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.
Not only that, but they all become heroin addicts and grab butcher knives and run in crowds, randomly slashing people. This happens several times every day.
That's BS. I smoked pot and now all I do is Xanax, Oxycontin, valium and vicodin so...uh...what were we talking about?
I'm just trying to remember ever hearing about some guy getting stoned at a bar and going home and beating his wife and kids....OTOH, don't have to think hard at all about all the times you hear about a drunk going home and beating his wife and kids, or getting in a fight at a bar, or doing something violent.
Alcohol consumption REGULARLY causes violence, both domestic and public. We lose around 10,000 people in a YEAR due to drunks.
But damn that cannabis, it sure is evil, leads to all kinds of craziness. Like eating a dozen donuts at 1:00AM in the basement. The horror of it all! Thank God we have the NEOCONS to keep marijuana illegal!!! Could you imagine having to deal with stoners at a bar who were laughing uncontrollably and ordering extra wings and pizza???
This two hour program, while very good and informative, is unwilling to REALLY examine the reason that marijuana is illegal. And if you guessed the reason is 'money', you're right! I don't know all the details and never cared enough to research it in depth, but I've heard that DuPont had friends in high places in the White House in 1927. By 1930 the illegality of marijuana was booming (remember the usefulness of hemp, and it being a "cash crop" replaced by man made fibers, thanks DuPont) and by 1935 it was illegal in half of the country. That was done on a state level, and likely came on orders/suggestions from Washington. And then you had Vietnam, widespread usage everywhere (and exposure to the drug by returning veterans) and Nixon starting the DEA and making users "criminals" in the eyes of the government. And that's coming from a known criminal himself.
As with everything "illegal" in this country you have to dig below the headlines. In one way, shape or form, it boils down to control and money. Usually in concert with one another.
There is also a lot of evidence that racism played a part. In the 1920s, the primary consumers of pot were Mexicans.
"The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" is another good documentary.
I'm just trying to remember ever hearing about some guy getting stoned at a bar and going home and beating his wife and kids....OTOH, don't have to think hard at all about all the times you hear about a drunk going home and beating his wife and kids, or getting in a fight at a bar, or doing something violent.
Alcohol consumption REGULARLY causes violence, both domestic and public. We lose around 10,000 people in a YEAR due to drunks.
But damn that cannabis, it sure is evil, leads to all kinds of craziness. Like eating a dozen donuts at 1:00AM in the basement. The horror of it all! Thank God we have the NEOCONS to keep marijuana illegal!!! Could you imagine having to deal with stoners at a bar who were laughing uncontrollably and ordering extra wings and pizza???
The response to what you pointed out is generally,
"Yeah, so we don't need more drugs causing problems."
Which is such a leap of logic its not even a reasonable thought. It assumes that marijuana causes more problems, when it is fairly well recognized that it causes less problems when legal, because you remove the illegal portions of the business.
Lots of people died when alcohol was illegal and run by the mob, not quite the problem it used to be when prohibition was repealed.
But damn that cannabis, it sure is evil, leads to all kinds of craziness. Like eating a dozen donuts at 1:00AM in the basement. The horror of it all! Thank God we have the NEOCONS to keep marijuana illegal!!! Could you imagine having to deal with stoners at a bar who were laughing uncontrollably and ordering extra wings and pizza???
Careful there. It's not just the NEOCONS. Last time I checked there were very few if any Dems supporting legalization. Obama certainly does not.
The response to what you pointed out is generally,
"Yeah, so we don't need more drugs causing problems."
Which is such a leap of logic its not even a reasonable thought. It assumes that marijuana causes more problems, when it is fairly well recognized that it causes less problems when legal, because you remove the illegal portions of the business.
Lots of people died when alcohol was illegal and run by the mob, not quite the problem it used to be when prohibition was repealed.
I am a fiscal conservative, socially libertarian and am constantly having to point out to social conservatives how ridiculous the drug laws are and how they create more danger than they prevent.
Careful there. It's not just the NEOCONS. Last time I checked there were very few if any Dems supporting legalization. Obama certainly does not.
Thats true. They are only holding back support because they are afraid of losing crucial independent votes and with older people, the support for prohibitions seems to be more across the board politically speaking. With the younger generation, the vast majority of supporters of prohibition fit into the neocon category of "small government except when we don't want it small".
Care to explain why you are for big government and against personal freedom in regard to the relatively benign drug Cannabis?
Your word relative is the reason I am against it. You see the smoking of it became popular before I was out of high school in 1950 and I never did find anything that convinced me that use of mary jane didn't lead to something stronger in many people which is what was being said by so many at that time.
I still see many things like that that are illegal that government keeps like that. How about driving at an earlier age than the law allows? Do I need to go on with things like that in order to allow your logic to see that this is just not a pile of big government Pelosi?
Thats true. They are only holding back support because they are afraid of losing crucial independent votes and with older people, the support for prohibitions seems to be more across the board politically speaking. With the younger generation, the vast majority of supporters of prohibition fit into the neocon category of "small government except when we don't want it small".
Hmmmmm.... not sure I agree with that. If that were true, wouldn't all of the Dems running for office support legalization? After all, they could care less what NEOCONS think and how they vote. So whose votes are they worried about ???
And most of us older ex-hippies support legalization.
I'm not sure there is more support from younger people than older people.
Your word relative is the reason I am against it. You see the smoking of it became popular before I was out of high school in 1950 and I never did find anything that convinced me that use of mary jane didn't lead to something stronger in many people which is what was being said by so many at that time.
If you ask 100 heroin addicts if they ever smoked pot, 100% of them will say yes. This is the logic of the "gateway drug" argument.
Now ask 100 potheads if they ever did heroin, which is the correct way to conduct the study, and yields radically different results.
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.
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.
