Posted on 07/29/2008 8:38:33 PM PDT by me_a_republican
Dear fellow forum members,
What are the best reasons or arguments you can think of to keep marijuana illegal?
It would really really help to if you can reply only after reading http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html .
Thank you.
The raid comment was inspired by this little piece of drama queen work:
As an example on the alcohol thing: how many parents might let their kid have a sip of beer at the table? Or a glass of champagne at New Year's? Technically, they are breaking the law, but the idea that government should reach into a family's house and dictate their actions is completely abhorrent to me.
I was making fun of your hyperbole, not saying that you had alleged real raids. BTW, got any arrests to report yet? So, let's move on and observe as you continue to exhibit more drama queen liberaltarian behavior:
This is what blows my mind about "conservatives" like you:
1. The "you're not a real conservative because you don't join me in my paranoid delusions" trope. Check!
it doesn't bother you, in the least, that simple things like giving your kid a sip of beer might be illegal, because you have so much trust in daddy government that you just know he would never actually make use of that law, right?
2. Assumption that not joining in the paranoid delusion means one favors paternalistic and overreaching government. Check!
Sweet Uncle Sugar would agree with you all of the time about which laws should be applied when. Uncle Sugar has never even considered using words like "zero tolerance", right? Uncle Sugar has so much common sense, and so much regard for the rights and dignity of his people, that he would never require old, crippled people to remove their shoes in an airport, or kick kids out of school for drawing pictures of guns in crayon. Right?
3. Paranoid belief that law enforcement will be eager to waste their time on "crimes" they can't even document. Check!
So what would it hurt if Uncle Sugar made a few laws that regulate things you do in your own home? He would never abuse them. Just curious - have you ever heard of an agency called CPS?
CPS? Completely Paranois Schizoids? Yeah, I think you're a member.
I already said yes. What else do you need to hear?
I just wanted to make sure you were really as stupid as you seemed. I thought I was misreading your posts. Little kids buying six packs, and you're the smart one who cares about families. Riiiiiiiiiiight!
Consider also that in 2006, Amsterdam closed nearly half of their “coffee shops” for selling hard drugs and other violations. In total all this suggests to me that there is a distinct difference between Marijuana and alcohol, that increased availability does lead to higher rates of use, and that legalized marijuana leads to significant increases in hard drug manufacture, sale and use. Not a good thing. Holland is now the drug emporium of Europe.
When we consider, as you pointed out, that no state has FULLY legalized marijuana use, I think we can see why.
I know how you feel. My wife is luscious and my best friend.
You see, posts like yours are the root of one of my greatest lingering doubts about legalization.
You see, you say I’m a hypocrite because I was OK with the dangers of legal cigarettes, but willing to ban marijuana because of its dangers.
BUT I NEVER SAID THAT.
What I said was that comparing the dangers of alcohol and the dangers of marijuana was not a fair comparison. In fact, I could have been 100% pro-legalization and made the exact same argument, in the same way that I’ve taken some of my fellow pro-lifers to task for making fallacious arguments.
I see this sort of thing every time I read an FR thread on drugs. And I’ve found that when a lot of people on a side of an issue have the firm conviction that everyone who disagrees with them is a hypocrite who hates freedom, they are usually on the wrong side.
The greatest accolade a man can have is that his wife is too good for him.
Thanks for the response. With respect to Holland I would agree that their system is not perfect. They still encourage organized crime by having a system where retail sales are allowed but retailers have to buy off the black market. Huge profits are still going to organized crime, and since they have a big infrastructure there for producing and smuggling marijuana and hashish into the country, it is no surprise that they are involved in distributing other illegal drugs. They would be much better off if they just legalized and regulated marijuana production too.
As for the increase in marijuana use I believe that actually covered the period beginning in 1976 when they first started allowing marijuana, but regardless, the fact is that marijuana use increased by several hundred percent in the U.S. when simple possession was still a serious felony offense in most states for which you could get major prison time. Most of the increase in marijuana use in Holland did take place after they “legalized it,” but at the same time marijuana use was going up throughout most of Western Europe. Now per capita marijuana use rates for the the Netherlands are middle of the road for Europe, and lower than per capita use rates for the U.S. A 200% increase isn’t that big of a deal when only a tiny percentage use it to begin with, and it doesn’t mean much when still a lower percentage of the Dutch use marijuana than the percentage of Americans who use it.
The only pain in the neck part is the little tiny bones. You have to floss imeediately after eating a pizza witrh anchovy on it.
But what the heck - it's worth it.
This is about the longest thread I’ve seen from a person who just logged on. And it has not been zapped.
I’m starting to get the impression that you’re the kind of guy who looks down on people who break “gun laws”.
I'm starting to doubt that.
Post and run.
Unless you were here under a previous handle..?
Yes, yes, I'm sure you have just read my mind. Even though the thoughts I think about the nature and role of government have no resemblance to what you've written, I'm sure you know my mind better over an Internet connection than I do. And I'm sure, for instance, that the reason I'm on the Nanny State Ping List here at FR is so I can cheer on the Nanny State, even though I do the opposite. Truly, you have shown me my true self, O Great Prophet.
You, however, appear to be convinced that if the government doesn't step in and watch your kids, they'll be heroin junkies within the year, and no amount of parenting on your part can change that.
Mark Twain once said that there were three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics. But as smart as he was, he missed one, the sort that you've offered here: Buffoonish lies.
Show me where I said anything in our conversation or even on this thread about the government needing to prevent kids from having access to "gateway drugs" so they wouldn't become addicts.
Well, perhaps that is the level of child neglect you're used to, but most caring parents would take steps to ensure that their child is not out boozing it up.
I disagree with you on a point of public policy, therefore I am a child abuser...do you actually believe you're making a rational argument at this point? And isn't the bud supposed to make people mellow?
In your case, we need to assign government agents to your children so that they will be properly supervised.
Yes, yes, having a law that prevents little Billy from buying a six pack at the Super Suds is exactly the same as assigning government agents to do our parenting for us. Thank goodness you came to offer stunning clarity on that. [Nods thoughtfully, puffs on a pipe even more thoughtfully]
BTW, are your kids home schooled?
Oh, however did this country survive the first one hundred and fifty years or so where there were no federal restrictions on cultivation or usage of any plant you could possibly sow?
I don't recall discussing pot with you before this post, except to mention the fact that pro-legalization folks can point to abuses by police. Can you point to any arrests?
How did we survive those dangerous days when people were free to make bad choices for themselves?
You mean like yesterday, today, last week...? I haven't seen anyone ban cigarettes yet, for instance. There's no federal Department of Making Sure You Don't Get Four Earrings, a Sports Car and a 25 Year Old Mistress During Your Mid-Life Crisis. And certainly no federal agent has arrived to prevent you from posting silly and libelous comments on the Internet.
According to panty-bunching folks like you, we'd all be dead in a year or so if big daddy government weren't enforcing restrictions on our personal behavior for our own good.
Hmmmm...again you have managed to detect thoughts and feelings that I neither expressed or even detected in my own head. Truly, you are some sort of paranormal wonder! [Puffs on pipe in an even more thoughtful and impressed manner]
Have you considered offering the CIA your services so you can read the minds of terrorists for them?
You're not from New Orleans, by any chance, are you?
Blimey, I never noticed before how the failure of New Orleans and Louisiana authroities to implement even the simplest disaster plans is exactly like having a drinking age. Truly, you have enlightened me today, and the most impressive part is how you're not blowing things out of proportion at all!
Oh, and that "blah, blah, blah" at the beginning of your post...very witty and insightful. Your gratuitous insult made your point all the more compelling, old bean.
Hmmmm...and if that were true (it's not), that would make me a hypocrite who hates freedom, just like everyone else who disagrees with you on drug legalization, right?
So, do you think you're still making a rational argument at this point?
oh yeah!
faded, blurry tattoos! Very sexy.
Add that perfect touch - the pony tail and you’ve got one smmmokin’ hot fella!
I’ve also noticed, the more pot smoking a person has done, the more susceptible they are to 9/11 trutherism.
And I say that, sadly, with a couple of family members in mind.
For that alone - it should be illegal.
Get rid of pot - and you’ll get rid of trutherism - guaranteed :)
No. Are you being a wise guy or are you short on reading comprehension skills? I am saying that I never said health problems should be a basis for banning marijuana, but you immediately filled that in because it fits with your template that people who disagree with you on this issue are hypocrites who hate freedom.
Sure it is. They are all drugs.
That's something like saying a Mustang, a minivan and a Peterbilt OTR truck are all motor vehicles, so there's no such thing as an apples and oranges comparison when discussing them.
Heroin and Levaquin are both drugs. Imagine if someone said "Since you need to take Levaquin over a course of at least three days to be effective, you must also need to take heroin for three days before you get high."
So, if the health dangers of alcohol stem from overuse and the health problems associated with pot often stem from normal use, comparing the safety of the two as apples to apples is like comparing heroin and Levaquin as apples to apples.
Most of the FR drug warriors from the past (most of whom have quit FR or have been canned) were closeted gun-grabbers who would defend the BATFags for anything.
You posted: We should ban peanuts.
They kill lots of people, many of them children.
think of the children.
***
Good point. Don’t forget to add swimming pools, cars and electricity. They kill many children too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.