good old Ronald Reagan saw the light. He went from an absolutist idiot to a pragmatist when he realized that Gorbachev wanted to off communism and confrontation for real. Conservatives thought he was a traitor till they saw the politics possible with the fall of the Berlin wall. Even today the assholes of the world don't want to negotiate with Iran and North Korea because, you see, they are evil.

The USSR failed because they went broke.

Are you on drugs? They failed because Soviet Communism was a joke. It didn't work. Far from being the evil empire, they were self critical and knew they had to change. Gorbachev accomplished that, the man of absolute evil.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Vic
Unfortunately, 40% doesn't make for a democratic majority.

Well you're assuming that the other 60%, or actually 11%, would make it a deciding factor in their decision.

Regardless, it doesn't matter.

What we will have to agree on, Vic, is that too much of the American public is too ignorant of the issues to make a valid choice.

What we will have to disagree on is the decision whether or not to follow the sheep.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I bet you couldn't hold in half a one-hitter of the kronic I smoke. ;)
I thought I detected drug induced delusions in most of your posts.
At least I have an excuse for my delusions. What's yours?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Those God damned secular humanists in the USSR and that evil monster Reagan saved the world from a nuclear war the absolutist would have loved. After all we had God on our side and we would have all gone to heaven.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: bamacre
Look at that video again, of the debates....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6fXpwp1bwQ

Would one of the Obama supporters like to explain to me, exactly, what Obama's actions were immediately following the question?

I don't know what you're getting at, just looked to me like he raised his say to indicate his opposition to legalization or he wanted to be recognized so he could speak. Can't tell.

Fern
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
BTW, no one cared to answer my question about Obama's actions in the video of that debate. Not surprised. If I were an Obama supporter, I wouldn't want to do so either.

Vic gave you a perfectly good answer.

He did? Have I gone blind? :confused:

Don't say you weren't warned. ;)

Still not seeing it. *shrug*