Marijuana and the law

[kılıç_mehmet]

Mary Jane=child porn?

Shut the fuck up, Mehmet.

No, you shut the fuck up. Drugs are a social ill as much as child porn is. Contributing to the sale of social ills with your money is taking part into social ills. If you're really people of such high regard for personal freedom, legalize child porn for personal use. After all, they weren't involved in its creation?

You people elevated this drug of yours, this false idol that you've created, to the position of God, and you take offense when someone calls out what it really is.

And I think you have the same knee jerk reaction that other people who don't do their research do. No offense. Let's dissect why you're wrong:

Lets see, then.

Perhaps not tobacco as much as alcohol. Alcohol is downright dangerous and has downer effects. Being high can either make you really giggly and happy or put you to sleep depending on what strand you take, and it has few if any negative side effects. And don't even get me started on high vs drunk drivers.

Well I really don't care whether alcohol has downer effects, and God knows it does, but it really makes no real difference. People in distress still drink it, as they smoke marijuana when they're in distress. And we know that a lot of people in the world are in distress. Providing people with illegal drugs, the kind that alter the mind as to create a state of euphoria is a dangerous thing. You give them something that allows them to escape reality far better than with alcohol. I know that not a lot of marijuana users like alcohol. Obviously it lacks the same potence of "happy making". However I'm pretty sure that there is little difference between drunk driving, and stoned driving.

I like the current status of marijuana as being the kind of thing that is used by people during a certain period of their lifetime. Something...that is special to that period, something that you use on certain occasions during your time as a student in high school or university. It would be no real problem if it stayed that way, people would move on as they went on to work and starting families...

No they won't. Everyone will grow their own or buy from the states legally for FAR less than any cartel will sell for. They'll face massive shipping losses to this country.

And you think that the cartels won't be the ones that own the business?
Besides, I am against the growing availability of such drugs, and their spread in society. The cartels moving their business to a legal circle is just a means of making the drug more accessible as they do this for profit. Self-growers don't do it for profit(some do though), but if their practice becomes widespread, it means that marijuana will become socially widespread and acceptable. Meaning, unacceptable for me. They won't miss anything, as being legal in your country, I'm sure they can work out an import deal? Why not? It's the free market, innit? Unless you nationalize the marijuana business, I'm sure you'll be dealing with cartels going legal a lot.

Uhhhhh really? How about cancer sufferers for one. Chronic seizures, digestive disease, and glaucoma are all treated and in some cases damn near cured. Again, knee jerk, no research done.

Cancer? You want to cure cancer with marijuana?
Or at least cure the effects of cancer with marijuana? You people are raving mad, this man is in pain, and the nurse just rolls him a joint.
I am both a smoker and a drinker, and you don't see me advertising my vices as anyting than what they are. You on the other hand advertise your vices as some sort of a miracle as to advocate its use for cancer patients.
Marijuana may have medicinal benefits in one way or the other, but advocating its use as the way its used now is simply ridiculous.
If there is a healing agent present within marijuana, you extract it, and purify it, and use it for its medicinal benefits in forms of tables, pills and injections. Presenting it to patients as a rolled joint? Really, that's witch doctor medicine, and you people who usually brag a lot about science and all use it and claim that it cured you of your cancer.
Its a false idol, with worshippers more fanatical than in any other cult I've seen.

Not at all what l mean. Lower arrest rates and prison pop is a positive byproduct of legalizing.

Well I fail to see what is so positive about releasing drug dealers and junkies back into society, though I personally think that the only "positive" thing could be take people off the taxpayer's backs, however you can do this by legalizing a number of other crimes, like illegal prostitution, allowing for anyone to prostitute themselves on the streets, or legalizing child abuse via the watching and downloading of illegal material related to child abuse. They would probably archive the same thing of taking people off the backs of the taxpayer, but in the long run, release a lot of the causes of social ills into society.

So stupid in fact that 20 states have legalized for medicinal use.

As I said, the medicinal use of this is a joke. There are today a number of plants that can be used for medicinal purposes. But no doctors actually advocate people to smoke them. If a patient is in pain, you don't supply him with opium in a pipe, you give him extracted and purified morphium.
Similarly, if one patient is in need of a chemical present within marijuana, you don't supply the patient with the plant, you supply him with the chemical present in the plant in the extracted and purified form.

Um, you know we can change the laws to make it all legal, don't you? And keeping it illegal because it's currently illegal doesn't seem to make much sense, at least not in a progressive way.

You can change everything to be legal, including things like treason, or murder, or whatever you want, hypothetically, you could do this, you could even just abolish the notion of laws to abolish the notions of "legal" and "illegal". Anarchists don't have such concepts.
And it must be kept illegal for the same reasons it became illegal, due to the fact that its a social ill, and provides a reasoning for any other social ill to be released into society.

Again I might ask, why do you have problems with keeping your habits for yourself? Why do you want the state to sanction your habits, and make them more accessible for contemporary people? What you people are talking about is not just legalizing it, you want to advocate this drug as something that is on the level of alcohol or tobacco, something that is akin to drinking a can of beer every afternoon. You want society to recognize and accept your habits as being anything but what it is. A social ill. Indeed, philosophising about prostitution is a lot easier than to advocate chastity.

Alcohol used to be illegal in the United States at one point, but all that did was create more crime and inconvenience the people who enjoyed drinking. If we took your idea and kept it illegal because it was illegal, that wouldn't have helped anyone.

Well, alcohol was at one point legal before it was made illegal, and it was widespread, people used to go and buy alcohol from their respective stores. When and how did marijuana first enter your country?
And was it in any way a socially recognized recreationary activity? No. So common people who value a healthy and well adjusted society were against the usage of this drug, and it becoming more and more widespread within the younger populace. Now however we talk about it being on the same level as alcohol is, like being sold and bought on the premises, accessible for more than just youngsters who wanted to just try it perhaps.

And indeed, legalisation does not help anyone but those who wish to use it as a basis to legalise their otherwise socially unacceptable behavior as acceptable. Using drugs is socially unacceptable. You can't smoke a joint in public. But with your reasoning, I'm sure it won't be too long until these brave soldiers for weed will start advocating the use of marijuana in every aspect of social and private life, as I see from how they are marketing it as a preferable alternative in the treatment of cancer pain...
I don't care if you people smoke marijuana. Smoke it until you reach the high heavens. But you're talking of legalisation, manufacture and sale of it, which is pretty much the same as increasing its current influence by a hundredfold, people who would have otherwise smoked a single joint in college will continue to do it later in life, and given its connections with the bohemian lifestyles, I'm sure that it will aid in the ongoing war against family and society. No wonder why cultural marxists advocate this along with other filth that they try to push onto normal society.

So in other words, you're one of those Puritan bastards who get offended that other people are enjoying something and think you have to ban it.

Well, lets say that I'm one of the bastards that tell you to keep your "enjoyable habits" or better said "vices" to your own bloody selves.
Society is not based on vice, it is based on virtue, and what your doing is to push for the social recognition of vice.
Indeed, it being illegal did not diminish its access to people who really need the feel to smoke marijuana, so what is your problem? Do you need the state to provide you with a legal backing? Why? What is your real purpose? Why provide easier access to drugs to people who might have otherwise not sought it out?
But yeah, these crusaders are on a mission to spread the good news about weed to the ignorant masses who live otherwise quite well without it. But the laws don't permit you to do this, so what do we do? Push for legalisation, so we can undermine society more easily and create our hippie utopia. Pfft. I think weed legalisation activists are cowards and liars, they hide behind long words and statements.

And I suppose in your utopian society, you're the one who gets to choose what is harmful and what isn't? What happens when someone else decides they don't like something you're eating and decide to ban it?

I am but a humble servent to society, a slave to my nation, and a soldier for my ideology. I see that bad food, tobacco and drugs of any kind, including alcohol are harmful for my people, they only serve to make them lazy, they make them seek happiness in mind altering substances rather than in being virtuous, clean, healthy and productive human beings.
So my ideology dictates that in a society that is ruled by our ideology, drugs cannot and will not exist. If people never had access to tobacco, they wouldn't feel the need to smoke tobacco. Same for marijuana. I'm advocating to crush the snakes head while its still a hatchling.

I'm a freelance writer and transcriptionist on the side. I occasionally do my work while on marijuana, and not only does the quality of my work not suffer, but I am actually able to focus better and for longer periods of time. If I were to try that with alcohol, itw wojkd klokk liekiw thies. Certainly, in my case, I'm not only contributing in spite of my drug preference, but actually a bit better because of it.

Yes, again with the miraculous attributes of the magic weed again, personally I'm not really interested in your stories about your high-times, I'm interested in society, and how society can be kept clean.
And to be honest, marijuana can have its uses to fuel the creativity of artists, as it generally makes you think of stuff that you might not have thought about before, for example, I used to dance a lot better when I smoked it, and was able to control my movements better, however it means nothing when you try to dance the same way when your head is clean, and what you can't do when your sober, equals zero in my mind.
That's why performance enhancing drugs are forbidden in sports competitions my friend. Similarly, using PED can perhaps work wonders for sportsman in professional competitions, and a guy who would perhaps lift weights in sets of 30 will lift sets of 40 or 50, when on PED, it really won't be something that will be attested to YOU.
So don't come to me with the excuse of how marijuana actually helped you in your work.

As for writing of course, it might be a different case, however its not really your drug habit itself that I'm attacking. You can produce your drugs in whatever illegal means you can, and smoke it without coming to the attention of the authorities, if you think it helps you that much, be my fucking guest.

Why not?

Because it is a socially destructive tool, that's why, silly.

Nothing is declared illegal without a reason, true, but there are scads of things declared illegal for bad or faulty reasons. Marijuana is one of them.

No, the reason marijuana was declared illegal is due to it being a drug with high psychological addictive potential, and its mind altering attributes that far exceed those that you can get from drinking a couple of beers.
Give it a push by legalisation, and push for the social acceptance of its use, by means of political advocacy, advertising and growing numbers of smokers of various ranges of people, in different age groups, you create a socially destructive drug.

There is no bad or faulty reason. It was declared illegal for the right reasons, as to keep it from spreading far into society.
It was declared illegal to keep people from trying or getting potentially addicted to it. I guess I made myself clear on why I think it should stay illegal a couple of times before.

Humor us with the specific reasons you believe pot deserves to be illegal, so that we can correct you.

The above mentioned reasons.
And there is a reason right there, in the post you've quoted. Giving it legal status makes it far easier to advocate the use of the drug, spreading its influence. Corporations will obviously play a part in this far more than the average user with their advertising, and their army of bought intellectuals and politicians. And perhaps not just marijuana. Why not legalize cocaine while you're at it? Cocaine is far better than any other drug I've ever tried. Makes you feel like the king of the world. Legalize that, and on top, remove trade restrictions with Colombia on cocaine, allow for easy flow of the blow, baby.

However I still think that "marijuana activists", although I'd say its best to refer to them as general-drug activists, as advocating personal freedom would mean to respect the preferences of all drug-users, ranging from heroin to peyote to cocaine and to marijuana, however I can't really see anyone pushing for the advocacy of medicinal heroin, nor the "legal recreational use" of heroin, because heroin is a substance that is known to be lethal in certain doses. It is due to the reason that you simply wish for your drug-advocacy to have a more harmless face, as being marijuana, the magical drug that is behind the brilliance of various artists, associated with mysteriously seductive avant-garde movements and the idealized bohemian lifestyle of hippies.

Well, I don't buy into this propaganda.

Because my drug use poses no threat or risk to society. Therefore, that society has no right to tell me I can't do what I want, in this case.

You're wrong, my friend, you're very wrong.
Mind altering drugs of any and all kinds present a threat to society, they destroy families, they destroy good customs and virtues.
Drugs are the very definition of what it means to be the enemy of society.

In all, I think that you think that society has no right to tell you what to do, regardless of what you do it harmful to society. I state this because you do actually lack the concept of a "society" in how you're so absorbed into your individualism, you really fail to see the greater picture, and you only band together when your personal hedonistic desires are at stake.

Really. "Contribute nothing to society"?

I'm a professional software developer. I've been continuously eemployed for approximately 25 years, the last 14 with the same employer. I make good money, pay my taxes, and donate to the needy. I suppose those contributions don't count?

I also happen to smoke weed when I feel like it.

And you're a very few in amongst load of people who wallow in filth.
Still does not change the general judgement.