Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

User avatar
GBNATO
General
Posts: 5884
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013 12:20
Location: The Republic of Dave
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby GBNATO » Tue 12 May 2015 14:45

Heard good things about this doc, about to watch it now.

Image

User avatar
Bollywood Baloney
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu 7 May 2015 21:32
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Bollywood Baloney » Tue 12 May 2015 15:19

I'm not a supporter of legalized marijuana, I'm a supporter of compulsory marijuana.

User avatar
Countess Bathory
Colonel
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun 3 Nov 2013 14:09
Location: East of the Sun, West of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Countess Bathory » Tue 12 May 2015 15:30

Bollywood Baloney wrote:I'm not a supporter of legalized marijuana, I'm a supporter of compulsory marijuana.

Do you smoke w33d and love edgy memes?
Image
Accept Roki Vulovic as your Lord and Saviour today and beware of the false prophet, Jesus Christ

User avatar
Mitchverr
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10646
Joined: Sat 24 Mar 2012 18:08
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Mitchverr » Tue 12 May 2015 15:41

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:People can get destructive on weed the same as they get destructive on alcohol.

It's more the mood/personality beforehand, some people just can't help themselves, and you can usually see it coming...


Although both are depressants 1 is much more so (alcohol) is it not? Though you are able to be destructive on weed, its still much more likely to be so from alcohol.

LoneRifle wrote:I'm curious where the equivalent of Detroit or Gary exists in Portugal. Because I doubt the Portuguese ever had to deal with those kinds of disasters when they were reforming.


Err, you obviously know little of Portugals problems prior to radical drug reforms :) Not to mention that Detriot has more problems then that, its like saying using hot soap/water to clean medical equipment is pointless to do because they can risk infection afterwards. Every little helps.
Image

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby LoneRifle » Tue 12 May 2015 18:26

Fade2Gray wrote:
LoneRifle wrote:If you read you might find the answer you seek Fade.


Provide reading materials then.

edit: There's so many holes in this logic it isn't even funny. Lone, I'm sorry, but you have to do better than this. Considering the conflict between local, state, and federal laws, compared to a country with total decriminalization from top to bottom, yeah, please try again. Maybe Mr. Geography Fail can help you out on this one.


Comparing the USA to Europe is apples to oranges. Especially comparing Portugal and it's 10 million people to the USA and it's 300 million plus whatever undocumented immigrants is idiotic, without even getting into the VAST demographic/cultural differences.

I mentioned Detroit because the places that need the most help would get very little benefit from legalizing marijuana and it's sale. Colorado is a good test for how it would do in a well off place, but it would compare poorly to places that actually need help (Detroit). And the help that is needed is not drug legalization, but education and jobs. Neither will come to Detroit from legalizing drugs.

The whole legalization thing is just a Catch 22, you legalize Weed but WHO would really benefit from it? The poor or some yuppie type folks? Be honest with yourself here. Sure the poor who get screwed the most by getting arrested for a bag of dope will not have to worry about that anymore, but that won't change the fact they are still poor and still will be smoking dope. If anything the price of smoking will probably go up with taxes. That's not to say it wouldn't have good parts. The millions of arrests for possession would end, so it would ease the strain on the justice system, but it doesn't solve the fact that you still have a huge amount of Urban poor with no jobs (Detroit). And unless you can find folks steady paying jobs, what's the ending impact on actually legalizing drugs? Hippies are happy.

People here are going on about how "It would add tax dollars and we could use the money to fund rehab centers!". It would bring in a good amount of money, but the chances of the government actually spending that money on drug rehab for it's people are low. Politicians raid these kinds of buckets of taxes for pet projects or whatever all the time. It would be no different if there was a pile of cash set aside for Drug rehab that was funded from weed taxes. The jobs "created" by the industry would also be heavily regulated by nature of the business, and I suspect would exclude the kinds of folks that need the jobs the most (but not the Hipsters and Hippies).

And legalizing hard drugs would be a terrible decision. People can argue for Marijuana because it's on the fence so to speak, but hard drugs absolutely not. We have enough alcoholics as it is, we don't need hard drug addicts coming out of the woodwork because some fools thought it would be neat to legalize Heroin.

People here can talk about how great it would be to legalize weed, but I just don't buy into the idea it would be some great boon for the country.

Err, you obviously know little of Portugals problems prior to radical drug reforms :) Not to mention that Detriot has more problems then that, its like saying using hot soap/water to clean medical equipment is pointless to do because they can risk infection afterwards. Every little helps.


If you can't even spell Detroit right, I doubt you know the first thing about it's problems.
Image

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Fade2Gray » Tue 12 May 2015 18:49

Wow, a total lack of reading material, and just some invented nonsense.

LoneRifle wrote:I mentioned Detroit because the places that need the most help would get very little benefit from legalizing marijuana and it's sale. Colorado is a good test for how it would do in a well off place, but it would compare poorly to places that actually need help (Detroit). And the help that is needed is not drug legalization, but education and jobs. Neither will come to Detroit from legalizing drugs.


First off, I've stated repeatedly, the point of legalization is to get drugs away from pushers, gang-bangers, and the cartels. Why? To take away one of their most massive sources of income. It would also be something to directly help addicts. As Detroit is my birth city and where I grew up and lived for 21 years of my life, thanks for the lecture on the incredibly obvious. I already told you that Detroit is a mess and needs all sorts of help from multiple angles, and here you are repeating what I said with more words. Worse yet, there's all sorts of conflicts with state and federal laws, which has created a system where "nothing has changed."

Congrats on trying to dodge my points.

The whole legalization thing is just a Catch 22, you legalize Weed but WHO would really benefit from it?


Dealers, pushers, and the cartels (which you are suddenly ignoring now, curious that) would not.

The poor or some yuppie type folks? Be honest with yourself here. Sure the poor who get screwed the most by getting arrested for a bag of dope will not have to worry about that anymore, but that won't change the fact they are still poor and still will be smoking dope. If anything the price of smoking will probably go up with taxes. That's not to say it wouldn't have good parts. The millions of arrests for possession would end, so it would ease the strain on the justice system, but it doesn't solve the fact that you still have a huge amount of Urban poor with no jobs (Detroit). And unless you can find folks steady paying jobs, what's the ending impact on actually legalizing drugs? Hippies are happy.


I already stated the reduced strain on the system before, thanks for repeating what I said.

Jobs is a totally different issue and doesn't have anything to do with decriminalization or legalization, you are trying to avoid the point, and failing hard.

People here are going on about how "It would add tax dollars and we could use the money to fund rehab centers!". It would bring in a good amount of money, but the chances of the government actually spending that money on drug rehab for it's people are low. Politicians raid these kinds of buckets of taxes for pet projects or whatever all the time. It would be no different if there was a pile of cash set aside for Drug rehab that was funded from weed taxes. The jobs "created" by the industry would also be heavily regulated by nature of the business, and I suspect would exclude the kinds of folks that need the jobs the most (but not the Hipsters and Hippies).


Political corruption is a different topic altogether. Inter-government fund raiding is not something I approve of, and something that needs to be put to a stop.

And legalizing hard drugs would be a terrible decision. People can argue for Marijuana because it's on the fence so to speak, but hard drugs absolutely not. We have enough alcoholics as it is, we don't need hard drug addicts coming out of the woodwork because some fools thought it would be neat to legalize Heroin.


It's already shown that decriminalization reduces the amount of drug users, but keep trying to avoid it. With this in mind, full on legalization could prove to take it a bit further. I think it would be worth a shot, and should it backfire? We could always change it.

People here can talk about how great it would be to legalize weed, but I just don't buy into the idea it would be some great boon for the country.


It would be a great way to reduce the load on the justice system, and if that isn't a great enough of a boon for you, oh well.

If you can't even spell Detroit right, I doubt you know the first thing about it's problems.


This from the guy trying to invent reasons to avoid something that works, because 'Murika. That and someone crying about "we can't afford a major expense" then turns around and says we need to totally lock down the border, which would be, to put it lightly, expensive. Curious double standard there.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

delfo
Major-General
Posts: 3735
Joined: Wed 6 Aug 2014 19:57
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby delfo » Tue 12 May 2015 19:00

How did we get here again ? I thought we were in Kansas ... I mean Texas. And Texas was being Texan for the political season. Like a crazy stunt some political group pulls each election cycle. In a state with that many people you are sure to get critical mass.

So I should I just put you down for No on making the low amounts of possession a non jail-able misdemeanor. And also a No on removing a debtor's prison style vicious cycle for misdemeanor fines?
Or would you pick option C. Put a time out for a few years with boiler plate legislation and move it for someone else to solve who doesn't have the "Oh shit primary" switch on this year.

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6605
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Tue 12 May 2015 19:06

The abolishment of the middle class, and the lack of opportunity to be able to climb the social ladder would probably be a bigger contributor to the degradation of Detroit compared to drug abuse. That, and a few other contributing factors...


Mitchverr wrote:
Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:People can get destructive on weed the same as they get destructive on alcohol.

It's more the mood/personality beforehand, some people just can't help themselves, and you can usually see it coming...


Although both are depressants 1 is much more so (alcohol) is it not? Though you are able to be destructive on weed, its still much more likely to be so from alcohol.

Eh, that's more of an excuse by weed worshipers to make booze look like the devil, it's about the same in my experience, booze is just more common.
Image

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby LoneRifle » Tue 12 May 2015 19:48

Fade2Gray wrote:Wow, a total lack of reading material, and just some invented nonsense.

I've put something like this up before, not my fault you can't use the search function.

First off, I've stated repeatedly, the point of legalization is to get drugs away from pushers, gang-bangers, and the cartels. Why? To take away one of their most massive sources of income. It would also be something to directly help addicts. As Detroit is my birth city and where I grew up and lived for 21 years of my life, thanks for the lecture on the incredibly obvious. I already told you that Detroit is a mess and needs all sorts of help from multiple angles, and here you are repeating what I said with more words. Worse yet, there's all sorts of conflicts with state and federal laws, which has created a system where "nothing has changed."

Congrats on trying to dodge my points.


I mean, if you grew up there, you should know better than to think taking away a gangbangers income and not giving them a lawful alternative will somehow improve the situation. That just means you have a bunch or criminals out of a criminal job and in need of another one. But congrats on the thought. Also, I fail to see how legalizing drugs would "Directly help addicts". That's just idiotic.

Dealers, pushers, and the cartels (which you are suddenly ignoring now, curious that) would not.

I know you have this virulent hatred of the USA's foreign policy, but the only way to kill the Cartels at this point in time is to put the full court press on with the CIA/DEA. The Mexican government is incapable of handling it on it's own because of it's own massive internal issues, and the second you legalize the Marijuana trade like you want, is the second the Mexican Mafia takes over the new "legal" growing industry just as easily as the American mob took over so many unions and what not when Prohibition ended. Unless you deal with the problem at the source it will just keep coming back in a different form.These people are ruthless and will not go away because of words on paper saying something is legal or not legal. I thought a soldier would understand that.

Of course a head in the sand person like yourself would never dare to agree with the USA doing something as shady as what happened in Columbia during the 1980-90s. But that's exactly what needs to be done if the USA wants the Cartels crushed.

I already stated the reduced strain on the system before, thanks for repeating what I said.

Jobs is a totally different issue and doesn't have anything to do with decriminalization or legalization, you are trying to avoid the point, and failing hard.


Attacking the symptom and not the problem. You gotta use that brain of yours and think deeper. You legalize, and don't give a good alternative job to the former drug dealers/smugglers/pushers. So then what?

It's already shown that decriminalization reduces the amount of drug users, but keep trying to avoid it. With this in mind, full on legalization could prove to take it a bit further. I think it would be worth a shot, and should it backfire? We could always change it.


Unless that study your referring too had a population like Flint or Detroit, I doubt it would do a damn thing to solving the real problems the country faces. As for changing laws, you must not know American history very well. When was the last time a law allowing a former criminal activity to become legal got repealed because the population didn't like it?

It would be a great way to reduce the load on the justice system, and if that isn't a great enough of a boon for you, oh well.


The effect would help, but not nearly as much as everyone makes it out to be.

This from the guy trying to invent reasons to avoid something that works, because 'Murika. That and someone crying about "we can't afford a major expense" then turns around and says we need to totally lock down the border, which would be, to put it lightly, expensive. Curious double standard there.

One of the Governments primary jobs is to guard the border. We have a rather large border with Mexico. Of course it's going to be expensive. Not to get itself involved in something the states can handle themselves.

If you want to go ahead and legalize it whichever state you live, that's fine I really don't care. But don't delude yourself into thinking that it will solve a whole lot of problems.
Image

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Texas, WTF? y u do dis?

Postby Fade2Gray » Tue 12 May 2015 20:52

LoneRifle wrote:I mean, if you grew up there, you should know better than to think taking away a gangbangers income and not giving them a lawful alternative will somehow improve the situation. That just means you have a bunch or criminals out of a criminal job and in need of another one. But congrats on the thought. Also, I fail to see how legalizing drugs would "Directly help addicts". That's just idiotic.


Tell me where I said it'd be a total improvement across the board? The main focus, as this whole discussion started with, was dealing with the cartels. Robbing dealers of their income and instead making it a taxable product like anything else is still an improvement, whether you like it or not. Can't say I'm surprised you can't wrap your head around making it a health care issue with dealing with addicts would be a benefit, but that's your classic outlook and ignorance.

I know you have this virulent hatred of the USA's foreign policy, but the only way to kill the Cartels at this point in time is to put the full court press on with the CIA/DEA. The Mexican government is incapable of handling it on it's own because of it's own massive internal issues, and the second you legalize the Marijuana trade like you want, is the second the Mexican Mafia takes over the new "legal" growing industry just as easily as the American mob took over so many unions and what not when Prohibition ended. Unless you deal with the problem at the source it will just keep coming back in a different form.These people are ruthless and will not go away because of words on paper saying something is legal or not legal. I thought a soldier would understand that.

Of course a head in the sand person like yourself would never dare to agree with the USA doing something as shady as what happened in Columbia during the 1980-90s. But that's exactly what needs to be done if the USA wants the Cartels crushed.


Oh boy, getting the CIA involved, that couldn't possibly backfire. Also, tell me all about how the cartels have taken over weed in Colorado. Pro-tip, it hasn't despite all the worries about it, there is however a good bit to suggest that its already hurting the cartels. To think that the cartels could compete against pharmaceutical corporations is pretty cute btw. Hilarious even. I also never claimed that the cartels would go away, I did however claim it would rob them of a major source of income. Full blown decriminalization or legalization from local to federal levels would remove all restrictions from American businesses against competing against the cartels, and American business would surely push them out of business locally.

Also, if we robbed the cartels of a significant chunk of their income, I think they would be a lot weaker and easier to deal with if you wanted to pull some CIA madness.


Attacking the symptom and not the problem. You gotta use that brain of yours and think deeper. You legalize, and don't give a good alternative job to the former drug dealers/smugglers/pushers. So then what?


You are inventing a problem to something totally unrelated. You also realize that legalization would actually create legit jobs, right? You know, which is part of that problem that you are harping on about? Come on Lone, even some Republicans are starting to wake up to this realization, how come you have not? You usually are not this slow. Also, I'm fully aware it wouldn't be enough to cover the unemployment in places like Detroit, but it would be something. Providing more jobs is something the market is going to have to cover on its own, along with local and state reforms in laws to attract businesses.

Unless that study your referring too had a population like Flint or Detroit, I doubt it would do a damn thing to solving the real problems the country faces. As for changing laws, you must not know American history very well. When was the last time a law allowing a former criminal activity to become legal got repealed because the population didn't like it?


Total decriminalization/legalization would be best implemented when enacted from the local level all the way to the federal level. Hell, weed being legalized in Colorado has caused its own brand of issues because of the conflict of laws between the state and federal levels. I could repeat myself some more, but as usual, you are burying your head in the sand to the reality of the issue and beating the dead horse. Seriously, let the dead horse be.

The effect would help, but not nearly as much as everyone makes it out to be.


Not good enough, go figure.

One of the Governments primary jobs is to guard the border. We have a rather large border with Mexico. Of course it's going to be expensive. Not to get itself involved in something the states can handle themselves.

If you want to go ahead and legalize it whichever state you live, that's fine I really don't care. But don't delude yourself into thinking that it will solve a whole lot of problems.


Classic Lone/Darth, putting words into my mouth. Where did I claim it would solve a lot of problems? The biggest focus is hammering the cartels and reducing a major strain on the justice system. Also, you are crying about not having money to do my idea, but putting into effect an overwhelming presence on the border in order to guard against the cartels? As well as the all of our coast lines? Me thinks you don't grasp at just how many ways the cartels infiltrate their product into our country.

I think common sense is that the cartels would be weakened just a touch if they had to compete against Big Pharma for getting products to the consumer. Somehow I don't see the cartels "taking over" Big Pharma either. Full legalization at the federal level would allow Big Pharma to invest in such means and it would be child's play for them to push the cartels out of the market. Colorado is a perfect example of that, people are thrilled to not have to mess around with shady dealers and the like.

If you want to go ahead and legalize it whichever state you live


Oh goody, just legalize it in a state so that the feds can come in and mess with it all, banks will not want to get involved, and all sorts of other issues that would arise. Brilliant. Half assed solutions that create more problems FTW. "But Detroit! Never mind nothing has changed in Detroit! It's a great example to back up what I've said! Also, 'Murika!" Also, "The Mob! They took over! Never mind that they are, by what I said earlier, a shadow of what they were before!"

The amount of holes in your logic Lone is staggering. Please, tell me more about how I should "read more" when it's fully obvious you are clueless on such matters.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 19 guests