No they don't open your eyes drugs arent going away. No matter how many laws there are made or how much tax payer money we put into stopping them. As long as there are users they will still be drugs coming in, so why not regulate the problem and save some money, and stop some crimes evolving around drugs at the same time. It doesn't matter if you think beer is fine, because 51% and more think it does and i think 51% think pot should be legal but my word is worth nothing too. You still haven't said why pot can't be illegal and beer can when the bodily affects around the same. Unless you want to get rid of all drugs and then we would have a clean society, which i think would be very benefical. But thats never going to happen.
Random drug testing in school approved
- Thread starter I Are Baboon
- Start date
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n1703/a11.html?117
"The fact is, 80 million Americans have tried marijuana at one time in their lives and they didn't go onto harder drugs and they aren't homeless."
http://freedom2008.com/blog/archives/000016.html
um... the polls were almost even? and you say no the general public doesnt want pot to be legal, check your figures.
"The fact is, 80 million Americans have tried marijuana at one time in their lives and they didn't go onto harder drugs and they aren't homeless."
http://freedom2008.com/blog/archives/000016.html
um... the polls were almost even? and you say no the general public doesnt want pot to be legal, check your figures.
The figure you posted about 51% of people is completely false. The actual number is somewhere around 12% i believe. Maybe lower.
And as ive already stated, about why Beer can be legal and POT cant, because POT is a gateway drug. Pot leads to worse things. I dont care about your personal friends and how they quit at pot. The facts remain facts.
Since Beer is already legal, it remains regulated and taxed, but still a problem right? So why introduce another problem? As you said, and i agree, we could never get a completely clean society, but if we can create a few less heroine adicts by fear of the law, Im all for it.
PS.
Dont post a 51% Hippie Propaganda number from some slanted website.
Dont post a 51% Hippie Propaganda number from some slanted website.
alright maybe they were a little off but the numbers are rising quickly http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/28/timep.politics.pot.tm/index.html and last i check cnn isnt a hippie pot site but then again my heads just so damn thick nothing is getting through there. And i can tell you got that pot was a gateway drug for DARE i dont know how many damn times they said that but why dont they call beer one i mean it lead so wouldnt that be the first gateway? The question is not about adding more problems it whether its justified as a right.
FROM YOUR LINK:
A TIME/CNN poll last week found that only 34% want pot to be totally legalized
Now, that number is way higher than what i stated, but recognize first that CNN is not the be all end all of statistics, especially when they formulate their own polls. They are quite slanted in a hippyish, liberal sort of way.
I, being one that often works in media, could care less about a CNN poll because anything thats not pro-gay, pro the little guy, pro minority is seen as inherently bad. Thats a serious problem in the media today, but thats another argument altogether.
A TIME/CNN poll last week found that only 34% want pot to be totally legalized
Now, that number is way higher than what i stated, but recognize first that CNN is not the be all end all of statistics, especially when they formulate their own polls. They are quite slanted in a hippyish, liberal sort of way.
I, being one that often works in media, could care less about a CNN poll because anything thats not pro-gay, pro the little guy, pro minority is seen as inherently bad. Thats a serious problem in the media today, but thats another argument altogether.
And i never said it was the end all but i haven't seen one poll or article online saying that popular support isnt rising. And you haven't shown any but since cnn is to hippish and liberal i can maybe find another poll from another media company there are plenty out there just give me some and ill look it up.
Theres not one good reason for pot to be illigal.
Dude, do i really have to start all over again?
Ah...I see the cycle has come full circle and we are having another drug legalization debate. It is amazing to me all of the propaganda Burly has digested that our government has spoon fed us about drugs that started with Nixon's political platform--the true beginning of the "War on Drugs." I encourage you to read "Smoke and Mirrors: The War on Drugs and the Politics of Failure" by Dan Baum. I think in order to really be convincing in your argument, you should have studied information from both camps, and let me emphasize the word INFORMATION. This is a little different than what one feels is morally good or bad.
I also encourage you to look at the Bureau of Justice Statistics website regarding this false connection between drugs and violent crime. Read the Real Facts Notice that drugs are the major cause of property crimes. You know why drugs are involved in violent crime? Because of their illegality. Imagine if you will, being able to walk down to your local 7-11, flashing a 21 ID and being able to buy a pack of marijuana cigarettes. There would no longer be dark alleys and shady individuals involved in drug deals--therein crime would reduce.
And as for people using drugs, it would be just another population with substance abuse problems. They could now join the ranks of the alcoholics, prescription drug addicts, and smokers. Big deal? If people want to smoke pot or inject a needle into their eyeballs, let them do it.
In doing so, this would help with prison overcrowding. Treating drug addiction as a health problem instead of a criminal act. Of the 2 million people in prison and jail, 500,000 are there for non-violent drug offenses. That, in and of itself, should outrage everyone.
Should I continue?
I also encourage you to look at the Bureau of Justice Statistics website regarding this false connection between drugs and violent crime. Read the Real Facts Notice that drugs are the major cause of property crimes. You know why drugs are involved in violent crime? Because of their illegality. Imagine if you will, being able to walk down to your local 7-11, flashing a 21 ID and being able to buy a pack of marijuana cigarettes. There would no longer be dark alleys and shady individuals involved in drug deals--therein crime would reduce.
And as for people using drugs, it would be just another population with substance abuse problems. They could now join the ranks of the alcoholics, prescription drug addicts, and smokers. Big deal? If people want to smoke pot or inject a needle into their eyeballs, let them do it.
In doing so, this would help with prison overcrowding. Treating drug addiction as a health problem instead of a criminal act. Of the 2 million people in prison and jail, 500,000 are there for non-violent drug offenses. That, in and of itself, should outrage everyone.
Should I continue?
Yes, but this time concider the facts and not the lies.Originally posted by BurlySurly
Dude, do i really have to start all over again?
Here's what i see yet again, another person so bent on being a non conformist that they've failed to even pay notice to good sense, and not only that, but have also decided that all my choices towards a particular subject are the product of government propaganda.
I could read all the hippy, pro pot jargon in the world, just like you could read the government propaganda in the world, and still come away with nothing. Id still come away with the feeling that marijuana would cause more problems if it were legal than if it stayed where it was.
Its almost comical to me that you think if drugs were made legal, there would be less crime. To me, it seems like addicts will be addicts until they're broke regardless of the legality of the substance. It seems like drug users who are a dangerous problem, would still commit violent crimes to acquire drugs. WE ALREADY HAVE PLENTY OF ADICTS. WHY WOULD WE WANT TO EXPAND THE PROBLEM?
Why one earth would we want another population with substance abuse problems? Why support people's stupidity with tax dollars?
Im sure some of those 500,000 inmates you speak of probably sold pot to kids and heroin to pregnant women. I believe thats as bad as any violent crime. That should be an outrage to everyone.
Finally, drug addiction is treated medically. Its not a crime necessarily to be an addict. Only to posess and use drugs. If someone wanted to go to a methadone clinic because they wanted to kick a habit, they would recieve no legal consequences to my knowledge.
Surely all this speaking of common sense of I've done will come to no avail, simply because people's minds are already set here. I try to listen to new ideas, but this one, which isnt new by any standard, is almost proposterous. Its almost not worth arguing anymore.
Let's look at it another way.....
Have you read Safetrails?
Pretty hysterical stuff, isn't it? Reading it, I'm struck by how much it sounds like a government official preaching about drugs.
Let's see:
1. Some mountain bikers are irresponsible.
2. There have been accidents in the past involving hikers and bikers, which have caused harm to people other than the biker.
3. Therefore, all mountian bikes need to be banned, because an accident MAY occur again in the future. It's all about safety for the largest number of people, right? Hikers do outnumber bikers.
If you agree with that, BurlySurly, then I'll have to give you respect for being consistent. Once again, it's not about drugs...it's about making decisions for others that you have no right to be making.
The marijuana as gateway drug myth has been debunked as well, read up on a recent report by the Canandian Senate. I can dig up some links for you if you want.
Let's all go ride now
It's a beautiful day!
Have you read Safetrails?
Pretty hysterical stuff, isn't it? Reading it, I'm struck by how much it sounds like a government official preaching about drugs.
Let's see:
1. Some mountain bikers are irresponsible.
2. There have been accidents in the past involving hikers and bikers, which have caused harm to people other than the biker.
3. Therefore, all mountian bikes need to be banned, because an accident MAY occur again in the future. It's all about safety for the largest number of people, right? Hikers do outnumber bikers.
If you agree with that, BurlySurly, then I'll have to give you respect for being consistent. Once again, it's not about drugs...it's about making decisions for others that you have no right to be making.
The marijuana as gateway drug myth has been debunked as well, read up on a recent report by the Canandian Senate. I can dig up some links for you if you want.
Let's all go ride now
It's a beautiful day!
I suppose I should preface who I am and where I am coming from. First of all, according to your profile, I'm over ten years older than you--research has shown that the more education a person has, the more liberal his/her views are. Now, I am not saying you are uneducated, please....you are very articulate and can form very convincing arguments. But you are young, and have not been exposed to other information besides what has been given to you in your high school classrooms, plus what you call "common sense" based on either personal experiences or anything else.
As for my talk about crime, prison populations and the like, my information doesnt come from "hippy, pro pot" feelings. I'm a graduate student at the College of Criminal Justice at Northeastern University. I think I have a little more knowledge about crime than the average Joe. So my views arent just "non-conformist," they are based on my education, my studies, and whatever other knowledge I try to fill my head with.
So please dont think that I'm some pot smoker who just wants to have an excuse to get high. I dont smoke pot or do any drugs for that matter. I used to, but I was by no means a pothead. I was not what you seem to think the typical pot smoker was: burned out, loser, eating doritoes in my friend's basement while taking bong hits and playing tony hawk's pro skater.
I would love to see what your attitude is about this in ten years.
I'm staying out of this one, being the fundamentalist Christian that I am.
Long time no see Leatherface.
Long time no see Leatherface.
HAHA you know I couldn't let this one get by me...how are u doing?Originally posted by fourgivn1
I'm staying out of this one, being the fundamentalist Christian that I am.
Long time no see Leatherface.
Not too bad. Got a new truck (2003 Dodge Ram 1500 V8 4x4) and just bought a house in the 'foothills' of the Ozarks. On the lake, no less. 
Life has been good to me.
One of the reasons you don't see me here too much is because I realized a while back that our views, and also whether or not we're willing to change our viewpoints and stances, has almost everything to do with specifically what we're basing it on. Being a Christian, EVERYTHING about life relates and is based on, in some way, to my beliefs, and when arguing with those who don't believe the same way, it's very tough to find that common ground. Even when evidence is provided to the contrary, in the end I'd have to default to what I believe.
And that makes for a lot of circular arguments So now I just sort of hang back, get into an argument every once in a while, but mostly just make dumb comments. 
Life has been good to me.One of the reasons you don't see me here too much is because I realized a while back that our views, and also whether or not we're willing to change our viewpoints and stances, has almost everything to do with specifically what we're basing it on. Being a Christian, EVERYTHING about life relates and is based on, in some way, to my beliefs, and when arguing with those who don't believe the same way, it's very tough to find that common ground. Even when evidence is provided to the contrary, in the end I'd have to default to what I believe.
And that makes for a lot of circular arguments
So now I just sort of hang back, get into an argument every once in a while, but mostly just make dumb comments.
So now its just about how you're smarter than me, so you obviously know the right answer. Gimme a break. I know lots of people with alot of education who are quite conservative.
I also know lots of people with college degrees who are complete morons. Your years in school do not lend any credit to your argument in my eyes (it is something to be proud of however).
But just for your information.
Im in my 2nd year of College and third year of the Marine Corps.
I graduated from the Defense Information School in Ft. Meade Md. and hold an equivalent to an associates degree in Journalism. Yeah, Im 20........so what. I've been around the world to more countries than most people will visit in their life. I've been published in more than 20 newspapers and magazines, not to mention countless websites.
I've been a bit further than my high school classroom, but really none of that matters. Im not sure why you would even bring this up, other than to gloat about your accomplishments.
Now, did I say that I was smarter than you? I dont think so--I said with more education a person has more liberal views. And I was merely pointing out that this was my field of study...but if you take that to be gloating, fine. I am glad that I know more about crime and the American criminal justice system than John Q. Public because I am able to make my own decisions based on my independent research, not what Fox News or Bill O'Reilly tells me.
My uncle used to have a house at the Lake of the Ozarks---like 2 houses away from the tip of Cobb's Chimney Point. Is that still there? Right across the big lake from the 4 Seasons. We went down there every summer until I was 18. Before all of the hoopla and people who started to move in.Originally posted by fourgivn1
Not too bad. Got a new truck (2003 Dodge Ram 1500 V8 4x4) and just bought a house in the 'foothills' of the Ozarks. On the lake, no less.
One of the reasons you don't see me here too much is because I realized a while back that our views, and also whether or not we're willing to change our viewpoints and stances, has almost everything to do with specifically what we're basing it on. Being a Christian, EVERYTHING about life relates and is based on, in some way, to my beliefs, and when arguing with those who don't believe the same way, it's very tough to find that common ground. Even when evidence is provided to the contrary, in the end I'd have to default to what I believe.
And that makes for a lot of circular arguments
And I'm wondering--you have Chrisitanity to base your beliefs on, and that shapes your thoughts, I wonder what mine is
Originally posted by Silver
Let's look at it another way.....
Have you read Safetrails?
Pretty hysterical stuff, isn't it? Reading it, I'm struck by how much it sounds like a government official preaching about drugs.
Let's see:
1. Some mountain bikers are irresponsible.
2. There have been accidents in the past involving hikers and bikers, which have caused harm to people other than the biker.
3. Therefore, all mountian bikes need to be banned, because an accident MAY occur again in the future. It's all about safety for the largest number of people, right? Hikers do outnumber bikers.
If you agree with that, BurlySurly, then I'll have to give you respect for being consistent. Once again, it's not about drugs...it's about making decisions for others that you have no right to be making.
The marijuana as gateway drug myth has been debunked as well, read up on a recent report by the Canandian Senate. I can dig up some links for you if you want.
Let's all go ride now
Breaking things down by extreme examples to help define logic can be very helpful in an argument, but this isnt really one of those cases.
First off, some of every group of people are responsible, this includes both Mt. Bikers and drug users and underwater basket weavers.
However, drugs and drug users seriously cause damage to huge numbers of people every day. In fact, All drug users could be considered irresponsible since they are "breaking the law".
Mt. Bikes are very minute in their effects on.....well, just about anything.
Its a matter of scale, thats all. If bikes were a huge menace to society, I wouldnt participate. I personally happen to think bikes are good for people.
Oh......about your random canadian study, Its bullsh%$, no, i havent read it, and i dont care.
Think further south. I think the Lake of the Ozarks is in Missouri. What we're doing (my wife and I) is buying my Uncle Jack's house. He owns a house on the shore of Lake Norfork in Elizabeth, AR....near Mountain Home, AR. You might have heard of the White River and Bull Shoals Lake. If so, that's where.
I thought yours was the Catholic church, which would explain a lotAnd I'm wondering--you have Chrisitanity to base your beliefs on, and that shapes your thoughts, I wonder what mine is
(Gotta get my potshots in when I can ) I really have no clue. BUT I'm willing to bet that you do not accept the Bible as the infallible perfect Word of God, as I do. (Let the tomaters fly )
Pot doesnt cause damage to any number of people.
Even on a bad day.
Marijuana users are can not be collectively called irresponsible simply by the fact that they break the law. Thats a silly generalization.
Marijuana is not a menace to society.
True--I call myself a "recovering Catholic" and no, I dont accept the Bible as the infallible perfect Word of God. I dont even believe in God...let the hellfire and brimstone envelop me now! Can I get an AMEN!Originally posted by fourgivn1
I thought yours was the Catholic church, which would explain a lot
Yes it does, yes they can, not it isnt and yes it is.
Does this mean people who drive 56 in a 55 are "irresponsible" because they breaking a posted law?
I really do admire you Burly, but damn, you've been brainwashed by the Marines. Really, it's ok, my buddy Seth was too, now he's into Quixtar and driving a 92 Ford Escort.
Yes it does, yes they can, not it isnt and yes it is.
Na-ner-na-ner-boo-booOriginally posted by BurlySurly
Yes it does, yes they can, not it isnt and yes it is.
If I smoke pot, what will happen to me? Please tell me.Originally posted by BurlySurly
Yes it does, yes they can, not it isnt and yes it is.
You will get arrested if you get caught
I have smoked pot exactly one time when I was 14 or 15, at the time I preferred beer. That was over 20 years ago. Right now I do not think pot should be illegal; and I don't buy the gateway argument either - one beer almost always leads to another but as long as it's not abused then no problem...
I do have a problem with drug abuse but I do not think the legal system will ever have any impact on this issue. Millions of people smoke dope regularly and, while I view this a serious weakness in character, I do not think it should be a crime. This is not a liberal point of view, many well known conservatives also share the same views.
I do have a problem with drug abuse but I do not think the legal system will ever have any impact on this issue. Millions of people smoke dope regularly and, while I view this a serious weakness in character, I do not think it should be a crime. This is not a liberal point of view, many well known conservatives also share the same views.
I buy it because I've seen it. I've seen it too many times and i still see it. Alchoholism is a big problem, so why allow others to legally follow?Originally posted by Serial Midget
I have smoked pot exactly one time when I was 14 or 15, at the time I preferred beer. That was over 20 years ago. Right now I do not think pot should be illegal; and I don't buy the gateway argument either - one beer almost always leads to another but as long as it's not abused then no problem...
But your making is sound like my life will deteriorate and I'll be living out of a shopping cart if I take a hit off a joint. Come on dude, your not that dumb. I know an investment banker that smokes. I know a maxilofacial surgeon that smokes, and he's the maxilo surgeon for a pro football team. Engineers, farmers, accountants....thousands of successful people.Originally posted by BurlySurly
You will get arrested if you get caught
Want me to tell you about my life and what I smoke? Probably not.
It's only illegal because when prohibition ended, that department needed something to do or they would loose their jobs. Next target......marijuana.......and it's useful cousin hemp!!!!!!!!
And let's not forget that the reason marijuana is criminal is not because it is harmful to people--god forbid Americans can't take care of themselves and the government has to tell us what we can and cannot do to our bodies because it is our "parent"--but let's break down the financial aspect of marijuana and other drugs.
Let's say that we legalize marijuana, not all drugs. How does this affect our corporate government?
The DEA estimates that there are 45 million casual drug users in America. Casual drug user means that at the least, you use drugs once a month. Out of that 45 million, 40 million smoke pot. So imagine what would happen to the DEA, the ATF, Customs, and the INS if marijuana was legalized...these huge agencies would only have to police 5 million people in a population of 280 million. Can we say BUDGET CUTS?
So I ask you, in whose best interest is it to make marijuana illegal?
No.
:
So Im at least pretty dumb.
Anyway, sure there are those who smoke and are successful, good on them. I, personally, wouldnt want a pot smoking surgeon cutting away on me or managing my funds, but hey, I guess im old fashioned.
The point is that pot isnt any good for any one. (spare me the medicinal speech cause thats not the issue) Marijuana smokers often progress to harder drugs that cause problems for not only themselves but the entire world around them. Legalizing Marijuana would cause more marijuana smokers and hence, more people to progress to harder drugs, and finally, more problems than we already have.
Its not that hard to see.
Ive stated my case here, and im about through with this thread because everyone keeps coming at me saying the same things over and over and not getting the point, so as i leave, I'll leave you with one though er.....question.
DO YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO DO DRUGS?
If you say no, then you already know deep down that drugs are wrong.
If you say yes, you've got some serious issues.
Thanks all.
I'd say oil and chemical companies are at greatest financial risk should pot become legal.
Next would be law enforcement agencies.
And foresting companies would also suffer.
Those are my top three whose best interest it is to keep marijuana illegal.
I can see by now that you don't care. You're obviously choosing to remain ignorant, but hey, your decision. In case you get curious though, here is the Cliff's Notes version from CNN.
Cnn.com
Just notice that this isn't a "random" study. This is a commitee of the Canadian government. Not exactly a bunch of "liberal hippie pothead smokers"
Here is the summary of the report:
Canadian Senate Commitee Special Report on Illegal Drugs
OK I was just being stupid for a few seconds there......
Obviously, there are government officials jobs at stake should marijuana become legal. And like it or not Mr. Surly, that is the TRUTH.
Tobacco companies (huge contributers to government) would probably take a hit, then jump on the bandwagon and the cycle would start all over again.
Alcohol (another huge contributer to government)......I'd stop drinking if I could go to the store and pick up a pack of Northern Lights.
Then you have all the crap associated with rehab and the like.
My point is that the current system in which pot is illegal is a total failure and a huge waste of our national resources. The "War on Drugs" is a scam that hasn't made any impact on drug usage at all. Law enforcement is an industry like any other pot smokers are their bread and butter. Don't think I am pro drug because I am not, I think their use is a personal weakness of the worst kind.
" ... it is our judgment that the war on drugs has failed, that it is diverting intelligent energy away from how to deal with the problem of addiction, that it is wasting our resources, and that it is encouraging civil, judicial, and penal procedures associated with police states."
Read more here: National Review