Grothistan
Military Diplomat
Prime Minister of the Equilism Commonwealth
Posts: 66
|
Post by Grothistan on Oct 1, 2005 6:55:26 GMT
Always glad to be of help.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 1, 2005 22:35:28 GMT
Indeed it would.
LOL biochemically they may not be addicted but psycologically they are? Same resut, those people have been defined as dependant on the drug.
I might be but ive never had the oppertunity to question enough users to work out those values with any degree of accuracy. But to the real point you dont deny that a significant percentage of those who end up taking hard drugs started out on the mild ones like cannabis?
But those who do use it as an escape in my opinion are weak.
Depends what they are using the alcohol for and no we should be helping them with the problem instead of just sidelining it and perpetuating the misery.
Sometimes you just got to impose some restriction, why because due to human nature we occationally need protection for ourselves. Due to the reasons above cannabis can be damaging to society and individuals which is why it must be banned.
John knew it was illegal, john stupidly risked everything he had worked for a quick high, john should have thought harder, john should not have hidden the drugs in such an obvious place :.D, john was an idiot and now he pays the price, pity poor johnny but it was his own fault really.
At the risk of what ES just outlined, and who would be first to exploit this, the criminal gangs who illigally supplied the drugs, and they could use legal cannabis as a front for worse. and ignoring the disadvantages biochemical Yey lets all have cannabis and who cares about that pain that it will cause to that unlucky minority and their families, is it really that nessasary?
I oppose all of those (in the way they are used today)as its just a way of getting money out of people for things they dont need and that does cause them harm.
Its also protecting a lot of people from a lot of misery.
Hardly, see the above. Is a majority calling for total legalisation?
|
|
|
Post by Dobbyniania on Oct 2, 2005 0:25:55 GMT
RM while I'm too damn lazy to whip out my NORML podium and open up a can of rhetorical whoop ass on you, I can't stop noticing that you're acting incredibly authoritarian. The end game of any communist revolution is total freedom for individuals and society. I fail to see how supporting repressive laws that dictate how people deal with their OWN bodies helps along the cause of freedom.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 2, 2005 2:17:06 GMT
Authoritarian, indeed. I'm not a communist, but I definately believe that people have the right to do what they want with their bodies, as long as it's not at the expense of society. And, the way I see it, a guy smoking weed in his loft appartment and listening to Phish is not a threat to society. I would allow cannabis to be smoked in the privacy of one's own home, or on one's own private property. Intoxication standards similair to that of alcohol, which I believe should remain legal for practical purposes and fear of a public outcry (US, 1920's....), should be implemented, so as to at least reduce the risk of high drivers. However, a friend supposedly read an article (I don't have access to it, but I will try to find it) that states that marijuana intoxication is likely to improve the judgement and driving capabilities of one who is already drunk (I'll admit that I've found this to be quite true, although I won't be replicating any of those experiences any time soon...my crazy days are over).
Besides, you can't deny it: the world would be alot more fun if we all just sat down and had a toke together once in a while ;D
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 2, 2005 9:50:52 GMT
Not when my Revolutionary Civil Protection Squads come down on you wouldnt!.....KIDDING PEOPLE . Yes your quite right in that I probably am being over authoritarian..........but in the current climate I oppose legalising cannabis for what is does do and what it would do. Among all the other things I feel that our time would be spent better working for other goals and more important and less fuzzy issues. In the future post revolution, people will indeed have the right to do what they want with their bodies, within the rule. In that I can take reassurance because it wouldnt be too long before people did abuse it and it gets put under control once again :.).
|
|
|
Post by TheMightyPump on Oct 2, 2005 18:57:15 GMT
I'm starting a poll in this forum to get an idea of how many smokers we have amongst us.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 2, 2005 23:07:47 GMT
LOL
|
|
Grothistan
Military Diplomat
Prime Minister of the Equilism Commonwealth
Posts: 66
|
Post by Grothistan on Oct 3, 2005 17:02:54 GMT
RM, your primary argumentation seems to be that the fact that since most western conservative governments want it to be illegal, that must be the correct stand. I have a problem finding other logic than that. LOL biochemically they may not be addicted but psycologically they are? Same resut, those people have been defined as dependant on the drug. In that case, let us go ahead and ban everything that can be psycologically addictive! Chocolate, cola, tea, porcelain and kangaroos must be burned and never allowed to enter the country! I might be but ive never had the oppertunity to question enough users to work out those values with any degree of accuracy. But to the real point you dont deny that a significant percentage of those who end up taking hard drugs started out on the mild ones like cannabis? I'm not going to argue against that. But for every one who starts out smoking weed, and goes on to cocaine, there are a hundred, maybe thousand, who just stick to weed, or just try it a few times and stops. Sometimes you just got to impose some restriction, why because due to human nature we occationally need protection for ourselves. Due to the reasons above cannabis can be damaging to society and individuals which is why it must be banned.
You've failed to clearify why cannabis is so harmful. It's not addictive like coffee and tobacco, and it won't kill you, like alcohol and tobacco. At the risk of what ES just outlined, and who would be first to exploit this, the criminal gangs who illigally supplied the drugs, and they could use legal cannabis as a front for worse. If cannabis was legalized, the gangs would face legal competition. The illegalization and then legalization of alcohol in the US has proven, that gangs can not compete with legal competition. If I had the choice between buying a few grams off a shady dealer in some apartment, or go to my local shop and get a few grams of a quality I am perfectly informed off, I'd only buy it in stores. John knew it was illegal, john stupidly risked everything he had worked for a quick high, john should have thought harder, john should not have hidden the drugs in such an obvious place :.D, john was an idiot and now he pays the price, pity poor johnny but it was his own fault really. You didn't answer the question. Does society win, by letting John, a stable and helpful part of society, go to jail over a victimless crime? Yey lets all have cannabis and who cares about that pain that it will cause to that unlucky minority and their families, is it really that nessasary? I can see how the minority is better off in jail. All you ever hear from former inmates, is how great it's been. How they got a lot of good friends, evolved socially, and learned skills which were crucial outside of jail. And how easy it was for them to return to a good place in society, after a few years behind bars.
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 3, 2005 19:34:42 GMT
Let's not say that jail is good for people. Some fare well, others fare poorly. Some get raped, and that's no joke. It is unfortunate for that minority, but let's face it, that minority will get their hands on it whether it's legal or not. Don't let a small statistic hold back the will of the collective whole.
|
|
Grothistan
Military Diplomat
Prime Minister of the Equilism Commonwealth
Posts: 66
|
Post by Grothistan on Oct 3, 2005 20:14:39 GMT
Let's not say that jail is good for people. Some fare well, others fare poorly. Some get raped, and that's no joke. It is unfortunate for that minority, but let's face it, that minority will get their hands on it whether it's legal or not. Don't let a small statistic hold back the will of the collective whole. I was being deeply ironic. I believe that jail as we know it is a horrible institution, which degrades good people, and makes them worse human beings. The irony might have been in poor taste, but I was just trying to make a point.
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 3, 2005 21:58:31 GMT
Groth you must be delirious when have I ever mentioned the right in my arguments? Flimsy ground also! When has anyone ever moved onto hard kangaroo or coffee? Oh and dont hit me with the statistical exception please! Let them suffer then, how wonderful! Say you have inferior genetics, go get addicted we dont care about your suffering as long as we get our "un-nessasary high" that we are not addicted too, isnt important and we dont actually need to live our lives! WOOT See above posts, including those of ES. Then maby once the bloodsucking capitalists have seen what they could gain from selling legal drugs some start selling hard ones? You may have a sensible head but does everyone? Are you willing to let your pleasure be forfilled on the suffering of others or make some sacrifices for the good of all? Drug legalisation is purely the selfish work of a minority over another minority in the above case, shame on thee. But there was a victim...John! Your example is also incredibly biased. I see those that can happily take cannabis with no ill effects like you, I also see, unlike you, the misery of those who carnt, no? Your point being that that the minority drug users shouldnt pay? Let them burn if it teches them a lesson and keeps society safe, rehabilitate also, as you said in a proper jail a few years never hurt anyone! LOL just iscovered my freinds brother was trying to grow it in his attic, but his parents found it 3 times now ha ha ha, they germinated as well he spent 40£ on lighting and watering!
|
|
Ketoprofen
Defence Forces
Ketoprofen - The Proletariat Coalition
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Ketoprofen on Oct 6, 2005 11:56:12 GMT
How is John a victim? Those who wish to smoke weed, such as myself, should be allowed to do so without people such as yourself passing legislations to prevent me from doing what I want with my own body! What right do you have to dictate what I do with my own body? A weed smoker is no more danger for society than you are. Alcoholists are another issue however - an alcoholists can grow much more dangerous and is definitly a liability for society. Why aren't you arguing in favour of restrictive legislations towards alcohol? Because you use it?
|
|
Grothistan
Military Diplomat
Prime Minister of the Equilism Commonwealth
Posts: 66
|
Post by Grothistan on Oct 6, 2005 13:09:07 GMT
You never mentioned the right, but you use the fact that it is illegal, as basis for the evilness of the drug. And we all know who made it illegal - Reactionary governments. And hard drugs would still be illegal. There's an incredible difference between legalizing one, minor drug, which isn't addictive, and isn't lethal, and then to legalize hard drugs, which are very addictive, and very lethal. Also, Marijuahna has gotten a tradition in the west, although it is not as much as alcohol. It has grown to be an every-mans drug - You'll find people in all layers of society using marijuahna. On the contrary, it would be much easier to track down the people selling addictive, lethal drugs. THC-related products account for much of their income, and as a result, they would all have a lower budget to work with. They'll also loose a hell of a lot of customers, since people won't come to them for marijuahna anymore. Plus, the taxation of marijuahna could be used for rehab, for those who can not handle it. Besides, it is illogical to tell me that I can only have milk, because infants can't handle a steak. You're confusing me. Are we doing this to protect the unnamed minorities, or to punish the one's who can handle it? And what exactly is the difference? The drug laws of today doesn't consider this - You'll just get punished. Sending these "poor suffering people" to jail isn't really helping them, if you ask me. Or is it?
|
|
|
Post by Revolutionary Masses on Oct 7, 2005 12:28:18 GMT
He is a victim of his own stupidity, the decisions that took him to jail were entirely his own and he could have easily avoided them.
To stop people from harming society, yes I think I should have that right.
This is not within the frame of this argument, I would indeed pose more restrictions upon alcohol and have never used a comparison to alcohol in this debate as yet I believe or argued for it.
I am arguing over the fact of weather it should be legal, the basis of my arguments are medical and to do with the potential damage to society. I have never said cannabis is ilegal so it must be evil! I have said cannabis should remain illegal due to the the above points.
Please explain how this will be? It will make their operations smaller and harder to detect and provides massive numbers of buyers, the state would be doing the first phase for them by exposing millions to drugs that can lead onto harder and harder drugs!
. Isnt this a contradiction to what you have said above On one hand you says its unaddictive and pretty much harmless, the next your suggesting re-hab clinics, this shows you are determined to forfill your unnessasary needs on the suffering of others!!
To protect those that cannot. The fact as you have said before is that cannabis is not nessasary for you to live therefore when it has the potential to cause much grief and suffering I choose to protect those who cannot take it.[ The problem with punishment is a prison system issue not a legality one, the state prison should re-habilitate!
|
|
gilligus
Diplomat
Ambassador from the Alliance of Socialist States
Posts: 100
|
Post by gilligus on Oct 7, 2005 13:58:21 GMT
It's true that some people cannot handle marijuana use. Such are the people that go on to use harder drugs like crack, heroine, etc. Because of these peoples' propensity to try other drugs, we must have rehab clinics. However, not everyone is like that. Not everyone feels the need to go on to try harder drugs; take Grothistan and myself as examples. While we may have experimented with other things (I myself have tried mushrooms and LSD, and found them quite to my liking), what's to say that, with marijuana legal, people will still have the desire to try others? I know that my first experience with mushrooms was a direct result of my dealer being out of weed, and me and a friend having nothing to do for a Friday night. I find what Grothistan said very true: If the same people selling weed now weren't also selling hard drugs, most marijuana users wouldn't have access to such things and, as such, wouldn't feel tempted to move onto harder things.
Exhibit A: You don't see alcoholics moving onto cocaine and heroine, do you? Not nearly the same amount as marijuana users. So what's the difference? I bet that, if bartenders sold crack, most alcoholics would be crackheads, too. It only makes sense.
|
|