That's a new emoticon to me. It is ... uncannily ... Homer Simpson.
mmmmm....... donuts! (_8(I)Please tell me that is not the heretofor unknow emoticon for having sex with donuts.
Now that you mentioned it I've already imagined four of those.
Next thing you know, Marge Simpson will do a Playboy spread.
Waitaminute....
Speaking of which, I see a bearclaw that's just asking for it...
...grab that, and a box of timbits, go behind the building ... and you know what comes next.
We live in a society where we fail to prosecute child rapists, and cops steal drugs from dealers to sell to high school kids or to trade for sex with minors. Our kids know that their teachers and cops buy, sell and use drugs illegally, and we wonder why they hold the law in contempt.Just to be clear, you're of course not saying all cops or teachers act that way, or even most do, just some.
There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.
Ah, the "moral decay" meme. I was wondering when that might show up...
I think it's worth noting that our current and last president were coke heads, and our last 3 presidents were known drug users.The war on drugs has been lost for a long time.
We live in a society where we fail to prosecute child rapists, and cops steal drugs from dealers to sell to high school kids or to trade for sex with minors. Our kids know that their teachers and cops buy, sell and use drugs illegally, and we wonder why they hold the law in contempt.
We keep laws on the books that we know over 100,000,000 people have violated. I guess they broke the public's trust. Should they all be in the system?
The war on drugs is a joke that breeds contempt for our corrupt legal system. At some point we have to act like rational adults and make laws that make some sense. If legislators won't do it we have the ballot initiative process in many states.
I'm a little fuzzy as to how I've invoked "moral decay" by pointing out that our system is a corrupt joke.
Can you break that down for me a bit? I'm a little slow.
There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.
I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.
There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.
My world view is pretty harsh, but yes I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek. I have friends in law enforcement and education, and I know some of them use. I could care less if they (or Bush or Obama) like blow except for the legal hypocrisy. Of course most of my friends with an education back ground are no longer involved in the public system. My friends in SWAT are pretty straight laced religious conservatives and they both have mixed feeling about the war on drugs. They also know that their counties have serious issues with corruption often associated with vice enforcement.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
Me, neither. There's a difference between seeing a fairly corrupt baseline -- possibly with minor improvements over time, and maybe occasional dips as well (as Bitter Thorn and I do) -- vs. declaring that "everything was better back in the day and is all going downhill" (which is B.S.).
It's possible to have a net positive slope with a very low baseline, in other words.
More Death, More Drug Raids Gone Wrong: FBI Edition
human cost of the war on drugs
EDIT: one more
Swat Squad Kills Grandpapa, Keeps Life Savings
Have we had enough yet?
|
More Death, More Drug Raids Gone Wrong: FBI Edition
human cost of the war on drugs
EDIT: one more
Swat Squad Kills Grandpapa, Keeps Life Savings
Have we had enough yet?
Yeah, that's just whinny "we want to smoke pot" arguments :P
There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.My world view is pretty harsh, but yes I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek. I have friends in law enforcement and education, and I know some of them use. I could care less if they (or Bush or Obama) like blow except for the legal hypocrisy. Of course most of my friends with an education back ground are no longer involved in the public system. My friends in SWAT are pretty straight laced religious conservatives and they both have mixed feeling about the war on drugs. They also know that their counties have serious issues with corruption often associated with vice enforcement.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
Granted, I inferred the "everything was better back in the day." If I perceived implications that were not present, I apologize.
More Death, More Drug Raids Gone Wrong: FBI Edition
human cost of the war on drugs
EDIT: one more
Swat Squad Kills Grandpapa, Keeps Life Savings
Have we had enough yet?
You'll have to forgive me in my (what you probably consider naive) belief that most people (police, teachers, or otherwise) are fundamentally good.
Sure, people screw up. In a national of hundreds of millions, people screw up often. But writing off most people as morally bankrupt? I don't think so.
You'll have to forgive me in my (what you probably consider naive) belief that most people (police, teachers, or otherwise) are fundamentally good.
Most? Sure, I'd agree. But give 'em power and temptation, and see how long that "goodness" lasts.
Granted, I inferred the "everything was better back in the day." If I perceived implications that were not present, I apologize.There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.My world view is pretty harsh, but yes I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek. I have friends in law enforcement and education, and I know some of them use. I could care less if they (or Bush or Obama) like blow except for the legal hypocrisy. Of course most of my friends with an education back ground are no longer involved in the public system. My friends in SWAT are pretty straight laced religious conservatives and they both have mixed feeling about the war on drugs. They also know that their counties have serious issues with corruption often associated with vice enforcement.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
Quite alright. It's not unusual for me to rub folks the wrong way.
My point is really basically that power corrupts. We have this insane loop where the government creates the black market by criminalizing the drugs. Then the government justifies the raids and wire taps and property seizures and all the other abuses of power on the basis of the black market that their own prohibition caused.
Am I the only one who finds this insane?
You'll have to forgive me in my (what you probably consider naive) belief that most people (police, teachers, or otherwise) are fundamentally good.Most? Sure, I'd agree. But give 'em power and temptation, and see how long that "goodness" lasts.
I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"
Granted, I inferred the "everything was better back in the day." If I perceived implications that were not present, I apologize.There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.My world view is pretty harsh, but yes I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek. I have friends in law enforcement and education, and I know some of them use. I could care less if they (or Bush or Obama) like blow except for the legal hypocrisy. Of course most of my friends with an education back ground are no longer involved in the public system. My friends in SWAT are pretty straight laced religious conservatives and they both have mixed feeling about the war on drugs. They also know that their counties have serious issues with corruption often associated with vice enforcement.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
Quite alright. It's not unusual for me to rub folks the wrong way.
My point is really basically that power corrupts. We have this insane loop where the government creates the black market by criminalizing the drugs. Then the government justifies the raids and wire taps and property seizures and all the other abuses of power on the basis of the black market that their own prohibition caused.
Am I the only one who finds this insane?
Not at all...it is insane. And power does often corrupt. I just think that for every "rotten" police officer, there are many who are trying to do the right thing. But I may well be naive; this certainly wouldn't be the first time I've been accused of it.
And the bit about teachers just seemed...random.
More Death, More Drug Raids Gone Wrong: FBI Edition
human cost of the war on drugs
EDIT: one more
Swat Squad Kills Grandpapa, Keeps Life Savings
Have we had enough yet?
You'll have to forgive me in my (what you probably consider naive) belief that most people (police, teachers, or otherwise) are fundamentally good.
Sure, people screw up. In a national of hundreds of millions, people screw up often. But writing off most people as morally bankrupt? I don't think so.
It neither here nor there to me if human nature is good or evil or if such conditions even really exist for the purpose of this policy debate.
I think that the state having more power and less accountability will end badly. That's the lesson I draw from history and personal experience.
My distrust tends to focus the states abuse of power, but is certainly not limited to that.
For me this is simply one facet of my broad distrust of state power. I think the state has far to much control over our lives, bodies, choices, and property.
I'm often puzzled by my fellow conservatives who oppose Obamacare because it interferes in our choices about drugs and treatment, but drug prohibition is laudable in spite of the same obvious objections.
*sigh* I just think the individual is the best person to make these and basically all choices not the state.
Granted, I inferred the "everything was better back in the day." If I perceived implications that were not present, I apologize.There are probably some cops and teachers out there who are ok.I can't tell if you're kidding. If you aren't, then your world view is seriously f*@^3D up.My world view is pretty harsh, but yes I'm being somewhat tongue in cheek. I have friends in law enforcement and education, and I know some of them use. I could care less if they (or Bush or Obama) like blow except for the legal hypocrisy. Of course most of my friends with an education back ground are no longer involved in the public system. My friends in SWAT are pretty straight laced religious conservatives and they both have mixed feeling about the war on drugs. They also know that their counties have serious issues with corruption often associated with vice enforcement.
I still don't see where any of this invokes moral decay.
Quite alright. It's not unusual for me to rub folks the wrong way.
My point is really basically that power corrupts. We have this insane loop where the government creates the black market by criminalizing the drugs. Then the government justifies the raids and wire taps and property seizures and all the other abuses of power on the basis of the black market that their own prohibition caused.
Am I the only one who finds this insane?
Not at all...it is insane. And power does often corrupt. I just think that for every "rotten" police officer, there are many who are trying to do the right thing. But I may well be naive; this certainly wouldn't be the first time I've been accused of it.
And the bit about teachers just seemed...random.
The issues with teachers using and selling drugs are ones that have come up in my life on several occasions, and my daughter had friends who traded sexual favors to deputies and officers for drugs when they were minors. I really didn't provide any context though. These aren't abstract problems to me and I don't even live in a terribly large city.
There are presumably decent people in any large group, but if the system they operate in is corrupt and broken that tends to make it tough to be decent.
I'm sure teachers and social workers and cops don't go into those fields planning on ruining innocent peoples lives for the most part.
Unfortunately it works out that way all too often.
EDIT: Teachers were also relevant to the corruption issue. For many kids school is their first exposure to government and their experience in school may color their perception of the state.
I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"
No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
Many who take a dim view of "most people" tend to somehow exclude themselves; I'm glad to see you don't seem to be doing so. As for me, the biggest fault I attribute to the general public is a lack of critical thinking. I'm often amazed anew at people who hold mutually exclusive views, yet don't perceive any conflict.
I agree that power coupled and a lack of accountability make for a horrible combination. I don't see that confined to government, however; I tend to think of corporations as being big offenders. Which leads to an interesting random thought: Some feel threatened by the government (which is just a group of people); others by corporations (just another group of people). Despite the underlying ideologies generally considered to be opposites, are these fears really that different?
Some feel threatened by the government (which is just a group of people); others by corporations (just another group of people). Despite the underlying ideologies generally considered to be opposites, are these fears really that different?
To some extent, only because their spheres of influence don't fully overlap. Some corporations certainly have the power to affect us more profoundly than the government, but in a more limited area.
|
@bitterthorn,
As a teacher in a public system for the past 13 years, I can say with 100 percent certaintly that the hundreds of other teachers I've worked with in that time have never been tempted to sell or buy drugs from or to students.
One of the quickest things you hear about in a school, is when a teacher does something dodgy. Kids will roll over on them amazingly fast. And I've never had one of my colleagues dobbed in for drug dealing or sex charges or other forms of corruption. Ever.
That's 13 years and hundreds of teachers, all of whom go through a police check every 5 years to maintain their registration.
I'm thinking your perspective may have been skewed by the system. I emplore you not to paint the rest of the world in your view.
(An important note, I'm an Australian working in our public system. Since you didn't see the relevence to distinguish between teachers countries I felt it important to post our perspective).
You may now return to your original discourse.
Cheers
|
Insight to Australia's status quo.
Trust me, you're lucky. We aren't. I was a student at three different high schools that had teachers busted for selling dope. Four high schools that had teachers go to jail for sex with students. Two that had teachers busted for kiddie porn. Two that had police officers fired for having sex with 18 year old seniors.
When I was doing dirty, several of my customers were school teachers. All levels. Mostly weed, but some x and coke.
And, to be frank, the thread is about something happening in the U.S., so what happens in Canberra is somewhat irrelevant. No offense.
(I went to five high schools in four states)
Edit: The one high school that none of this happened (at least the semester I was there) was an "inner city" school. Three of the four that stuff happened were suburban "good" schools, one was in rural New York.
|
|
I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
I would totally go James Bond, for the record. It wasn't a terrorist situation, but my life was at stake, so...
And, considering how you handled the situation in West Texas, I'm sure you would as well.
As far as the "power and temptation" question, well, we know how that turned out for me. But I'm trying to get better with that.
@bitterthorn,
As a teacher in a public system for the past 13 years, I can say with 100 percent certaintly that the hundreds of other teachers I've worked with in that time have never been tempted to sell or buy drugs from or to students.
One of the quickest things you hear about in a school, is when a teacher does something dodgy. Kids will roll over on them amazingly fast. And I've never had one of my colleagues dobbed in for drug dealing or sex charges or other forms of corruption. Ever.
That's 13 years and hundreds of teachers, all of whom go through a police check every 5 years to maintain their registration.
I'm thinking your perspective may have been skewed by the system. I emplore you not to paint the rest of the world in your view.
(An important note, I'm an Australian working in our public system. Since you didn't see the relevence to distinguish between teachers countries I felt it important to post our perspective).
You may now return to your original discourse.
Cheers
I've been teaching for 11 years and I have only personally met one teacher that ended up getting in trouble with the law (for having relations with an 18 year old student). While I know things happen, I think we hear more about the bad apples then we do the rest.
I would totally go James Bond, for the record.I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
Sean Connery or Roger Moore?
|
|
Sean Connery or Roger Moore?I would totally go James Bond, for the record.I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
Connery. C'mon now.
Connery. C'mon now.Sean Connery or Roger Moore?I would totally go James Bond, for the record.I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
Just making sure ;)
One positive I do see for Humboldt if marijuana were legalized though is that the crimes perpetuated against growers and sellers could be reported without fear of being arrested themselves.
I mean seriously, right now, what would you expect if you walked into a police station and tried to file a police report because you just got held up a gunpoint for 5 lbs and they killed your best friend right in front of you when you resisted?
I'm from Humboldt as well and know a couple of (medical) growers who got ripped off and decided to call the cops. Humboldt County Sheriff actually pulled over one of the thieves as he and his partner were making their getaway. Nailed with poundage: ain't karma a b$$#@?
That said, and having been a dank connoisseur in the past, keeping herb illegal is a really unhealthy way for Humboldt to stay alive. Thriving car stereo shops and 21 year old kids in $50,000 trucks does not make for a healthy economy when everyone else is hurting.
Zo
I hate to say it, but for all the debate the thing that's been foremonst on my mind concerning this matter is "What are Willie Nelson, Tommy Chong, and Dave Chappelle thinking at this moment?"
Do you ever wonder if our solar system could be just like, an atom in some other universe?
I hate to say it, but for all the debate the thing that's been foremonst on my mind concerning this matter is "What are Willie Nelson, Tommy Chong, and Dave Chappelle thinking at this moment?"Do you ever wonder if our solar system could be just like, an atom in some other universe?
Only when I'm really high.
|
|
Insight to Australia's status quo.And, to be frank, the thread is about something happening in the U.S., so what happens in Canberra is somewhat irrelevant. No offense.
No offence taken, but please allow me to respond.
The relevence, (and I thought you'd understand this given some of the things you've written about in this thread), is that narrow minded views about an entire class or group of people from the limited experience of some others are a little insulting and occasionally dangerous. This is true whether it be from an ex cons perspective struggling to get work, or from a teacher constantly judged and ridiculed for his profession because a very few people in that profession are jerks. As I said, I actually figured you'd understand that.
Since you mentioned it, btw, Canberra has had legalised Marijuana for over ten years. From what I've heard and read about, it hasn't changed levels of corruption at any level. Nor has it stopped people dealing drugs and making lots of money from it. Now they just sell something different.
The reason behind why people break the laws is often as important as the law themselves. Fast money, supply and demand and all that.
I believe the idea of a law that prevents smoking marijuana to be ironic given alcohol is perfectly legal and kills far more people. However I don't believe bandying about the ideas of legalising it to prevent corruption, organised crime and over expenditure to be persuasive. All that happens is you shift the medium through which these occur.
Cheers
|
Ahh....finally a real keyboard to type on.
So, the question is: Should Marijuana be legalized (or decriminalized) in CA, and why or why not?
My answer is simple: Similar to Bitter Thorn and other "self-actualized" thinking people above, I do not believe the Federal, State, or Municipal government should be outlawing what I choose to put in my body.
Booze, Cheeseburgers, Pot, Ecstasy, or Heroin, they are all inanimate objects that have no power to act. Being a crime in and of itself is silly. Having laws that make it a crime to consume any one of these is as arbirtary as any other one. One could make an argument that "Society Suffers" from overconsumption of any of the suggested items, or that an individual's life is bettered in some way by them.
That suggests to me that there is no logical and reasonable justification for said laws. After all, if you're just throwing darts at a list of things to choose which are crimes and which are not, your laws do NOT belong on the books.
That being said, it was my understanding that pot was widely used (and less frequently abused) in the period during and just after WW1, leading up the Prohibition era and the Great Depression in the US. The <actual> reasons for its criminalization (really, Schedule 1 Narcotic? that doesn't even make sense as a definition of Narcotic...) was based on racial profiling and the intent to prosecute Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics.
After all, if everyone (including all the above racial groups, and everyone else) is using a "Narcotic" to little societal effect, it's gotta be pretty easy to nail those people who have the wrong skin tone when they enjoy it. It became illegal to have non-pink skin, basically.
We all know how well Prohibition worked, right? Starting from a more well reasoned point (we are women who believe our drunk husbands shouldn't be allowed to hit us, so get rid of the drunkenness), it was considered the "Great Experiment" in US policy. It failed, spectacularly, for pretty obvious reasons.
Now, with their fruitless, wasteful "War on Drugs" (really, declaring "War" on an inanimate object? that's as nonsensical as a "War on Terror" by definition...wars need to perpetrated against a nation, organization, or somesuch...not an Ideal, or a Set of Objects), the US Government has decided that Prohibition was a Good Idea, and has chosen to exercise its rather capable force.
This would be a way for the US people to begin reclaiming some of the reason and rationality we were supposed to be founded upon. It will fail, of course, because the DEA, FBI, FDA, and a whole slew of alphabet organizations like being paid to wear body armor and carry guns and kick in doors. Why would they want to give that up? Why would Anheiser-Busch, Miller Brewing, Pfizer, or Bayer want to give up their market share of "legal intoxicant" purchases? These are organizations heavily vested in our society, capable of wielding tremendous financial and political influence, and more than capable of squashing a "people's referendum" seeking to overturn some of that power.
A point was made above (i think in this thread) that "if you don't like the government as it is, vote for a change". That works, assuming that the people in charge play by the rules as laid out for the average citizen. I, for one, do not believe that to be the case. Too often have I seen political corruption, vote-buying, backroom-deals, and the like to have any faith in the system as it stands.
Perhaps when CA goes absolutely bankrupt, or the Federal government cannot float the economy with "Steal from Peter to pay Paul" and "Just print some more money, we're the government" tricks, we'll see this kind of action take place. At their heart, politicians are thieves, producing nothing, legislating what you can and can't do in the privacy of your home, and charging you money for the privilege of being "governed" by them.
When the US finally wakes up and realizes that their government is in place by the will of the people, and stops believing the tripe that CNN and FOXNews spew, we'll have the capability to decide for ourselves if smoking/eating/vaporizing a plant is a good choice.
-t
PS: Heroin is Illegal, a Schedule 1 Narcotic, definied as "Unsuitable for any consumption, including Medical Uses or Research." Funny, I though H and Morphine were remarkably similar...
Schedule I
• The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
• The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
• There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
• Examples of Schedule I substances include heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana, and methaqualone.
Schedule II
• The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
• The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.
• Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.
• Examples of Schedule II substances include morphine, phencyclidine (PCP), cocaine, methadone, and methamphetamine.
Schedule III
• The drug or other substance has less potential for abuse than the drugs or other substances in schedules I and II.
• The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
• Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.
• Anabolic steroids, codeine and hydrocodone with aspirin or Tylenol®, and some barbiturates are examples of Schedule III substances.
Schedule IV
• The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule III.
• The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
• Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule III.
• Examples of drugs included in schedule IV are Darvon®, Talwin®, Equanil®, Valium®, and Xanax®.
Schedule V
• The drug or other substance has a low potential for abuse relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule IV.
• The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
• Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to limited physical dependence or psychological dependence relative to the drugs or other substances in Schedule IV.
• Cough medicines with codeine are examples of Schedule V drugs.
Sean Connery or Roger Moore?
George Lazenby, all the way!
Sean Connery or Roger Moore?George Lazenby, all the way!
As long as no one goes for Pierce Brosnan - *that* James Bond is dead inside!
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I'm curious: How do you see yourself reacting in a situation of "power and temptation?"No idea; I've never had any. But probably not good.
That's like the old "what would you do if terrorists burst into your school/workplace?" EVERYONE says they'd be James Bond and Rick MacLean rolled into one, but in reality you never know how you'll react to something like that until it happens. Power and temptation are worse, though, because instead of requiring a single burst of courage, they call for a drawn-out struggle that erodes your resistance, most often without you being aware of it. Ultimately, I don't think anyone can hold out indefinitely.
+1 and a great argument for term limits. Lawmaking shouldn't be a profession.
Let me sum up.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within
limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add
'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's
will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
Okay first off I want to start this by saying, no one should break the law or encourage others, this is not a thread to brag about flaunting current laws. This is merely to discuss this article and ask a few simple questions.
California to vote on legalization of marijuana
Now the questions
1) are you for or against this passing
2) why
3) if it passes would you like to see other states adopt this measure.
Please keep things civil and be aware of the rules of this forum. I would like to have an interesting and honest discussion, not have this thread locked for violation of the rules.
1) Against
2) Various reasons - mainly it will start a stupid conflict over state vs federal laws and which trumps which. Again
3) no not really
|
Personally I find it strange that at the same time we are pushing for rolling back bans on smoking stuff, we are the same time pushing for banning smoking in public places. At the same time as we push for education on the physical damage smoking does, we are promoting smoking other things.
Who said anything about smoking? I personally am a big fan of brownies :D
|
|
This is basically exactly how I feel about it.I'm for it.
I'm not into the stuff, and I think it tends to make people unhealthily apathetic, but I'd rather see my tax dollars put to better use than prosecuting people for marijuana possession. It just shouldn't be a priority, and the illegal trade encourages smuggling, turf wars, and all the rest.
I agree with this as well. Plus (this might have already been said) one can make/manufacture SOOO many things with hemp (paper, textiles, hemp oil, milk, fuel, paints, resins, shellacs, varnishes, medium density fiber board, oriented strand board, and even beams, studs and posts.
Check this link out...
http://www.naihc.org/hemp_information/hemp_facts.html
All in all, I think its much better as a resource then as a drug.