or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Milton Friedman: Legalize It! - Page 4

post #121 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Flash back to Germany, 1938...

Right. Minus the death camp and mass starvation. But, yeah exactly the same.
post #122 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Right. Minus the death camp and mass starvation. But, yeah exactly the same.

They started off small with the "inform on your neighbors" stuff too... I don't think that the death camps came until later (1942?)
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #123 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
They would be more dangerous. The amazing amount of time and effort that goes into obtaining pot, keeps them busy. The somewhat prohibitive price and the effort it takes to obtain keeps their use down compared to if it was affordable and convenient, IMO.

But since these clowns are already driving drunk, as you stated, their pursuit of the elusive green makes them more of a threat every second they are out trying to pursue it.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #124 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Flash back to Germany, 1938...

Another brain dead idea from the Far Right Republican party bent on building the police state.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #125 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
But since these clowns are already driving drunk, as you stated, their pursuit of the elusive green makes them more of a threat every second they are out trying to pursue it.

Agreed.

So, you think if they can buy it at the local 7/11 for cheap that they will just go home and munch on old stale Doritos?
\\
I say they will put more gas in their tanks and drive even more.
post #126 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Agreed.

So, you think if they can buy it at the local 7/11 for cheap that they will just go home and munch on old stale Doritos?
\\
I say they will put more gas in their tanks and drive even more.

Why do you say they'll drive more? What studies suggest smoking legal marijuana induces people to drive more than they normally would smoking illegal marijuana?
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #127 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
I agree, Stupidist thing Miami ever did was getting rid of the best runner they had in 20 years. They figure out they need a running game after 2 decades of Marino and no superBowl and what do they do? Loose a great runner over something stupid like weed. What they should do is have a bowl ready for ricky

um, Ricky "retired"
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #128 of 368
Quote:
Another brain dead idea from the Far Right Republican party bent on building the police state.

I don't understand what the problem is with this proposed law. If you aren't doing the drugs then you have nothing to be concerned about riiiiiiiight? This is also a far faster way to get these people of the streets and broken of their habit. Hell, I'd have no problem turning my brother in, I don't like him that much anyway.

Quote:
Right. Minus the death camp and mass starvation. But, yeah exactly the same.

Quit the fearmongering. Noone is sending anyone to death camps and nooone is advocating mass starvation.
The Supreme Being
Reply
The Supreme Being
Reply
post #129 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Why do you say they'll drive more? What studies suggest smoking legal marijuana induces people to drive more than they normally would smoking illegal marijuana?

My study. the NaplesX study that says more money in pocket means freedom to drive more.

Come on. I am speculating just as you and all the other pot legalization people are.
post #130 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Protostar
I don't understand what the problem is with this proposed law. If you aren't doing the drugs then you have nothing to be concerned about riiiiiiiight? This is also a far faster way to get these people of the streets and broken of their habit. Hell, I'd have no problem turning my brother in, I don't like him that much anyway.



Quit the fearmongering. Noone is sending anyone to death camps and nooone is advocating mass starvation.

I was being sarcastic.
post #131 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Protostar
I don't understand what the problem is with this proposed law. If you aren't doing the drugs then you have nothing to be concerned about riiiiiiiight? This is also a far faster way to get these people of the streets and broken of their habit. Hell, I'd have no problem turning my brother in, I don't like him that much anyway.

Maybe when people like you get lynched after narking out everyone they know, someone might realize that this law is a bad idea.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #132 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Protostar
I don't understand what the problem is with this proposed law. If you aren't doing the drugs then you have nothing to be concerned about riiiiiiiight? This is also a far faster way to get these people of the streets and broken of their habit. Hell, I'd have no problem turning my brother in, I don't like him that much anyway.



Quit the fearmongering. Noone is sending anyone to death camps and nooone is advocating mass starvation.

Yeah its just a start , 5 years for a joint? Clearly another example of the time doesnt fit the crime. Marijuana shouldnt even be illegal.Federal Govt did a major study on weed during Nixon and found it not the blown scare Govt would like you to think so Nixon threw the study away. Forcing 5 years sentence on what amounts to No crime is Fricking Nuts when we dont have room for Murderers,Rapist,etc. Then who gets the bill for this awful legislation? we the tax payer plus its another step to creating the Police State. What happened to Freedom? The Politicians are destroying all freedoms. Didnt these Neocons learn anything from prohibition? its all about power and control and interfering with people.

Hr 1528 causes way more problems then it fixes.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #133 of 368
Quote:
Maybe when people like you get lynched after narking out everyone they know, someone might realize that this law is a bad idea.

Not everyone I know. Just the people I know are doing it and dont know really well (i.e. don't care about) and the people I know that are doing it and just don't like.

Quote:
I was being sarcastic.

Sorry. Sometimes I have a hard time picking up on sarcasm.
The Supreme Being
Reply
The Supreme Being
Reply
post #134 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Protostar
Not everyone I know. Just the people I know are doing it and dont know really well (i.e. don't care about) and the people I know that are doing it and just don't like.

even better - if you dislike them enough, you can just make shit up about hearing them talk about smoking pot, and then giggle like you're high when you see the cops come and arrest them

don't forget to tell your government how much you appreciate the opportunity for retribution against those you don't like.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #135 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
even better - if you dislike them enough, you can just make shit up about hearing them talk about smoking pot, and then giggle like you're high when you see the cops come and arrest them

don't forget to tell your government how much you appreciate the opportunity for retribution against those you don't like.

You forget the bill of rights. Everyone has the right to face their accuser.

I am positive that helps with wrongful prosecution.

The only positive I see from legalizing pot, is it may help cut the flow of money to terrorists who get a lot of cash-flow from drug sales.
post #136 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
My study. the NaplesX study that says more money in pocket means freedom to drive more.

Come on. I am speculating just as you and all the other pot legalization people are.

I'm not speculating at all, actually. People are going to do irresponsible shit with their vehicles no matter what, and they should all be punished accordingly. You can drink, but you can't drink and drive.

You're arguing a silly point that everyone is going to agree with, and somehow spinning it into some absolute underpinning for why pot should not be legalized under any circumstances. There are countless risks associated with motor vehicle operation, and drugs aren't near the top of that list. It's ridiculous to make people's driving habits a cornerstone issue for reinforcing current drug laws. There's a reason trafic laws often differ from pedestrian laws.

Now, what do we do about those people who AREN'T retarded enough to drive under the influence? What do we do about Joe American having his house raided because an anonymous tip informs the cops he has pot in his house? What do we do about the huge burden we've put on our society with overflowing jails since the inception of the war on drugs? If mandatory drug sentencing were a good idea, shouldn't we be seeing positive results at this point?
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #137 of 368
Quote:
Yeah its just a start , 5 years for a joint? Clearly another example of the time doesnt fit the crime. Marijuana shouldnt even be illegal.Federal Govt did a major study on weed during Nixon and found it not the blown scare Govt would like you to think so Nixon threw the study away. Forcing 5 years sentence on what amounts to No crime is Fricking Nuts when we dont have room for Murderers,Rapist,etc. Then who gets the bill for this awful legislation? we the tax payer plus its another step to creating the Police State. What happened to Freedom? The Politicians are destroying all freedoms. Didnt these Neocons learn anything from prohibition? its all about power and control and interfering with people.

Hr 1528 causes way more problems then it fixes.

In your eyes it causes more problems. That is just your opinion. If we had all of the prisoners out digging ditches where they belong we wouldn't be having as many prison problems as we are. But because of the left wing libs crying crocodile tears about "prisoner rights" we have these people sitting in prison when they could be out doing something. As far as legalising weed I'm against it because it is a gateway drug. Many crack users are former weed users. They just didn't start out on crack jump street, they transitioned there from marijuana. Also I don't want a bunch of pot users on my street. It brings the property value down. Because slowly but surely "Pot Street" will transform into "Crack Street" b/c of the aforementioned reason. Also noone has mentioned the effect pot would have on workers. Not just productivity but the company image. No client is going to deal with a business where half its employees are high on marijuana for the same reason they wouldn't deal with them if everyone was walking around barefoot: it's just not professional. As for the law I think it would deter more people b/c if a person feels as though more people are watching/monitoring them they are less likely to do something illegal.
The Supreme Being
Reply
The Supreme Being
Reply
post #138 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Protostar
it is a gateway drug.

Actually, it's not. RAND did a big study a couple of years ago on it
Quote:
Instead, the associations can result from known differences in the ages at which youths have opportunities to use marijuana and hard drugs, and known variations in individuals' willingness to try any drugs, researchers found...

"The people who are predisposed to use drugs and have the opportunity to use drugs are more likely than others to use both marijuana and harder drugs," Morral said. "Marijuana typically comes first because it is more available. Once we incorporated these facts into our mathematical model of adolescent drug use, we could explain all of the drug use associations that have been cited as evidence of marijuana's gateway effect."
post #139 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You forget the bill of rights. Everyone has the right to face their accuser.

I am positive that helps with wrongful prosecution.

The only positive I see from legalizing pot, is it may help cut the flow of money to terrorists who get a lot of cash-flow from drug sales.

You miss the point, at the moment we keep drug dealers in business with it illegal and this makes it easy for kids to get. By legalization we get help for cancer patients,we free up courts & jails for real criminals, we still have it for the users( 50 years of drugwars have done little to stop the pot smoker)we tax it so the govt gets its money and we can use that money for education,rehab,roads etc. And the big one we the tax payer save billions. But it doesnt Grow the Police State and we all know Govt wants to grow the police state.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #140 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
You miss the point, at the moment we keep drug dealers in business with it illegal and this makes it easy for kids to get. By legalization we get help for cancer patients,we free up courts & jails for real criminals, we still have it for the users( 50 years of drugwars have done little to stop the pot smoker)we tax it so the govt gets its money and we can use that money for education,rehab,roads etc. And the big one we the tax payer save billions. But it doesnt Grow the Police State and we all know Govt wants to grow the police state.

Police state?

Is this the new buzzword?

Everyone talk like legalizing drugs will free up resources in the government. But in the very argument you suggest tight regulation. This requires a giant bureaucracy. You admit that people that smoke pot are generally retards to one extent or another. They don't obey the law as it is. I am unconvinced they would do so after this legalization is passed. I would also venture to say that typically people going to jail/prison are continuos offenders, often on other charges than just drugs.

I don't see any savings in cost. Typically government doesn't work that way. It will be just another entitlement gone wild.
post #141 of 368
Just to emphasize the problem with this kind of thing look at how convicted sex offenders are getting prescriptions for viagra.

Bureaucracies can't control anything, they will just exacerbate the problem.

I can see see criminal economies being created by legalizing drugs:

EDIT: I mean inside the welfare and entitlement offerings rather than outside.
post #142 of 368
Quote:
It will be just another entitlement gone wild.

No - it is not an entitlement gone wild. An entitlement is when they give you wellfare or something. If they take away your rights, it is not an entitlement if they give them back again.

If ice cream was made illegal, it would not be an entitlement when they made it legal again.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #143 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
No - it is not an entitlement gone wild. An entitlement is when they give you wellfare or something. If they take away your rights, it is not an entitlement if they give them back again.

If ice cream was made illegal, it would not be an entitlement when they made it legal again.

So lets legalize cocaine, opium, speed, extacy, rush, and all other drugs? Many of those were legal at one time or other.

Let's here a reason why not.
post #144 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You admit that people that smoke pot are generally retards to one extent or another. They don't obey the law as it is. I am unconvinced they would do so after this legalization is passed. I would also venture to say that typically people going to jail/prison are continuos offenders, often on other charges than just drugs.

You would venture wrong actually. It's obvious you are not intimately aware of the realities of the drug situation. Being from Detroit, I have seen the ridiulousness of what passes as drug enforcement. Judges are all too willing to throw young black males (I specify blacks because they constitute a huge majority of those arrested for drugs in Detroit) in jail so that they appear to be tough on crime, and drug possession gives them an opportunity to do so. As in many urban areas, the sad myth is that young black male + drugs = career criminal out to rape white women and rob your home. So few of the more elite politicians and white suburbanites care because it's not a bad thing to toss away burglarapers.

And that's the doorway. We allow and encourage creation of these bullshit laws based on false prejudices that we think are going to make us safer (hell they're just going after those black folks downtown, not John the white guy across the street) and start locking up huge numbers of first time offenders.

But then we see that these halfassed laws not only fail to do what they are supposed to be doing (lower drug use, lower crime) they are being totally misued and end up creating a worse situation than existed before. You have people of every race getting thrown in for lengthy mandatory sentences and those convicted of violent felonies getting parolled to make room for the incoming hippies.

More later. My lady just offered to make me a PB&J sandwich, and I'd be a fool to refuse such an offer.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #145 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
So lets legalize cocaine, opium, speed, extacy, rush, and all other drugs? Many of those were legal at one time or other.

Let's here a reason why not.

There is no reason. We should legalise all those drugs, but I think we have to take them one at a time.

We should also make all perscription drugs OTC.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #146 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
You would venture wrong actually. It's obvious you are not intimately aware of the realities of the drug situation. Being from Detroit, I have seen the ridiulousness of what passes as drug enforcement. Judges are all too willing to throw young black males (I specify blacks because they constitute a huge majority of those arrested for drugs in Detroit) in jail so that they appear to be tough on crime, and drug possession gives them an opportunity to do so. As in many urban areas, the sad myth is that young black male + drugs = career criminal out to rape white women and rob your home. So few of the more elite politicians and white suburbanites care because it's not a bad thing to toss away burglarapers.

And that's the doorway. We allow and encourage creation of these bullshit laws based on false prejudices that we think are going to make us safer (hell they're just going after those black folks downtown, not John the white guy across the street) and start locking up huge numbers of first time offenders.

But then we see that these halfassed laws not only fail to do what they are supposed to be doing (lower drug use, lower crime) they are being totally misued and end up creating a worse situation than existed before. You have people of every race getting thrown in for lengthy mandatory sentences and those convicted of violent felonies getting parolled to make room for the incoming hippies.

More later. My lady just offered to make me a PB&J sandwich, and I'd be a fool to refuse such an offer.

I am all for changing penalties for drug use. Just not legalization of the drug entirely. Unlike truptman I am a slippery slope person on this issue. You will just be asking for more problems, IMO
post #147 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=28

One can't fully appreciate the doublespeak of HR 1528 without knowing the title of the bill:

"Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005"

You can easily imagine the campaign ads against anyone who doesn't vote for this bill now... sinister sounding music... bad, squinty-looking pictures of the guy who wouldn't vote for this assinine bill... "My opponent voted to put the interests of drug dealers ahead of protecting our children." Sininster music shifts into happy Morning-in-America lilting string music, happy photos of the "I'm tough on crime!" candidate posing with his happy family slide by... "Unlike my opponent, I believe our children need to be protected against the most vicious members of our society..." Yadda yadda.

Ah, the joys of democracy in America.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #148 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Judges are all too willing to throw young black males (I specify blacks because they constitute a huge majority of those arrested for drugs in Detroit) in jail so that they appear to be tough on crime, and drug possession gives them an opportunity to do so.

This is a really important point. Imprisonment of african americans and targeting through racial profiling is one of the biggest problems with current drug laws and enforcement. It's really the primary issue in anydiscussion of the real-world effects of the war on drugs.
post #149 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Police state?

Is this the new buzzword?

Everyone talk like legalizing drugs will free up resources in the government. But in the very argument you suggest tight regulation. This requires a giant bureaucracy. You admit that people that smoke pot are generally retards to one extent or another. They don't obey the law as it is. I am unconvinced they would do so after this legalization is passed. I would also venture to say that typically people going to jail/prison are continuos offenders, often on other charges than just drugs.

I don't see any savings in cost. Typically government doesn't work that way. It will be just another entitlement gone wild.

Lets see all those courts cases, all those judges, all those cops,all those that are in jail for weed at the moment and there is no cost savings??? Sounds like you are higher then a Kite.The Police state wants to grow we all know that, it also wants more control of OUR lives, we all know that. Also the Gateway Drug thing is Pure B.S and spin and many studies have shown thats just govt lies.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #150 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
One can't fully appreciate the doublespeak of HR 1528 without knowing the title of the bill:

"Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005"

You can easily imagine the campaign ads against anyone who doesn't vote for this bill now... sinister sounding music... bad, squinty-looking pictures of the guy who wouldn't vote for this assinine bill... "My opponent voted to put the interests of drug dealers ahead of protecting our children." Sininster music shifts into happy Morning-in-America lilting string music, happy photos of the "I'm tough on crime!" candidate posing with his happy family slide by... "Unlike my opponent, I believe our children need to be protected against the most vicious members of our society..." Yadda yadda.

Ah, the joys of democracy in America.

This is what the republican party has resorted to,They make a Bill and give it a spin name here are a few....no child left behind,Patriot Act,Clean Air inititive, all lies and spin.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #151 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
This is what the republican party has resorted to,They make a Bill and give it a spin name here are a few....no child left behind,Patriot Act,Clean Air inititive, all lies and spin.

So we just need to create a drug legalisation bill and title it "The Jesus is my personal savior act of 2005" - they won't dare vote against it 8)
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #152 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
So we just need to create a drug legalisation bill and title it "The Jesus is my personal savior act of 2005" - they won't dare vote against it 8)

Seems thats how it works these days with the Far Right Extremist in the Republican party, which by the way ran me off now a independent\
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #153 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Everyone talk like legalizing drugs will free up resources in the government. But in the very argument you suggest tight regulation. This requires a giant bureaucracy. You admit that people that smoke pot are generally retards to one extent or another. They don't obey the law as it is. I am unconvinced they would do so after this legalization is passed. I would also venture to say that typically people going to jail/prison are continuos offenders, often on other charges than just drugs.

I don't see any savings in cost.


Thank God we have your enlightened wisdom to save us from the ignorance of the 500 Professors of Economics that issued the open letter cited in the initial posting.
Quote:
Using the Wednesday release of a study suggesting that replacing marijuana prohibition with a tax and regulate policy would save billions of dollars as a peg, more than 500 economists led by free market apostle Milton Friedman are calling for a national debate on moving toward regulated marijuana markets. The call comes in an open letter to President Bush, Congress, and state governors and legislators.

In his study, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition," Dr. Jeffrey Miron, a Boston University economics professor and visiting professor at Harvard University, looked at the financial costs associated with marijuana prohibition as well as the revenue implications of a regulated marijuana market. Using state and federal sources, Miron concluded that legalizing marijuana would save approximately $7.7 billion a year in enforcement costs, with savings of $2.4 billion at the federal law and $5.3 billion among the states and localities.

But wait, there's more: According to Miron, whose research was largely underwritten by the Marijuana Policy Project, a tax and regulate system would not only save billions in policing costs, it would also generate as much as $6 billion annually in taxes. If marijuana were taxed like ordinary consumer goods, revenues would range around $2.4 billion a year, but if it were taxed like alcohol and tobacco, that number could rise to as much as $6.2 billion, Miron concluded. That is a net savings of almost $14 billion a year.

In their open letter, the economists called attention to Miron's work and conclusions and urged a national debate on legalization. "The fact that marijuana prohibition has these budgetary impacts does not by itself mean prohibition is bad policy," the economists wrote. "Existing evidence, however, suggests prohibition has minimal benefits and may itself cause substantial harm. We therefore urge the country to commence an open and honest debate about marijuana prohibition. We believe such a debate will favor a regime in which marijuana is legal but taxed and regulated like other goods. At a minimum, this debate will force advocates of current policy to show that prohibition has benefits sufficient to justify the cost to taxpayers, foregone tax revenues, and numerous ancillary consequences that result from marijuana prohibition."
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #154 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker

Thank God we have your enlightened wisdom to save us from the ignorance of the 500 Professors of Economics that issued the open letter cited in the initial posting.

This is based on unknowables and best-case-scemarios.

I love how some people are so willing to bow at the alter of academia.

How many of these college professors do you suppose were high while conducting this study?

post #155 of 368
The bottom line is we need common sense laws and the weed laws are Bullshit lies made up from some zealots who passed laws based on pure fiction. I would rather people go home at the end of the day and burn one rather then use beer and alcohol. Its much safer then alcohol. Period.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #156 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
The bottom line is we need common sense laws and the weed laws are Bullshit lies made up from some zealots who passed laws based on pure fiction. I would rather people go home at the end of the day and burn one rather then use beer and alcohol. Its much safer then alcohol. Period.

I think CCS and ACS would both dissagree. Some quotes for you to react to:

"The fact that many people who smoke marijuana also smoke tobacco also makes it difficult to determine the strength of the association. However, given the strength of expert opinion, our knowledge that marijuana and cigarette smoking contain as many as 50 of the same cancer causing substances and the resulting probability of harm associated with long-term use of marijuana and with exposure to second-hand marijuana smoke, the Canadian Cancer Society recommends that exposure to marijuana smoke should be avoided."

"Marijuana contains more tar than cigarettes. Marijuana is also inhaled very deeply and the smoke is held in the lungs for a long time. Marijuana is smoked all the way to the end where tar content is the highest. Many of the cancer-causing substances in tobacco are also found in marijuana. Because marijuana is an illegal substance, it is not possible to control whether it contains fungi, pesticides, and other additives. Medical reports suggest marijuana may cause cancers of the mouth and throat.

It has been hard to prove a connection between marijuana and lung cancer because it is not easy to gather information about the use of illegal drugs. Also, many marijuana smokers also smoke cigarettes. This makes it difficult to know how much of the risk is from tobacco and how much is from marijuana."

Safe?
post #157 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
This is based on unknowables and best-case-scemarios.

What the fuck's a "scemario"? And what qualifies you to dismiss it?
Quote:
I love how some people are so willing to bow at the alter of academia.

What's "alter"? That place where you pray to Bush is called altar. You're welcome.
Maybe if you weren't against academia so much you'd actually know how to spell and phrase things correctly. The irony of this is just brilliant! I need a Guinness.
Quote:
How many of these college professors do you suppose were high while conducting this study?

Just curious. Have you ever been high?

I agree Aurora. Plus it would be a huge boon for the take-out restaurant industry.
post #158 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think CCS and ACS would both dissagree. Some quotes for you to react to:

"The fact that many people who smoke marijuana also smoke tobacco also makes it difficult to determine the strength of the association. However, given the strength of expert opinion, our knowledge that marijuana and cigarette smoking contain as many as 50 of the same cancer causing substances and the resulting probability of harm associated with long-term use of marijuana and with exposure to second-hand marijuana smoke, the Canadian Cancer Society recommends that exposure to marijuana smoke should be avoided."

"Marijuana contains more tar than cigarettes. Marijuana is also inhaled very deeply and the smoke is held in the lungs for a long time. Marijuana is smoked all the way to the end where tar content is the highest. Many of the cancer-causing substances in tobacco are also found in marijuana. Because marijuana is an illegal substance, it is not possible to control whether it contains fungi, pesticides, and other additives. Medical reports suggest marijuana may cause cancers of the mouth and throat.

It has been hard to prove a connection between marijuana and lung cancer because it is not easy to gather information about the use of illegal drugs. Also, many marijuana smokers also smoke cigarettes. This makes it difficult to know how much of the risk is from tobacco and how much is from marijuana."

Safe?

Perhaps your right lets just throw those bastards in jail because they deserve it right? its their bodies not yours or the govt. Being Fat is proven much more dangerous so lets start throwing the fatso's in jail along with some others. Govt has no business trying to legislate behavior. I remember them telling me all kinds of things in school about weed. From freaking you out to making you a killer to that if you smoked weed your tits would grow. All govt lies. The govt has done many studies on weed and the fact is there is no reason to be throwing people in jail over it but they want everyone to think weed is like cocaine or heroine and its not. Stop the lies. Again Alcohol is way way more dangerous.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #159 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
You're welcome.
Maybe if you weren't against academia so much you'd actually know how to spell and phrase things correctly. The irony of this is just brilliant! I need a Guinness.

Thanks for proving me human.. But it does nothing to counter my point.
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Just curious. Have you ever been high?

Sure, in the past. Then I grew up. But I'm uncertain how that has anything to do with anything.
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
I agree Aurora. Plus it would be a huge boon for the take-out restaurant industry.

I actually agree with the better law part of his statement, to be clear.
post #160 of 368
Cigarette smokers smoke more cigarettes than marihuana smokers smoke joints.

From personal experience, 90% of the people I know who smoke ganja don't smoke cigarettes. On the other hand, most people I know who drink socially once or twice per week do smoke cigarettes.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Milton Friedman: Legalize It!