Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

I think we're both right, GOK.

_________________

There's nothing socially acceptable about a loud drunk puking in the hallway of your apartment complex.

There's nothing socially acceptable about a DUI driver that kills a family of 3.

There's nothing socially acceptable about an alcoholic father that comes home from work and beats his children.

...

To be fair, though, if you pull only the negatives, you can make anything look bad, I suppose.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Yes, but having a glass of wine/beer at dinner is socially accepted. I'm not saying getting drunk is, though it is more accepted than getting stoned.

Well, that's because it's normal. If marijuana were legal, and had been for many, many years, it would be more normal. (And yes, I know saying that actually hurts the side of the argument I'm on, but I like to look at both sides of things. I still say, despite what i mentioned above, that marijuana shouldn't be egalized recreationally, just for the record)

It may not be socially acceptable, but it's fun.

I am one of those people who believe that marijuana should be regulated like alcohol.

_________________

I guess the main difference in that scenario is that smoking maryjane fills the room with a noxious smell of smoke, and alcohol doesn't. Not very appealing for anyone's appetite.

I saw a commercial yesterday that said prety much all that should be said.
It showed three stoners on a couch in a basement, two of them are looking up into the ceiling, and the other starts to talk into the camera, he says that he smoked pot, and he started explaining that tomarow he wont overdose on crack, drive over a little girl, go rob a bank, or fund terrorism. he says that the only thing that will get hurt is their couch.

That best described it all. if i can find that commercial on youtube or something, i'll post it.

_________________

You know something, though, I don't smoke marijuana, and I won't overdose on crack tomorrow, nor will I drive over a little girl, rob a bank, or fund terrorism.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

I remember a commercial very similar to that one. If I remember correctly, he also didn't have a job and was living in his mother's basement. So, basically, a deadbeat. Yeah, that sends a real positive message about pot, alright.

_________________

I know plenty of people who have full time jobs and smoke pot on a regular basis.

If you're going to sit around and be lazy in your parent's basement and watch the world pass by, don't blame pot. You would have done the exact same thing... pot or no pot.

Claiming that pot is anymore harmful than alcohol or cigarettes is incredibly ignorant.

That said, I personally choose none of the above. My money and time is best spent elsewhere!

I do too. I used to work with them at WalMart.

I haven't worked with any since I left that place...
Seems like most of the intelligent people I know DON'T smoke marijuana. Is it because they don't smoke that they are smart or that they don't smoke because they're smart or something else? Your guess is as good as mine.

Personally, I think it's worse than alcohol or cigarettes. It's illegal. Were it to be legalized, my opinion would change. I would put it in the same category as other vices (meaning, if you don't abuse it, don't ruin your life or the lives of others, and don't expect me to give you a break because you're under the influence, then I don't care about it).

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

DARN STRAIGHT!

EDIT: Didds, that was the point, he was a dead beat, but was he funding Terrorism? Was he overdosing on crack? was he doing everything that you and several other people/commercials say you do if you smoke pot? no, he was just sitting there...ruining a good couch... doing nothing... thats what will get kids to not do it, the truth, not fiction.

_________________

My biggest beef with the war on drugs is that the US is wasting an incredible amount of money policing a drug that is no more harmful than alcohol or cigarettes.

That money could be spent on education.

Have you ever heard of someone overdosing from pot?

Have you ever heard of someone robbing a bank to support a dope habit?

Show me a study that shows that pot is anymore addictive than alcohol or cigarettes.

It may come as a suprise to many of you, but pot was not always illegal in the US.

I highly recommend the movie "Grass".
http://www.dvdmoviecentral.com/ReviewsText/grass.htm

I won't argue you there.
You could go further, though. Although it goes against every conservative bone in my body*, "Can you imagine the tax revenues we're missing?"



*-I really hate taxes

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Then why do you keep defending the village idi0t, Dubya?



Goodnight, mate. I'm off to bed. It's been fun chatting with you.

Umm... I said TAXES, and I'm defending the "Villiage Idiot" because he (sadly) has been the better choice of candidates in the last two elections.
I love Texans (I used to work for one).

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!

As much as I like the Simpsons reference, can we please try to keep it on topic please?

_________________

It became illegal because it was competing too much with the Cotton trade, and the Cotton farmers didnt want competition, so they Outlawed the growing of Marijuana. they changed the reason a few years afterwards to cover that up. or at least thats what i think.

_________________

COLA, you are becoming one of my favorite posters.

Tell me your theory on the Kennedy assassination.

If the mods feel that would be too off-topic, boardmail it to me. I'm interested.

_________________

What do you mean by that??!?!
Tell me, How am i funny?
Am i like Seinfeld Funny?
Am i like Family Guy Funny?
Am i like South Park Funny?
Tell me, How am i funny?

_________________

Ok.. This is too far out in left field. Seriously.




Please.
Thank you.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

here you go: 100% facts as to how Marijuana was legal then became illegal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_o ... ted_States

_________________

Yes, it should be legalised. My reasons? Well, some people complain of health risks. Well, smoking is bad too, and it is legal. It will make you violent/crazy ect?

I heard it does quite the oposite, makes one clam.

_________________

OR one could simply respond, as I do, that cigarette smoking should be outlawed. At least MJ has some medicinal value, but tobacco does nothing but cause cancer.

The only problem is, just because tobacco is legal, even though more dangerous and should be illegal, does not mean that MJ should be legal too.

_________________

Yes, but the problem with that is, when you try to ban things that people have been useing for years, you begin to question their freedom.

Surely they have the freedom to harm themselves?

Of course, there is the whole "second hand smoke" thing. That is why smoking has been banned in public places over here.

_________________

Why should people have the freedom to harm themselves? It is the responsibility of the government to protect it's citizens, even from their own foolishness.

_________________

WARNING: THREAD THREATENING TO BECOME DEBATE ON FUNDAMENTAL ASSUMPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT! TOASTPAINT THREAT LEVEL RED!

Banning substances that harm you "for your own good" makes as much sense as any other abstinence oriented policy. It ignores the fact that a good percent of people are going to do these things whether they're legal or not. So the question is, do we want a large percent of the population in jail, or would we rather find ways of controlling use? Whenever something like this is outlawed, people just find more dangerous ways of getting it. If that just affected them, then I'd say who cares, but the illegal drug distribution network ends up bringing down entire neighborhoods of uninvolved people.

Make it legal and:
1) the illegal types no longer have that source of profit
2) prices come down, ending the vicious cycle of drug-poverty for many (and when that stress is removed they'll be more likely to be able to quit)
3) just think of the initial business boom for convenience stores and drugstores
4) of course, taxation

[I haven't checked the rest of this thread to see if there are already good arguments against these things]

If we want to talk government philosophy, I take a taoist approach. Forcing things usually leads to more problems. Finding ways to redirect the problem are much better in the long run. The tax can be matched to fund programs that help people quit. Alcohol and tobacco would finally fall in with the rest of the drugs in classification, where they belong.

[note: I've never used any drugs, tobacco, beer, or liquor. red wine from time to time, no more than 2 glasses per 24 hrs]

_________________
ATTN: LOWER BOARD USERS HAVE MOVED TO ANOTHER FORUM. COME JOIN THE FUN!

There is a flaw in your reasoning: Legalization leads to greater production, higher availability, and inevitably higher consumption. Rather than diminish the negative effects of the drug consumption, it would only increase them.

True, you would be looking at lower prices for the drugs, but the poverty caused by the negative health impact would only cause an increace in the poverty, not a decrease. Only now, the escape mechanism that people would use to deflect from the poverty - that is, the drugs - would be more readily available.

So, no, I don't see your strategy as being that beneficial.

_________________

Well, seeing as both of your arguments are equal, maybe legalising them, or keeping them illegal won't make a difference either way. The pros and cons will cancel each other out.

_________________