I agree, but this has nothing to do with "pining away for intoxicants".
would you like better schools and roads? would you like people to not have to worry about prisoners getting out early because prisons are too full, thanks to nonviolent offenders? would you like courtrooms to not be clogged with useless cases?
ericlp
Diamond Member
- Dec 24, 2000
- 6,133
- 219
- 106
The problem with taxation is most people will grow there own. If it become legal I'd have an order in for some HPS lights and a pair of sun circles.
I don't think most people would buy from other sources avoid the tax.
That's just my guess. Also, I don't think it will be ever legalized.
My opinion is that the church don't like it and with the majority of them they will continue to vote it down........... Don't believe me, walk into 95% of them and ask if your still gonna go to heaven if you take bong hits every Sunday before church ....
I haven't smoked it in a long time... I voted no... Tho, I'd love to see it become legal ... I wonder if old drug charges would drop if the laws were changed?
Death Penalty? I'm all for it. Maybe expand the concept to "Electric Bleachers" and roast a dozen at a time.
US Military Torture? I'm all for it, properly applied, to the right people. Whether we do it or not apparently doesn't deter others ("The Bad Guys") from using it against our people when "captured" (kidnapped,, whatever)
Human rights violations in China? What do you suppose can be done about that? Oh! I know! Maybe a rousing protest song, that'll show 'em !! Quietly assist the dissenters, same as has been going on for decades now. I'm also sure there are folks on this board that would say "What goes on in China is China's people's problem"
Child Slave labor? Well, that's a little grey ... In some places (like some areas of India), children's labor & wages contribute to the overall family welfare. I can't say I'm for having them crawl around the inside of a chemical tank to clean it, but making a rug or tourist fluff is fine with me. Dial in a little on that child slavery thing a little. Stop trying to apply Western culture in places that don't agree with it or want it, unless you are prepared to enforce it by some meaningful action.
"etc" ... ran out of things to ask about but you want answers for them anyway?
Jumping through hoops for people that won't make any effort themselves is a waste of time.
All the users have to do to not end up in court or jail is to not use. It's a passive action (so to speak). If they are doing something that they know can put them in legal jeopardy and they do it anyway, they should be prepared to face the consequences.
Recreational drug use (inc: alcohol, tobacco, caffeine...) is nowhere in the same neighborhood as the other concerns you brought up (except maybe "etc" whatever that was). There are plenty of legal intoxicants, if you want more, then lobby your government representatives.
As far as hurting the mobs / gangs ... they'll still be around, whether pot is legal or not. They're probably making more money on black market gas & tobacco at this point anyway.
There are other things you can do (other than flap your gums / post in forums) that can make a difference. Do you volunteer anywhere? What do you do to make your community better? Start there then work on expanding the circle.
Spending time worrying about whether your intoxicant-of-choice is legal or not is, IMO, a waste of time. No one NEEDS to get high/drunk/intoxicated for recreational purposes.
And you (gunslinger) say I'm self-centered because I don't have my undies in a knot over legal pot?? Go piss up a rope jack, you are the one with the misplaced priorities .
BTW: Got any arguments that are on-topic?
The Establishment you fought against is still in congress getting re-elected no matter how old they get. Those are the ones that need to retire or die off, not the ordinary citizens.
I agree regarding the ugly peripheral laws (like the cash limit reporting and seizure laws) and to some degree, on the loss of freedoms.
Moral judgments are not always a bad thing; the perspective is entirely on where you fall within the scale. The scale is adjusted by culture, right? i.e., Things that are OK here will cost you your head in some other countries/cultures.
So, let's keep it local. Within the USA, we have a system that evolved with the culture to enact and enforce the laws. The current laws are what they are (and I"m sure everyone probably has some "No whistling on Tuesday" stupid law to cite) : There's a method for changing them (like California making medicinal pot legal), or by whatever regional authority, ignoring them (actively electing to not enforce them, like "sanctuary cities").
I remember when Ann Arbor MI decriminalized pot (US$5.00 ticket), and I attended the first "Hash Bash" long, long ago. East Lansing was not much different; people openly walked down the sidewalk with joints, no big deal.
Whining about the law and not doing something about it is patent bullshit. If it matters that much to the person, they should divert some of that energy into doing something about it. Posting on a forum that you don't like the law is not doing something about it; it accomplishes nothing, it's just bullshit.
Do I feel bad for people that got popped with possession? No, I don't. They knew the law and chose to break it. If they made the decision knowing that if they were arrested and charged it would screw up their future, why should I be concerned? We're not talking about some vital need here, we're talking about intoxication.
Certainly as a conservative old fart, I'm in the minority here ... it doesn't mean I"m wrong. And, it doesn't mean I'm against pot (or any other recreational drug). The question was whether pot will be legalized in my lifetime; and I responded "who cares?" because I really don't care one way or the other. With everyone just sitting around whining about the law, it will never be changed.
You bet! Better schools and roads! Put the arrested pot smokers / drug abusers out on a chain gang doing road work, and the ones with degrees can do tutoring in depressed urban areas! Great idea! I'm all for it.
If the cops and court can do their job, then the next step is getting the prison system straightened out. The sheriff out in Arizona doesn't seem to have a problem with his overflow.
Change the law, live with the law, or be prepared for the consequences if you get caught breaking the law.
Fern
Elite Member
- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 173
- 106
Nope, too much money in keeping it illegal.
Go sit in a courtroom sometime with a calculator. All these non-violent type infractions are huge revenue generators for the legal system.
I'd love to see how much gov revenue is generated annually by pot infractions.
Fern
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,030
- 2
- 61
Exactly. This is what I have been saying for years. By keeping it illegal, you just give criminals a product to sell. It makes a lot more sense to take the money away from the drug lords and the street gangs, and put the money into legal business who pay taxes and employ people. Plus, you can regulate it, tax it, and make sure other chemicals are not mixed in with it. And because it would be sold in a legal establishment, it is more difficult for children to get ahold of it. Criminals don't ask for an ID.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
Yes, it makes perfect sense, but "law and order" politicians can't elected without a phony crime wave, and "reform" politicians can't get elected without a budget shortage. In between is public apathy, like that represented in this thread by ScottMac, who would have us believe that the current prohibition is the natural state of things, and why aren't we content with the tiny crumbs of liberty that authority already gives us?
Not apathy, it's just waaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list of things that I'd worry about.
If the "government" sees no interest from the constituent population, it's not going to do anything about it. If the constituents can't get OFF THEIR ASS, STOP WHINING, and do something, why should anyones else care?
Nobody's getting too worked up about the loss of property owner's rights to permit cigarette smoking on their premises. Burning weeds is burning weeds. Ya'll are doing it to yourselves.
Not my apathy. Look in the mirror.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
Who is whining here except you? I find it amusing that you're trying to discourage involvement on this issue while pretending that you are trying to encourage it. It's so transparent it's ridiculous. That's why no one here is falling for it but you.
And I'm anything but apathetic. Among countless other issues, I get "worked up" about the loss of property owner's rights to permit cigarette smoking on their own premises all the time. Sorry I'm doing it in this thread. :roll:
apoppin
Lifer
Yes I guarantee it will be legalized in the US - whether they want it or not
I reminded people on a major growing forum ? about 8 years ago ? that there was a ?movement? to legalize marijuana by cival disobediance back in the 1960s ,, it didn?t ?go anywhere? as the timing was obviously wrong. But now it is changing and I see it happening by reading the news!
If just 100 people would actively OVERGROW the national forests, cannabis will seed itself .. if every garden, every waterway ? every farm ? was sown by cannabis seed from the air ? it will spread itself
And the Blood in this war will be green not red
It is already happening
I voted yes because in some states it's already legal with a prescription.
The internet is also a big factor as it is a huge source of information and once the kids of the internet generation grows up to be politicians, you will start to see change happen.
The internet is also a big factor as it is a huge source of information and once the kids of the internet generation grows up to be politicians, you will start to see change happen.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
- Nov 29, 1999
- 16,408
- 57
- 91
You keep coming back to this, but despite all your holier-than-thou babble, you have yet to defend the idea behind it. It's not about the substance, it's about the idea that government can dictate how you handle your body, even if it has no affect on others.
I tried to untangle the physical item from the underlying principle with a simple analogy or two, but apparently that was way too complicated for you and you decided to use that instead as a springboard for some semi-rant about how you'd like to see more people tortured and killed
No, no one *needs* to get high/drunk/intoxicated for recreational purposes, but then again, no one needs to eat fast food, skydive, watch porn, take vacations, fuck, visit their grandma, pray, eat at restaurants, or any of the billions of things that people like to do for recreation. But according to you, it's perfectly fine for your government to ban all citizens from doing any of the these things, as long as there exists a person who doesn't care about it.
And your claim that the only people who care about such things are obviously pot-heads is also demonstrably bunk.
And you (gunslinger) say I'm self-centered because I don't have my undies in a knot over legal pot?? Go piss up a rope jack, you are the one with the misplaced priorities .
No, you seem self-centered because of the statement you made that things that don't personally affect you should not be cared about by anyone. The rest just made you seem like a 'roided-up, Neanderthal who lacks the ability to discuss issues without embarking upon unasked-for, off-topic rants while beating your virtual chest. *wink*
Possible, I suppose. But when it comes to sin tax, the collective government agencies tend to overdo it. IMO, the outcome would be that the taxes would end up being so high (pardon the expression) that it'd just end up operating through the existing black market (with some people growing their own, as possible).
They'd spend more money collecting the taxes than what they'd get in taxes.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
- Nov 29, 1999
- 16,408
- 57
- 91
Because everyday we hear news stories about gangs violence and murder over Camels, 87-Octane, and 6-packs of Old Milwaukie, right?
OK, fine, I'm the apathetic evil incarnate.
The status quo is that pot has been illegal longer then most, if not all, of us have been alive.
Punishment for simple possession is a wrist-slap in most communities.
It just ain't worth getting excited about.
I'm just responding to people who addressed me directly i most cases.
So you're against the loss of personal property rights related to the smoking bans, cool, good, thanks, have a cookie.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
You keep coming back to this, but despite all your holier-than-thou babble, you have yet to defend the idea behind it. It's not about the substance, it's about the idea that government can dictate how you handle your body, even if it has no affect on others.
I tried to untangle the physical item from the underlying principle with a simple analogy or two, but apparently that was way too complicated for you and you decided to use that instead as a springboard for some semi-rant about how you'd like to see more people tortured and killed
No, no one *needs* to get high/drunk/intoxicated for recreational purposes, but then again, no one needs to eat fast food, skydive, watch porn, take vacations, fuck, visit their grandma, pray, eat at restaurants, or any of the billions of things that people like to do for recreation. But according to you, it's perfectly fine for your government to ban all citizens from doing any of the these things, as long as there exists a person who doesn't care about it.
And your claim that the only people who care about such things are obviously pot-heads is also demonstrably bunk.
And you (gunslinger) say I'm self-centered because I don't have my undies in a knot over legal pot?? Go piss up a rope jack, you are the one with the misplaced priorities .
No, you seem self-centered because of the statement you made that things that don't personally affect you should not be cared about by anyone. And your claim that the only people who care about such things are obviously pot-heads is also demonstrably bunk.
No, no one *needs* to get high/drunk/intoxicated for recreational purposes, but then again, no one needs to eat fast food, skydive, watch porn, take vacations, fuck, visit their grandma, pray, eat at restaurants, or any of the billions of things that people like to do for recreation. But according to you, it's perfectly fine for your government to ban all citizens from doing any of the these things, as long as there exists a person who doesn't care about it.
Excellent point. I agree (not that you'd care). To change the status quo, especially one that has stood for so long, takes more than forum babble.
It's not about the substance
Yes, it is. It's (unfortunately) classified as a narcotic, last time I checked. It's an illegal substance; it has been since what? the thirties?
And your claim that the only people who care about such things are obviously pot-heads is also demonstrably bunk.
OK, demonstrate that it's bunk ... got any good non-pothead references that are actively working to repeal the pot laws in the USA? Why haven't any of the pothead presidents just issued a blank pardon or commuted sentence? Or a governor?
... Neanderthal who lacks the ability to discuss issues without embarking upon unasked-for, off-topic rants while beating your virtual chest. *wink*
From one of your previous posts:
"So do you also have a "who cares" on the death penally, US Military torture, human rights violations in China and elsewhere, child slave labor, etc, all because it doesn't affect you personally?"
You brought up the OT stuff, I responded.
It's all a non-issue.
Not yet, but the year is young. Beer is legal in the vast majority of states & counties. (BTW: "Milwaukee", OK?)
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,030
- 2
- 61
That's just a bunch of BS. People would probably be much more likely to even pay double of what they could on the street, just knowing that's it's pure, and knowing that they will get exactly what they think they are getting. Nothing more, nothing less.
I don't see people buying cigarettes and booze out of some guy's car trunk.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
- Nov 29, 1999
- 16,408
- 57
- 91
I thought the whole point was to discuss what would happen if pot was also legal in most states and counties. This whole concept of 'analogies' really eludes you, doesn't it?
Followed by the sign of the true victor of debate - pointing out typos/spelling mistakes.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter