Should we decriminalize drugs and let big pharma take over production?

[darthtang aw]

The 90's is when cities and states started militarizing the police forces. Zero tollarance began going into effect all over the place after gangster rap hit the air waves lol. Bush jr. pumped more money into it than anyone. Regans polices paved the way
So you have a system now that goes after people with problems with reckless abandon. Meanwhile people grow up with an increasing anger and distrust towards a system that believes in helping people by locking them up, taking away their rights or any chance at ever getting a real job or hold a business license in their state.
So rather than just roll back the harsh laws causing the higher incarceration, we decide instead to make it legal? Seems a tad ignorant doesn't it?
Anyone who's ever been through a serious addiction like that knows it doesn't happen over night. And if you didn't end up dead, robbed or in prison than you better thank your lucky stars your still out in the free world and able to support a family.
I can attest to that. It does start off "fun" and "harmless".........

 

[2quills]

So rather than just roll back the harsh laws causing the higher incarceration, we decide instead to make it legal? Seems a tad ignorant doesn't it?
I can attest to that. It does start off "fun" and "harmless".........
It would be ignorant if legalizing it was all you did IMO. But if you could make some money off of it then maybe it could be put towards better help or rehab options for those people.
I'm not convinced that legalizing it for everyone is a good idea. People should get access to it for medicinal reasons IMO. But we should still have a way to convict on criminal behavior. I just don't think that the non violent offenders always need to face such harsh treatment for mistakes perhaps they made when they were younger. There are perhaps better ways to reach those people.
I look at my cousin for instance. He hurt his back, couldn't work for a while. Put a strain on his marriage then his wife left cause he got addicted to pain medication.
He got two DUIs within a year immediately after that.The guy hasn't been able to get a good job now that his back is better and he's moved passed his divorce. So he's remained in this state of depression and can't even hold down regular work because of his pill problem that he's still addicted to because of his depression probably. His family has pretty muchgiven up on him and right now hes in some motel in south carolina practically on the verge of suicide.
There has to be better ways to help people than destroying their future.

 

[darthtang aw]

It would be ignorant if legalizing it was all you did IMO. But if you could make some money off of it then maybe it could be put towards better help or rehab options for those people.
I'm not convinced that legalizing it for everyone is a good idea. People should get access to it for medicinal reasons IMO. But we should still have a way to convict on criminal behavior. I just don't think that the non violent offenders always need to face such harsh treatment for mistakes perhaps they made when they were younger. There are perhaps better ways to reach those people.
I look at my cousin for instance. He hurt his back, couldn't work for a while. Put a strain on his marriage then his wife left cause he got addicted to pain medication.
He got two DUIs within a year immediately after that.The guy hasn't been able to get a good job now that his back is better and he's moved passed his divorce. So he's remained in this state of depression and can't even hold down regular work because of his pill problem that he's still addicted to because of his depression probably. His family has pretty muchgiven up on him and right now hes in some motel in south carolina practically on the verge of suicide.
There has to be better ways to help people than destroying their future.
Access to Medical I have no problem. However as with any drug, prescription or not, there is the very high risk of addiction that can ruin your life.
Here is the problem with legalizing and making money off it. It is now legal to possess. A Person can possess up to an ounce of weed as a resident of Colorado. The cost for this weed is now double. So the cost has doubled, why not just buy it from the street pusher still. It is still legal to possess...and is half the cost. The street pusher can now have up to an ounce on them and not be tagged with a felony for holding so much weed. Or grow it in your house and bypass the state government all together. after all it is legal to posses and as long as you aren't growing a crap ton of it no one will know. The state will still need a search warrant to check houses for indoor growing illegally.
If I am a cartel, I dont see it hurting business to much. If anything a cartel can up their cost some to account for some sales loss....Weed is generally shared, so an ounce just might not last long enough until a person is able to legally buy again. Or a person that doesnt smoke will buy for his relative or friend as well.
Read the Colorado laws....and think how it can be circumvented and where the crime will come from. Because it wont go away.

 

[2quills]

Access to Medical I have no problem. However as with any drug, prescription or not, there is the very high risk of addiction that can ruin your life.
Here is the problem with legalizing and making money off it. It is now legal to possess. A Person can possess up to an ounce of weed as a resident of Colorado. The cost for this weed is now double. So the cost has doubled, why not just buy it from the street pusher still. It is still legal to possess...and is half the cost. The street pusher can now have up to an ounce on them and not be tagged with a felony for holding so much weed. Or grow it in your house and bypass the state government all together. after all it is legal to posses and as long as you aren't growing a crap ton of it no one will know. The state will still need a search warrant to check houses for indoor growing illegally.
If I am a cartel, I dont see it hurting business to much. If anything a cartel can up their cost some to account for some sales loss....Weed is generally shared, so an ounce just might not last long enough until a person is able to legally buy again. Or a person that doesnt smoke will buy for his relative or friend as well.
Read the Colorado laws....and think how it can be circumvented and where the crime will come from. Because it wont go away.
People have the option of cultivating up to 6 plants for personal use. If people are paying double for pot then they are either morons or people with money who can afford to pay for someone else to produce it for them. 6 plants for a seasoned botanist could yield a person enough weed to smoke at least an ounce every week. Sounds like plenty of cheap pot to go around to me. The question here becomes will people be getting it from violent sources or more peaceful ones? The demand associated with the crime may ultimately drop. But you won't know anything for the first few years.
One of the problems we have here is not enough work to go around. This allows employers to be very selective with their prospects by weeding out the strong from the weak using all of these methods nowadays. Everything from substance testing, to credit to health. If people had better things to do with their time and could be productive then maybe we'd see some crime and substance abuse drop.

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production/40#post_3538940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production/30#post_3538934
So rather than just roll back the harsh laws causing the higher incarceration, we decide instead to make it legal? Seems a tad ignorant doesn't it?
I can attest to that. It does start off "fun" and "harmless".........
It would be ignorant if legalizing it was all you did IMO. But if you could make some money off of it then maybe it could be put towards better help or rehab options for those people.
I'm not convinced that legalizing it for everyone is a good idea. People should get access to it for medicinal reasons IMO. But we should still have a way to convict on criminal behavior. I just don't think that the non violent offenders always need to face such harsh treatment for mistakes perhaps they made when they were younger. There are perhaps better ways to reach those people.
I look at my cousin for instance. He hurt his back, couldn't work for a while. Put a strain on his marriage then his wife left cause he got addicted to pain medication.
He got two DUIs within a year immediately after that.The guy hasn't been able to get a good job now that his back is better and he's moved passed his divorce. So he's remained in this state of depression and can't even hold down regular work because of his pill problem that he's still addicted to because of his depression probably. His family has pretty muchgiven up on him and right now hes in some motel in south carolina practically on the verge of suicide.
There has to be better ways to help people than destroying their future.

"Their strength and their speed are still based in a world that is built on rules. Because of that, they will never be as strong or as fast as you can be"
I heard a story of a guy named John Doe in a similar situation who changed his name to Javier Running Bull and was hired for a part time federal job. Part time to ensure his income kept him below the threshold allowable for Medicare and not have to deal with the ACA. Javier Running Bull to ensure he met the "diversity criteria" they were looking for. His part time income was low enough to qualify for the earned income credit and food substinance. Since he was disabled he also applied for and recieved disability benefits. Once hired he confirmed with the HR dept that his new job was indeed an equal opportunity employer and did not discriminate based on ethniticity, race, religion or physical disability for the job he was hired for. He then changed his name back to his original name.

If Ted Kennedy can drive drunk and kill people with his car then go on to make millions in congress off the tax payers , John Doe deserves better.

"What is the Matrix ? Control"
Morpheus

 

[darthtang aw]

People have the option of cultivating up to 6 plants for personal use. .
AhhhhhHAAA! Now we have reached the crux of the problem with in the law. If they are growing their own, where is the tax revenue coming from? Tax revenue is a key component as to why this is beneficial.
Also the law clearly states those plants can not be used to for distribution outside the property and must be used on property.......The other thing is, if you dont own and the landlord says no...this is not an option for you and you MUST purchase. But lets use home owners as an example. Many municipalities have a nuisance law in place for the smell of pot smoke. Meaning if you are smoking outside, and the neighbors complain of the smell, they come and test for the odor...if you are over the "legal odor limit" (that is friggin hilarious to me) you will be fined. This forcing people to risk being fined OR smoking indoors where their children are.......Bringing us full circle to my point about the brain development of the future generations being severely damaged by this legalization.....
LOL.....Everyone thinks legalization is the simplest method, but upon further examinition we can hopefully agree it is NOT a solution.
The solution, still...roll back the harsh war against drugs penalties towards marijuana...treat it as it was treated for decades before 1981.

 

[2quills]

AhhhhhHAAA! Now we have reached the crux of the problem with in the law. If they are growing their own, where is the tax revenue coming from? Tax revenue is a key component as to why this is beneficial.
Also the law clearly states those plants can not be used to for distribution outside the property and must be used on property.......The other thing is, if you dont own and the landlord says no...this is not an option for you and you MUST purchase. But lets use home owners as an example. Many municipalities have a nuisance law in place for the smell of pot smoke. Meaning if you are smoking outside, and the neighbors complain of the smell, they come and test for the odor...if you are over the "legal odor limit" (that is friggin hilarious to me) you will be fined. This forcing people to risk being fined OR smoking indoors where their children are.......Bringing us full circle to my point about the brain development of the future generations being severely damaged by this legalization.....
LOL.....Everyone thinks legalization is the simplest method, but upon further examinition we can hopefully agree it is NOT a solution.
The solution, still...roll back the harsh war against drugs penalties towards marijuana...treat it as it was treated for decades before 1981.
Your solution is to do nothing? lol
IMO, the tax revenue gained off of sales is simply an added bonus for tax payers that wasn't there before. Making your own beer is legal too but not everyone has the patience or the time to do it.
If it cuts down on crime then there will be further tax saving that will be tough to quantify but it will still save law enforcement time and money.
People were still smoking in their homes with kids before the law past and obviously will continue to do so. If there was a silver bullet somewhere I'm sure we would have used it by now.

 

[darthtang aw]

No. My solotion is to roll back the harsh penalties enacted after 1981. Especially for possesion. Traficking would still be a felony.

 

[2quills]

No. My solotion is to roll back the harsh penalties enacted after 1981. Especially for possesion. Traficking would still be a felony.
I think they already beat you to it.
They're not going after the personal smokers who want to grow their own or share it with their friends because we already know people are going to do it anyways.
The minute you start selling it without permission or doing it in public its still a crime.

 

[darthtang aw]

I think they already beat you to it.
They're not going after the personal smokers who want to grow their own or share it with their friends because we already know people are going to do it anyways.
The minute you start selling it without permission or doing it in public its still a crime.
So if they are rolling back the harsh penalties...what is the problem?

 

[2quills]

So if they are rolling back the harsh penalties...what is the problem?
You tell me. I wasn't the one arguing against it. Shall I roll you another lol?

 

[darthtang aw]

You tell me. I wasn't the one arguing against it. Shall I roll you another lol?
Ugh. Now you are doing circular arguments such as bionic is known for.
Your stance is it will generate much needed tax revenue. Yet no revenue is gained by growing. You also stated it will reduce the prison pop and reduce law enforcement efforts. Yet you just spoke about the reduction in penalties already occurring. So explain the need to legalize weed...if these two main things that support the argument to legalize it already are happening.

 

[2quills]

Ugh. Now you are doing circular arguments such as bionic is known for.
Your stance is it will generate much needed tax revenue. Yet no revenue is gained by growing. You also stated it will reduce the prison pop and reduce law enforcement efforts. Yet you just spoke about the reduction in penalties already occurring. So explain the need to legalize weed...if these two main things that support the argument to legalize it already are happening.
The only ones rolling back harsh penalties for non violent drug users are those two states. Remember, the ones you're saying its a bad idea to do? Even though you say we should relax the laws a bit prior to the 80's. I'm saying that is essentially what they just did by "legalizing it". Even though dealing it is still a crime, you can't smoke in public or carry more than an ounce on your person you're under some impression that everything is going to get worse than it already is.
I just don't know where you're getting that from when we have annecdotal evidence that it seems to be working in other areas who've already been trying it for several years. And unlike obamacare its low risk for the tax payers and economy.

 

[reefraff]

Tastes Great!

I am all for legalizing the weed but not the other stuff, I grew up in the middle of the drug culture as someone who didn't partake. Saw too many people ruin (or end) their lives because of coke and tar.

 

[darthtang aw]

I just don't know where you're getting that from when we have annecdotal evidence that it seems to be working in other areas who've already been trying it for several years. And unlike obamacare its low risk for the tax payers and economy.
Where? Out of curiosity I am curious which countries you find these trials appealing.

 

[2quills]

Where? Out of curiosity I am curious which countries you find these trials appealing.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

 

[darthtang aw]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/
Decriminalization and legalization are to different things. One still imposes fines and such...the other does not. Decriminalization I think I stated I support.
For every dollar spent through treatment issued by courts saves us 18 dollars in prison and penitentiary costs.

 

[2quills]

Decriminalization and legalization are to different things. One still imposes fines and such...the other does not. Decriminalization I think I stated I support.
For every dollar spent through treatment issued by courts saves us 18 dollars in prison and penitentiary costs.
Oh, I thought you were ok with strictly medicinal purposes. When it comes to full blown legalization with sale and production we don't have any reference to turn to yet. That's probably why states are trying stuff out before federal decisions get made. We're still a ways off for that IMO.

 

[darthtang aw]

Oh, I thought you were ok with strictly medicinal purposes. When it comes to full blown legalization with sale and production we don't have any reference to turn to yet. That's probably why states are trying stuff out before federal decisions get made. We're still a ways off for that IMO.
Rolling back to pre 1981 criminal prosecutions of marijuana is decriminalization IMO. Decriminalization involves treatment, legalization does not...which is my issue. It states it is OK.

 

[darthtang aw]

This will be the new problem for legal states in the interim.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/14/colorado-pot-drug-cartels/5485421/