Why are people against legalizing marijuana?

[Blues Man]

What is their rationale? We have alcohol and nobody believes that should be illegal. If one is for freedom and liberty one is supportive of legalization.

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

 

[Papageorgio]

I think there are professions where partaking of marijuana should be illegal. Pilots, truck drivers are two that come to mind.

only when they are on duty.

What they do on their own time is no one's business

Because it stays in the system for such a long time, how do you know the only did it on their own time?

We should be easily be able to come up with a portable test that will be able to measure the level of active chemicals just like we do with alcohol

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

You would think so however here we are. Until then, the transportation industry is mandated to drug test, and if marijuana is in your system, your license is pulled and you have to go to counseling at the very least. On the mandatory pre-employment test you application is automatically rejected and your license is suspended.

Law enforcement will eventually catch up and new tools for enforcement will be made available

And any employer can set his own standards for his business.

If you want to use weed then you have the choice of applying for a job where the employer doesn't require a drug test

If you are a transportation company and have commercial vehicles, the federal government, DOT requires drug testing at
pre-employment and random. If you do not drug test properly, the DOT can fine you or put you out of service. The same goes for any personal they feel is in a safety sensitive position. This also goes for commercial airlines, the railroad and boating industry.

h in two hours of an accident the DOT requires drivers to be drug and alcohol tested, if there is a fatality, a person goes to the hospital from the crash scene, the CDL driver is cited or any vehicles are towed from the scene. Failure to do so could result in a fine, the drivers license suspended and the DOT could put you out of service.

So the idea that any employer can set their standards is false, the government has its hooks in the transportation industry.

 

[Papageorgio]

What is their rationale? We have alcohol and nobody believes that should be illegal. If one is for freedom and liberty one is supportive of legalization.

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

I agree, this reminds me school where a couple kids were screwing around in the classroom so no one has a recess is plain dictatorial nonsense to control everyone.

 

[Andylusion]

What is their rationale? We have alcohol and nobody believes that should be illegal. If one is for freedom and liberty one is supportive of legalization.

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

If you take Social Security, Medicare, or any other form of benefit from the government.... then flat out, you are wrong. If tax payers like me, are paying for ANYTHING for you... then yes you do have an obligation to society.

And yes, it is bad behavior.... *IF*... we have to pay for you.

Again, you save for your own retirement, and not take any tax money.... you pay for your own health care, and not take any tax money.... and pay for your own food, and your own house, and your own everything.....

Then I agree. If you are being completely responsible, then you can do anything you want.

The problem is, even if *YOU* specifically are being responsible, the flat out truth is, many people are not. I know they are not, because they have openly told me as much.

Now if you want to institute a system where we have an exclusion list, where if you are caught on drugs or drinking, then you forfeit all government benefits for life....

Ok, then you can do what you want.

Short of having that system, then we need to either eliminate all government benefits, or we need to ban bad behavior.

One or the other. It is evil to have hard working people, who live responsibly, paying for those who choose not to. And as long as this system exists, then I'll be fighting and voting for anyone anywhere that will either prevent bad behavior, or prevent me from paying for that bad behavior.

One or the other.... can't have both.

 

[Scamp]

The medical profession is against marijuana because it cures or helps with so many ailments that it is bad for their business.

 

[dblack]

So is sugar...sugar is probably worse. It is responsible for alot of the diseases fat butted people suffer from. But sugar should not be illegal. Neither should tobacco, or all the other chemicals in our environment that humans ingest. Hell glyophosate the main part of roundup is a carcinogen but fields are laced in it.

My reason is because I have witnessed too many young people throwing their lives away with it and I disagree. It most certainly is a gateway drug, I've seen that too.

Bottom line is that druggies are their own worse enemy by being piss poor ambassadors of their own cause.

By orders of magnitude, more young people have thrown their lives away using alcohol than pot.

There is no reason that pot should not be legal for adults and I say it should be regulated the same way as alcohol. I don't even use pot because I don't like its effects on me, but that is no reason to deny the liberty to make their own decisions.

I would sooner vote to ban booze than to legalize pot. As, I have witnessed the destructive effects of both. I have also witnessed and experienced the combination of the two and I can imagine nothing good coming from it being "legal."

Freedom is one thing but it doesn't give us the right to get wasted for fun and put the lives of others in danger.

No one is claiming the right to put the lives of others in danger. Next excuse?

 

[Chuz Life]

So is sugar...sugar is probably worse. It is responsible for alot of the diseases fat butted people suffer from. But sugar should not be illegal. Neither should tobacco, or all the other chemicals in our environment that humans ingest. Hell glyophosate the main part of roundup is a carcinogen but fields are laced in it.

My reason is because I have witnessed too many young people throwing their lives away with it and I disagree. It most certainly is a gateway drug, I've seen that too.

Bottom line is that druggies are their own worse enemy by being piss poor ambassadors of their own cause.

By orders of magnitude, more young people have thrown their lives away using alcohol than pot.

There is no reason that pot should not be legal for adults and I say it should be regulated the same way as alcohol. I don't even use pot because I don't like its effects on me, but that is no reason to deny the liberty to make their own decisions.

I would sooner vote to ban booze than to legalize pot. As, I have witnessed the destructive effects of both. I have also witnessed and experienced the combination of the two and I can imagine nothing good coming from it being "legal."

Freedom is one thing but it doesn't give us the right to get wasted for fun and put the lives of others in danger.

No one is claiming the right to put the lives of others in danger. Next excuse?

Excuse?

Nice dodge of all the other points.

Go fuck yourself.

 

[Blues Man]

only when they are on duty.

What they do on their own time is no one's business

Because it stays in the system for such a long time, how do you know the only did it on their own time?

We should be easily be able to come up with a portable test that will be able to measure the level of active chemicals just like we do with alcohol

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

You would think so however here we are. Until then, the transportation industry is mandated to drug test, and if marijuana is in your system, your license is pulled and you have to go to counseling at the very least. On the mandatory pre-employment test you application is automatically rejected and your license is suspended.

Law enforcement will eventually catch up and new tools for enforcement will be made available

And any employer can set his own standards for his business.

If you want to use weed then you have the choice of applying for a job where the employer doesn't require a drug test

If you are a transportation company and have commercial vehicles, the federal government, DOT requires drug testing at
pre-employment and random. If you do not drug test properly, the DOT can fine you or put you out of service. The same goes for any personal they feel is in a safety sensitive position. This also goes for commercial airlines, the railroad and boating industry.

h in two hours of an accident the DOT requires drivers to be drug and alcohol tested, if there is a fatality, a person goes to the hospital from the crash scene, the CDL driver is cited or any vehicles are towed from the scene. Failure to do so could result in a fine, the drivers license suspended and the DOT could put you out of service.

So the idea that any employer can set their standards is false, the government has its hooks in the transportation industry.

Well those vehicles will be operated on the federal highway system right?

In that case the federal government has the right to set whatever standards it wants for those who will be using federal highways. I'm pretty sure the Commerce clause gives them the authority to do so.

Let's not for get that driving on public roads is not a right but a privilege granted by the government

 

[Rye Catcher]

The power to tax, is the power to destroy. CA has legalized MJ for recreation, and yet the costs to buy a weed are enormous. Some of us, like me, used MJ socially while in College. Then we married, had kids and in my case worked in LE, and left MJ behind for decades.

After retirement my niece's husband gave us a MJ Cookie for Xmas. I learned one thing very fast, that high in college was manageable, my wife and I kept looking at each other as the high seemed to grow and grow. In college I usually ended up at Doggie Diner, couple of big dogs and then to bed. With the MJ Cookie I couldn't even go to the kitchen, we both agreed we didn't enjoy a euphoric experience; we kept wondering when it would wear off.

 

[Rye Catcher]

The medical profession is against marijuana because it cures or helps with so many ailments that it is bad for their business.

Besides Big Pharma the adult beverage industry opposes MJ.

 

[Blues Man]

What is their rationale? We have alcohol and nobody believes that should be illegal. If one is for freedom and liberty one is supportive of legalization.

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

If you take Social Security, Medicare, or any other form of benefit from the government.... then flat out, you are wrong. If tax payers like me, are paying for ANYTHING for you... then yes you do have an obligation to society.

And yes, it is bad behavior.... *IF*... we have to pay for you.

Again, you save for your own retirement, and not take any tax money.... you pay for your own health care, and not take any tax money.... and pay for your own food, and your own house, and your own everything.....

Then I agree. If you are being completely responsible, then you can do anything you want.

The problem is, even if *YOU* specifically are being responsible, the flat out truth is, many people are not. I know they are not, because they have openly told me as much.

Now if you want to institute a system where we have an exclusion list, where if you are caught on drugs or drinking, then you forfeit all government benefits for life....

Ok, then you can do what you want.

Short of having that system, then we need to either eliminate all government benefits, or we need to ban bad behavior.

One or the other. It is evil to have hard working people, who live responsibly, paying for those who choose not to. And as long as this system exists, then I'll be fighting and voting for anyone anywhere that will either prevent bad behavior, or prevent me from paying for that bad behavior.

One or the other.... can't have both.

I take nothing from the government.

And don't forget the money I will get from Social Security after the age of 67 is money that I had taken from me in the form of taxes.

And FYI I would love to get rid of the Social Security scam.

 

[petro]

Yep. But if used in moderation they help relieve the awful stress that one endures grinding out a living in america. If one works hard to barely squeak by why take away the little enjoyment of this life?

You actually just harmed your cause with this post.

Yeah.
Much better he visits his doctor to see if a variety of addictive toxic legal substances "is right for him" and his anxiety.
Big Pharm wins again.

 

[Blues Man]

The power to tax, is the power to destroy. CA has legalized MJ for recreation, and yet the costs to buy a weed are enormous. Some of us, like me, used MJ socially while in College. Then we married, had kids and in my case worked in LE, and left MJ behind for decades.

After retirement my niece's husband gave us a MJ Cookie for Xmas. I learned one thing very fast, that high in college was manageable, my wife and I kept looking at each other as the high seemed to grow and grow. In college I usually ended up at Doggie Diner, couple of big dogs and then to bed. With the MJ Cookie I couldn't even go to the kitchen, we both agreed we didn't enjoy a euphoric experience; we kept wondering when it would wear off.

I don't like edibles for that very reason.

 

[petro]

Responsible people don't get drunk or use drugs including marijuana.

Responsible people use what ever they want responsibly

People who think they can't be responsible choose abstinence because deep down they know they have no self control

Nope. Not even close. The pothead or drunk driving the wrong way on the freeway both think they are being responsible. The mom who was high on pot when she put the baby on top of the car and drove off believed herself to be responsible at all times.

Wrong

Everyone who drives impaired is irresponsible

You just can't seem to not use the broadest brush possible in your efforts to understand the world



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Everytime they post I picture Carrie Nation ...


Just an updated version of the Ladies of Prohibition.

 

[Chuz Life]

What is their rationale? We have alcohol and nobody believes that should be illegal. If one is for freedom and liberty one is supportive of legalization.

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

I actuality agree with all of that.

At least in principle, that is.

 

[Andylusion]

The problem is, it ruins families, wrecks lives, and makes people stupid. Every single idiot I have ever run into, has been a pot head.

Additionally, THC is well known to cause birth problems, including learning disabilities, or low birth weight.

Lastly, work ethic and performance, are greatly impaired. 55% more accidents, more injuries, 75% higher rates of absenteeism. Higher job turn over.

This all matches my experience in the work place.

Additionally, on a purely economic standpoint, drugs have zero economic benefit.

When you produce say, iron ore, that iron ore has an economic benefit. That production has value, which grows the economy. The iron can be turned into other products, like steel, which can be turned into other products like beams, which can be turned into other products like buildings, bridges, or cars or on and on and on.

These are productive industries that build value in the economy, which in turn produce more jobs, and more value, and more products.

Pot, like gambling, produces nothing. It's poor people, paying rich people, to consume something that produces no value.

So what?

everything you listed can be applied to other legal drugs.

And people buy shit everyday that produces no value.

If a person wants to indulge in recreational drug use it is his choice and you have absolutely no right to tell him otherwise.

If a persons. pot use, alcohol use, cigarette use etc etc affects his job that's between him and his employer and not your concern.

Does the fact that one action is bad, mean that other bad actions, are ok?

I mean generally I would agree with you, but at some point you are wrecking society.

Now if we had an entirely capitalist system, meaning no Social Security, no Medicare, no food stamps, no public housing, no welfare... under that system, where if you fail to save for retirement, then you work until you die.... when you fail pay for health insurance, then you sell your house to pay medical bills..... when you fail buy your own food you starve... when you fail to pay for your own housing, you end up homeless....

If we had that kind of system, then I would entirely agree with you.

Because an individuals choices, have no effect on the rest of society.

But as long as you have all those welfare benefits, then you must have controls on how people live, because if you are taking my tax money, then I don't want you smoking pot. If you are going to live off the government, then drugs need to be illegal.

Why should I be forced to take care of your child, because you are pot head? Why should I take care of you in retirement, because you smoked all your retirement away, getting high?

And again, you are right, that you could say the same thing for Alcohol and Tobacco.... I agree. We should have the same rules for all of them. But since I can't ban alcohol and tobacco, doesn't mean that we should allow more bad behavior.

The alternative is, we eliminate all government programs completely, and you can do whatever you want.

I have no obligation to "society".


Drinking or using weed occasionally is not "bad " behavior.

As long as I am not endangering anyone else what I do is not anyone's business.

So as far as society is concerned , we have laws that address public intoxication, driving while impaired etc. So those people who do put others in danger will be punished.

And I never once mentioned abolishing any law or government program that is designed to protect people from those who would be a danger to them.

But telling me I can't use a little hash for enjoyment on occasion because someone else might not be able to control himself is ridiculous

If you take Social Security, Medicare, or any other form of benefit from the government.... then flat out, you are wrong. If tax payers like me, are paying for ANYTHING for you... then yes you do have an obligation to society.

And yes, it is bad behavior.... *IF*... we have to pay for you.

Again, you save for your own retirement, and not take any tax money.... you pay for your own health care, and not take any tax money.... and pay for your own food, and your own house, and your own everything.....

Then I agree. If you are being completely responsible, then you can do anything you want.

The problem is, even if *YOU* specifically are being responsible, the flat out truth is, many people are not. I know they are not, because they have openly told me as much.

Now if you want to institute a system where we have an exclusion list, where if you are caught on drugs or drinking, then you forfeit all government benefits for life....

Ok, then you can do what you want.

Short of having that system, then we need to either eliminate all government benefits, or we need to ban bad behavior.

One or the other. It is evil to have hard working people, who live responsibly, paying for those who choose not to. And as long as this system exists, then I'll be fighting and voting for anyone anywhere that will either prevent bad behavior, or prevent me from paying for that bad behavior.

One or the other.... can't have both.

I take nothing from the government.

And don't forget the money I will get from Social Security after the age of 67 is money that I had taken from me in the form of taxes.

And FYI I would love to get rid of the Social Security scam.

Just like all the rest of us are paying tax. Social Security is money paid in income tax, just like any other income tax. And social security benefits, are benefits like any other benefit.

So generally... we agree. I want to get rid of it too. Actually, I would like to privatize it.
If we privatized it, so the money went into your own account, in your own assets.... then I wouldn't care what you did, because you would only be taking your own money.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Drug addiction is more like pollution. What difference does it make if some factory dumps a couple of gallons of gunk in the river? It doesn't really hurt anyone if some junkie throws his needle away or craps on the sidewalk. Except that we know its not one factory and a couple of gallons. It's not one junkie and a needle. How do you decide who will have that license to pollute or use drugs.

If you want to confine drug users to homes or wherever they are warehoused you have a better point. Just keep them from getting out.

 

[dblack]

So is sugar...sugar is probably worse. It is responsible for alot of the diseases fat butted people suffer from. But sugar should not be illegal. Neither should tobacco, or all the other chemicals in our environment that humans ingest. Hell glyophosate the main part of roundup is a carcinogen but fields are laced in it.

My reason is because I have witnessed too many young people throwing their lives away with it and I disagree. It most certainly is a gateway drug, I've seen that too.

Bottom line is that druggies are their own worse enemy by being piss poor ambassadors of their own cause.

By orders of magnitude, more young people have thrown their lives away using alcohol than pot.

There is no reason that pot should not be legal for adults and I say it should be regulated the same way as alcohol. I don't even use pot because I don't like its effects on me, but that is no reason to deny the liberty to make their own decisions.

I would sooner vote to ban booze than to legalize pot. As, I have witnessed the destructive effects of both. I have also witnessed and experienced the combination of the two and I can imagine nothing good coming from it being "legal."

Freedom is one thing but it doesn't give us the right to get wasted for fun and put the lives of others in danger.

No one is claiming the right to put the lives of others in danger. Next excuse?

Excuse?

Nice dodge of all the other points.

Go fuck yourself.

I that legal?

 

[dblack]

Drug addiction is more like pollution.

More like pollution than what? It doesn't seem anything like pollution to me.

 

[dblack]

I have no obligation to "society".

If you take Social Security, Medicare, or any other form of benefit from the government.... then flat out, you are wrong. If tax payers like me, are paying for ANYTHING for you... then yes you do have an obligation to society.

This is the claim Democrats are always making and it's bullshit. They force state dependency on us and then claim we owe them for it. Screw that. Talk about "blaming the victim".