Marijuana and the law

[Crossless2.0]

It is illegal for a reason my friend. It is the reasons why I oppose its legalisation.

Aside from ensuring that producers and distributors of alcohol don't have to face legal competition from a less dangerous drug, what other "reasons" are there for keeping pot illegal?

Besides, those who advocate legalisation are mostly advocating legalisation with the said phrase of "personal freedoms". I have a problem with that, as this argument can also be used to legalise any other recreational drug, as it befits people.

Damn straight it's about personal freedom. Sorry you have a problem with the idea. I don't.

And well, as our materialist/pragmatist friend Lastpoet spoke, it can be taxed, so legalisation has benefits? No, it does not.

Mere assertion.

I'm fairly certain that it will become another focal point of international corporations to establish a monopoly on the "legal" drug trade, and they will pressure the world to legalize its trade, usage and growing worldwide. The concept of legalisation represents everything I hate.

I doubt it's the "concept of legalization" that you hate. Is it the possibility that someone might *gasp* profit from providing a product that people like and will gladly pay for?

I don't get it. You object to people profiting in the black market and you object to people profiting from legal sales?

[Walking Void]

So much tax to be gathered from being legal. And the users wouldn't resort to crime because it would probably be cheaper, and in better quality.

Spoken like a true capitalist.

You are opposed to legalizing marijuana because . . . it's currently illegal? Sorry, but if your post means something else, the meaning escapes me.

It is illegal for a reason my friend. It is the reasons why I oppose its legalisation.
Besides, those who advocate legalisation are mostly advocating legalisation with the said phrase of "personal freedoms". I have a problem with that, as this argument can also be used to legalise any other recreational drug, as it befits people.
And well, as our materialist/pragmatist friend Lastpoet spoke, it can be taxed, so legalisation has benefits? No, it does not. I'm fairly certain that it will become another focal point of international corporations to establish a monopoly on the "legal" drug trade, and they will pressure the world to legalize its trade, usage and growing worldwide. The concept of legalisation represents everything I hate.

A balloon post: massive volume, full of air or a buoyant, inert gas.

Dare I point out the illogical arguments? Alright, I will.

•You oppose its legalization because it is illegal.

You are running in circles, comrade.

•"People who are siding with legalization argue 'personal freedoms' "

If they are: your point? What is your argument? For a short point, I say it should be legalized because black markets are being made to obtain said contraband, and government is making a business out of charging people for said contraband. If people want the drug, they will get it, by force if necessary. We establish an industry and market to produce the weed safely if We do legalize it.

•A corporate monopoly will be made in respect to the legalization of weed.

Possibly?! I mean, are those effects not taking place in the real world in other industries? Microsoft and Apple have a choke hold on every computer store. Disney has the choke hold on every animated film production (and now Star Wars). Walmart has the choke hold on every grocery district (usually slowly killing other smaller businesses surrounding it).

And You are worried about a monopoly on weed.

Weed. Something any garden center could provide. I could walk in to Lowe's or Home Depot or Walmart, go to their gardening department, buy a packet of seeds... and farm my own weed at my house, independent of any corporate seller of the packaged drug. Now now, Mehmet.

[kılıç_mehmet]

That's obvious. I already knew you're a fascist.

I do not identify myself with that name, I am a Turkish nationalist, however we do have a lot in common with fascists in how I and they view that a general well adjusted society should be. I do not stand for excessive personal freedoms that destroy society and therefore, the nation.

Aside from ensuring that producers and distributors of alcohol don't have to face legal competition from a less dangerous drug, what other "reasons" are there for keeping pot illegal?

You think that marijuana is a competitor to the alcohol industry?
Those who absolutely want to smoke marijuana already do so by buying them from their local dealers. What you're talking about is to represent marijuana as an alternative to alcohol.
Meaning, that you want to turn it into an enterprise that seeks to multiply its customers, and like alcohol, they will have brands, they will use advertising and will have shops in every city and town where you can buy marijuana legally.

Of course, since you regard alcohol as more "dangerous" than marijuana, I guess this is due to the reason that marijuana is less accessible to people, and is therefore not very well known. Not many people want to affiliate themselves with scum like drug dealers, or may not wish to pollute their minds with a drug that is illegal, and therefore, has a higher stigma potential alcohol. But once its legal, and once its as widespread as alcohol, I'm sure that you will swallow your words, if you have any common sense left by then of course.
Of course you can brag all about how the evil alcohol industry is keeping you from getting your fix from a local store, but all your tinfoil theories won't change the fact that marijuana is a mind-altering, potentially addictive drug that appeals to people that require it to be happy and fulfilled. Namely, people that contribute nothing to society.

Damn straight it's about personal freedom. Sorry you have a problem with the idea. I don't.

Therefore, its not just about marijuana. How about coke? Heroin? Meth?
This is why you don't make the law. Lawmaking is reserved for people that can think collectively, and that can actually consider public health and social well being as the standing point for laws.

Mere assertion.

Well, why else would one quote taxation as a "pro" for legalisation?

I doubt it's the "concept of legalization" that you hate. Is it the possibility that someone might *gasp* profit from providing a product that people like and will gladly pay for?

I don't get it. You object to people profiting in the black market and you object to people profiting from legal sales?

As I said, if I marketed a drug that provides quick and painless death solely for those who wish to commit suicide to buy it, and people do pay money, should this product be allowed on the premises?

People profit on the black market, as its illegal, and can be fought by the full might of the state that seeks to protect its people. But if it is the state that provides this filth to its people, its a different story.
Same goes for alcohol and tobacco.
Previously in the older ages, drugs and many other substances ran rampart across many countries. But as time progressed, people and governments realized the evils that these substances produce. Opium was such as substance, and nearly all countries outlawed the legal sale and the use of opium for recreation.
Of course, those who advocated "legal sales" like the British empire of the time, declared war upon China who wanted to protect its people from the evils of opium, China destroyed any opium that tried to enter the country, and the British empire, whereas opium use and sell was forbidden in England, was appalled at the notion that they could not sell their legally produced opium in a country, where it was declared illegal.

So I think you understand my point. Given its current position as a superpower, and given how multinational corporations pull the strings in the US, I'm sure that they will do everything in their power to "bring personal freedom" to other countries.

•You oppose its legalization because it is illegal.

You are running in circles, comrade.

I oppose its legalisation due to the reasons it was declared illegal.
Nothing is declared illegal without a reason.

If they are: your point? What is your argument? For a short point, I say it should be legalized because black markets are being made to obtain said contraband, and government is making a business out of charging people for said contraband. If people want the drug, they will get it, by force if necessary. We establish an industry and market to produce the weed safely if We do legalize it.

Well, thats not a solution, however. There are many people who try to enter the country illegally. So what do you do? Open your borders for everyone to come and settle. There are many people who try to rob banks. So what do you do? Open the vaults and let anyone come and grab a handful of money. There is a lot of smuggling(not just drugs), so what do you do? Remove all trade restrictions! This is not how a country works. That's not how law and order are established. You are speaking of reconciling drug cartels with the world, with only the drug cartels profiting from this, as they won't have to go through great lengths to smuggle their drugs and use secondary agents to provide users with the said drugs.
The industry already exists my good man, you don't need to establish it.

Possibly?! I mean, are those effects not taking place in the real world in other industries? Microsoft and Apple have a choke hold on every computer store. Disney has the choke hold on every animated film production (and now Star Wars). Walmart has the choke hold on every grocery district (usually slowly killing other smaller businesses surrounding it).

Not possibly, certainly.

And You are worried about a monopoly on weed.

Weed. Something any garden center could provide. I could walk in to Lowe's or Home Depot or Walmart, go to their gardening department, buy a packet of seeds... and farm my own weed at my house, independent of any corporate seller of the packaged drug. Now now, Mehmet.

Well, its not monopoly that worries me, but that's what is going to happen. Obviously you can't have a weed garden in every household. But that's what you think is going to happen when they legalize it, I guess?
I really don't care whether they create a monopoly on it, or whether everyone in the world has their own weed garden as to make a monopoly impossible, I'm against the spreading of the said drug in society. The creation of a monopoly by international corporations serves this purpose as they do this for profit, and they will naturally seek to enlarge their customer base. And with how you people regard marijuana as some sort of a "magic" drug that is completely harmless and even beneficial, I can see that in the future, both old and young will sit on their asses all day, gorging themselves on munchies, smoking marijuana.
Well, not going to happen.


Besides, if you're so independent on drug dealers to get your fix, produce it in your own home, and let your habits stay and die with you. Why really allow for drugs to gain a strong foothold in society? As you said, you can procure your drugs by illegal means. So why do you want the whole of society to acknowledge your drug habits and make them legal?

[Heir Apparent]

Marijuana was banned from the US because the dickhead that largely ran the paper manufacturing business didn't want the innovation of modernized hemp manufacturing to take his monopoly. Hemp has enormous benefits to an economy and to the environment.

It's still illegal for largely the same reasons, and also because it will seriously wound other enterprises as mentioned, such as alcohol and tobacco companies.

The benefits of full legalization and regulation far outweigh the negatives. Cartels/dealers lose business, millions of sick people feel better, arrest rates and prison population go down, money spent on pursuing growers goes towards other things, the deficit plummets, jobs are created, and people everywhere will chill the fuck out about the little things. Just to name a few. I'm sure I missed something.

The arrest rate for marijuana use is absurd and there are way too many people in jail for it. It's embarrassing.

Edit - I also have to contend your point about people being lazy if they all smoked. That's simply not true. Lazy people WILL do that, hard workers will continue to do hard work. Weed doesn't suddenly make you stop functioning unless your on a powerful indica strain and you're me.

To loosely quote Joe Rogan: if you're a lazy fuck and you smoke, you'll be a lazy fuck who smokes it. If you work hard and smoke, you'll be a hard working smoker.

[kılıç_mehmet]

It's still illegal for largely the same reasons, and also because it will seriously wound other enterprises as mentioned, such as alcohol and tobacco companies.

I think you're fooling yourselves by claiming such theories as "it will hurt the tobacco industry","it'll finish off alcohol". These are nothing but stories that you tell yourself, I think. And it shows me that you are hoping that marijuana will rise in popularity over alcohol and cigarettes, meaning, it will become a "generic" habit that you can see in normal society.
This is why it should be illegal, due to people like you, trying force this drug on society.

The benefits of full legalization and regulation far outweigh the negatives. Cartels/dealers lose business, millions of sick people feel better, arrest rates and prison population go down, money spent on pursuing growers goes towards other things, the deficit plummets, jobs are created, and people everywhere will chill the fuck out about the little things. Just to name a few. I'm sure I missed something.

Please tell me how cartels will lose their business by legalization?
They won't, they'll just probably be happy because they won't need to use round-about ways just to sell their wares. Millions of sick people? Who are those?

Besides, legalizing drugs and drug trade as a means of lowering arrest rates and prison populations is kind of stupid. If you legalize a previously illegal thing, of course people are not going to be arrested on that accord, and will not be put in jail. Legalize child porn for instance. Its the same thing if you ask me. Legalizing child porn would also stop the moneyspent on pursuing those who watch it, and obviously it will lower government spending by a large measure by the means you've just described.
So really, what good is there to legalize a social ill to make more money?
Obviously its purpose is self-defeating.

The arrest rate for marijuana use is absurd and there are way too many people in jail for it. It's embarrassing.

Well, I guess not enough for them to pursue this stupid agenda.
Go USA! I support you on this one.

[Captain Colostomy]

Mary Jane=child porn?

Shut the fuck up, Mehmet.

[Heir Apparent]

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:

"It won't hurt tobacco or alcohol"

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.

"Cartels will be happy"

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.

"Millions of sick people"

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.

"Legalizing as a means to lower arrest rates"

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

"Stupid agenda"

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

*Waggles finger in disappointment*

[Doubting Thomas]

I used to think that marijuana should be legal for recreational usage only, however lastly, my opinion shifted to it being illegal in any case.
For if you are a recreational user, you must procure the drug from somewhere. That usually is a drug dealer, that breaks the law so that it can supply users with its wares, and the continued use of these makes the drug dealer naturally commit more crimes in the future by selling illegal drugs.
Or, you could be a self-grower, in which you would be treated the same as a dealer, as you create a massive quantity of the illegal substance, whether to sell or for your own use, its the same.
I think it should be illegal for both use, manufacture and trade.

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.

[Jackalope]

So much tax to be gathered from being legal. And the users wouldn't resort to crime because it would probably be cheaper, and in better quality.

It might not be cheaper once the government takes its cut, but quality would certainly improve. I spent so many years living in Nevada, where the quality is consistently high, that I had actually forgotten that there were such things as stems and seeds. Now I live in Baton Rouge, where apparently the only shit you can buy is low-grade brown Mexican ditch weed.

I miss the West . . .

I don't expect it to be cheaper in Washington state once legal sales start. I did some back-of-the-envelope math one time, and with it being taxed (and profit taken) at the mandated three layers (grow, packaging, retail) - I expect that retail sale will be about the same price as it is today, give or take.

However, with mandated quality testing and labeling standards, I expect consistency and overall product quality to go up. It'll be nice to be able to buy what you want, and know exactly what you're getting.

[Doubting Thomas]

It is illegal for a reason my friend. It is the reasons why I oppose its legalisation.

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.

I can enjoy having a few drinks in the evening after work, and alcohol isn't ruining my life. Pot users do the same thing. So why should one be legal and the other not?

---

In my ideal society, no one would use drugs, alcohol or tobacco, anything that is harmful to the human body or mind, and therefore, harmful to 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.

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?