im driving to therapy coz u insulted me lol.
Printable View
im driving to therapy coz u insulted me lol.
Shit!
*hangs head in shame*
*goes to ticket booth*
"Yes, ticket for Guiltsville, please..."
lol
Yeah the topic isn't bad, but the content is pretty bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinsemilla Jones
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...ve/sucks13.jpg
Dammit! How do you post pics? Do I have to use that attached file thing? Why doesn't it come out?
At least on some points.
Of course, a lot depends on where you live.
I live in a southern U.S. state where there are a LOT of dry spells of even shit weed, and KB is always way over priced and in short supply. If you are caught growing your own, you will spend at least 3 years in prison for just one seedling, mandatory minimum sentence (no probation, no parole, the judge has no choice).
If it were legalized, the price would drop not rise. The reason it can cost as much as gold is because it's illegal.
The government keeps the supply artificially lower than the demand. If legal, grow operations could be bigger and more numerous, thus increasing the supply to meet the demand and lowering the price. And instead of being lucky to find one dealer (my situation, at least), I would have a choice of vendors and a greater variety of weed and prices. Competition would not only create lower prices, but the availability of better pot.
Although greatly taxed, tobacco is still much cheaper than marijuana, even though they are both plants. That's because there are competing tobacco companies, and no limit on how much can be grown or transported because of the threat government confiscation.
Decrim makes things easier on the user as far as incarceration is concerned, but it keeps the constraints on supply, so availability remains low and prices remain high.
Pot testing in the workplace has already become common in the US, it's becoming more frequent in schools, and is soon coming to the highways. Legalization couldn't make this any worse, but could make things better by allowing people to openly demand tests that would show whether on not someone is acutely intoxicated on marijuana, rather than the tests today that only show whether someone might have smoked pot once in the last month.
Actually, I think people should be judged by their behavior, rather than what's in their urine, blood, breath, or hair. If you are in control of yourself, there's no problem no matter what you've ingested. If you're out of control, you're a problem even if it's because you're just sleepy or angry.
I think pot is a gateway drug, not from its effects, but because it is illegal. The person you buy pot from often has coke and pills for sale, too. The store where you buy cigs and beer doesn't sell crack and heroin. Plus, when people are told that pot is bad for you and then they discover it isn't, they often think what they've been told about truly dangerous drugs is a lie, too.
Finally, while cotton benefitted from hemp prohibition, the real instigators, at least in the U.S., were the timber and the petroleum based synthetics industries.
William Randolph Hearst, the biggest newspaper publisher in the U.S. before WWII, owned vast amounts of timber used to make pulp paper. The value of his timber was threatened by new technology to havest and process hemp into pulp for much less cost than timber. Hearst not only published the many lies about marijuana circulated in the 1920s and 30s, but wrote them himself and personally met with federal officials to encourage a national marijuana law.
Du Pont was the richest and most powerful company in the world by the 1920s, after supplying most of the arms to both sides in WWI, and was partners with Standard Oil. They were developing petroleum based synthetic materials such as Nylon, whose main competition would be natual hemp fiber and the synthetics that could be made from hemp's rich source of cellulose. They also developed chemicals used in the processing of timber into pulp paper and owned a lot of timber land. As if that wasn't enough, DuPont also owned General Motors, whose chief competitor, Ford, was developing cars made of hempen materials. DuPont was well aware of hemp's potential, because they had used a lot of it to manufacture dynamite. Politicians key in the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 were connected to DuPont.
I now see the bad about getting it legalized. but what about this. what if they kept it illegal but you no longer got arrested for it, unless you got a ticket or warning or whatnot for driving under the influence or something. ya know what i mean? they do it in other contries, i think canada. i forget. but still no smoking on the job. Just dont be as harsh about it. I got arrested for having 1 bowl pack (less than a gram) of nug on me. what the fuck? and i wasnt even smoking. i was on my way to work. and i had my container with me. he took both my bowls too, which i wasnt using at the time. now i have to go to court. thats a waste.
your right too tho. lower prices and better selection. werd. keep it out of the stores tho.
hey spot on. when i first started smoking i thought coz my oldies lied about pot all the rest must be ok too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinsemilla Jones
*applauds* some good points of view, Sinsemilla..some of which I hadn't considered.
I guess it's swings and roundabouts, isn't it.
I still disagree with the 'gateway drug' theory, but I see your point (as I did yours, Imotep :) ) - but no-one is forcing you to go the 'next step', surely that is down to you (?)
I think that the main issue here is proper education and research. We still don't know the long-term effects of smoking dope/grass, and there are still a great many people in positions of power that are ill-informed about the use of cannabis and other drugs in general.
I suppose that I am a bit blase, because it is readily available where I live, and so am of the mind that 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.
Good debate :)
Legal/illegal, crim/decrim. Both have the good aspects and bad, but like res said most importantly people need to be educated cause when it comes down to it, you make your own bed. Whether you choose to smoke, use other drugs or whatever.
Shit I am studying to be a primary school teacher and I had to sit through some fuckers lesson on how marijuana is a bad drug and it's bad for you so just don't do it. Kids don't listen to that shit and then go ok I won't. They go oh wow drugs I wonder give me some and I will find out for myself.
My mum was a counsellor, and we lived with a reggae band for a while and saw people completely fucked on drugs a lot as a child. My mum gave me some sort of scientific pamphlets to educate me a little on what drugs where and what they did to your body but never once did she say don't do them or their bad. Nothing was hidden or exagerated.
As a teenager I experimented and was able to tald to my mum about stuff. I saw many of my friends fuck up badly because of drugs and they had no one to turn to, because they felt ashamed and knew their parents would freak. To be exact three of them died, 2 suicides one on pot and the other drunk and 1 o.d on smack. One guy started on pot, moved to speed, then smack and now he's in jail.
The whole point of this long story is that the one thing most of these people had in common is that they were not given real life education just stuff out of books or out of their parents mouths. If using drugs was out in the open then society would be able to better deal with the problems that come with (such as addictions and mental disorders).
Hope this all makes sense. I just had to get it out.