Legalize soft-drugs yes or no.

[Whispering Death]

which it is unlikely that the taxes placed on the legalized drug will compensate for the amount of manpower needed to insure proper oversight.

Oh really, and that's so much more expensive than the current "war" on drugs that is doing nothing?

You can get marijuana anytime anywhere in America and the government spends millions making absolutely zero difference.

It's quite rediculous.

 

[bulldogg]

It doesn't matter whether or not you legalise them people have used and abused them for ages and will continue to do so. Its a matter of supply and demand, as long as there is a demand someone will supply it. Whether it is the government as in our socialist European allies or the criminal cartels of the western hemisphere it will continue until people no longer WANT to stop and that I do not think will ever happen.

Either legal or illegal it is a game that provides diversions, money and jobs for thousands of people. The only difference is the role and title of who is on the receiving end of the money train and as 03 said there will always be people skirting the system. The Boston Tea Party is a perfect example.

Just depends on how a society wishes to approach it. I think cops like my uncles and 03 are not in a losing battle but a stagnant one that cannot be won. I also think that countries that legalise drugs are fooling themselves. I think more attention needs to be paid to cutting off the demand. Why do people take drugs? Cure that and you cure the problem.

 

[Whispering Death]

Why do people take drugs? Why not ask why people drink beer? Or watch football and go to the movies?

It's the exact same thing. Now some drugs are so deadly like heroin that they have to be illiegalized.

But Marijuana? We saw what happened when we criminalized alchohol and if you don't see the exact same thing happening with marijuana prohobition you're blind.

The reason there will always be a huge demand for beer and marijuana is because for the vast majority of people it's fun and never does a thing negative in their life outside of maybe sleeping with a fat chick.

 

[Chief Bones]

ARE YOU CRAZY?

{A} Alcohol has been a legal drug longer than I've been alive and alcohol is the number one factor in accident related deaths on the highway, and you're in favor of putting another "legal" mind altering drug out there on our roads!


{B} Almost every single study into hard drug usage leads to one common datum. When marijuana is described as a "gateway" drug, there's a very valid reason for it. Every single hard drug user started out experimenting with marijuana and not one single person (in the studies I've read) started out recreationally, using hard drugs.
(The footnotes on one study did state that out of the 532 cases in the study, 1 person was hooked on cocaine as a result of a wound received in Vietnam - (yes) one of our fellow warriors).

{C} For those who bring up the legalisation of "soft" drugs in Holland, following are just a few eye openers:

NOTE: From a CNN Special Report (Don't remember date"
1) According to local law enforcement authorities, usage of hard drugs has been slowly increasing since marijuana has been legalised and become readily available.


2) Since usage of hard drugs has become a source of worry for law enforcement authorities, the total number of non-licenced streetwalkers has risen drastically.
(Correlation: more & more fixes needed when hooked + higher price of hard drugs = more non-licensed streetwalkers trying to earn money for next fix because they can't hold a regular job).


3) Since the total number of non-licenced streetwalkers has risen drastically, the incidence of aids and aids related diseases has risen to epidemic proportions.

Before those who are so blase as to say "soft drugs aren't dangerous", take a closer look at Holland, I believe that the facts just don't support this statement.

I would love to see marijuana taken off the government's "hit" list for two reasons. There are way too many "three time" criminals locked up for life because one of the crimes they were found guilty of was possession of marijuana (the felony charged one).

The second reason has to do with medicinal usage of marijuana - until it is removed from the heavy-handed control of the federal government, states will not be able to pass legislation which gives doctor's the power to prescribe marijuana for their patients who really need it.

THE SIMPLE FACT IS THAT LEGALISING "SOFT" DRUGS ISN'T QUITE SO SIMPLE.

 

[Whispering Death]

{B} Almost every single study into hard drug usage leads to one common datum. When marijuana is described as a "gateway" drug, there's a very valid reason for it. Every single hard drug user started out experimenting with marijuana and not one single person (in the studies I've read) started out recreationally, using hard drugs.

Yeah, but that's because some 50% of the population alive today has tried marijuana at some time in their lives. That's including all you old folk too!

Saying marijuana is a gateway to becomming a druggie is like saying being born is a gateway to becomming a serial murderer.

 

[sunb!]

The way I see it, drugs should be legalized for a purpose - and that purpose is stricktly medical. If a cancer patient fail to respond to the prescribed dose of morphine then maybe marijuana can be a better alternative as pain killer.

There are so many bad things happening in the world today and we should not make it worse by allowing other drugs than alcohol.

 

[bulldogg]

Saying marijuana is a gateway to becomming a druggie is like saying being born is a gateway to becomming a serial murderer.

:roll:
That is not a logical argument WD. To have proper comparison you must follow logic, not a fallacy of logic. Equal comparisons. A more apt comparison would be to say that committing grand theft auto is a gateway crime to armed robbery. Its when your arguments lose their logic and enter into specious displays of ideology that you lose the edge in persuading people.

The fact of the matter is that marajuana is a gateway drug. Nearly all surveys have proven beyond a doubt that the vast majority of all hard drug users do not start on that drug but in fact marajuana. This does not mean that all ganja smokers progress beyond it but those who are on the harder more illicit drugs have almost all started with smoking marajuana. So a more proper way to argue the "gateway" is by a proper comparison of the percentage of all people who smoke marajuana who then go on to use more illicit drugs. IF the percentage is small you might have some sway in arguing this point being moot as a reason to keep the drug illegal. If the percentage is high then the law and order crowd rule the day.

You may fire when ready.

 

[Chief Bones]

............ Saying marijuana is a gateway to becomming a druggie is like saying being born is a gateway to becomming a serial murderer.

Not every person born becomes a serial murderer - however - without exception (except rare cases) every "hard" drug addict started with marijuana.

Above "fact" is inarguable - but - fire away anyway.

 

[Whispering Death]

Alright I was being a tad commical with my last comment on the "gateway" issue.

You want a logical argument?

It's 100% EXACTLY like saying eating at McDonnald's is a gateway to becomming morbidly obese. Statistically everyone who is morbidly obese in America has eaten at McDonnalds. Therefore we should illiegalize those quarter pounders with cheese! I have the statistics right here that PROVE BEYOND A DOUBT that everyone who becomes morbidly obese has eaten at McDonnalds. That institution of sin must be shut down for the good of America or we will be consumed by fat canibalistic filet-of-fish crazed maniacs!

 

[Chief Bones]

WD
I guess there is only one final argument I can use.

Jonathan Swift said: "There's none so blind as they that won't see".

Do you suppose he was talking about you and I?

 

[Whispering Death]

I'm hoping you more than I

All I'm saying is if it where a theoretical thing of civil liberties vs. social welfare then maybe it's up in the air. But when you get to the reality of all the crime, murder, battery, and assault that has been sent across the country like the greatest 20th century plague due to the drug laws... I don't see how you can say they are a success.

As much as there are traditional American values that should be protected, America is a country of flexible change and these stupid drug laws are only a mere 30 years old.

 

[Chief Bones]

No where did I say the drug laws are a success. That was not what this discussion was all about.

The drug laws are a compromise with what is ideal and what is the best realistic control that society will accept.

 

[Whispering Death]

Well I don't deal in politics and what if scenarios. I deal with reality and results and the results of current drug laws have been widespread failure worse than prohibition. Reform begins with admiting which drugs are dangerous and which are only dangerous when criminalized.

 

[Ted]

ARE YOU CRAZY?


{C} For those who bring up the legalisation of "soft" drugs in Holland, following are just a few eye openers:

NOTE: From a CNN Special Report (Don't remember date"
1) According to local law enforcement authorities, usage of hard drugs has been slowly increasing since marijuana has been legalised and become readily available.


2) Since usage of hard drugs has become a source of worry for law enforcement authorities, the total number of non-licenced streetwalkers has risen drastically.
(Correlation: more & more fixes needed when hooked + higher price of hard drugs = more non-licensed streetwalkers trying to earn money for next fix because they can't hold a regular job).


3) Since the total number of non-licenced streetwalkers has risen drastically, the incidence of aids and aids related diseases has risen to epidemic proportions.

Before those who are so blase as to say "soft drugs aren't dangerous", take a closer look at Holland, I believe that the facts just don't support this statement.


THE SIMPLE FACT IS THAT LEGALISING "SOFT" DRUGS ISN'T QUITE SO SIMPLE.

I'm not sure who to believe on this one Chief. I take myself as a standard Dutchman who happens to live near Amsterdam. What I see, hear and read doens't concur with what CNN says.
Your first statement correlates soft drugs to hard drugs. But an entire generation grew up with XTC and speed. They skipped softdrugs all together and in the week-end they visit a rave and pop some chemicals. This will show you a dramatic rise in harddrug usage, but not due to cannabis.
statement 2 deals with dealers dealing hard drugs. They should be hunted down as they are now. They bother tourists, locals and me when they offer their shit. I don't link them to softdrugs. They have underground providers via which they buy the kind of drugs I am not talking about!
Statement 3: I wouldn't know about that. We hae quite a gay scene who started practising unsafe sex again and also use the hard-drug partydrugs. So that might be true, but that isn't the group I am looking at...

But I wholely agree with your last statement. It needs a mentality change as well.

 

[03USMC]

I'm hoping you more than I

All I'm saying is if it where a theoretical thing of civil liberties vs. social welfare then maybe it's up in the air. But when you get to the reality of all the crime, murder, battery, and assault that has been sent across the country like the greatest 20th century plague due to the drug laws... I don't see how you can say they are a success.

As much as there are traditional American values that should be protected, America is a country of flexible change and these stupid drug laws are only a mere 30 years old.

So in that vain. The rise in violent crime is linked to drug laws? Uhhhh BS. According to most DOJ surveys Murder/Homicide is decreasing over the last 4 years in most jurisdictions, to include the Big 3 cities of LA , NYC and Chicago. Assaults/Batteries being up well if the they are in any certain jurisdiction alot of it will be related to states passing a "must arrest/must charge" law concerning domestic violence. But in reality very few assaults are drug related they are usually mouth related and sometimes taking the last pork chop related.

What is generally found to be drug related: Burglery, theft, auto theft, burglery to auto, armed robbery, strong armed robbery. With the exception of the robberies none can be construed as violent they are property crimes. And yes property crimes are up. Drug users steal to gain money to maintain their habit. Because addicts/hardcore users generally do not hold jobs (yes this includes hardcore weed smokers).

So pray tell enlighten me how legalizing pot will sweep away the problem, unless we pass out free dime bags to the 420 nation.

 

[Ted]

What is generally found to be drug related: Burglery, theft, auto theft, burglery to auto, armed robbery, strong armed robbery. With the exception of the robberies none can be construed as violent they are property crimes. And yes property crimes are up. Drug users steal to gain money to maintain their habit. Because addicts/hardcore users generally do not hold jobs (yes this includes hardcore weed smokers).

I note that you and I are not getting any nearer a compromise on this one. I think that, as I said before, our frame of reference is so different. Where I live, most of the crimes you mention are done by junkies who are strung out on hard drugs. Suppose if weed smokers were to be exempted from this list, could you see any point in my question? If the world of hard and soft drugs were two different entities, could you see any profitability in legalizing this type of drug?

 

[03USMC]

I note that you and I are not getting any nearer a compromise on this one. I think that, as I said before, our frame of reference is so different. Where I live, most of the crimes you mention are done by junkies who are strung out on hard drugs. Suppose if weed smokers were to be exempted from this list, could you see any point in my question? If the world of hard and soft drugs were two different entities, could you see any profitability in legalizing this type of drug?[/quote]

We probably will never agree on this. Your haven't looked at on the same level I have on a daily basis. You look at from the beginning occasional toker hanging out with their friends. I look at it from the perspective of that occasional smoker becoming a hardcore waterpipe sucking no-load worried about where his next bowl is coming from or continuing on to search for that better high and turning on to Crack, Meth or Smack.

You see it from the perspective of an intellectul appoarch of legalization begets peace and harmony. I see it from the perspective of the mother who spends her last 20 bucks on bag while her two year old goes hungry and lives without utilties cause mom needs the money for weed.

You see it as the harmless past time. I see it has the 80 year old Grandmother who just had her house broken into and her life stolen.By kids who want money so they can load their one hitter up.

 

[Italian Guy]

The fact of the matter is that marajuana is a gateway drug. Nearly all surveys have proven beyond a doubt that the vast majority of all hard drug users do not start on that drug but in fact marajuana. This does not mean that all ganja smokers progress beyond it but those who are on the harder more illicit drugs have almost all started with smoking marajuana. So a more proper way to argue the "gateway" is by a proper comparison of the percentage of all people who smoke marajuana who then go on to use more illicit drugs. IF the percentage is small you might have some sway in arguing this point being moot as a reason to keep the drug illegal. If the percentage is high then the law and order crowd rule the day.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Marinerhodes]

Oh really, and that's so much more expensive than the current "war" on drugs that is doing nothing?

You can get marijuana anytime anywhere in America and the government spends millions making absolutely zero difference.

It's quite rediculous.

Are you assuming that the war on drugs will stop once they legalize soft drugs? No, it will not. My argument stands.

 

[Ted]

Well 03, at least we agree that we disagree. I know that on this topic I might be naieve, and your world and mine differ greatly in this respect. So enough said.
I do however miss some feedback on the stats that Bulldogg gave. They explain some increases he gave in drug abuse, but they don't make Holland into some pool of decay.