Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by crushilista, Apr 11, 2010.
Didn't even read the first page, obviously.
Countries that ban alcohol are actually ISLAMIC country, right now I don't believe any country has taken the decision for laïc reasons to prohibit alcohol.
^sort it by value and ALL the top results (0.00 or 0.01) are islamic countries (Which is quite surprising to know somalia and niger are muslim countries to me)
Either way I didnt prove you wrong to be a smartass, but rather to make a point: Islam has organized (forced) weddings. Now why does this change anything? I DONT KNOW, I wish i did but I do see a correlation there. I could TRY to say it's because when you go out in bar without alcohol it's harder to speak to any random looking girl FOR SOME PEOPLE (I know some of you are love doctors and don't need the help of alcohol). But that logic would be flawed or imcomplete
So AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALL of that brings us back to topic. If Afghanistan has a ban on alcohol, and they produce massive amounts of opium *Insert conclusion here*
if that is the case nothing would get done and the country would grind to a halt
The fact that marijuana is a ‘gateway’ drug is just common sense thinking. Conditioning yourself to take any psychogenic substance such as marijuana can lead to the use of other such substances. All it takes is a certain personality type or the right set of circumstances and the user of marijuana is now smoking Crank or Crack. The user of marijuana is looking to get ‘high’ and often times marijuana is just not enough of a ‘high’ so the person moves on to a more powerful drug. The criminality of marijuana probably has very little to do with it being one of the gateway drugs. The person seeking a higher ‘high’ is vastly more influencing. I have personally seen it hundreds if not thousands of times. Not all users of marijuana will move on to use ‘harder’ drugs, just as not all people that drink alcohol will become alcoholics or start using drugs. The drinking of alcohol does however increase your risks of becoming an alcoholic or a drug addict. If the person never used drugs, then they could never become a drug addict. Again, this is just common sense.
A gateway drug not often talked about is cigarettes. The chemical compounds in cigarettes are known to be addictive and get their users ‘high’. Probably 95% of the ‘hard’ drug users I have interacted with were also cigarette smokers. Not science, just a personal observation.
Citing studies that compare the US to other countries with regards to this issue is not necessarily an effective argument as there are just too many cultural, social and economical factors to consider before a clear conclusion can be drawn. Raw numbers can’t always be used to draw a conclusion. There are vast differences between the US and it population when compared to any European country. There can be many factors in why there are more users of marijuana in the US where it is largely illegal and a country like the Netherlands where the use of marijuana is legal.
I also love the per capita spending on criminal justice and homicide rate per 100,000 people is thrown in there. The fact that that information was cited at all actually caused me to call the whole study into question as I have seen those numbers misreported and skewed more times than I can count. The citing of certain facts and figures while at the same time disregarding other readily available information or ‘cherry picking’, is a favorite tactic of those who are for things such as more firearms regulations. Both sides of the isle do it so I guess it just sucks to be a citizen sometimes.
not really. i dont need to smoke. some people like a nice cold beer or drink after a hard day at work, i preffer a nice phat blunt. to each there own.
even though i've been smoking for years i dont need to smoke to go out and enjoy my time. my smoke habbit is when i'm home doing nothing i rather smoke then drink.
in no way am i addicted to marijuana. noone gets addicted. its habbit forming for people not addicting.
i can easily stop smoking weed if need be, i've done many times. now i wish i can stop my ciggarette smoke like i can weed.
and smoking marijuana was not a gateway even though i've tried other drugs. some drugs i've tried i wasent even smoking weed at the time.
i know people who do harder drugs and dont smoke weed or ciggarettes.
people who get addicted to harder drugs will get addicted to them regardless if they smoked weed or not. personally i grew up in a bad area and i saw alot of my friends waste there lives on drugs. (hard drugs) but all my friends that smoke weed live there lifes, work there jobs just fine.
has anyone here ever went to rehab or freind that went to rehab for weed? lol you will get laughed at.
i beleive it should be legalized, thats that.... California already proved how much money it can bring in to this dam country.
smoke weed all day every day
if your avatar fit this tread quite nicely
The problem is, is that you do it everyday, so maybe you are addicted, but in denial, or not aware that you do need it.
Even some alcoholics believe that they are in control, when if they use it everyday they obviously aren't.
The hardest thing to do is admit you have a problem.
What is an addict? is it someone who uses it every day, or someone who cant do without it. Whats the difference? There is a fine line between the 2. People who use it every day will says its because they like it. People who cant do without it will also say they like it.
I will submit simply this. Were marijuana legalized, would not your job, as a police officer, be safer? Would not an enormous sum of many tens or hundreds of billions of dollars over time be removed from the hands of drug lord and gang members? Would not this money go instead to the local growers at first, the small businessmen and women? Would it not go eventually to large corporations that can do it even cheaper?
Why do we continue to send money to other countries, to the bad people in other countries. There are countries, especially south American ones that are literally run by our desire for these drugs. The cartels and the drug lords own these countries and rule them with an iron fist and why? Because we allow it, because people give them money to do what they do. The overwhelming number of people in general, and even people in this thread, who have tried marijuana (even if they are arguing against legalization) shows that our freedom should not and cannot be squashed.
If you want drugs, they're easy enough to get. To get them, you pay shady people. These shady people send their money to dangerous people who use terrorism as their weapon.
And yet all of this money can be dried up simply through legalization, when those drug lords are no longer depended on for their services.
the reason i picked it. =P
read my post again. i eddited.
lets say i am addicted. so be it. i rather have an addiction to weed then alcohol or anything else. i have no problem getting stoned, getting some munchies, enjoying some game time then some nice deserved sleep. if thats what i have to look forward to in my weed smoking. im all for it
Iligilasation of weed only makes the problems bigger becasue people need to sneak it in and out. Here in the Netherlands, you can buy it almost everywhere in the city. The downside of this legal weed is that foreigners only come to the Netherlands to buy weed. We call them, "Drug tourists".
I smoke weed err' day. And despite the fact that it's illegal, no one can (or will) do anything about it.
Well now that we have 12 pages of thorough discussion I'm sure we can form a conclusion/solution. Otherwise the thread is pointless.
Sorry in advance for this joke but: You're talking like theres another reason to visit the Netherlands. /Joke
You guys are abusing the gateway drug argument just like it changes anything in regards to who uses hardcore drugs, remember that legalization of marijuana != legalization of harder drugs
People that are willing currently to commit the crime to smoke pot, are more likely to commit another crime to take harder drugs then the newly smokers of legalized pot in a legal pot world. What that means is:
***Cannabis is not a gateway drug, it's a crime gateway at best for doing ''worse'' crime by consuming harder drugs (which in turn lead to life of crime to be able to obtain more of the more expensive harder drugs)
***Now if someone is already committed to committing a crime by smoking weed, he will be more likely to commit the hard drug crime. Now in a legalized world the people that were NOT consuming weed while it was illegal are now able to enjoy it freely, these people prior to legalization were NOT prone to committing a crime but were ok with consumming the drug. Now hard drugs being still illegal they would continue to not be ok with committing a crime
I know I just repeated myself, but I really think you guys should leave the ''gateway drug'' argument behind, it's extremly hard to put stats on these and in both cases we can agree that if you're willing to do cocaine/crack meth or heroin, cannabis won't be the thing to convince you.
(wonder if anyone will catch the reference...)
The marijuana equals crime so legalize marijuana argument is a flawed one because it employs circular reasoning.
If marijuana is or isn’t a ‘gateway’ drug is immaterial with regards to the argument for or against the legalization of marijuana. There are plenty of perfectly legal substances out there that one can use to get high and the use of which can be a ‘gateway’ to the use of ‘hard’ drugs. Cigarettes, alcohol, inhalants and prescription medications are at the fingertips of every Tom, Dick and Harry out there.
The argument needs to be about how the government will regulate tax and control the substance. There also needs to be some protections put in place to protect the people who choose not to put these harmful substances into their bodies so we are not stuck with the healthcare and social costs that recreational drug use always incurs.
Actually, its entirely relevant. At least to where you stand on the matter that is.
Now that we both agree any substance that alters your state should be considered and looked at the same (refer to above), AND we agree that its not REALLY the substance at fault, but the individual who performs the action. So, in regards to punishment, we ultimately punish the individuals responsible for the action, regardless of under an influence or not.
What I would like to know is what you expect society to think when there's an increase of incidents. What would you expect to tell someone who loses a family member or friend due to a substance user?
"Well I'm really sorry about that, we wanted to make everything available on the shelf for anyone who wants it. I guess you just had some bad luck of the draw."
I don't think that benefits society. Do you?
You see, you can't control the individual. Everyone has free will. But you can control the substance. At least from a legality point of view.
You can get high from snif spray paint, but we both know that's not the same kind of high you'll get from weed.
I mean even if we say that you know it's suggestive to which drug you prefer: some people go out of their way to commit a crime instead of using the legal spray paint, maybe because it's dangerous, and weed consumption in a none-abusive manner is not very health-threatening if at all. Now that being said, you haven't named spray paint so for the sake of the argument we'll go with prescription drug or anti-depressant (which OMG marijuana is one of them) will give you that ''legal'' high but obviously you need a prescription, I don't have a prescription
Anyway you still don't deny the fact that people willing to do harder drugs will do so rather it is legal or not, and that people that currently refrain from smoking weed but would consume it only because it is legal (not due to mass accessibility, finding weed is one of the least difficult challenge one can put him/herself through) The person that likes to live in the legality, won't be consuming harder drugs because they will remain:
3. More difficult to obtain without already having a step in the ''shady'' businesses
Now by removing the shady business and introducing front-store and taxed businesses, you remove availability of the drug.
It's quality and THC content can be regulated through the FCC and foreign counterpart. Obviously you can't control the quantity being purchased but then the same occurs with alcohol.
The biggest reason we want weed to be legalized is because we don't want to be committing a crime for a god-given right.
I'll requote nofx: ''If God created these plants that I find and abuse, then who the eff, are you to judge me''
-proFits, not an atheist when it pleases him
EDIT for FlawleZ: it's free market, the fact that government is interacting with the market by buying a substance over another (say alcohol, caffeine and refined sugar) is out of place. But then you CAN put stuff like heroin and cocaine in the grouping of ''dangerously poisonous substance with no other use then to kill, could even be considered a biological weapon''
Either way the question i like to ask myself is: what is ''right'' what is ''better for our society'', how would things be different. Theres definitly some pros and cons about legalizing pot, the big question is: How does our society VIEW soft drug usage? Because everything that is criminal or used to be criminal is or was banned because at some point someone though it was ''righteous'' to put a law to block this activity/object. Take woman's right for example, until the 1970s it was ok for a husband to sexually rape their wives, there was nothing legally wrong with that... and I believe one day we'll look back at weed and go ''duh, why didn't we do it earlier''
Well for starters, you're not going to want the FCC regulating that. More likely the FDA.
My bad I'm not american and I always mess those two, but you understood my point.