World wide war on drugs.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-12-2011, 05:48 PM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
I would probably not legalize all drugs but probably cannabis, because I see it as a relatively harmless drug. If cannabis would become legalized I believe we could keep lots of harmless criminals out of jail, we save money.
If legal companies produce it instead of criminals in a basement it could be made with higher quality and they could labeled quite clearly what type of cannabis, if it's skunk (cannabis with higher thc) or if it's a milder one. But harder drugs I think should remain illegal, atleast here in Sweden.

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof Christopher Hitchens

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion Steven Weinberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2011, 03:27 PM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
It's the illegality of drugs that make people search for alternate highs, like bath salts, or the creation of methamphetamine. It's like the moonshine of our modern prohibition. There will be more things coming the longer it takes to stop this nonsense.

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger.” -Siddhārtha Gautama
"I have just three things to teach: simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures.” -Lao Tzu
"...thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself..." -Jesus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thinking about Myths's post
31-12-2011, 03:38 PM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
(31-12-2011 03:27 PM)Thinking about Myths Wrote:  It's the illegality of drugs that make people search for alternate highs, like bath salts, or the creation of methamphetamine. It's like the moonshine of our modern prohibition. There will be more things coming the longer it takes to stop this nonsense.

I am in full agreement with you on that..
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2012, 11:58 AM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
I don't see any change coming in the near future. Our Government has made prisons system a privet owned and they are a profit based. In order to keep them profitable you need prisoners. What better than a drug user. Our laws have made them rich and the law makers have got rich off the lobbyist. Do you think anyone is going to break that cycle. We have 100 senators on the take and 500 congressmen also. If you think yours is clean think again. They can go into congress poor as a church mouse and come out millionaires. Most of America wants that evil weed legal but the message has been distorted.
Now for the opiates! I'm on a opiate for pain every day. What makes a drug company any better than the dealer on the street. The price the company charges me is $900 a month for my pain meds. I have to jump through the hoops every month too. I have to piss in a jar even after 15 years of use. I've never failed any of their stupid drug test. That too cost me money. I would go illegal but jail is not a option. The pain I am in would be far to great. In my eyes I see no difference between the Dr.(pusher) & the drug co.(supplier) and what goes on the street. If I was cut off I would be in withdraw like any other junkie. Plus I would have the pain to deal with. If that would ever happen I would get my 380 and end it. Reality sucks!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2012, 08:29 PM (This post was last modified: 02-01-2012 08:49 PM by Thinking about Myths.)
RE: World wide war on drugs.
(02-01-2012 11:58 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  I don't see any change coming in the near future. Our Government has made prisons system a privet owned and they are a profit based. In order to keep them profitable you need prisoners. What better than a drug user. Our laws have made them rich and the law makers have got rich off the lobbyist. Do you think anyone is going to break that cycle. We have 100 senators on the take and 500 congressmen also. If you think yours is clean think again. They can go into congress poor as a church mouse and come out millionaires. Most of America wants that evil weed legal but the message has been distorted.
Now for the opiates! I'm on a opiate for pain every day. What makes a drug company any better than the dealer on the street. The price the company charges me is $900 a month for my pain meds. I have to jump through the hoops every month too. I have to piss in a jar even after 15 years of use. I've never failed any of their stupid drug test. That too cost me money. I would go illegal but jail is not a option. The pain I am in would be far to great. In my eyes I see no difference between the Dr.(pusher) & the drug co.(supplier) and what goes on the street. If I was cut off I would be in withdraw like any other junkie. Plus I would have the pain to deal with. If that would ever happen I would get my 380 and end it. Reality sucks!!!

It's shocking to see how many cannabis users believe that they can lay back and vote for a politician that will actually change the drug war. It's a common idea over at the Cannabis Culture website and Marijuana website forums that Ron Paul will "Legalize" drugs. Ron Paul just wants to make it the states choice to enforce it or not, by decriminalizing it at the federal level. I honestly think that many, if not all, of the southern states will keep up the War on Drugs, even if it's not illegal on the federal level. When that argument was brought up, however, the response is always a resounding "then move to another state". A lot of people utilizing medical cannabis cannot simply "move to another state". It's really not an option for everybody, but selfishness causes some folks to lose kindness, as well as sight of alternate options.

I read this a while ago, and it helped me understand a bit why legalization is difficult for the President.

Quote:Federal Law: The Missing Link In The Tax Reporting Chain

The piece that haslargely been missing from the policy debate over legalizing and taxing marijuana at the state level is federal law. All marijuana production, distribution, sales and consumption remains illegal under federal law, and that won't change anytime soon. A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Raich made clear, less than a decade ago, that Congress enjoys the constitutional power to criminalize all marijuana cultivation, possession and use. Congress can even regulate and prohibit the growing and consumption of small amounts of marijuana at home for ostensible medicinal purposes. What Raich means is that if marijuana activity is to be decriminalized at the federal level, such a change will have to come from Congress, not the courts.

And in Congress, the prospects for decriminalization seem dim. Even if a majority of Americans (or close to it) were to mirror Californians' attitudes and favor decriminalization of the use of small amounts of marijuana for recreational purposes (and I don't know if polls really show that they would), it is improbable that Congress would act to change existing law. One important reason is the makeup of the Senate. All federal laws (including those that repeal or amend laws already on the books) must obtain the support of a majority of Senators as well as House members, and it seems likely that pro-legalization sentiment is and will remain weak in a large number of (admittedly smaller) socially conservative states. Thus, getting a majority of Senators, even if there were a majority of House members and Americans more generally, on board for marijuana decriminalization legislation would appear to be a tough task.

And as long as the specter of federal criminal sanctions remains, the reporting (and thus the taxation) of marijuana activity will likely be low in those states that decriminalize marijuana under state law. Even if a marijuana seller or user complies with state law, unless and until he could be confident that his sale or use would not land him in federal prison, he is heavily deterred from reporting and paying state taxes on that sale or use.

None of this means that the federal government can force states to keep marijuana illegal. Indeed, states can decriminalize marijuana, under state law, if they so choose; they simply cannot obstruct or interfere with federal efforts to enforce federal laws that Congress enjoys the power to pass, even if federal enforcement frustrates state policy or taxation objectives.
Amar, Vikram David. "Legalizing Marijuana in California: Why It Won't Lessen the State's Tax Woes." FindLaw's Writ | Legal Commentary. Web. 02 Jan. 2012. <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/amar/20090814.html>.

"You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger.” -Siddhārtha Gautama
"I have just three things to teach: simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures.” -Lao Tzu
"...thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself..." -Jesus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2012, 08:05 AM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
(02-01-2012 08:29 PM)Thinking about Myths Wrote:  
(02-01-2012 11:58 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  I don't see any change coming in the near future. Our Government has made prisons system a privet owned and they are a profit based. In order to keep them profitable you need prisoners. What better than a drug user. Our laws have made them rich and the law makers have got rich off the lobbyist. Do you think anyone is going to break that cycle. We have 100 senators on the take and 500 congressmen also. If you think yours is clean think again. They can go into congress poor as a church mouse and come out millionaires. Most of America wants that evil weed legal but the message has been distorted.
Now for the opiates! I'm on a opiate for pain every day. What makes a drug company any better than the dealer on the street. The price the company charges me is $900 a month for my pain meds. I have to jump through the hoops every month too. I have to piss in a jar even after 15 years of use. I've never failed any of their stupid drug test. That too cost me money. I would go illegal but jail is not a option. The pain I am in would be far to great. In my eyes I see no difference between the Dr.(pusher) & the drug co.(supplier) and what goes on the street. If I was cut off I would be in withdraw like any other junkie. Plus I would have the pain to deal with. If that would ever happen I would get my 380 and end it. Reality sucks!!!

It's shocking to see how many cannabis users believe that they can lay back and vote for a politician that will actually change the drug war. It's a common idea over at the Cannabis Culture website and Marijuana website forums that Ron Paul will "Legalize" drugs. Ron Paul just wants to make it the states choice to enforce it or not, by decriminalizing it at the federal level. I honestly think that many, if not all, of the southern states will keep up the War on Drugs, even if it's not illegal on the federal level. When that argument was brought up, however, the response is always a resounding "then move to another state". A lot of people utilizing medical cannabis cannot simply "move to another state". It's really not an option for everybody, but selfishness causes some folks to lose kindness, as well as sight of alternate options.

I read this a while ago, and it helped me understand a bit why legalization is difficult for the President.

Quote:Federal Law: The Missing Link In The Tax Reporting Chain

The piece that haslargely been missing from the policy debate over legalizing and taxing marijuana at the state level is federal law. All marijuana production, distribution, sales and consumption remains illegal under federal law, and that won't change anytime soon. A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Raich made clear, less than a decade ago, that Congress enjoys the constitutional power to criminalize all marijuana cultivation, possession and use. Congress can even regulate and prohibit the growing and consumption of small amounts of marijuana at home for ostensible medicinal purposes. What Raich means is that if marijuana activity is to be decriminalized at the federal level, such a change will have to come from Congress, not the courts.

And in Congress, the prospects for decriminalization seem dim. Even if a majority of Americans (or close to it) were to mirror Californians' attitudes and favor decriminalization of the use of small amounts of marijuana for recreational purposes (and I don't know if polls really show that they would), it is improbable that Congress would act to change existing law. One important reason is the makeup of the Senate. All federal laws (including those that repeal or amend laws already on the books) must obtain the support of a majority of Senators as well as House members, and it seems likely that pro-legalization sentiment is and will remain weak in a large number of (admittedly smaller) socially conservative states. Thus, getting a majority of Senators, even if there were a majority of House members and Americans more generally, on board for marijuana decriminalization legislation would appear to be a tough task.

And as long as the specter of federal criminal sanctions remains, the reporting (and thus the taxation) of marijuana activity will likely be low in those states that decriminalize marijuana under state law. Even if a marijuana seller or user complies with state law, unless and until he could be confident that his sale or use would not land him in federal prison, he is heavily deterred from reporting and paying state taxes on that sale or use.

None of this means that the federal government can force states to keep marijuana illegal. Indeed, states can decriminalize marijuana, under state law, if they so choose; they simply cannot obstruct or interfere with federal efforts to enforce federal laws that Congress enjoys the power to pass, even if federal enforcement frustrates state policy or taxation objectives.
Amar, Vikram David. "Legalizing Marijuana in California: Why It Won't Lessen the State's Tax Woes." FindLaw's Writ | Legal Commentary. Web. 02 Jan. 2012. <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/amar/20090814.html>.
I am NOT nor never have been a Ron Paul supporter. I find him disgusting and a bigot. Let the chips fall where they may on this statement.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes N.E.OhioAtheist's post
03-01-2012, 09:35 AM
RE: World wide war on drugs.
[/quote]I am NOT nor never have been a Ron Paul supporter. I find him disgusting and a bigot. Let the chips fall where they may on this statement.


I credit Ron for cluing me in on the phony baloney Federal Reserve and the screwed up monetary system.
Outside of that, he is a creationist and evolution denier.
While he looks reasonably healthy, he is 76 years old and is likely unable to maintain the energy level required to be president for the entire term.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: