It'll take a long time for this kind of legislation to make it on the East Coast... but I have faith in California. Maybe if they pull it off and get a big boost to their economy South Carolina will follow suit.
California Marijuana Regulation Act of 2010
- Thread starter AndyFromMonday
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Portugal adopted a policy that decriminalised illegal drugs, or at least possession around 6 years ago. Addicts have treatment clinics to go to to either regulate or quit their addictions, deaths from dirty needles have dropped significantly (1400 to 400 per year), and overdoses have dropped by ~25%. Drug trafficking is still criminalised obviously. Spain and Itally have followed suit, and Mexico is proposing to if they haven't already followed through. Interestingly enough, DEA spokespeople won't comment on the subject.benylor said:
No, no, no, because the dosage and ingestion do not matter. Hard drugs are always bad.AndyFromMonday said:
Yes.
So you're saying legalize it, then identify the addicts and try to get them off it? That's stupid way of going about it. If it were illegal, there'd be less chance of them getting addicted because it's less available. It's also a matter of principal. Why should we make drugs legal? What are the possible benefits? And don't give me the civil liberties bullshit, because it's not a choice that only affects the user.
Also, this. Maybe consider the impact on society and the state instead of just "me want drugs, drugs should be legal".Treblaine said:
Marijuana is a drug that I'm okay being legalized. Heroin, cocaine, etc, not so much.
Why? Well, I've never heard of a marijuana lab exploding and killing several people. I've never heard of someone getting HIV from a dirty bong. I've never heard of somebody taking a hit and going into a murderous rage.
Basically, marijuana is a whole different order of magnitude from hard drugs and it has a significantly smaller chance of negatively affecting anybody but the user than the hard drugs do. Put them in the designated smoker areas, require the 25-feet-from-doors thing, and move along.
Why? Well, I've never heard of a marijuana lab exploding and killing several people. I've never heard of someone getting HIV from a dirty bong. I've never heard of somebody taking a hit and going into a murderous rage.
Basically, marijuana is a whole different order of magnitude from hard drugs and it has a significantly smaller chance of negatively affecting anybody but the user than the hard drugs do. Put them in the designated smoker areas, require the 25-feet-from-doors thing, and move along.
I'm against it. I'm also against Alcohol. I know that as soon as it becomes at least partially legal it will become more common and the more common it becomes the more people become okay with it and hold to it. Making it legal will eventually make it something that can't be made illegal again (kind of like when they tried prohibition). Therefore, I'm against this bill.
It doesn't matter what you or anybody else considers bad. It's a persons right to do what they want with their body and not yours.Valkyrie101 said:
Are you saying that there's actually a record of someone getting high and murdering someone DUE to being high? If so, show it.Valkyrie101 said:
No. What I'm saying is that it would be easier to identify and help the addicts since the only source of drugs would be government sanctioned stores. Also, less of a chance of getting the drug? Do you even know how huge the drug industry is? Drugs are avalible at every corner of your street. How do you think addicts maintain their addiction? How the fuck do you think people become addicted in the first place?Valkyrie101 said:
Why should you make drugs legal? The same reason alcohol and smokes are legal. What are the possible benefits? Money, and considering the state of the USA you need that badly. And yes, I will give you that fucking bullshit about civil liberties. Who the fuck are you to have the right to tell other people what to do and how to live their own lives?
An additional thought on this drugs debate:
I and about half of my friends are drug users, nothing heavy for the most part. I got into raving a couple of years back, and it was great fun, taking some MDMA (ecstacy) and having a great night of dancing. Recently though in the UK (the last year or so), the organic compound that is used to make MDMA became illegal, and the drug dropped out of the scene, it became like golddust. In it's absence however, a new drug called methadrone sprung up out of nowhere, similar in effect as MDMA, but less potent and very addictive. It was sold legally at first online, under the pretense that it was plant fertiliser, and it was quite a while before the Government caught on, even longer before they made it illegal.
I have at least 3 friends who are now methadrone addicts (I say at least cause these are people I see a lot, I think there are more who I don't keep in close contact with). Kids have died on it. Sure, kids in the 90's died on ecstacy, but rarely from overdoses, usually from dehydration or flooding their internal organs by drinking too much water, and not as many died. And they didn't get addicted to ecstacy either, that's damn near impossible.
The war on drugs cannot be won by making it illegal, drug taking is going to happen one way or another, and clamping down just makes it worse.
I and about half of my friends are drug users, nothing heavy for the most part. I got into raving a couple of years back, and it was great fun, taking some MDMA (ecstacy) and having a great night of dancing. Recently though in the UK (the last year or so), the organic compound that is used to make MDMA became illegal, and the drug dropped out of the scene, it became like golddust. In it's absence however, a new drug called methadrone sprung up out of nowhere, similar in effect as MDMA, but less potent and very addictive. It was sold legally at first online, under the pretense that it was plant fertiliser, and it was quite a while before the Government caught on, even longer before they made it illegal.
I have at least 3 friends who are now methadrone addicts (I say at least cause these are people I see a lot, I think there are more who I don't keep in close contact with). Kids have died on it. Sure, kids in the 90's died on ecstacy, but rarely from overdoses, usually from dehydration or flooding their internal organs by drinking too much water, and not as many died. And they didn't get addicted to ecstacy either, that's damn near impossible.
The war on drugs cannot be won by making it illegal, drug taking is going to happen one way or another, and clamping down just makes it worse.
Prohibition was unsuccessful because Americans came from the British, and alcohol has been an established part of our society for CENTURIES. Since way before Columbus sailed to your country. It may have been settled by puritans, but the majority of the immigrants to the USA in the 19th and early 20th weren't, and liked a drink. And without those immigrants, you wouldn't *have* a country.Twilight_guy said:
Unfortunately, this prop won't pass because of the will of the Mormon church in California.
I wish you all of the best California. Hopefully a victory here will give us a stepping stone for a well-defined law in Canada.
I wish you all of the best California. Hopefully a victory here will give us a stepping stone for a well-defined law in Canada.
And it makes no sense that you've never heard of the most free western country in the world; The Netherlands/Holland. Marijuana is somewhat legal here for tens of years.... If you're 18+ you can go to a specified shop and buy weed.Milky_Fresh said:
Since it's not suprise you don't know the actual name of the country i live in Amsterdam should ring a bell. It's our capital ^^.
Oh and I ment no offense in the first sentence. I'm just a bit grumpy at this moment =)!