U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Old 04-23-2010, 11:45 AM
4,047 posts, read 4,377,436 times
Reputation: 1321


Originally Posted by Dub D View Post
Do you? Where is your proof?
Proof that some states have mandatory minimum sentences? You just spout without checking things don't you? There are a lot of them:
State By State Laws - NORML

Do you seriously think those people with possession of weed only have weed each and every time they are holding? You seriously think that?
I never said it was every time. However you would want to arrest those who do only have weed on them. That's cruel.

I have plenty of friends in law enforcement and have been on numerous ridealongs. If you get possession for weed that means you were searched. People who get searched are one of the following; look extremely suspicious (riding a bike in night next to a drug area), look like they are high (walking at night with sunglasses on looking at the sky), and/or standing next to the wrong people at the wrong time.
There's no law against riding a bike next to a drug area, wearing sunglasses at night or looking at the sky, or standing next to the wrong people at the wrong time.

Cops waste their time on petty weed when they could be arresting real criminals.

My good buddies brother is a cop. He stopped these two guys. They were holding weed. One started to run away and the other reached down towards his waist as my buddies brother proceeded to shot three shots straight into his chest point blank.
So the cop shot a guy because he had weed on him? That's brutal. If the guy had a gun, that's not weed. Maybe the guy panicked because the cop/legal system will screw him over hardcore just for measly weed. What we need to do is separate harmless cannabis from real crime. Don't you get that?

You can believe all the hype about "innocent" potheads minding their own business all you want but that is not the majority. Its not even close. There are more gangster smoking it up than Cheng and Chong.
PROVE IT. You do not have facts on your side.

Regardless, if someone harms another, then they should be punished. If someone merely smokes pot, buys it, sells it, or grows it, they didn't cause any harm to any non-consenting person, and there should be no imprisonment, stealing of property, or blacklisting with a criminal record.

My buddies who get medical marijuana here in the LA area smoke half of it and sell the rest. Medical marijuana has a higher level of TLC compared to street marijuana hence why he is able to do that.

Just about every single pothead I have ever known has done coke, prescription pills, or Ecstasy. I am in the drug capital of the US...maybe the world.
Anecdotes. Just about every single pothead I have known doesn't do harder drugs (other than alcohol). What does that prove?

The bottom line is, if you cause harm to a non-consenting individual or property that is not your own, then you should face repercussions; if not then you shouldn't.

Imprisonment, theft and blacklisting all cause harm a non-consenting individual, yet the govt does this to people who haven't caused any harm all the time. Shouldn't we only be hurting people who deserve it?

Legalize marijuana. Enforce real crimes instead.

Old 04-24-2010, 09:59 PM
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,759,048 times
Reputation: 2524
Originally Posted by Le Lune View Post
I'm going to be devil's advocate on this statement. Based on that part, it is okay for people to murder other people then? The government DOES tell us that killing other people is a no-no. And on other crimes as well. Saying anything otherwise contradicts your statement.
You lost me on this one. Explain a little more, break that one down. It is very confusing. Now, don't tell me it is obvious as some people like to say when something they say or write is not fully understood.

Originally Posted by Le Lune View Post
Who deemed killing to be wrong? If you looked back on history, bloodshed was quite common. Human sacrifices and gladiator battles ring a bell?

Stating that the government should stay 100% out of our lives implies that all laws should be removed. So one could do whatever one wants. And it doesn't seem like you get it either.

You have a great day.

Le Lune

My counter example is opium. You could pick it up easily in the woods or what not. I believe the thread is about recreational marijuana and not medicinal marijuana.
I believe you are talking about apples and oranges here. The only similarity is that both are fruit. I am talking about the first part.
Killing in history? Do you not see the difference?
Ok, I will go along with your logic here.
I wrote that it is universally accepted that killing is wrong. I will expand on that.
My premise is that people do not like killing by nature. Why? Because humans tend to protect life. It is survival desire we have. Now, I will clarify because I got the feeling you may cite sociopaths or maybe people that commit suicide as your counter measure. I am talking that people that do not have some special circumstances or have some mental problem.
I am talking people in general or in other words the average people.
I will cite examples of people that have killed for different reasons:
Let me cover your example of killings in history. You pick any historical individual like let us say Hitler. He did order the killing of so many people. However, did wish to be killed himself? No. He did so when he say things did not go his way. Had he won the WWII and get what he wanted what is the possiblity the he would go ahead and committed suicide? I venture to guess he would not. He had the inherent desire to live. Often many governments run by kings, presidents, etc. in reality wish they did not had to kill people for some reason but felt it was the thing to do. Regardless even murderers do not think they should die as they prove when they give reasons why they killed and in some cases even had some sort of ethic who should die and who should not.

Another example: People that commit suicide. I do not know if you have had training on preventing suicide, I have. People that have committed suicide have given many signals as outcries for help. They have mostly seen suicide as the only recourse they feel to take care of what they see as too much pain or to avoid some other situation they do not wish to be in BUT they would very much wished those things did not exist so they did not have to commit suicide. Many people that have been helped when they had suicidal thoughts have stated they are glad someone helped them see there was another alternative to suicide and it was not something they really wanted to do.

Bottom line? Killing is universally not accepted by people because by nature people want to survive and not die.

Even religious people do not want to die. I read somewhere that everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die.

The second part I believe you used some type of fallacy. You exaggerated my statement. I do not know if you did not read carefully, spin my comment, or something. Politicians are good at this by making exaggerated comments to bring emotions on others.
Where did I say "government should stay 100% out of our lives"? You are replying to my comments and I never said that. So please first quote me correctly and reply to my comment and then I will respond. Please read carefully.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Old 05-23-2013, 03:24 AM
1,825 posts, read 1,351,165 times
Reputation: 1373
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Marijuana is a drug whether you want to classify it as such or not.

When people become addicted (physically or psychologically) to a drug they do stupid things regardless of the drug.

Honestly, I haven't met to many pot smokers that are "hard working people". Most have been losers, after all its an illegal substance so it takes a certain sort of person to use it consistently instead of say drinking alcohol.

It takes a sensible person to prefer to smoke pot (0 deaths) vs. killing or disabling oneself with alcohol, which kills 100,000+ Americans a year. Many who drink too much, but enjoy it too much to quit would find if they used cannabis with alcohol, they would only have to drink half as much to get the same effect. Many alcoholics find it hard to get & keep a job. Would they meet your definition of losers?

Cannabis does not make people want to do things that they normally would not do. It makes people non-violent if anything can. Alcohol makes some people violent, and may impair judgment in some other ways. There are 126 medical conditions known to be helped with cannabis, which often helps more effectively than pills, with fewer unwanted side effects. Pills kill 125,000 Americans a year when used as directed, cannabis 0 deaths.

Do we owe it to our govt to become disabled &/or die prematurely? Why should we be arrested for doing something good for our health? Sites I like for info: rxmariujuana dot com has patients' listing their conditions, the pills they tried that didn't work or had serious side effects, and then they tried cannabis in desperation and it worked. Hosted by Lester Grinspoon, MD, retired from Harvard Medical School. Another is Granny Storm Crow's list (2009) that has medical studies and verifiable anecdotes, arranged alphabetically by condition helped. Wikipedia has some good info as well.

Willie Nelson may be the most familiar cannabis user that is no slacker. He used to get very drunk quite often, and smoked 3-4 packs of (tobacco) cigarettes a day. Since he started using cannabis, he quit tobacco & is now a moderate drinker. He is 80 years old & has said "marijuana" is the reason he is still alive. He still travels, writing music, on the way to his next concert. He has an alternative fuel business, also, called Bio-Willie. He just wrote his autobiography "Roll Me Up And Smoke Me When I Die".

I realize your post is about 3 years old. I would have answered sooner had I been reading it sooner.
Now, in 2013, 1 in 6 Americans admit to using cannabis, including 22.5% of 11 to 15 year olds.

I think the jails/prisons will get less crowded eventually, especially if we vote out those old politicians who are disconnected from the real world and act according to bribes, Dems & Reps. 3rd parties tend to believe we should have all our freedoms restored, but people vote for more of the same.

In an online CNN poll, 96% said legalize cannabis, 2% medical only & 2% keep it illegal. But I think legalization will be more likely to happen not from popular opinion, but broke govt will realize it could use the $$ from fees & taxes from legal cannabis. Best wishes.
Old 05-23-2013, 05:30 AM
1,825 posts, read 1,351,165 times
Reputation: 1373
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
How about making marijuana legal for those already in prison? ;-)
Yes, if guards could sell it to prisoners, they could have a good income & they would be pleasantly surprised how non-violent most inmates would become. But if we legalized it for everyone, there might not be hardly anyone in prison.

But if it was legal only in prisons and they could have as much as they wanted for free, I wonder how many would commit a crime to get in on that deal?

How about requiring violent kids (and adults) to use cannabis before they become so violent they kill people? I'm sure there are ways to reduce the # of prisoners & still keep people safe. But some don't want this to happen.

1 of 6 Americans now admit to using cannabis, it's 22.5% for 11 to 15 year olds. Canada topped the list of 29 countries surveyed, at 28% for 11 to 15 year olds. For tobacco use by 11-15 year olds, Canada & USA tied at 4%. In 24 of 29 countries, cannabis use by 11-15 year olds was higher than tobacco use.
Old 05-23-2013, 07:44 AM
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 49,604,613 times
Reputation: 24548
The Private Prison industry and the illegal suppliers spend a lot of money bribing Congress to keep MJ and other drugs illegal. I would legalize ALL the currently prohibited drugs and sell them in State or Town owned stores. That would assure quality and supply as well as reducing other taxes even after the cost of rehab is removed.
Old 05-25-2013, 10:31 PM
Location: Denver
13,976 posts, read 18,729,303 times
Reputation: 8386
Weed and cocaine are the only drugs which should be legal. Maybe not even cocaine, I don't care about that either way. It's obvious the governments make more money by keeping weed illegal and imprisoning people over what is essentially a completely harmless plant.
I wouldn't want state owned stores. Sell it like they sell alcohol, I mean, it's safer. I couldn't get a bottle of vodka nearly as quickly as I could get a dime bag in high school.
Old 05-26-2013, 12:50 PM
Location: Denver
13,976 posts, read 18,729,303 times
Reputation: 8386
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
I wonder how many people currently in jail WOULDN'T be in jail if marijuana use was and had always been legal. Maybe 69 people? I doubt too many people are in jail simply for marijuana use.

Now, if we were really serious about reducing prison overcrowding, we could legalize assault, murder, rape, grand theft, etc.
Clueless? Yeah obviously. Thousands of people sit in jail while awaiting court dates for getting caught with weed. Why are you only mentioning users? Dealers sit in prison for decades for selling, why don't we imprison the CEO of RJ Reynolds or Mockler Beverage? They are the ones killing innocent people. There are kids who ruin their lives over something so petty and useless in preventing crime. Perhaps you should learn what you are talking about before wasting bandwidth, we could have someone posting something worth reading.

Now if you want to be irrational and ignorant, I can be irrational and ignorant.
Originally Posted by totsuka View Post
We would still have a blackmarket for MJ. The legal MJ product would be heavily taxed and limited brands available so the private sector will fill the void with a cheaper, better etc....
Is there a large market for moonshine, joes, or backyard Oxy? Yea that's what I thought.
Old 05-26-2013, 10:23 PM
Location: California
29,633 posts, read 31,957,040 times
Reputation: 24761
It seems almost everyone I know smokes/has smoked pot. Not one loser in the bunch but many 6 figure incomes. Some folks just have their heads buried in the sand or don't know the habits of their acquaintances..

The "stones only" myth needs to die.

Yes, it would probably help with court time, some jail I suppose, and would really put a dent in the whole idea of "drug testing" almost everyghone for everything since it's one of the only "drugs" that sticks around long enough to be identified. g

PS: it's a plant.
Old 05-28-2013, 07:49 AM
Location: Kansas
19,189 posts, read 14,096,440 times
Reputation: 18141
No, I don't think it would make a significant difference. Of course, there are several crimes that could be dealt with differently in order to reduce jail/prison overcrowding and number one being things like theft where it would be better to have the offender on a program where they are not in the taxpayer's pocket but working in order to make restitution to their victim. You could legalize prostitution also. I do think crimes where financial restitution would be possible along with probation would be the place to begin with if your true concern is preventing jail/prison overcrowding which I am guessing is not the concern.
Old 05-28-2013, 10:09 AM
6,952 posts, read 8,893,130 times
Reputation: 7814
This is just silly. FAR MORE consume alcohol than use heroin, looking at the raw numbers tells you absolutely nothing. You need to look at the number of alcohol related deaths vs heroin deaths as a personage of the people using it.

Seriously? This is your argument? You are trying to argue that alcohol is a worse drug than heroin? I mean really?!??!

Anyhow, all of this is irrelevant to the topic though. Arguing with pot-heads is like arguing with fundamentalists. The belief comes first, the justification second.
You completely misread me. I didn't say alcohol was worse than heroin. I said they should both be classed as hard drugs because they are both so lethal. In a way alcohol is more lethal -- nobody dies from heroin withdrawal, but alcohol withdrawal kills about 15% of the people who are drying out.

And you're not arguing with a pothead. I never smoke that stuff. I am merely saying it is less harmful than either alcohol or heroin. Do you follow me?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top