Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Maryland > Washington, DC suburbs in Maryland
 [Register]
Washington, DC suburbs in Maryland Calvert County, Charles County, Montgomery County, and Prince George's County
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-08-2012, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Salisbury, MD
575 posts, read 554,325 times
Reputation: 183

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by seethelight View Post
Typical case of putting your thoughts and needs ahead of others. If you had cancer and had nausea and couldn't eat and marijuana could help you then, just maybe, you might be for the legalization of at least medical pot. If it's someone else that is suffering, so what, right? If someone gets shot then guns aren't the problem, people are. But if someone in your family got shot you might think differently.

There are many people out in this world that are really suffering and it's people like you that are NOT HELPING them to use whatever is available to get better. What business is it of yours what other people do?
Really don't care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2012, 03:07 PM
 
1,106 posts, read 2,883,192 times
Reputation: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
It's an overused talking point that has no merit.
Please elaborate further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 03:14 PM
 
Location: Cumberland
7,011 posts, read 11,304,621 times
Reputation: 6299
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
It's an overused talking point that has no merit.
Well, it does have merit. What makes one dangerous substance OK to be made legal, and another not? There may be very good reasons, I am still on the fence about this, but on its face all kinds of behaviors and goods that can used to harm are legal. I mean, if I can own a .357 why can't someone else smoke some dope?

Also, I have been thinking about it, and the people I know in my life that have admitted to smoking pot are otherwise indistguishable from everyone else. They all have jobs, a few are professionals making more money than me, and don't have any of the negative qualities you mention.

Granted, I don't really have many "bums" in my social circle, but it says something that a mid-30 something educated working guy that hangs out with pretty much the same kind of people still runs into people that smoke pot. I think a lot of folks across the spectrum of professions, income, and moral quaility do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 03:14 PM
 
Location: Salisbury, MD
575 posts, read 554,325 times
Reputation: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by badchad View Post
You're correct in that legalization is unlikely.

The more important question is whether this is a reasonable approach.

And again, the OP has presented no data or objective facts as to WHY marijuana should remain illegal. An obvious reason would be that relative to legal substances, MJ causes less harm.

I'm sorry, but I don't see a practical usage for pot. I used to support it for medicinal purposes, but the fact that it's so easy for anyone to get a license proves that people would just game the system; the same way they do with Welfare. In CA you can get a license for the simplest of stuff such as having a fear of stepping on cracks due to a superstition. Like really, that's messed up.

Besides, I do not want to pay taxes just so potheads can get high, I certainly don't want my food cooked by somebody who's high and I don't want to be in a car with somebody who's high. I have not even mentioned that taxing weed will not yield the profits that so many claim they do. It's profits have always been grossly exaggerated by those who seek to see it's legalization and it'd barely do anything to patch a budget deficit in just about all of the states. Let me also point out that when people use pot, productivity goes down and that is bad for businesses. Loss of productivity = loss of profit. Are you willing to jeopardize profit (and your job) just so you and your friends can light one up during break time? Remember if profit goes down so will your take home pay.

Finally, just because we legalize pot, that does not mean drug related crimes will go down. As I said before, if somebody wants something for "free" they'll get it for free. Not everyone is going to play by the rules now, some people will continue to do what they already do and sell/grow this **** illegally just so they can make a profit w/o having to go through a middle man (ie the gov't). By the way, who's gonna regulate this? Conservatives already claim government is too big as it is in this state. Are you prepared to have even more regulation by creating a separate agency? Or do we just let it regulate itself and hope for the best?

We still don't even know that much about the drug so to claim it's harmless is a misnomer. IIRC, putting ANY carcinogen in your body is dangerous and will lead to adverse affects down the road. So that is something you have to think about. Are you willing to risk lung cancer for the sake of getting high?

See these are the issues I have with legalization and why I do not want this drug EVER legalized in this country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 03:30 PM
 
Location: NYC
7,301 posts, read 13,513,021 times
Reputation: 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
In CA you can get a license for the simplest of stuff such as having a fear of stepping on cracks due to a superstition. Like really, that's messed up..
Which is EXACTLY why it should be legalized for all. There should be no "system" to game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Besides, I do not want to pay taxes just so potheads can get high, ..
Huh? How would your taxes be buying pot? Do you mean for public assistance? I guess you can be satisifed that anyone currently receiving PA is currently able to buy pot quite easily, but the profit goes into the pockets of criminals, not into producing revenue for use for the state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
I certainly don't want my food cooked by somebody who's high..
LOL I promise that you have already. Ask any cook you know what goes on on the line. Those vent fans have multiple purposes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
and I don't want to be in a car with somebody who's high. ..
No reason you'd have to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
I have not even mentioned that taxing weed will not yield the profits that so many claim they do. ..
Washington and CO believe otherwise, and so did their voters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Let me also point out that when people use pot, productivity goes down and that is bad for businesses. Loss of productivity = loss of profit. Are you willing to jeopardize profit (and your job) just so you and your friends can light one up during break time? Remember if profit goes down so will your take home pay...
Who's talking about lighting up at work? I'm sure that's still grounds for firing. Nobody's taking away an employer's right to fire an addict.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Finally, just because we legalize pot, that does not mean drug related crimes will go down. ...
It means they won't be eliminated, but they will certainly decrease.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Not everyone is going to play by the rules now, some people will continue to do what they already do and sell/grow this **** illegally just so they can make a profit w/o having to go through a middle man (ie the gov't). ...
Possibly, but it's a better deal to do it legally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
By the way, who's gonna regulate this?...
In WA, the state liquor board.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
We still don't even know that much about the drug so to claim it's harmless is a misnomer. ?...
We know it's far less harmful than alcohol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Are you willing to risk lung cancer for the sake of getting high?.
Check out how much weed you'd have to smoke to get cancer - it's never happened, ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
See these are the issues I have with legalization and why I do not want this drug EVER legalized in this country.
Thank you for supplying them, I appreciate it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2012, 06:03 AM
 
131 posts, read 344,175 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
See these are the issues I have with legalization and why I do not want this drug EVER legalized in this country.
Fair enough, and thanks for the input.

Most advocates of legalization seek decriminalization for non-medical (e.g. recreational) use. That is, there doesn't necessarily need to be a "practical" use, the same way there isn't much practical use for alcohol and tobacco.

Your concerns about productivity are valid, but these same concerns exist for EVERY drug. Hydrocodone (an opioid based pain killer) is the most prescribed drug in this country. Number one. I assume you wouldn't want your food cooked by someone high on hydrocodone, or drunk and you wouldn't want to drive with someone on any drug.

ALL drugs have the potential to cause harm, but these harms are mitigated, in part, through regulation. It's easier to control and decrease the risks of drugs through licit regulation, and the mechanisms for regulation already exist (we regulate pharmaceutical drugs and recreational drugs like alcohol)

Adverse health effects, and income through taxes are empirical questions. We really don't know what will happen one way or another. However, we DO know a few things:

1. We spend a lot money on law enforcement. More importantly, our national indicators of MJ use suggest that these efforts aren't doing to much. The percentage of high school kids smoking pot has remained pretty steady.

2. Lots of money can be made on the sale of pot. This can be taxed.

You are correct that the amount of revenue saved on law enforcement, and the amount brought in via taxes are unknown, but to say that it's trivial is not substantiated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2012, 07:24 AM
 
581 posts, read 1,172,272 times
Reputation: 509
Here's the deal:

O'Malley is one of the poster boys for the National Democratic Party, and he has hopes of running for national office someday. So he has to be in lockstep with the party line on issues. The national dem party is not ready for legalization yet, so neither is O'Malley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 02:44 PM
 
Location: the future
2,594 posts, read 4,655,643 times
Reputation: 1583
Default boredatwork

Making it legal is one thing but decriminalizing it is another. There is no reason one has to go to court with possibility of jail time (joke) for a plant that just to have it on a criminal record that not only brings down the individual but the society they live in because they're now labeled a criminal. The only issue with "pot" (such an outdated term) is that the feds cant control it and they know it so it is instantly bad. Yet they want to deny your right to know whether or not you are eating cancer causing genetically modified organisms or GMO's (prop 37) or pink slime in your beef. Yeah keep on hanging on to the governments every rationale in life. And to be honest Maryland may as well by Colorado or Washington without the new laws and coffee shops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 04:25 PM
 
Location: Salisbury, MD
575 posts, read 554,325 times
Reputation: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by boreatwork View Post
Making it legal is one thing but decriminalizing it is another. There is no reason one has to go to court with possibility of jail time (joke) for a plant that just to have it on a criminal record that not only brings down the individual but the society they live in because they're now labeled a criminal. The only issue with "pot" (such an outdated term) is that the feds cant control it and they know it so it is instantly bad. Yet they want to deny your right to know whether or not you are eating cancer causing genetically modified organisms or GMO's (prop 37) or pink slime in your beef. Yeah keep on hanging on to the governments every rationale in life. And to be honest Maryland may as well by Colorado or Washington without the new laws and coffee shops.
Summary: I have no argument for legalization, therefore, I'll use the tactic of blaming the government for all of life's problems with the hope it somehow gets enough support from the people on here.

It's like you guys aren't even trying anymore. The notion that the Feds can't control it is laughable at best; they seem to have no problem controlling Alcohol and Tobacco and how the hell did GMOs get into the conversation? This is about pot, not GMOs or the feds ability to control a drug.

Come correct with a better argument next time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 06:05 PM
 
Location: NYC
7,301 posts, read 13,513,021 times
Reputation: 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvaderBryce View Post
Summary: I have no argument for legalization, therefore, I'll use the tactic of blaming the government for all of life's problems with the hope it somehow gets enough support from the people on here.

It's like you guys aren't even trying anymore. The notion that the Feds can't control it is laughable at best; they seem to have no problem controlling Alcohol and Tobacco and how the hell did GMOs get into the conversation? This is about pot, not GMOs or the feds ability to control a drug.

Come correct with a better argument next time.
The Feds have no problem controlling it?!

LOL that's a good one. A true laugher. Do you know how ubiquitous marijuana is? It's easier to buy than a dozen eggs in a lot of places in our state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Maryland > Washington, DC suburbs in Maryland
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:03 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top