(November 19, 2012 at 9:05 pm)Creed of Heresy Wrote: Also, this idea of starting companies to sell weed sounds pretty good. I'm thinking of maybe jumping on this bandwagon if/when it comes to Wisconsin. Going to apply for a business loan at the bank and mingle it with my culinary skills, and open a restaurant centered around selling courses where pot-butter is an ingredient in either the appetizer, the main course, the dessert, the drinks, or some/all of the above. Bud-butter is versatile and its flavor can be finely tuned for culinary arts; you need only the creativity and innovation to make it work. And, seriously, get made an excellent meal that gets you stoned? Shit, I might even add a lounge room to said restaurant for slipping-in stoning for watching TV and playing video games and chilling with others, maybe with hookahs for continuing the fun, and of course with proper interior design work involving psychadelic designs and coloring...

You probably won't be able to get that loan as a marijuana purveyor, since it's still a federal crime and banks are cautious about things like that. Just get the loan for the restaurant, the bank doesn't need to know the details of your seasoning and decoration practices.

(November 20, 2012 at 2:11 pm)TaraJo Wrote: Well, that's the underbelly of it, yes, but as for the surface stuff, it's kinda obvious. Private prisons are being built all over the nation, with corporate tycoons making crazy amounts of money from locking people up. If marijuana were suddenly made legal, they would lose out on all those inmates in there for nothing more than simpley being in possession of marijuana, selling marijuana or using marijuana. If they lose inmates, they lose money so they do everything they can to push politicians to pass harsher and stricter penalties on people and they push judges to hand down harsh sentences with a long time in prison. We simply need to do away with private prisons; there's way too much potential for corruption.

I'm sure the tobacco and alcohol industry are paying money to keep it illegal, too. And the various industries that would take a hit to hemp-based products being legal again. There are a lot of fingers in the prohibition pie.

I don't know that too many industries would be affected. There hasn't been a textile grade hemp cultivar in this country for ages now..it would take time to re-select. The end result of which would still be inferior to cotton, imho. The same parties that grow tobacco would gladly grow weed. I think the parties with the most skin in this particular game are law enforcement and criminals. Those are the people who currently go to the bank on weed, those are the parties who stand to lose a breath-taking amount of income by decriminalization.

(November 21, 2012 at 1:13 am)Annik Wrote: I'm sure the tobacco and alcohol industry are paying money to keep it illegal, too. And the various industries that would take a hit to hemp-based products being legal again. There are a lot of fingers in the prohibition pie.

Substance sellers would take a direct hit.

Also, bullshit.

Synthetic products like rope are now superior to anything made with hemp can offer.

Some good technological developments did come out of prohibition.

(November 21, 2012 at 11:48 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: Also, bullshit.

Synthetic products like rope are now superior to anything made with hemp can offer.

Yet we still import hemp rope and manila envelopes. Perhaps the synthetic products available aren't always superior in every relevant way. Hemp might be cheaper for instance. And I know I'd rather try to climb a hemp rope than a more slippery nylon one.

We still ride horses and manufacture buggies (albeit for a specialized, tiny market). Your point?

What matters is the scale and distribution of the market.

"Hemp-made ropes et al replacing/being viable in the market" as a selling point for legalizing weed is moronic.

It's a red herring, and detracts from the message of civil rights, the message of tax revenue from regulated production and instead places marijuana legalization against EVERYONE.

Fucking stupid.

The majority use of weed, is, was and will always be, consuming it for personal and medicinal value.

That is why a rope manufacturer would support legalization, not some phoney baloney concept that they can drive all the other manufacturers out of business with an unestablished product.

Calm down, Moros, caaaalm doooown. Here, smoke this G-13, it'll chill you like dry ice...

CALM YO FUCKIN' TITS. WE FRIENDS HERE STOP HARSHIN' MY BUZZ. D8<

Ok but seriously. Yeah, it used to be that hemp was a direct competitor of the lumber industry due to its superiority to paper-based products, but not so much anymore. The sad fact [yes, sad fact] of it is is that science HAD to compensate for prohibition, but was it worth it? Nylon ropes and other such shit and for the tradeoff that I can't get the only fucking sleep-aid that actually works for me either easily OR cheaply because it's been criminalized for the last 80 fucking years. Yeah. To ME, it wasn't fucking worth it. ISN'T fucking worth it.

Now. YES. I stereotyped. I made the claim that stoned-driving doesn't take place and that wasn't entirely accurate. I will iterate for the umpteenth time; I generalize for the sake of simplicity, because if I were to take into account every single detail in every argument just to make sure I'm including everyone and every single viewpoint I'd spend an entire day on a single point because I like to talk about things that affect a large number of people. There's a REASON the general idea of a stoner is the laid-back, chilled-out mellowed fellow; because this is the most common kind of stoner. Not all of them are like this but a majority of them are. I'm not appealing this ruling against weed to the Supreme Court, I'm bitching to fellow potheads about what a load of garbage this continued idea of weed causing public safety issues in such grand scales as they claim is. If I WERE appealing to the Supreme Court...well let's face it, I'd get ten words in and they'd say "WE HAVE HEARD NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW WEED IS NOT AS DANGEROUS AS HEROINE AND METH, GET THE FUCK OUT."

And to make it clear to all the ultraliteral-minded on this forum; THAT'S AN EXAGGERATION.

I'm gonna have to start putting that up, I guess, because the idea of reading between the lines and seeing behind the curtain is just too hard for people these days or something. 9_9

That or maybe we on this forum are just constantly bombarded by religious shitbrickers so often that we're kind of stuck on the idea that if it SEEMS stupid it probably IS stupid... This is more likely, now I think on it...nor is it really all that inaccurate.

In closing; yes, I am HIGHLY aware that people stoned off their ass will go driving. I've done it several times, often with a friend who was ALSO stoned. Usually well past midnight, and to go to Mcdonald's to get a cheeseburger or...ten...

But the thing is, alcohol, for example, a legal substance, causes impairment while bolstering confidence...whereas when you're stoned you are still aware, albeit vaguely of your capacities. There's been times I've been really, REALLY baked, and I've WANTED to go to the gas station for snacks but I've known too damn well that there's no chance in hell that I'm getting behind the wheel. If I REALLY must, I'll walk. Other times, I've been aware and capable and able to drive and I am aware of this, too. Weed doesn't impair the judgment like alcohol does. It DOES alter your mindset but your judgment is still rather intact. Who the fuck gets stoned and fucks an ugly person, for example? Compare to, who gets drunk and fucks an ugly person?

Again. Generalization, but I really, truly, and honestly CANNOT think of a single instance in where someone got into a car accident that was caused by the person who was stoned. If someone can provide a link or something to show otherwise, I would appreciate it, of course, but I have looked and have not been able to find something where someone got into a car accident because they were stoned.

You do know, really, that legalizing weed will still allow you to keep those nice scientific advances made without hemp.

As I said, marijuana legalization is about weighing public safety (as any substance) against the civil rights to do what you want to your own body.

Marijuana does have some serious downsides:
- Youth that consume cannabis habitually before their late teens are significantly more prone to anxiety disorders and mental illness
- Users experience varying effects from excellent coordination to severely impaired
- Sudden Infant Death (SIDs) rises with exposure to second hand smoke (of any kind, but the data on infant-cannabis exposure is next to nil)
- People who are at-risk for mental illnesses raise their risk by using a psychedelic

Of course, when you look at alcohol, you get the similar-to-worse downsides if one is an severe alcoholic or prone to alcoholism.

So the analogy between the two of them is striking.

On the upside, marijuana doesn't allow users to kill themselves by simply consuming too much, creates a minor physiological addiction (compared to coffee) and more often relaxes people.

Legalization requires that the public develop means to detect impaired driving (the walking test, abc's, etc), develop a culture of shunning unsafe drivers and come to grips that by legalizing weed, they're going to get nasty events by criminals who blame the drug for their criminal actions.

It is inevitable (already happens) that people will crash and possibly kill/maim others while high on weed.

The problem is cultural, not a matter of legality.

But if our culture refuses to take responsibility, expect a puritanical Prohibition-style backlash.

The problem isn't Pot.

It's irresponsible pot-heads who make responsible users look bad.

(November 21, 2012 at 11:11 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: You do know, really, that legalizing weed will still allow you to keep those nice scientific advances made without hemp.

WE WON'T REGRESS?! D8< WHY THE FUCK DIDN'T SOMEONE TELL ME?!

I'm just fuckin' with ya. I'm aware of this. ;P

Quote:As I said, marijuana legalization is about weighing public safety (as any substance) against the civil rights to do what you want to your own body.

Well, I'm one of those crazies that thinks if someone really wants to end their life because they are in mind-breaking pain and cannot be treated for it and there's no real hope of them recovering they should be allowed to self-terminate or assisted-terminate, so... But yeah, public safety is still a thing, won't argue that.

Quote:Marijuana does have some serious downsides:
- Youth that consume cannabis habitually before their late teens are significantly more prone to anxiety disorders and mental illness

Well yeah. They're still in their developing period. That's a responsibility of the parents, though.

Quote:- Users experience varying effects from excellent coordination to severely impaired

Guilty of both. Somehow.

Quote:- Sudden Infant Death (SIDs) rises with exposure to second hand smoke (of any kind, but the data on infant-cannabis exposure is next to nil)

For the former; well YEAH. And for the latter; ...again, well YEAH. *lol*

Quote:- People who are at-risk for mental illnesses raise their risk by using a psychedelic

I HAVE mental illnesses. Yet they also tend to become far less pronounced while under the influence of marijuana.

Marijuana is a fairly chaotic intoxicant, isn't it?

Quote:Of course, when you look at alcohol, you get the similar-to-worse downsides if one is an severe alcoholic or prone to alcoholism.

So the analogy between the two of them is striking.

On the upside, marijuana doesn't allow users to kill themselves by simply consuming too much, creates a minor physiological addiction (compared to coffee) and more often relaxes people.

Legalization requires that the public develop means to detect impaired driving (the walking test, abc's, etc), develop a culture of shunning unsafe drivers and come to grips that by legalizing weed, they're going to get nasty events by criminals who blame the drug for their criminal actions.

It is inevitable (already happens) that people will crash and possibly kill/maim others while high on weed.

The problem is cultural, not a matter of legality.

But if our culture refuses to take responsibility, expect a puritanical Prohibition-style backlash.

The problem isn't Pot.

It's irresponsible pot-heads who make responsible users look bad.

[/quote]

Basically, I completely and totally agree with all of this. Responsibility is a key element to any society, and yet society sees fit to utilize the "kindergarten approach," as I call it. "Uh oh Billy was caught eating his Elmer's glue again so you've all lost your glue privileges for this week!" Drives me nuts. I get stoned, and I do one of three things. 1: I go walking around and just zone. 2: I write. I write a LOT, or 3: I go to the store and I buy WAY TOO FUCKING MANY BOXES OF CHIPS AHOY. So I either just do nothing, I provide to culture [heh, I can dream], or I stimulate the economy.

but then here comes Tweeny McFuckface and he rearends his family's SUV into his neighbor's Subaru. This is somehow legitimate reason to keep me from being able to easily access weed.

The fuck. Since when are we human beings NOT responsible for our own actions??

---

(November 20, 2012 at 3:03 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

---

(November 19, 2012 at 9:05 pm)Creed of Heresy Wrote: Also, this idea of starting companies to sell weed sounds pretty good. I'm thinking of maybe jumping on this bandwagon if/when it comes to Wisconsin. Going to apply for a business loan at the bank and mingle it with my culinary skills, and open a restaurant centered around selling courses where pot-butter is an ingredient in either the appetizer, the main course, the dessert, the drinks, or some/all of the above. Bud-butter is versatile and its flavor can be finely tuned for culinary arts; you need only the creativity and innovation to make it work. And, seriously, get made an excellent meal that gets you stoned? Shit, I might even add a lounge room to said restaurant for slipping-in stoning for watching TV and playing video games and chilling with others, maybe with hookahs for continuing the fun, and of course with proper interior design work involving psychadelic designs and coloring...

---

You probably won't be able to get that loan as a marijuana purveyor, since it's still a federal crime and banks are cautious about things like that. Just get the loan for the restaurant, the bank doesn't need to know the details of your seasoning and decoration practices.

Well of course.

If a culture is too infantile to control itself, then said infantile culture will demand the government protect them from themselves.

Prohibition is our best example.

I know, the majority shouldn't suffer for the actions of a minority.

But, to do otherwise, which is what you want, requires society to grow up and drop the "blame it on the alcohol" defense.

Will society grow up, Creed?