<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 21 2004, 11:25 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 21 2004, 11:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The people who are trying to push the hardest for legalization are the same people that want National Health Care, and a strong welfare system, and more socialization, less religious influence, etc. etc.
In my mind, those are warning flags. It is telling me that people want the opportunity to toke responsibly, and when they fail, they want the government/society/someone else to bail them out.
As for the equation (pricedrop+increased quality=increased usage), it is not true. Naturally I can only respond for my small part, but switching from random purchases of poor grade hashish to grade-A homegrown has in no way affected my consumption. I could grow enough to keep the whole city block high for one day every week, but I don't have any idea why I should do so. Excess is bad, be it the excess of anything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I can easily recognize myself from your text, for I am for legalization and also for a functional health care system, unemployment benefits and to some extent also socialization. Despite that, I do not mix my social opinions with my drug opinions when it comes to health/unemployment benefits, because I don't want a free licence from the government to sit on my butt, high as a kite all day while everybody else does the work for me.
These are two different battles, but as you quite insightfully noted, it is usually the same crowd for and the same crowd against both. This is due to the fact that the traditional conservatives are usually staunchly opposed to lightening the grip of the law on the society, especially when it comes to currently controlled intoxicants. Usually the same people encourage privatization and minimum government hold and control on private business.
This would merit its own discussion, but my want of a decent and functional health/unemployment care stems from the fact that I believe people to be equal. If the society encourages its members to experiment and find their trade and profession, it should not punish those who take a wrong step. Instead of drowning failed enterpreneurs under a debt load they cannot pay back, it is in the best interest of the society to help these poor fellows up and on their feet, so instead of depression, possible alcoholism and suicide they may once again become productive and self-confident members of the community. My views on drugs do not in any way affect this belief. We have a functional social security network in Finland, but apparently it is too bureaucratic, since it alienates many people from seeking help. It's hard to believe but there are still people in this country struggling for debts that befell on them during the economic depression of early 1990s.
I neither want to support people who only wish to leech the society for all its worth while giving nothing back (people constantly so intoxicated they are not able to work go here), nor practice darwinian natural selection where those who fail are doomed to poverty for the rest of their lives. The keyword is equal opportunity regardless of background.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 20 2004, 03:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 20 2004, 03:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Sep 20 2004, 09:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Sep 20 2004, 09:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Okay sure, we have plenty of counterarguments <b>AGAINST</b> the legalization for marijuana, but what I want to know is, where are the <b>FOR</b> arguments to legalize marijuana?
Do you guys really have more motive than "Cause it feels good"? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Suppose the government had banned Counterstrike. What could you say in its defense other than "it feels good"?
In a free society, you err on the side of freedom. This means that if there is no good reason for something to be illegal, then it should be legal by default.
(Not that there aren't good reasons for legalizing marijuana, I just wanted to dispose of this particular viewpoint and let someone more involved make the case.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> ^^
I'm for decriminilization of Chronic, as making it legal will just turn it into the new tobacco, where it will be cheaply mass produced in rolling papers. People have plenty of access to illicit things, why not make them legal?
the only thing the government stands to gain from this is taxes, so why not?
[edit] illicit substances are a multi billion dollar a year venture, why not tax this market, and regulate it as well. Plus legalization will make getting treatment alot easier [/edit]
Read the first 40 posts, not much time, so here's my bit:
I have many young friends who are heavy-duty stoners. They don't talk much and can't remember too much. However, they make it through school and get useful laborious jobs.
In moderation, I believe that marijuana is not so bad, though yes, the negative effects are still there. For those of us 18 and older, taking the risk should be our choice.
Anyways, where I live this discussion is kind of moot in my area because it's easier to get weed than pizza and almost everyone I know smokes it. I don't, I'm going to wait until my brain is fully developed and I've had a chance to use it before I let it decline...
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
edited September 2004
exactly,
on the flip side of the coin Marjiuana usage before the age of 16 and a half has been clinically shown to inhibit growth of the frontal lobe (1-800 L O V E 191 sunday thru thursday 10-12 pacific time if you don't believe me, this is my source for any other facts that I drop in this post, and that phone number leads to a doctor who is the head of the chemical dependancy unit in Los Encinas)
I like how you said your friends could get usefull laborious jobs <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Also most people don't know this but 3 out of every 4 admitances into a recovery center are for Marijuana addiction.
[edit] don't get me wrong or nothing, but I think that if you can take a rip or two of the chronic and still go out and be a productive member of society, why the eff not? Stoners aren't like crackheads or tweakers, they don't go out and rob people, they just laugh at stuff and help the food industry. However if it comes down to you using for affect regulation then it's about time to take yourself down to your local anon chapter and get clean. [/edit]
As long as the goverment is making millions of dollars a year on a soft money budget, War on Drugs that has an anual budget of <b>20 Billion Dollars</b> <a href='http://www.lindesmith.org/library/factsheets/economiccons/fact_economic.cfm' target='_blank'>20 billion and rising</a>, there will be no argument that can cause these people to decriminalize.
I also find it funny how the War on Drugs never ceases to supply ignorant teenagers posting about the deadly side effects of marijuna. This has been going on since the 1920's folks and you'll laugh about it once you're out of highschool. And I don't care if I'm generalizing because there has been alot of purely stupid arguments from both sides frankly.
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 21 2004, 11:25 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 21 2004, 11:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Honestly, for those of you who partake in this, if prices were 3x cheaper wouldn't you partake 3x as much? Is it really your moral system that holds you in check - or is it your wallet? What happens if you can toke 3x as much - will you be able to hold down your job, keep your house/appartment? Raise a family? Will you be going to the government for a handout, for medical health when your health begins to fail?
Those are the trends that I see just over the horrison of the legalization legislation, and until those trends can be "proven" to be non-existant, I will not support it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> This is a bizzare argument. Do you<i> really</i> think that money's a factor? If that was the case, there'd be less smokers as cigerette prices have risen; there aren't. Morals don't have much to do with how much booze or drugs a person takes.
Why would you want to take 3x as much when you don't need to? You only need enough to reach a high, which isn't all that much (depending on how much tobacco's put into the spliff). Most people I know just have a joint to unwind after a hard day's work. Smoking more than you need to is like making yourself so drunk that you puke, and it's a waste.
For curiosity's sake, have you ever tried either cannabis or alcohol?
You cannot stop some people destroying themselves. Just because some people binge drink doesn't mean that alcohol should be illegal, and the same thing goes for cannabis.
Yeah, marijuana is just a plant. So is Cocaine, and Heroin at one point. People who start to use marijuana are more likely to try other drugs.
Marijuana has no purpose other than to get high. There is an alterior motive to what you are actually saying about pot, u just want to get high legally.
Having marijuana illegal makes a cheap and easy means for businesses to test employees of drug use. You can't test for cocaine, and other drugs as effectively as marijuana. I don't want to work with ppl that use drugs, because "accidents" are more likely to occur.
Marijuana, in my opinion, should be used for some illnesses where other painkillers would cause worser side effects, especially in long term use.
Marijuana should never be legal, it would cause more problems then it would solve, In medicinal usage, it may be used in my opinion.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 21 2004, 12:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 21 2004, 12:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This has nothing to do with empathy - I hope you recognize that. It has to do with responsibility.
Go back and re-read my argument. A short sum up is this:
The government should not bail out irresponsible people (welfare, free health care, socialization) Smoking drugs is a sign of irresponsibility - doing so illegially now is even more irresponsible. Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> How on earth do you justify stating that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible regardless of the circumstances?
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 24 2004, 08:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 24 2004, 08:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 21 2004, 12:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 21 2004, 12:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This has nothing to do with empathy - I hope you recognize that. It has to do with responsibility.
Go back and re-read my argument. A short sum up is this:
The government should not bail out irresponsible people (welfare, free health care, socialization) Smoking drugs is a sign of irresponsibility - doing so illegially now is even more irresponsible. Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> How on earth do you justify stating that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible regardless of the circumstances? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I have not stated that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible.
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility. I said that those who are irresponsible tend towards abusive practices. I said why give those irresponsible people another tool - especially when it is the "governments" job to try to clean these people up.
Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible.
Some of you seem to think that if weed was legal it would cause all sorts of new problems but it wouldn't. Anybody that is going to abuse weed already is because (around here anyway) its as easy to get as a cup of coffee. Weed makes people mellow and alot easyer to deal with than if they were sober (Hamilton is full of **** heads).
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 09:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 09:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I have not stated that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible.
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> In what way?
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Sep 24 2004, 10:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Sep 24 2004, 10:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 09:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 09:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I have not stated that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible.
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> In what way? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Regardless of the "right/wrongness" of the laws of our land, they are still laws, and as such, they should be obeyed.
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 12:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 12:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Regardless of the "right/wrongness" of the laws of our land, they are still laws, and as such, they should be obeyed.
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Did you miss the whole civil rights movement or something?
Aside from all that, at the moment your argument is that drugs should not be legal because it is irresponsible to use them, because they are illegal. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Forget about the rest of us for the time being, how do you justify this line of argument to <i>yourself</i>?
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 24 2004, 12:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 24 2004, 12:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 12:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 12:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Regardless of the "right/wrongness" of the laws of our land, they are still laws, and as such, they should be obeyed.
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Did you miss the whole civil rights movement or something?
Aside from all that, at the moment your argument is that drugs should not be legal because it is irresponsible to use them, because they are illegal. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Forget about the rest of us for the time being, how do you justify this line of argument to <i>yourself</i>? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, I did miss the civil rights movement (too young) but I understand it well enough. They were fighting for equality between races - a completely different topic than consumption of illicit substances.
The pattern drug users have to refute is that drug use can be accomplished by "responsible people"
Unfortunatly for the pro-drug movement, most of these "responsible people" are criminals - by virtue of their drug use.
Now, that is just touching on the use of drugs itself - not to mention all the other "irresponsible behavior" that ususally accompanies drug consumption.
It is these same people who are filling up our welfare system, our health care system, filling our streets with crime - why should I support a movement propogated by these people?
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Dude are you seriously saying that drug use should be illegal because it is irresponsible, because it is illegal?
I just want to make sure I'm not completely missing something.
While you have compelling arguments, you're forgetting that many of the reasons why drugs cause crime is BECAUSE they're illegal. By making them illegal, drug runners need high payrolls to offset the risks of running drugs (not to mention that they KNOW they can get away with charging exorbitant prices because their customers are too addicted to just go "oh, I'll do without drugs then"). The result is that you can't pay for continued drug use (especially when you have trouble keeping a job because you're influenced much of the time) and have to turn to crime to dig up the money you need.
Legalizing drugs would mean state control on the costs (and free competition would mean that when one drug seller charges exorbitant prices, his customers just buy from a cheaper competitor), and thus easier affordable drugs, thus cutting down on drug-related crime (except those that arise directly from being under the influence of drugs, such as driving under influence). If you were only concerned about drug-related crime, legalizing would be the way to go.
The other side of the equation is the fear that drugs would ruin the structure of our society. Why work hard to earn enough money to feel safe & secure and afford the things that make you happy when you can just get your fix and feel happy anyway?
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 24 2004, 12:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 24 2004, 12:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Dude are you seriously saying that drug use should be illegal because it is irresponsible, because it is illegal?
I just want to make sure I'm not completely missing something. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> it makes perfect sense. "he who cannot be trusted with little, cannot be trusted with much."
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know.
Btw, the "drugs cause crime because they're illegal" argument...isn't that just a sign that drugs should be even more illegal? If they're so dangerous as to cause people to break the law on impulse, sometimes violently, to get their hands on it, shouldn't it be something we should discourage, and not encourage by legalizing?
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 01:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 01:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it makes perfect sense. "he who cannot be trusted with little, cannot be trusted with much."
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> What the hell?
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it?
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 12:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 12:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> re-read my reply on pg 6 (2nd from the bottom). <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It sounds like your objection is more against the stereotype you have of people who use marijuana than against the marijuana itself.
Let's frame this in something more concrete. I've read estimates that over 40% of the American population has tried marijuana at some point in their lives. If my own highschool is any indication, that figure suffers from significant under-response bias. Even if we take any case studies out of this, you are claiming that a HUGE percentage of the population shouldn't be trusted with their own welfare.
Now for personal examples, I know plenty of responsible adults who hold good jobs, have good families, and who also smoke pot on a regular basis.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Pepe_Muffassa+Sep 24 2004, 02:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Pepe_Muffassa @ Sep 24 2004, 02:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> now you have a burdon of proof to "prove" that smoking cannabis is moraly justifed. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 20 2004, 06:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 20 2004, 06:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> In a free society, you err on the side of freedom. This means that if there is no good reason for something to be illegal, then it should be legal by default.
(Not that there aren't good reasons for legalizing marijuana, I just wanted to dispose of this particular viewpoint and let someone more involved make the case.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I've demonstrated, the burden of proof when considering whether a law should be repealed is always on the side supporting the law.
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It's a shame how easily I could see someone preforming a serious crime and falling back on an argument like this.
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 24 2004, 02:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 24 2004, 02:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 01:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 01:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it makes perfect sense. "he who cannot be trusted with little, cannot be trusted with much."
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What the hell?
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> it doesn't matter. In a society, you give up some of your rights in exchange for certain protections and freedoms.
You are expected to obey the law. You don't thumb your nose at a law by breaking it, you challenge it in court.
Otherwise you're just being extremely and reprehensibly irresponsible.
If you want to do something so badly, move to a country where it's not illegal.
And if it's illegal in all countries, chances are you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.
Its only illeagal because of propaganda many many years ago so why shouldn't I be doing it? My mother smokes grass every day and shes a great person. She takes care of us and makes sure all the bills are paid on time. Does this sound like an irresponsible person to you? Why should she not be allowed to smoke a joint at night to relax?
<!--QuoteBegin-lolfighter+Sep 24 2004, 01:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (lolfighter @ Sep 24 2004, 01:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> While you have compelling arguments, you're forgetting that many of the reasons why drugs cause crime is BECAUSE they're illegal. By making them illegal, drug runners need high payrolls to offset the risks of running drugs (not to mention that they KNOW they can get away with charging exorbitant prices because their customers are too addicted to just go "oh, I'll do without drugs then"). The result is that you can't pay for continued drug use (especially when you have trouble keeping a job because you're influenced much of the time) and have to turn to crime to dig up the money you need.
Legalizing drugs would mean state control on the costs (and free competition would mean that when one drug seller charges exorbitant prices, his customers just buy from a cheaper competitor), and thus easier affordable drugs, thus cutting down on drug-related crime (except those that arise directly from being under the influence of drugs, such as driving under influence). If you were only concerned about drug-related crime, legalizing would be the way to go.
The other side of the equation is the fear that drugs would ruin the structure of our society. Why work hard to earn enough money to feel safe & secure and afford the things that make you happy when you can just get your fix and feel happy anyway? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=81102&view=findpost&p=1247865' target='_blank'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/in...dpost&p=1247865</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 03:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 03:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it doesn't matter. In a society, you give up some of your rights in exchange for certain protections and freedoms. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Answer this question above all else. What freedoms are being EXCHANGED by specifically banning marijuana?
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 03:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 03:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it doesn't matter. In a society, you give up some of your rights in exchange for certain protections and freedoms.
You are expected to obey the law. You don't thumb your nose at a law by breaking it, you challenge it in court.
Otherwise you're just being extremely and reprehensibly irresponsible.
If you want to do something so badly, move to a country where it's not illegal.
And if it's illegal in all countries, chances are you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Riiiight, so Martin Luther King and Gandhi were "reprehensibly irresponsible."
Disagreeing with marijuana legalization is fine. But at the point that we let law become a measure of morality such that disobeying the law is inherently immoral, we are begging to wind up in a police state. I think you really need to reevaluate this.
Comments
In my mind, those are warning flags. It is telling me that people want the opportunity to toke responsibly, and when they fail, they want the government/society/someone else to bail them out.
As for the equation (pricedrop+increased quality=increased usage), it is not true. Naturally I can only respond for my small part, but switching from random purchases of poor grade hashish to grade-A homegrown has in no way affected my consumption. I could grow enough to keep the whole city block high for one day every week, but I don't have any idea why I should do so. Excess is bad, be it the excess of anything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can easily recognize myself from your text, for I am for legalization and also for a functional health care system, unemployment benefits and to some extent also socialization. Despite that, I do not mix my social opinions with my drug opinions when it comes to health/unemployment benefits, because I don't want a free licence from the government to sit on my butt, high as a kite all day while everybody else does the work for me.
These are two different battles, but as you quite insightfully noted, it is usually the same crowd for and the same crowd against both. This is due to the fact that the traditional conservatives are usually staunchly opposed to lightening the grip of the law on the society, especially when it comes to currently controlled intoxicants. Usually the same people encourage privatization and minimum government hold and control on private business.
This would merit its own discussion, but my want of a decent and functional health/unemployment care stems from the fact that I believe people to be equal. If the society encourages its members to experiment and find their trade and profession, it should not punish those who take a wrong step. Instead of drowning failed enterpreneurs under a debt load they cannot pay back, it is in the best interest of the society to help these poor fellows up and on their feet, so instead of depression, possible alcoholism and suicide they may once again become productive and self-confident members of the community. My views on drugs do not in any way affect this belief. We have a functional social security network in Finland, but apparently it is too bureaucratic, since it alienates many people from seeking help. It's hard to believe but there are still people in this country struggling for debts that befell on them during the economic depression of early 1990s.
I neither want to support people who only wish to leech the society for all its worth while giving nothing back (people constantly so intoxicated they are not able to work go here), nor practice darwinian natural selection where those who fail are doomed to poverty for the rest of their lives. The keyword is equal opportunity regardless of background.
Do you guys really have more motive than "Cause it feels good"? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Suppose the government had banned Counterstrike. What could you say in its defense other than "it feels good"?
In a free society, you err on the side of freedom. This means that if there is no good reason for something to be illegal, then it should be legal by default.
(Not that there aren't good reasons for legalizing marijuana, I just wanted to dispose of this particular viewpoint and let someone more involved make the case.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
^^
I'm for decriminilization of Chronic, as making it legal will just turn it into the new tobacco, where it will be cheaply mass produced in rolling papers. People have plenty of access to illicit things, why not make them legal?
the only thing the government stands to gain from this is taxes, so why not?
[edit]
illicit substances are a multi billion dollar a year venture, why not tax this market, and regulate it as well. Plus legalization will make getting treatment alot easier
[/edit]
I have many young friends who are heavy-duty stoners. They don't talk much and can't remember too much. However, they make it through school and get useful laborious jobs.
In moderation, I believe that marijuana is not so bad, though yes, the negative effects are still there. For those of us 18 and older, taking the risk should be our choice.
Anyways, where I live this discussion is kind of moot in my area because it's easier to get weed than pizza and almost everyone I know smokes it. I don't, I'm going to wait until my brain is fully developed and I've had a chance to use it before I let it decline...
on the flip side of the coin Marjiuana usage before the age of 16 and a half has been clinically shown to inhibit growth of the frontal lobe (1-800 L O V E 191 sunday thru thursday 10-12 pacific time if you don't believe me, this is my source for any other facts that I drop in this post, and that phone number leads to a doctor who is the head of the chemical dependancy unit in Los Encinas)
I like how you said your friends could get usefull laborious jobs <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Also most people don't know this but 3 out of every 4 admitances into a recovery center are for Marijuana addiction.
[edit]
don't get me wrong or nothing, but I think that if you can take a rip or two of the chronic and still go out and be a productive member of society, why the eff not? Stoners aren't like crackheads or tweakers, they don't go out and rob people, they just laugh at stuff and help the food industry. However if it comes down to you using for affect regulation then it's about time to take yourself down to your local anon chapter and get clean.
[/edit]
I also find it funny how the War on Drugs never ceases to supply ignorant teenagers posting about the deadly side effects of marijuna. This has been going on since the 1920's folks and you'll laugh about it once you're out of highschool. And I don't care if I'm generalizing because there has been alot of purely stupid arguments from both sides frankly.
Those are the trends that I see just over the horrison of the legalization legislation, and until those trends can be "proven" to be non-existant, I will not support it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is a bizzare argument. Do you<i> really</i> think that money's a factor? If that was the case, there'd be less smokers as cigerette prices have risen; there aren't. Morals don't have much to do with how much booze or drugs a person takes.
Why would you want to take 3x as much when you don't need to? You only need enough to reach a high, which isn't all that much (depending on how much tobacco's put into the spliff). Most people I know just have a joint to unwind after a hard day's work. Smoking more than you need to is like making yourself so drunk that you puke, and it's a waste.
For curiosity's sake, have you ever tried either cannabis or alcohol?
You cannot stop some people destroying themselves. Just because some people binge drink doesn't mean that alcohol should be illegal, and the same thing goes for cannabis.
People who start to use marijuana are more likely to try other drugs.
Marijuana has no purpose other than to get high. There is an alterior motive to what you are actually saying about pot, u just want to get high legally.
Having marijuana illegal makes a cheap and easy means for businesses to test employees of drug use. You can't test for cocaine, and other drugs as effectively as marijuana. I don't want to work with ppl that use drugs, because "accidents" are more likely to occur.
Marijuana, in my opinion, should be used for some illnesses where other painkillers would cause worser side effects, especially in long term use.
Marijuana should never be legal, it would cause more problems then it would solve, In medicinal usage, it may be used in my opinion.
Go back and re-read my argument. A short sum up is this:
The government should not bail out irresponsible people (welfare, free health care, socialization)
Smoking drugs is a sign of irresponsibility - doing so illegially now is even more irresponsible.
Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> How on earth do you justify stating that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible regardless of the circumstances?
Go back and re-read my argument. A short sum up is this:
The government should not bail out irresponsible people (welfare, free health care, socialization)
Smoking drugs is a sign of irresponsibility - doing so illegially now is even more irresponsible.
Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> How on earth do you justify stating that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible regardless of the circumstances? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have not stated that smoking drugs is inherently irresponsible.
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility.
I said that those who are irresponsible tend towards abusive practices.
I said why give those irresponsible people another tool - especially when it is the "governments" job to try to clean these people up.
Until you (as a legalization proponent) prove otherwise, I will not support giving irresponsible people another tool (drugs) to be more irresponsible.
Weed makes people mellow and alot easyer to deal with than if they were sober (Hamilton is full of **** heads).
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
In what way?
I said that smoking drugs is a <b>sign</b> of irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In what way? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Regardless of the "right/wrongness" of the laws of our land, they are still laws, and as such, they should be obeyed.
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility.
Breaking laws is not responsible behavior.
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did you miss the whole civil rights movement or something?
Aside from all that, at the moment your argument is that drugs should not be legal because it is irresponsible to use them, because they are illegal. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Forget about the rest of us for the time being, how do you justify this line of argument to <i>yourself</i>?
Breaking said laws are a sign of irresponsibility - be it breaking it by drinking under age, by drinking and driving, by having relations with animals, by smoking cigaretts underage, or by smoking illegal drugs. By doing so, you are showing irresponsibility. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did you miss the whole civil rights movement or something?
Aside from all that, at the moment your argument is that drugs should not be legal because it is irresponsible to use them, because they are illegal. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Forget about the rest of us for the time being, how do you justify this line of argument to <i>yourself</i>? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, I did miss the civil rights movement (too young) but I understand it well enough. They were fighting for equality between races - a completely different topic than consumption of illicit substances.
The pattern drug users have to refute is that drug use can be accomplished by "responsible people"
Unfortunatly for the pro-drug movement, most of these "responsible people" are criminals - by virtue of their drug use.
Now, that is just touching on the use of drugs itself - not to mention all the other "irresponsible behavior" that ususally accompanies drug consumption.
It is these same people who are filling up our welfare system, our health care system, filling our streets with crime - why should I support a movement propogated by these people?
How do you support a movement propogated by them?
Dude are you seriously saying that drug use should be illegal because it is irresponsible, because it is illegal?
I just want to make sure I'm not completely missing something.
Legalizing drugs would mean state control on the costs (and free competition would mean that when one drug seller charges exorbitant prices, his customers just buy from a cheaper competitor), and thus easier affordable drugs, thus cutting down on drug-related crime (except those that arise directly from being under the influence of drugs, such as driving under influence). If you were only concerned about drug-related crime, legalizing would be the way to go.
The other side of the equation is the fear that drugs would ruin the structure of our society. Why work hard to earn enough money to feel safe & secure and afford the things that make you happy when you can just get your fix and feel happy anyway?
Dude are you seriously saying that drug use should be illegal because it is irresponsible, because it is illegal?
I just want to make sure I'm not completely missing something. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
it makes perfect sense. "he who cannot be trusted with little, cannot be trusted with much."
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know.
Btw, the "drugs cause crime because they're illegal" argument...isn't that just a sign that drugs should be even more illegal? If they're so dangerous as to cause people to break the law on impulse, sometimes violently, to get their hands on it, shouldn't it be something we should discourage, and not encourage by legalizing?
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
What the hell?
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it?
It sounds like your objection is more against the stereotype you have of people who use marijuana than against the marijuana itself.
Let's frame this in something more concrete. I've read estimates that over 40% of the American population has tried marijuana at some point in their lives. If my own highschool is any indication, that figure suffers from significant under-response bias. Even if we take any case studies out of this, you are claiming that a HUGE percentage of the population shouldn't be trusted with their own welfare.
Now for personal examples, I know plenty of responsible adults who hold good jobs, have good families, and who also smoke pot on a regular basis.
<!--QuoteBegin-moultano+Sep 20 2004, 06:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Sep 20 2004, 06:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
In a free society, you err on the side of freedom. This means that if there is no good reason for something to be illegal, then it should be legal by default.
(Not that there aren't good reasons for legalizing marijuana, I just wanted to dispose of this particular viewpoint and let someone more involved make the case.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I've demonstrated, the burden of proof when considering whether a law should be repealed is always on the side supporting the law.
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a shame how easily I could see someone preforming a serious crime and falling back on an argument like this.
If you can't obey the law when smoking pot is illegal, that is the sign of an irresponsible attitude.
Irresponsible people shouldn't be given more rights to kick themselves in the teeth, that's why suicide is also kind of illegal, you know. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What the hell?
If you don't believe that a certain law is morally justified, why on earth should you be considered irresponsible if you decide to break it? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
it doesn't matter. In a society, you give up some of your rights in exchange for certain protections and freedoms.
You are expected to obey the law. You don't thumb your nose at a law by breaking it, you challenge it in court.
Otherwise you're just being extremely and reprehensibly irresponsible.
If you want to do something so badly, move to a country where it's not illegal.
And if it's illegal in all countries, chances are you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.
My mother smokes grass every day and shes a great person. She takes care of us and makes sure all the bills are paid on time. Does this sound like an irresponsible person to you? Why should she not be allowed to smoke a joint at night to relax?
Legalizing drugs would mean state control on the costs (and free competition would mean that when one drug seller charges exorbitant prices, his customers just buy from a cheaper competitor), and thus easier affordable drugs, thus cutting down on drug-related crime (except those that arise directly from being under the influence of drugs, such as driving under influence). If you were only concerned about drug-related crime, legalizing would be the way to go.
The other side of the equation is the fear that drugs would ruin the structure of our society. Why work hard to earn enough money to feel safe & secure and afford the things that make you happy when you can just get your fix and feel happy anyway? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=81102&view=findpost&p=1247865' target='_blank'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/in...dpost&p=1247865</a>
Answer this question above all else. What freedoms are being EXCHANGED by specifically banning marijuana?
You are expected to obey the law. You don't thumb your nose at a law by breaking it, you challenge it in court.
Otherwise you're just being extremely and reprehensibly irresponsible.
If you want to do something so badly, move to a country where it's not illegal.
And if it's illegal in all countries, chances are you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Riiiight, so Martin Luther King and Gandhi were "reprehensibly irresponsible."
Disagreeing with marijuana legalization is fine. But at the point that we let law become a measure of morality such that disobeying the law is inherently immoral, we are begging to wind up in a police state. I think you really need to reevaluate this.