|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 9, 2008 18:37:50 GMT -5
We've seen where limiting the use of drugs has gotten us. There is a huge black market for drugs. I remember one conspiracy theorist claiming that it's fueled by the government to make us feel like the government is out to protect us. Bit of a stretch, if you ask me. But we have banned certain drugs from being used and they're more widespread today than before. I was naive in high school. When I got to college, I could not believe the number of people who smoked pot snorted cocaine; people I never thought would do it. Even my ex admitted to doing cocaine until three years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 9, 2008 20:07:54 GMT -5
Yup, I don't think anyone can stop it. Too much money involved. What the hell would those guys in the Golden Crescent, including Afghanistan, do without poppies? I laugh when I hear of government programs to get them to grow wheat. Wheat! On the other hand, what will we do when everyone is stoned. "Hey, sweetie, whyncha pass that driver's license application over here to me and I'll stamp, ya know? I mean, STAMP IT, big guy. I feel GOOD!" I suppose the Prohibitionists feared for the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 9, 2008 20:13:35 GMT -5
That's why we should try legalizing the drugs. We've seen that prohibiting them has failed.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 9, 2008 21:21:19 GMT -5
I suppose one could make the argument that we are doing just that, albeit slowly. I don't have the stats, but anecdotally it appears more and more opiates and their cousins are being prescribed by non-specialist doctors. Laws may be rolling back as well as penalties. We're having this big argument in America while the deed is slowly being done. Something familiar about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 9, 2008 22:21:05 GMT -5
Prohibition?
|
|
|
|
Post by nhcitizen18 on Feb 10, 2008 6:49:16 GMT -5
Legalization will never be on teh table for politicians. This is just another example of where emotions regarding an issue will always trump logic and economics. If you took the emotion out of the issue (i.e. my brother/cousin/son/uncle was killed by that crap it should be illegal) and looked at it as a simple supply and demand equation legalization makes sense from a government revenue standpoint, would cause a huge reduction in crime and street gangs and would even create a safer product for the drug users themselves.
That being said, the day that common sense and logic trump ignorance and emotion in our electorate will probably never occur in our lifetimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 10, 2008 8:59:38 GMT -5
[Prohibition?] Yes, you know, your grandfather's war on drugs. Where the electorate NHCit is speaking of tried to make society better by banning a mood altering drug, alcohol. It is seen today as a failed experiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 10, 2008 9:02:17 GMT -5
Oh I know what Prohibition was. I was just making sure we were on the same page and you weren't referring to something else.
Nicely said, nhcitizen. I couldn't agree more.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 10, 2008 9:17:54 GMT -5
Swimmy, we are ALWAYS on the same page.  |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 10, 2008 10:28:11 GMT -5
G :)d to know |
|
|
|
Post by uticaclub on Feb 12, 2008 11:32:20 GMT -5
I think what a lot of people fail to think about when arguing for the decriminalzation of drugs is the DWI factor. In my opinion that is the main reason Marijuana is not legal. There isn't an easy way to test for it on the roadside. Sure, you can give them a field sobriety test, but without a blood test you cannot determine the amount of THC in someone's system. A urine test will only prove that the person is a user, not when they used. Very rarely do you see DUID's because unless the driver is caught in the act or admidts to using before driving, there is no easy way to prove they were. Law enforcement is constantly making it harder for people to gather and become inebriated, I don't think any politician is going to go against them by throwing another drug into the mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by losjibaros on Feb 12, 2008 11:55:18 GMT -5
No different than somebody popping three oxy's and driving down the street.... no different than it is now.. shit.. i would wager that half the people in utica drive stoned.. that would make the other half driving stupid??
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 12, 2008 11:56:45 GMT -5
You don't need a THC blood count to tell if someone is high. Often times they're smoking it in the car and you can smell it from a mile away.
|
|
|
|
Post by uticaclub on Feb 12, 2008 12:50:51 GMT -5
But you do need absolute proof to admit in court. And the arguement that people already drive stoned does not fly. People drive drunk too, and it's a problem. Now combine that with the synergystic effects of smoking a joint and you have multiplied the problem. BTW, I'm not saying pot shouldn't be legal, I'm just stating common sense reasons it is not.
|
|
|
|
Post by uticaclub on Feb 12, 2008 12:54:19 GMT -5
Basically, why would they legalize something they don't want you to do while driving, especially when it would be difficult to establish tolerances for it, as well as punish those who exceed those tolerances. Or prove they have exceeded them in the first place.
|
|
