I think that Eminem had a much more realistic (and I'm being loose with the word here.....incredibly) portrayal of drug use and slinging dope than the "I'm on a yacht with a limo and 8 supermodels" crowd. It doesn't matter though, it's all fantasy (and it's produced not for the dope slinging crowd...or even the ghetto crowd - but young white suburbanites...they're the ones with the cash that buys the cds and merch).

Without buyers there would be no sellers. What I'm suggesting, is that it is neither the buying -nor- the selling that are to blame for these problems you see. Lets say that you and I sell coke to roughly the same clientele - and we have a "business dispute". Can I litigate you? Can I hire a lawyer and take you to a civil court in order to negotiate an agreement between us? No, I cannot. I can, however, shoot you - all of your employees...and perhaps a few of your customers. If I don't - given the slims margins involved, I may be out of a living shortly. Does this sort of business model attract "morally flexible" people? Yes. If I -could- litigate you, how much room would there be for those gangbangers in the coke market? Sure, those people who would get into shootouts would still do so - but not for this. You don't see the manager of the 7-11 on top of his store firing an ak at the manager of the Circle K across the street on his roof, with his norinco, -over accusations of slurpee price fixing or market infringement, eh?

(I want to add, that the vast majority of drug dealers are just as non violent as the vast majority of drug users. I don't know what the kids call it nowadays - but we used to call it squashing beef, and that was always the way to go - it's better for business)

(September 20, 2014 at 5:46 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I think that Eminem had a much more realistic (and I'm being loose with the word here.....incredibly) portrayal of drug use and slinging dope than the "I'm on a yacht with a limo and 8 supermodels" crowd. It doesn't matter though, it's all fantasy (and it's produced not for the dope slinging crowd...or even the ghetto crowd - but young white suburbanites...they're the ones with the cash that buys the cds and merch).

Without buyers there would be no sellers. What I'm suggesting, is that it is neither the buying -nor- the selling that are to blame for these problems you see. Lets say that you and I sell coke to roughly the same clientele - and we have a "business dispute". Can I litigate you? Can I hire a lawyer and take you to a civil court in order to negotiate an agreement between us? No, I cannot. I can, however, shoot you - all of your employees...and perhaps a few of your customers. If I don't - given the slims margins involved, I may be out of a living shortly. Does this sort of business model attract "morally flexible" people? Yes. If I -could- litigate you, how much room would there be for those gangbangers in the coke market? Sure, those people who would get into shootouts would still do so - but not for this. You don't see the manager of the 7-11 on top of his store firing an ak at the manager of the Circle K across the street on his roof, with his norinco, -over accusations of slurpee price fixing or market infringement, eh?

You're suggesting that with or without freedom of drugs there will be drug use. You're saying that legalizing drugs will make the scenario less violent. I concur with that statement. Is the war on drugs a viable solution to all these problems? Obviously not. It's apparently failing and costing the world a lot of money. I think this could be a "the grass is always greener" dilemma though. How do you know that legalizing drugs would make the united states better. I imagine that if drugs got legalized, without regulations, there would be a massive bonanza of hardcore drug use and celebration. I suspect that may people's lives would be lost. Countless people would develop addiction. As well as more unforeseen issues, all in the first week.

So maybe it would be a matter of regulating the drug use. Don't allow the most severely heavy drugs, like heroin etc. on the market and allowed people access to less sever drugs, in regulated amounts, perhaps that would alleviate some drug war tension. No one would want to use those sever drugs like heroin after the safer drugs are available. My guess is that hard drugs are cheap. So if you allow some to be legalized, I'm sure the taxes would be high and the price of the drugs would be high as well. Just look at the price of cigarettes. Yet people still smoke them and I don't ever hear about a cigarette black market. I also like the idea of not criminalizing drug users and cleaner quality of drugs through professional regulated distribution. I think that would be a good solution. Would you agree?

I would doubt that changing one thing would "make the US better". I'm not even sure what that would mean, but if by "better" we meant "less violent specifically pertaining to the drug trade" then yes - it would be a start.

If some nutball wants to put hay-ron up his damned veins that's his business, as long as he doesn't go joyriding in his car and mow over a bunch of kids. I don;t see the problem...it;s not like we have a national health program whereby I'd have to foot the bill for his treatment - but even if we did, I would, and I wouldn't bitch about it. That's how this works. We all help each other on the notion that doing so furthers our own interests. If my taxes get a guy off of heroin, cool, I bet they buy more immunizations than they do methadone.

(there -is- a cigarrette black market btw, you should see the fines and penalties...lol. Everytime I come out of the fields with a trunk tied I worry that some state ag agent will accuse me of having intent to sell.......)

(September 20, 2014 at 6:11 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I would doubt that changing one thing would "make the US better". I'm not even sure what that would mean, but if by "better" we meant "less violent specifically pertaining to the drug trade" then yes - it would be a start.

That's the point of this thread. We weren't talking about the all the problems in the entire US in the first place.

(September 20, 2014 at 1:22 pm)MusicLovingAtheist Wrote: I was in a secular community called secular sevens on a website called bungie.net that developed the Halo series for Xbox. It seemed like everyone in that community was supportive of complete legalization of all drugs, because "a person should have control over what they put in their body", as they say. I was just reading an interview with an artist called Brethren, an extremely racist and antisemitic power electronics artist who makes music I like. I don't agree with a lot of the things he said in this interview [click for the interview]. Obviously this guy's political views are messed up, if you actually feel like reading it (which I don't expect you to). He briefly touch on the issue of drugs, saying that it's a moral issue and that the government should butt out (if you ctrl-f the word moral you might find that part of the interview).

I am for the legalization of marijuana and that's it. I have heard from so many people that marijuana has very little harmful effects and actually can help cancer patients and has other great stress relieving effects. It seems like a strange drug to be trying to criminalize. I have been told that the drug is criminalized as an artificial crime to help give money to the government and prisons. I have no idea, but artificial crime sounds like bullshit if that's the case.

My personal reason for being against legalization of drugs is because I don't want to live in a world with junkies. Imagine how bad poor neighborhoods are now. Now imagine them with everyone out of their mind on drugs. How scary would it be if we lived in a world with violent psychotic people with impaired cognitive ability? There are so many negative health effects for using drugs. I looked up some effects of a drug on arrowid called DXM. There was a gigantic list of side effects for that drug. Drugs are addictive, dangerous to health, can cause permanent brain damage and schizophrenia; there are so many health risks for drugs, it would take an encyclopedia to list them all. I think it's more of a matter of health than it is morality. Maybe some people have religious reasons for not doing drugs (you can have a faith reason for doing anything). My positions I hold are not unchangeable. I just need someone to give me a good persuasive argument to change my mind (if such an argument exists).

I agree that yes, marijuana should be legal because it's about as dangerous as alcohol, probably less so in fact, because there's really no such thing as an angry stoner or violent stoner whereas people do sometimes get violent when they drink. Here is a a great video in which comedian Jim Jefferies makes an excellent point as to why other hard drugs should not be legalized. His argument in the video is against guns but he uses drugs as an example and makes a great point in the process. Skip ahead to the 11:06 mark and watch to about the 12:06 mark. It is a minute well spent I assure you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBpuLlw4Xjs

I grow all of my plants with ZERO chemicals and pesticides. I test all of my finished product through an accredited local agency. I have extreme respect for the plants and their recipients. Legalize cannabis NOW!

That's a bit misleading Shaman. Of course you use chemicals, otherwise the plants wouldn't grow.
(and one of the reasons that you require no -additional- pesticides is that MJ produces a heady brew of it's own, more lethal than many field standards - that may actually be the purpose of THC to begin with, but the plants arsenal isn't limited to THC, of course. One of the most amusing explanations of the "munchies" is as an encouragement for predators to eat even more of the VOCing plant...in order to get a more properly lethal dose.)

(September 20, 2014 at 6:17 pm)ShaMan Wrote: I grow all of my plants with ZERO chemicals and pesticides. I test all of my finished product through an accredited local agency. I have extreme respect for the plants and their recipients. Legalize cannabis NOW!

I bet you use copious amounts of dihydrogen monoxide. In fact, I'm certain of it. What are you trying to do, kill us all with that dangerous stuff?

(September 20, 2014 at 6:19 pm)Rhythm Wrote: That's a bit misleading Shaman. Of course you use chemicals, otherwise the plants wouldn't grow.

You are correct. I apply nitrogen, potassium silicate, and phosphorous to certain soils. I also hydrate the plants with a liquid solution of H2o. I allow the plants to do the rest through their own chemical processes.

ETA: I do not use DHMO

(September 20, 2014 at 6:14 pm)AtheistBuddha Wrote:

(September 20, 2014 at 1:22 pm)MusicLovingAtheist Wrote: I was in a secular community called secular sevens on a website called bungie.net that developed the Halo series for Xbox. It seemed like everyone in that community was supportive of complete legalization of all drugs, because "a person should have control over what they put in their body", as they say. I was just reading an interview with an artist called Brethren, an extremely racist and antisemitic power electronics artist who makes music I like. I don't agree with a lot of the things he said in this interview [click for the interview]. Obviously this guy's political views are messed up, if you actually feel like reading it (which I don't expect you to). He briefly touch on the issue of drugs, saying that it's a moral issue and that the government should butt out (if you ctrl-f the word moral you might find that part of the interview).

I am for the legalization of marijuana and that's it. I have heard from so many people that marijuana has very little harmful effects and actually can help cancer patients and has other great stress relieving effects. It seems like a strange drug to be trying to criminalize. I have been told that the drug is criminalized as an artificial crime to help give money to the government and prisons. I have no idea, but artificial crime sounds like bullshit if that's the case.

My personal reason for being against legalization of drugs is because I don't want to live in a world with junkies. Imagine how bad poor neighborhoods are now. Now imagine them with everyone out of their mind on drugs. How scary would it be if we lived in a world with violent psychotic people with impaired cognitive ability? There are so many negative health effects for using drugs. I looked up some effects of a drug on arrowid called DXM. There was a gigantic list of side effects for that drug. Drugs are addictive, dangerous to health, can cause permanent brain damage and schizophrenia; there are so many health risks for drugs, it would take an encyclopedia to list them all. I think it's more of a matter of health than it is morality. Maybe some people have religious reasons for not doing drugs (you can have a faith reason for doing anything). My positions I hold are not unchangeable. I just need someone to give me a good persuasive argument to change my mind (if such an argument exists).

I agree that yes, marijuana should be legal because it's about as dangerous as alcohol, probably less so in fact, because there's really no such thing as an angry stoner or violent stoner whereas people do sometimes get violent when they drink. Here is a a great video in which comedian Jim Jefferies makes an excellent point as to why other hard drugs should not be legalized. His argument in the video is against guns but he uses drugs as an example and makes a great point in the process. Skip ahead to the 11:06 mark and watch to about the 12:06 mark. It is a minute well spent I assure you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBpuLlw4Xjs

That comedian does make a good point.