Thread: Recreational Marijuana now legal in Washington and Colorado

Originally Posted by dutchraptor

In the nederlands average herione lifetime use decreased by almost 40% when cannabis was legalized.

Is that the amount used, or how many people using it? I think the amount of people using heroin is more important to show if legalizing cannabis would help keep people away from it.

Originally Posted by Woodstock

Is that the amount used, or how many people using it? I think the amount of people using heroin is more important to show if legalizing cannabis would help keep people away from it.

The one I was getting at was ever-used. However the same trend can be seen in yearly prevalance. In america lifetime prevalence for 12+ years of age is 1.5% compared to the nederlands which have 0.6% of the population after bringing in the drug laws.
I have to say though that the legalisation wasn't entirely the cause of the drop in use, the netherlands also heavily invested into helping drug addicts.

Your argument actually reminds me a lot of this guy's

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Your argument actually reminds me a lot of this guy's

Thank you for that, now I can sleep soundly knowing that I remind you of another guy.

To be precise, your argument appears to be like an incomplete or slightly misdirected version of his.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Your argument actually reminds me a lot of this guy's

That's a pretty damn good speech.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Obama has the worst record regarding marijuana prohibition in the history of US presidency. He has persecuted medical growers in California and elsewhere for the entirety of his first term.

What's weird about that is that he apparently used to smoke pot a lot in his college years, and even admitted it, unlike Clinton. Did he personally pass laws to "persecute medical growers"?

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Obama has the worst record regarding marijuana prohibition in the history of US presidency. He has persecuted medical growers in California and elsewhere for the entirety of his first term.

No, Reagan has the worst record. He was the one who started the war on drugs. Obama is just following precedent.

Originally Posted by MindGames

No, Reagan has the worst record. He was the one who started the war on drugs. Obama is just following precedent.

Nixon started it.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Nixon started it.

You're right, I got them confused.

Originally Posted by MindGames

You're right, I got them confused.

Nixon was out of office in 1974, so Obama has no excuse. Obama has also spent tons more on the war on drugs than Nixon did. They both suck, though.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Nixon was out of office in 1974, so Obama has no excuse. Obama has also spent tons more on the war on drugs than Nixon did. They both suck, though.

Democrats get a pass on civil liberty offenses and warmongering because "only republicans do that", and republicans get a pass on expanding the welfare state because "only democrats do that". Divide and conquer.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Nixon was out of office in 1974, so Obama has no excuse. Obama has also spent tons more on the war on drugs than Nixon did. They both suck, though.

Every president since Nixon has increased spending on "the war on drugs". None of them seems to have realized that throwing money on it only fuels the flames.

Originally Posted by khh

Every president since Nixon has increased spending on "the war on drugs". None of them seems to have realized that throwing money on it only fuels the flames.

I can't imagine politicians and economists being so ignorant and just plain dumb that they wouldn't realize how much money they would get from taxes by legalizing it. I'm sure they know that. Marijuana as a drug isn't the problem. The main problem to them is probably how many things can be made out of hemp.

All oil and gas companies would be bankrupt within 10 years and there would be no reason to start wars. The cotton industry would die. Wood wouldn't be needed as much, you can build houses that are fireproof and last forever with hempcrete (a mixture of hemp, lime, and water). That could also be used for roads and bridges that don't crack.

This wouldn't be much of a problem for most people, they would just have to make shirts out of hemp instead of cotton or make hempcrete instead of concrete. Workers from the oil and gas companies and a lot of unemployed people could find jobs from all the new businesses using hemp. But a lot of politicians get their money from oil. Their profit would decrease, even if the rest of America would benefit. These politicians are parasites slowly destroying the country they claim to love.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Nixon was out of office in 1974, so Obama has no excuse. Obama has also spent tons more on the war on drugs than Nixon did. They both suck, though.

Well that would be kind of singling Obama out since every president since Nixon has continued the war on drugs. I don't think Obama deserves too much blame for it.

Originally Posted by Woodstock

I can't imagine politicians and economists being so ignorant and just plain dumb that they wouldn't realize how much money they would get from taxes by legalizing it. I'm sure they know that. Marijuana as a drug isn't the problem. The main problem to them is probably how many things can be made out of hemp.

All oil and gas companies would be bankrupt within 10 years and there would be no reason to start wars. The cotton industry would die. Wood wouldn't be needed as much, you can build houses that are fireproof and last forever with hempcrete (a mixture of hemp, lime, and water). That could also be used for roads and bridges that don't crack.

This wouldn't be much of a problem for most people, they would just have to make shirts out of hemp instead of cotton or make hempcrete instead of concrete. Workers from the oil and gas companies and a lot of unemployed people could find jobs from all the new businesses using hemp. But a lot of politicians get their money from oil. Their profit would decrease, even if the rest of America would benefit. These politicians are parasites slowly destroying the country they claim to love.

People fail to visualize just how much practical uses there are for hemp, people wonder why there are cracks in all their walls and why it is so hard to keep at an even temperature, it is usually becuase their house doesn't "breath" enough. All over the world people have their own variations of hempcrete and again and again you can see how flexible and temperature regulating they are. In hot counries through a mix of good natural materials, proper layout and cross ventilation there is no need for air conditioning, the house can be 20 celsius/ 72 fahrenheit while its almost 40 degrees celsius/ 112 fahrenheit outside. Humanity is essentially destroying itself they're so busy playing their little money games.

Originally Posted by Woodstock

I can't imagine politicians and economists being so ignorant and just plain dumb that they wouldn't realize how much money they would get from taxes by legalizing it. I'm sure they know that. Marijuana as a drug isn't the problem. The main problem to them is probably how many things can be made out of hemp.

I don't think it's a conspiracy like this, I think it's much simpler. In order to justify the banning and war on drugs the governments all over the world had to demonize them and paint a darker and worse picture of what drugs were and did every year. The populace took this lessen to heart and now there's widespread fear and misinformation about drugs and the whole drug industry. Therefore sitting politicians don't dare raise the issue of decriminalization or legalization, for fear of losing votes and being seen as "soft on crime". Eventually people could get turned around, especially if the government started spreading actual information rather than propaganda, but it is a process that takes time.

Originally Posted by MindGames

Well that would be kind of singling Obama out since every president since Nixon has continued the war on drugs. I don't think Obama deserves too much blame for it.

But Obama is still in office. Who else should we be talking about? George Bush? Clinton? You are the perfect textbook exemplification of what I'm talking about with democrats getting a total pass on civil liberty offenses. You're defending the man who is actively engaged in war against the American people, because he's a democrat? Pathetic.

Originally Posted by MindGames

Well that would be kind of singling Obama out since every president since Nixon has continued the war on drugs. I don't think Obama deserves too much blame for it.

They all deserve blame for it. Why would you say Obama doesn't? He's the president now, so I'm singling him out. Why should he get a pass?

Originally Posted by khh

I don't think it's a conspiracy like this, I think it's much simpler. In order to justify the banning and war on drugs the governments all over the world had to demonize them and paint a darker and worse picture of what drugs were and did every year.

Hemp was the main reason it became illegal, it's probably still the same now.

Originally Posted by Woodstock

Hemp was the main reason it became illegal, it's probably still the same now.

That seems implausible that the paper industry is still behind it today. More likely it's caused by two things: the prison industrial complex, and the fact that a president legalizing drugs is political suicide. The fact is, the vast majority of Americans, even democrats, don't consider legalization a high priority. We know this for a fact because if they did, they wouldn't have reelected Obama after he promised to end the drug war campaigning in 2008 and did a complete 180 as president.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

They all deserve blame for it. Why would you say Obama doesn't? He's the president now, so I'm singling him out. Why should he get a pass?

I didn't say Obama doesn't deserve any of the blame for it, I just don't think he deserves any more blame for it than any other presidents.

Originally Posted by cmind

You are the perfect textbook exemplification of what I'm talking about with democrats getting a total pass on civil liberty offenses. You're defending the man who is actively engaged in war against the American people, because he's a democrat? Pathetic.

Slow the fuck down, buddy. I'm not a democrat. Read what I wrote above.

Originally Posted by MindGames

Slow the fuck down, buddy. I'm not a democrat. Read what I wrote above.

Thou dost protest too much. Somehow I doubt that during the Bush presidency you were saying "why u guyz singling out Bush??!".

Originally Posted by cmind

Thou dost protest too much. Somehow I doubt that during the Bush presidency you were saying "why u guyz singling out Bush??!".

George Bush deserves just as much blame for the war on drugs as Obama.