Legalizing Marijuana

[devilof76]

When it becomes a matter of either/or, I'll take Prog's lazy economy scenario (which I think is extremely unrealistic) before I accept the one you just described.

Also, where did you come from?

...I heard you were dead...

 

[Star Puffs]

When it becomes a matter of either/or, I'll take Prog's lazy economy scenario (which I think is extremely unrealistic) before I accept the one you just described.

Scenario? My point was that in contrast to his hypothetical destruction of society, actual drug violence has been raging for thirty years, ever since the 'War on Drugs' was launched in America.

Also, where did you come from?
...I heard you were dead...

I've just been very busy. Catwoman and Marion Ravenwood have been the only things I've kept up on.

 

[devilof76]

Prog's is a hypothetical scenario. I know the one you presented is real, and that is the ultimate indictment of the War on Drugs. Nevermind the billions in taxpayer money it has wasted, while simultaneously paying through disability and welfare claims for the social conditions it has engendered. The institutionalized violence that followed on its heels is unforgivable.

 

[ProgMatinee]

of course its a hypothesis.

as for the real world I just can't put myself in a position where I'm thinking, "if only pot was legal America would be a perfect place". that just stinks of hyperbole that someone who's preoccupied with getting high would think.

and is the solution to legalize everything, because if gangs didn't desolve when alchohol was legalized, then they won't desolve when pot is legalized. so the whole "world of violence would end" line is bull.

 

[Deckard]

Whos saying that, not a single person, pot smokers included. Again your taking evey single arguement you make against it to the extreme and its getting desperate/impossible to take you seriously.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Whos saying that, not a single person, pot smokers included. Again your taking evey single arguement you make against it to the extreme and its getting desperate/impossible to take you seriously.

i'm not being any more extreme than the other side claiming that the evils of America all boil down to prohibition. you're only having trouble with my take because you have personal interest in this.

 

[Deckard]

i'm not being any more extreme than the other side claiming that the evils of America all boil down to prohibition. you're only having trouble because you have personal interest in this.

So then you admit your stooping to the level of stupid people that happen to be on my side of the arguement making your side of the arguement stupid.

Its not only prohibition, it plays a minor part, all these things add up however, the hemp export, the taxing, the money saved from not prosecuting and arresting people just for having it. You refuse to see the big picture or cannot do addition.

What am I having trouble with, your lack of reasoning skills? Yep, Im high so I think that if its legal well all live in peace and harmony and no one will ever commit a crime ever again. You got me.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Sorry Deckard, but stooping to name calling to flatter yourself isn't going to make your argument any more valid.

I think both Devilof76 and Star Puffs are very intellegent and I think its sad you just called them stupid in an effort to call me stupid, but whatever.

I'm just stating an opinion, and I'm actually not very emotionally vested in this discussion, where as apparently you are. In that situation anything I say that you may disagree with is going to seem profound to you.

 

[Deckard]

Sorry Deckard, but stooping to name calling to flatter yourself isn't going to make your argument any more valid.

I think both Devilof76 and Star Puffs are very intellegent and I think its sad you just called them stupid in an effort to call me stupid, but whatever.

I'm just stating an opinion, and I'm actually not very emotionally vested in this discussion, where as apparently you are. In that situation anything I say that you may disagree with is going to seem profound to you.

I wasn't referring to them but of course you know best so you win.

 

[ProgMatinee]

geez. no offense, but go mature a little and come back if you want a discussion with the adults.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

There was a study done in 1978 I believe, to see how many high school kids had tried pot. The number was 50%. Now 30 some odd years later the number is at 48%. The war on drugs and just say no, and dare and all that crap just don't work, but just so the anti-pot people can feel better we just keep pouring money down the drain to fight this unwinable war. Money as stated in this very thread we don't have. So I ask you what is the bigger crime, smoking a non-addictive plant or wasting money that can be put towards many number of things to help the infrastructure of this country.

There is not a single person in here that said legalization of pot would solve the worlds problems but there is a valid argument that a lot of money would be earned/saved. The numbers support this.

 

[Deckard]

geez. no offense, but go mature a little and come back if you want a discussion with the adults.

You've done nothing but purposely misinterpret or twist people's arguments to make them seem like extemists or idiots, gimme a break, your tactics are impossible to reason with, far from a mature adult.

 

[ProgMatinee]

saving money in one pocket, but spending money out of the other pocket.

sure we'd save on all the counter activity.

but how much money would be spent on drugs? billions or trillions a year? that money just goes up in smoke too.

 

[Deckard]

How much is already spent on unnecassary presription drugs for people who don't need but feel more mellow on Vicodin or Xanax.

People give theyre cats prozac. This nation has and always will be filled with people abusing drugs, grouping everyone who uses into that categoery is irresponsible.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

no, money doesn't go up in smoke, the pot has to be grown somewhere so land has to be bought. The purchase of the pot itself gets taxed. Distributions centers or Liquor Store type places open up creating jobs. Plants to make paper, rope, clothes, etc, etc open up creating even more jobs. Tell me how money goes up in smoke.

 

[ProgMatinee]

You've done nothing but purposely misinterpret or twist people's arguments to make them seem like extemists or idiots, gimme a break, your tactics are impossible to reason with, far from a mature adult.

i've never quoted anyone in this thread to turn their words around. you're having a problem with my opinion and the fact i don't just bend over and change it doesn't mean I'm being disengenuous.

i've never stated anything as fact. i didn't make up statistics. i've never done anything but admit that i foresee the hypothetical situation. i've also not disagreed with you that my view is extreme.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

If we have to have a "war" on drugs can't we just narrow our targets? MJ is a class 3 drug while cocaine is a class 2. Explain to me how MJ is worse than cocaine.

edit: also tell me how is it that if cocaine is not as bad as MJ then how can MJ be a "gateway" drug. It should be the other way around.

 

[ProgMatinee]

no, money doesn't go up in smoke, the pot has to be grown somewhere so land has to be bought. The purchase of the pot itself gets taxed. Distributions centers or Liquor Store type places open up creating jobs. Plants to make paper, rope, clothes, etc, etc open up creating even more jobs. Tell me how money goes up in smoke.

1)You're proposing a creation of an industry. In itself that does not create "new money". It simply moves money from other industries to it. For example, people who chose to smoke pot must do it at the expense of something else. Maybe thats alcohol or movie tickets, or food, or cars, or baby formula. Something loses money.

2)The land that is proposed for growing will have to come from somewhere. I'm not an expert, but typically the most profitable plants demand the best land. I'm sure pot will be super profitable, so that means land currently being used here in the states for corn, or wheat or other produce will be converted. That means a bigger reliance on outsourced food. Higher food costs, more money leaving the country.

3)True new money is created when America exports goods to other countries. Will other countries be interested/able to buy American pot? Probably not unless other countries legalize.

To me, the legalization of pot just moves money from productive industries to non productive industry. If people can't afford to spend money on legal stuff today, where are they going to get money to spend on pot?

 

[Deckard]

i've never quoted anyone in this thread to turn their words around. you're having a problem with my opinion and the fact i don't just bend over and change it doesn't mean I'm being disengenuous.

i've never stated anything as fact. i didn't make up statistics. i've never done anything but admit that i foresee the hypothetical situation. i've also not disagreed with you that my view is extreme.

No I have no problem with people who don't smoke or are against it being legalised as long as theyre reasons are legit.

Just because something is an opinion doesn't mean it cannot be wrong, this is an arguement I hear way too often, well its my opinion. You can't say IMO the sky is made of solid cheese. And as you say your taking it to the extreme so it is what it is, you choose to envision apocalyptic scenrios rather then take all the facts into account and realise there would be some serious benefits. Instead when we make that arguement your response is we think the world would be totally at peace or Prohibition is responible for 100 percent of crime.

 

[Deckard]

1)You're proposing a creation of an industry. In itself that does not create "new money". It simply moves money from other industries to it. For example, people who chose to smoke pot must do it at the expense of something else. Maybe thats alcohol or movie tickets, or food, or cars, or baby formula. Something loses money.

2)The land that is proposed for growing will have to come from somewhere. I'm not an expert, but typically the most profitable plants demand the best land. I'm sure pot will be super profitable, so that means land currently being used here in the states for corn, or wheat or other produce will be converted. That means a bigger reliance on outsourced food. Higher food costs, more money leaving the country.

3)True new money is created when America exports goods to other countries. Will other countries be interested/able to buy American pot? Probably not unless other countries legalize.

1. No one has extra money just laying in a bank?

2. You really think were going to prioritise weed above food crops. The goverment already forces farmers to limit what they grow so they can control the price.

3. Unfortunately this is true, its illegal in most countries but Hemp as pointed out could still be profitable.

I have zero emotional investment as you call it in convicing you, your clearly against it no matter what, and frankly your vote on such a thing given your location would likely be unimportant anyway. But if I can help it, I won't allow people to misinform others with extremist viewpoints. Way too much of that already happening in this country.