700,000 Pot Legalization Signatures Filed in California (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter chronic
- Start date
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
They'll just have to advocate pot smoking without mixing it with tobacco. ;)
The opponents of legal pot will probably say, apart from the drug issue itself, that "in times where we tell people not to smoke tobacco, we cannot allow people to smoke pot as the smoke is even more harmful than tobacco smoke". :rolleyes:
Okay, we'll eat it in cakes instead then! :)
The opponents of legal pot will probably say, apart from the drug issue itself, that "in times where we tell people not to smoke tobacco, we cannot allow people to smoke pot as the smoke is even more harmful than tobacco smoke". :rolleyes:
Okay, we'll eat it in cakes instead then! :)
Last edited by a moderator:
who cares who or where we get it from, either commercial or home grown. Its time that the laws quit making criminals. a friend gave me a few bottles of his homemade wine for x-mas. theres room for both. I'm a pessimist though, and this debate has been going on for longer than I care to remember. I just don't think that this redneck nation is ready for legalization. then again we did elect a black (?) president. good luck Ca. the rest of us are waiting.
horrible, if some pharma giants take control over the plant.
mjp
Founding member
It doesn't matter what laws are passed in California, the federal drug laws will always trump our little laws, and they can be used against someone here, where herb is pretty much ignored by cops unless you're carrying around a bale of the stuff (or they need it to prop up some other petty bullshit charge).
All "drug laws" are a ridiculous waste of money and everyone sitting in the government knows that. All they do is give cops with Rambo complexes something to do on Saturday nights. They get to play Serpico and use that big door bashing tool.
But those laws will never, ever change drastically because they would have to be changed by politicians. And politicians - all of them - are too cowardly to do anything that might lose them one vote.
All "drug laws" are a ridiculous waste of money and everyone sitting in the government knows that. All they do is give cops with Rambo complexes something to do on Saturday nights. They get to play Serpico and use that big door bashing tool.
But those laws will never, ever change drastically because they would have to be changed by politicians. And politicians - all of them - are too cowardly to do anything that might lose them one vote.
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
plausible to me
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
Same thing over here. The politicians in Copenhagen including the mayor wants to set up "Coffee shops" on an experimental basis but our right-wing Government won't let them do it.
Right! It's so ridiculous and certainly overkill when you see the "storm troopers" use their bashing tool to get through the door of some low level pot dealer's home. They don't even wait for the guy to open the door (what a disappointment that would be!). They could just bring a locksmith along instead but I guess that's not as exciting as getting to use the door bashing tool (and the bulletproof vests, the helmets and what not).
Last edited by a moderator:
P
pigmantoo
Drugs -?
I was like most children of the 60's, believing that the legalization of drugs and the controls that would naturally come would be good for society. I saw no problems with this "no victim crime". What is the difference between alcohol and pot, etc. type of arguments? However, I tell you that after 7 years on and off doing outreach for people on skid row I am not so sure. I believe that the majority of the population can handle drugs but there is lots of people that cannot and it really f**k them up, bad and a lot worse that alcohol (my opinion). Anyway, I an not going to tell people how to live their lives, but lots of the stuff out there can really mess up your brain, and that brain is you.
I just don't know anymore.
I was like most children of the 60's, believing that the legalization of drugs and the controls that would naturally come would be good for society. I saw no problems with this "no victim crime". What is the difference between alcohol and pot, etc. type of arguments? However, I tell you that after 7 years on and off doing outreach for people on skid row I am not so sure. I believe that the majority of the population can handle drugs but there is lots of people that cannot and it really f**k them up, bad and a lot worse that alcohol (my opinion). Anyway, I an not going to tell people how to live their lives, but lots of the stuff out there can really mess up your brain, and that brain is you.
I just don't know anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
well, we are taking about pot, not crack, are we?
I have never seen anyone get violent after smoking a joint.
I have never seen anyone get violent after smoking a joint.
P
pigmantoo
Once a doctor told me that stuff from plants is better for you than the stuff just made out of chemicals. I am not a doctor, I don't know but I have seen some really messed up brains out there, and sometimes it transmits to their kids, maybe in the early stages of pregancy. I don't know and if you have been doing pot with no problems then tok up, but some bodies just cannot handle the stuff, pot, alcohol, crack, H, Mo Jo, bennies, etc,etc,etc.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
Right, but we don't forbid alcohol just because some people can't handle it, do we?
The people you mention who can't handle pot etc., don't seem to have had any trouble getting their hands on those "illegal substances". To me it seems like they'll get hold of it whether it's illegal or not.
If they couldn't get hold of "illegal substances", then you would have an argument for keeping it illegal, but since they have no trouble getting what they want anyway, the argument fades away.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm terrible at posting links, but there is a great book by Dr. Andrew Weil titled, The Marriage of Sun and Moon. All about mind altering drugs, from chocolate to cocaine and all others "in between". I read it many years ago and remember thinking how awesome it was that there was a Dr. who actually gave an unbiased study to the importance of susbstances in the lives of we humans.
I've always been suspect of the Pharm. Co.'s and their control over what is 'okay' to take. This lesson was driven home to me several years ago whan Kava was made illegal. Kava is a fantastic herb that WORKS for depression. It was affordable and no other 'drugs' or supplements are needed, (though combined with St. Johns wort made for a very nice day indeed!) I think you can still get certain 'forms or grades' of it, but it is not the same.
I don't think pot will ever be allowed in the U.S., the big guys will just not let it happen. I can't say I understand why. The tax revenue alone should be the factor in government wanting it legalized/decriminalized but that does not seem to make any difference. I guess the big business of prisons beats it out?
:)Toke on peeps,toke on...
I've always been suspect of the Pharm. Co.'s and their control over what is 'okay' to take. This lesson was driven home to me several years ago whan Kava was made illegal. Kava is a fantastic herb that WORKS for depression. It was affordable and no other 'drugs' or supplements are needed, (though combined with St. Johns wort made for a very nice day indeed!) I think you can still get certain 'forms or grades' of it, but it is not the same.
I don't think pot will ever be allowed in the U.S., the big guys will just not let it happen. I can't say I understand why. The tax revenue alone should be the factor in government wanting it legalized/decriminalized but that does not seem to make any difference. I guess the big business of prisons beats it out?
:)Toke on peeps,toke on...
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
Probably! Private prisons rented out to the States are big business. I watched an English documentary on TV about it where they said it was the most profitable business on the stock exchange.
I'm sure the private prisons owners just love the "three strikes you're out" law and the so-called "war on drugs" (= war on people).
Last edited by a moderator:
nervas
more crickets than friends
I have lots of friends that truly believe a law to legalize pot will happen any day now! Probably because they smoke too much of it! I liked pot 15 years ago, but now, even the smell of it sets a panic attack in motion for me! Don't know why, it just has that shitty effect on me.
To use the well-trodden terms of the debate though I'd say the people you are on about are, if you like, the true casualties of the 'War on Drugs' and while legalisation of all drugs wouldn't be perfect it would perhaps allow addicts to get on with relatively 'normal' lives. For one thing the pursuit of their habit wouldn't have to be what amounts to a full-time occupation.
The political will just doesn't exist though.
As for pot, I think it's ridiculous that it's illegal.
Last edited by a moderator:
P
pigmantoo
Bukfan, I am not making an agruement -- I just don't know. I would never tell another person how to live their life, as long as they are not trying to kill me or others or burn down buildings or crash cars, etc.
Drugs have been a part of human existence since the dawn of time -- its just where I work I see the cost to the individual on those individuals who could not handle them.
Again, I am not taking sides so I am sitting in that eight ring of hell as I have not taken issue. I just don't know.
Bruno, as usual you make some good arguements. All I am saying is that some of that stuff out there really, and I mean really f**k up your mind, sometimes for good. I have seen people that maybe have a memory span of 10 to 15 seconds, thats all. They can't even talk but a few words. Maybe thats why I like zombie books, as these people are about as close to zombies as you can get, and they get pregant have kids, rob, kill, etc.etc.etc.
Anway, as I say - I just don't know anymore, but sometimes it makes me cry, a life down the toilet.
Drugs have been a part of human existence since the dawn of time -- its just where I work I see the cost to the individual on those individuals who could not handle them.
Again, I am not taking sides so I am sitting in that eight ring of hell as I have not taken issue. I just don't know.
Bruno, as usual you make some good arguements. All I am saying is that some of that stuff out there really, and I mean really f**k up your mind, sometimes for good. I have seen people that maybe have a memory span of 10 to 15 seconds, thats all. They can't even talk but a few words. Maybe thats why I like zombie books, as these people are about as close to zombies as you can get, and they get pregant have kids, rob, kill, etc.etc.etc.
Anway, as I say - I just don't know anymore, but sometimes it makes me cry, a life down the toilet.
mjp
Founding member
But you do know.
If you didn't "know" you wouldn't keep talking out of both sides of your mouth, repeatedly inferring the whorey old rhetoric that certain people should be protected from themselves.
That evangelical Republican idea that WE - the ELEVATED, the EDUCATED, the CHOSEN, the WHITE MEN of the world! - must protect the dirty commoner, because they are far too addled and stupid to protect or help themselves.
That's what your pro bono rap stinks of. Be a man and say what you really think. Stop hemming and hawing and covering your bases. You come across like a weasely cunt, if it please the court.
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
My signature is among the 700,000 and it is going to be tough to get it to pass. The pharmaceutical giants need to make money. There are people who believe asparagus, broccoli, cauliflower and a few other common vegetables have properties that cure cancer but how can you charge $1500. a dose for that?
It's all about the money.
It's all about the money.
I agree and I'm not naive enough to think people can take drugs and there will be no consequences. I just think that, in general, the law quite possibly makes it worse for those people. It's criminalising people unnecessarily. That's just my view and I know people make their own decisions and not everyone is some innocent victim.pigmantoo said:
I think it's important to distinguish between something like marijuana and harder drugs as well though. In fact, each drug (or at least each type of drug) should be considered separately.
Having worked for the DOC (last time I'll mention this) all I can say is amen. Sad thing is it comes down to a numbers crunch. Prisons have a finite number of beds. They'll release Petey the Perv (who fucked your neighbor's 12 year old daughter) to accommodate Mr. Caught-with-40-plants-in-his-basement-pot-grower type felon. It's a sad, sick world if you pay too close attention to it. Buk knew the score, caught him at the right time. Bless me more or bless him more for the catch. I don't personally smoke weed but vote for legality if nothing more than to keep the proper types locked up. As Americans, VOTE you take-it-for-granted cock-suckers. Thanks.
P
pigmantoo
"weasely cunt?" Well I have never been called that before. Scum bucket, idiolator, shit head, shyster, legal crook, etc., etc., etc. and more but ever that. That is a first mjp, but remember what your first grade teached told you, "Stick and stones can break your bones, but words can never hurt you." Man, did I disagree with that BS. Words are God.
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
they'll standardize the vegetables, regulate the caloric content, dry freeze the items, pulverize and encapsulate them in gelatin-free capsules, tell you it's wheat and gluten free, bottle it pretty with a label that says natural, and we'll pay 13.00 for 90 grams. Easy does it. All this, FDA approved.
ROC
It is what it is
But they do, by fuck, they do.
If there were no speed limits here, our roads would be a Mad Max style death trap. Not only do we (in Oz) need limits but also a constant police presence to keep the more belligerent and foolhardy from simply ignoring those limits.
We have hardcore gun control here and our death rate from shootings is less than 10 a year. In the U.S. it's thousands per year.
Marijuana? If alcohol and tobacco is legal then it's a no brainer - marijuana should be legalised.
But let's face it; the vast majority of this deranged herd we call humanity needs some form of protection from itself.
I've never thought that drug laws were created so much to protect people from 'themselves' as much as they were to protect the rest general public from the things the addicts might do while they're on / trying to get drugs.
If a crackhead gets desperate enough for crack money, he may assault and rob someone in order to get it. Legalizing the crack and making it readily available still doesn't necessarily help him because he still needs a way to get the money to buy it. I realize this reasoning is a slippery slope, but I still think that some drug laws against the heavier stuff might have some legitimacy if it protects the general public.
Alcohol, tobacco, weed are less addictive, less expensive, etc. so you don't have the same level of desperation. Regulate it and tax it.
But like someone said, as it currently stands the cops here in California couldn't care less about someone carrying a little weed on them anyway.
If a crackhead gets desperate enough for crack money, he may assault and rob someone in order to get it. Legalizing the crack and making it readily available still doesn't necessarily help him because he still needs a way to get the money to buy it. I realize this reasoning is a slippery slope, but I still think that some drug laws against the heavier stuff might have some legitimacy if it protects the general public.
Alcohol, tobacco, weed are less addictive, less expensive, etc. so you don't have the same level of desperation. Regulate it and tax it.
But like someone said, as it currently stands the cops here in California couldn't care less about someone carrying a little weed on them anyway.
mjp
Founding member
You can't "protect" people from themselves.
Guns are a genie that can't be put back into the bottle. Like meth or American Idol. But guns and drugs are apples and oranges.
But we have drug laws, thousands of them, and people steal and whore and everything else to get their drugs. So what would change?
We wouldn't waste billions of dollars a year arresting and imprisoning people who's only crime is having/taking/selling the drugs. That would change.
People will do whatever they want to do as far as intoxication goes, whether it's legal or not. Making this shit illegal only lines the pockets of the private companies that run a lot of the prisons, props up law enforcement budgets and buys votes for politicians.
Yes, a percentage of the populations does already. But you don't think there would be more people taking heroin for a test drive if it were sitting on the shelf next to the Coors Light?
I hear you, though. I agree that it's a waste to lock up the guy who minds his own business and sits in his living room and shoots up. But if that same guy later ends up in the county hospital because of his habit, then you're back to having a public interest - taking away money and resources from everyone else.
I just think there's too many ways that someone's drug use can affect the general public, directly or indirectly, so the government should at least attempt to mitigate the risk to some degree.
I think regulation would be a better form of 'protection' than the current situation though.
There's different forms of decriminalisation / legalisation though. You could have a system whereby (for example) registered heroin addicts who met certain criteria can get their fix at a clinic. This has been trialled in the UK and it met with success where some addicts were able to get and hold down jobs because their waking lives weren't devoted to finding enough money to get drugs then finding someone who had some drugs. They were then able to wean themselves off it far more effectively than by being given methadone (which is the widely prescribed 'cure' in the UK). Obviously it only works for people who are prepared to register etc. and who want to sort themselves out. Unfortunately it hasn't been extended because (as with so many other things) the political will for this sort of pragmatism doesn't exist due to the controversy it would cause (you can imagine the stupid scaremongering headlines).
mjp
Founding member
No, I don't. But then everything changes when it's legal, so it's hard to say what the eventual outcome is. In that case you have to ask if addiction causes crime, and I don't think it does.
How many alcoholics do we have in the world? How many of them stick a knife in your back or steal your car when they run out of booze? How many times has someone hit you ever the head with a crowbar because they were out of cigarettes?
When a drug is "illegal" its users become criminals by definition. It seems more likely someone who has to cultivate a lifestyle of lying, sneaking around and avoiding cops is much closer to doing actual crime than someone who can walk into the grocery store and buy their Friday night heroin.
Anyway, I still don't believe someone who is not predisposed to suck down some meth would do so, even if the meth was next to the Chivas on the shelf. There are hundreds of substances that are completely legal and completely addictive. The laws we have now are like making beer illegal but leaving wine in the grocery store. They are arbitrary, senseless and maybe worst of all, used as tools of oppression.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
I have to argue this point. Tobacco is crazy addictive. I have been trying to kick it for 25 years. I'm doing great now, by only smoking a couple cigarettes a week, but I have been in this place before only to start buying packs again. I dream about cigarettes...
Also, talk to a hardcore alcoholic and you will know that they cannot stop.
I'm not convinced that cocaine is more addictive. I have done coke, meth, in my younger years, maybe 10 times. It was GREAT, but I didn't crave or need it the next morning and do not crave or need it now...
Bill
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
Cigarettes make you crave another cigarette and I never felt any high from them. I never smoked more than half a pack a day but I would smoke one cigarette 2 or 3 times- which is bad. When I quit in Feb 1998 I had been smoking one or two cigarettes a day for the previous six months. I craved cigarettes and dreamed about them for about a year. In fact I have had dreams of smoking in the last couple of years in which I was worried that just one drag off a smoke would make me start again.
Bill is right cigarettes are very addictive even the dogs like to sit with my wife when she goes outside for a smoke. They say nicotine is more addictive than heroin but I never heard of anyone getting sick from kicking it.
Bill is right cigarettes are very addictive even the dogs like to sit with my wife when she goes outside for a smoke. They say nicotine is more addictive than heroin but I never heard of anyone getting sick from kicking it.
That's my point. I think those drugs can exist without the same level of desperation occurring amongst the users. I have a hardcore alcoholic in my family. He's screwed up a lot of things, but he's never stolen from me in order to go buy booze. I also have a family member who takes whatever drug is in front of him. He's stolen my shit to sell it for drug money, he's taken my ATM card out of my wallet, you name it and he's done it. Making the drugs legal wouldn't help the issue - he would still need the money. And he'd do anything to get his fix.
Maybe you're right. It's hard to tell what would happen if it were to become legal. Would I pick up some meth at the grocery store now? No. Would I have done it when I was 21? Maybe.
Point taken. I guess 'less addictive' was the wrong description. I was trying to say that no one would hit you ever the head with a crowbar because they were out of cigarettes, but I'm not quite convinced that a serious meth user wouldn't.
mjp
Founding member
Well it all comes back to whether or not someone thinks that addiction causes crime. And if an alcoholic or smoker isn't likely to rob you to get their fix, the answer is clearly 'no.' So the question becomes why do illegal drug users often turn to crime?
All I'm saying is you already force them into an underworld by marginalizing and criminalizing their behavior, and that seems makes the step to real crime much easier.
Physically and mentally I think you would be hard pressed to find a scientific difference between someone craving meth or nicotine. Any scientists in the audience feel free to shoot that down.
But if addictions are equal, how else can we explain the crime?
Bob Marley said once (when he was very, very high), "Laws cause crimes and violence." And in this scenario, I think he's right on target.
All I'm saying is you already force them into an underworld by marginalizing and criminalizing their behavior, and that seems makes the step to real crime much easier.
Physically and mentally I think you would be hard pressed to find a scientific difference between someone craving meth or nicotine. Any scientists in the audience feel free to shoot that down.
But if addictions are equal, how else can we explain the crime?
Bob Marley said once (when he was very, very high), "Laws cause crimes and violence." And in this scenario, I think he's right on target.
I think that's where we disagree then. I don't necessarily think all addictions are equal. There's certainly more of a physical reaction from meth withdrawal than there is from nicotine withdrawal.
If I'm addicted to caffeine and I don't drink a coffee, then I get a headache. If I'm addicted to heroin and I don't get my fix, then there's vomiting, muscle spasms, sweating, etc. If I'm experiencing those things, I'm more likely to do whatever I need to in order to alleviate the symptoms.
But I've never been addicted to any of the heavy things, so I realize it's pretty easy for me to sit back and pontificate. I'm just basing that off of what I've seen from others around me.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Heroin is a different beast altogether. My understanding of Opiate addiction is that your cells get addicted to the drug. Nicotine, Caffeine, alcohol are all physical addictions, but are even a stronger mental addiction.
If I was president, I'd pardon all non-violent drug offenders in the US. That would clear out what, half the prison population? I would then push hard as hell to get the laws changed to make all drugs legal.
Of course, I would not be re-elected and likely would be killed. On top of that, those that write laws, the Congress, would never pass it, so in a few years, the same people would be in prison for minor (in the whole scale of crime) offenses doing hard time for non-violent offenses with seriously dangerous people.
(/pontification)
Bill
If I was president, I'd pardon all non-violent drug offenders in the US. That would clear out what, half the prison population? I would then push hard as hell to get the laws changed to make all drugs legal.
Of course, I would not be re-elected and likely would be killed. On top of that, those that write laws, the Congress, would never pass it, so in a few years, the same people would be in prison for minor (in the whole scale of crime) offenses doing hard time for non-violent offenses with seriously dangerous people.
(/pontification)
Bill
mjp
Founding member
Yeah, I hear you.
Of course it's kind of difficult to rob someone when you're doubled up on a dirty mattress somewhere sweating out a dope withdrawal. ;)
I've never been addicted to any illegal drugs either, but I just keep thinking back to nicotine, and the clusters of people outside 12 step meetings chain smoking during breaks, and the people in drug treatment centers chain smoking around the clock. If hard core addicts can quit heroin, alcohol, meth, whatever, but not nicotine, I think the idea that smoking is a "lesser" or different addiction kind of goes out the window.
Along with the whole 12 step crackpot philosophy (which doesn't work anyway).
But this is all speculation and blah blah blah because these things will never be legal in this country.
Actually I saw something recently about new research that indicates that any addiction changes the way the brain functions, and those changes never go away. So it would seem that any differences would have to be physical.
the thing that always killed me about 12 step programs is that they don't treat the addiction, they transfer it. so, like mjp pointed out, you can smoke your brains out at AA meetings, just don't have a beer. addiction is the disease, regardless of the poison.
