I just read a very interesting article claiming that it’s not just those silly bible-thumping conservatives that want pot to stay illegal - another large community that rejects the legalization of marijuana is the drug dealers themselves:
The paper and textile industry.
How about hardcore drug doers who know the perception of their drugs will never meet the the standards of “natural intended plants and herbs”
If I want coke but that gets in the way of the weed movement . . . what then? I doubt pot heads care about my choice.
So from that standpoint, I’d say no to weed and put a ban on alcohol, the most dangerous.
I’ll say something stupid here. If you think crack will ever be accepted “you must be smoking crack.” That’s stupid because weed causes much stranger thoughts than crack.
I don’t care about what you want.
Hypocrites. Take inch take a mile goes against your inch.
I’m sorry, I didn’t quite understand your logic. Could you put it in something closer to syllogistic form?
This is a classic “Baptist and Bootleggers” phenomenon. So much so, that the 2010 Cannabis referendum made it to the Wikipedia article:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootleggers_and_Baptists
What people should realise is that the same mechanism is very often in play. What the public sees and hears are the “Baptists”, righteously advocating government action in the name of their morality. What we see less often are the Bootleggers, working behind the scenes to perpetuate their government-sponsored criminality.
Environmentalists, by the way, are today’s biggest “Baptist” community.
Thank you for that link Eran. I didn’t know it was a widely recognized phenomenon
Screw making it legal grow your own. Its fairly easy and safe if you don’t get greedy. Its the folks that have their homes turned into a nursery that get caught. Two to three plants and you are set. Get the seed out of the bud then smoke the bud, keep the plant trimmed … If you choose to dry the whole plant, save one for seed. To get a potent plant don’t water it for awhile once its matured. then water then shock it again. Killer smoke.
Here’s why I don’t like the present status of pot:
Let’s assume for a second that pot is “immoral” and should be punished (I don’t actually believe that, we’re pretending here children). One has to compare this immoral crime to other ones. How does pot compare to murder, firstly? Doesn’t even come close to being as immoral, but they don’t punish people for pot the same degree they punish for murder, so that’s fine. Let’s move on: how does it compare to battery? Obviously doesn’t come close to battery either. Nobody is hurt directly from doing or selling pot (although of course people are hurt indirectly), but people are obviously hurt directly from battery. Drug dealers, however, some times get longer sentences than people charged with battery.
So, right there, even assuming it is immoral, the punishment does not fit the crime. If it was, in fact, immoral, it MIGHT make sense to fine them or put them in jail for like a week, not prison, come on.
Its not immoral, that was just away to get the law pushed through. The whole immoral thing is a smoke screen. Its about money. If legal and taxed the money would go to the state and feds. Right now it brings in money to courts, jails and police through fines. Who do you think was behind the whole making it illegal? Lawmakers or law enforcement? Is jaywalking really immoral or wrong or totally dangerous? How about parking meters? Uhhuh now thats a cash cow. There are some drugs that should be totally illegal but I can’t see any morality in it. Just that those drugs tend to cause alot of social problems. Pot though, nope, its just a cash cow.
When drug money and illegal goods are seized more money is taken than made from taxes. Plus the re-sale in the black market.
Alcohol is the worst drug. The legality of it proves that logic is only claimed not used.
I agree with you, but I would like to suggest following this line of thinking further.
If pot is not immoral (as we both, and many others, seem to agree), isn’t it immoral to arrest and imprison people for using or dealing in it?
Aren’t government agents (law-makers, DEA, prosecuters, judges, jailers) all guilty of evil on a huge scale, for putting into cages millions of people who have not done anything immoral themselves?
Creating a society that enjoys itself in ways that don’t require the desire to alter the mind should be the true goal.
You can admire a doctor for his post-accident-response knowledge, skill, and learning dedication.
We need more preventers.
Otherwise, the wealthy estate of the dead will contiune to be taxed most-heavy.
And you’re not going to create that society by imprisoning nonviolent “criminals” for victimless “crimes”. That’s just going to breed a society of fearful obedient slaves whose only escape from this hell on earth is massive amounts of cocaine.
Why? What’s categorically wrong with a desire to alter the mind (presumably for the better)?
What the heck does law have to do with morality?
Law is presented by the lawmakers and enforces as moral. That’s what it has to do with morality.
The desire is about escaping the disfunction of society. Then you return to find things haywire and a stronger desire to escape. To eliminate this need would welcome great relief and new social adventure.
This is an ideal, just as heighted and romantic as a rush of blood flow to your head.
Besides, don’t worry, the older generation will die and this thing will be voted on again. But coke better be next.
So what is supposed to be morally wrong about jaywalking?
To me, the crime by my local airport comes as a noisy assault of noise pollution. Any description of this airport notes the airplaine engine in flight as a joy to hear. Sounds victimless.
Now, you don’t care about my issue.
So don’t get angry at people who seemingly refuse your right.
The weed movement is about numbers. Sometimes you don’t have the numbers.
The airport thing is not a movement. So at least you have that.