Issue 3 (For Ohio Residents)

[WhoDeyWho]

(11-04-2015, 04:49 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: But you yourself even said that everyone who wants to smoke weed can and does.  So exactly how much dumber and distracted are people going to get, if there is no increase in use?  The ability is there regardless, so then I have to wonder where the real disconnect lies.  

Is it a morality issue?  Is it only the idea that simply saying it would be ok for others to choose is, in fact, not ok.

IMHO, people have been programmed for so long to associate marijuana with other drugs, or as part of some agenda or slippery slope.  DARE, Just Say No, "There is No Hope with Dope" , etc that there completely oblivious to the fact that is less harmful than a great deal of things readily available at a gas station.  Instead of it being actually about marijuana and it's affects it's about an ideal of being against drugs.

If we're really worried about the collective IQ of this nation then weed is the least of our worries.  I mean, c'mon.  Can't we turn onur attention to the loads of other things that are actually relevant to these issues?

It ultimately is about being morality cops.  If we were so concerned with the IQ of the nation we wouldn't be a society that glamorizes the use of alcohol.  

[WhoDeyWho]

(11-04-2015, 04:59 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: That's the key word for me.  It is completely arbitrary.  I think people have been programmed to oppose this idea of drugs and drug culture, completely dependent on how they were introduced to the issue.  And unfortunately, marijuana was lumped into that category for decades

The actual benefits and drawbacks of it, when compared to other substances, is completely irrelevant.  It doesn't matter that it's less harmful than alcohol.  It doesn't matter that the sale of 20oz drinks, via readily available machine after machine, poses a much greater health threat.  It only matters that the ideal is "I'm against drugs" and the facts be damned when compared to alcohol.

And God help us if they ever did apply this logic and prohibition evenly across the board.  You might as well be living in M. Night Shamadamalalalala's  The Village.  Puritan people everywhere, no drinking, no smoking, no tang before marriage, nothing. 

We've been indoctrinated.  "Reefer Madness" did it's job.  That said, sugar has been my biggest downfall.  I'm literally addicted to that shit.  

But no worries.  You can't get high off sugar.

[WhoDeyWho]

(11-04-2015, 04:50 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: taking a hit or two would give you the same effect as drinking a energy drink. See you have no clue what you're talking about. You think that taking a hit makes you a lot more messed up than it does.

With no frame of reference why shouldn't he?

[Brownshoe]

(11-04-2015, 05:04 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: With no frame of reference why shouldn't he?

That's why I had the analogy of a virgin trying to say what sex feels like. He doesn't know. He thinks he knows, but doesn't. He thinks it's much more potent than what it is because he's been conditioned to believe that. It's kind of funny he has such a strong belief about marijuana when he doesn't know what it's really like.

[WhoDeyWho]

(11-04-2015, 05:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's kind of funny he has such a strong belief about marijuana when he doesn't know what it's really like.

It is sad actually.  Ignorance isn't funny.  

[Au165]

(11-04-2015, 05:16 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: It is sad actually.  Ignorance isn't funny.  

One must not partake in something to support or reject it. I support the legalization of it, but have never used it. I base my argument around science and our current situation and what we allow already. He just refuses to use anything other than, stereotypes to make a judgment.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-04-2015, 04:41 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Then why do people buy caffeine free pop? Why does it even exist if that is pop's purpose and the main reason why people buy it? Same thing with decaf coffee. Why?

Why do people buy NA Beer? 

[PDub80]

Alright, I just got off the phone with one of my buddies who smokes and is a big Bengals fan. When I was talking to him I was able to better verbalize my sentiments....

- I do NOT think that possession of weed should be a criminal act. Nor do I believe that possessing it or being high in public (unless operating machinery or doing something dangerous) should be punishable at all.

- I DO believe consuming it or selling it in public spaces should be punishable by heavy fines for both the user and the business allowing it. Unless it's in a private space or club. So, Wes Mantooth, feel free to toke up when you're at your local swingers dive looking to happen into a "situation".

- I DO think that people should be allowed to grow or have it for personal use and in small quantities. No farmers cultivating fields of the stuff.

- I do NOT think that stores or business should be selling it to the general public.

- I do NOT believe people should be allowed to grow or cultivate it for a home based business or for sale or distribution outside of their property. So, like, no ADVOCARE for the hippie lettuce.

[RoyleRedlegs]

So you just want to reinforce the illegal drug market and keep dirty dealings on?

[WhoDeyWho]

(11-04-2015, 05:28 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Alright, I just got off the phone with one of my buddies who smokes and is a big Bengals fan. When I was talking to him I was able to better verbalize my sentiments....

- I do NOT think that possession of weed should be a criminal act. Nor do I believe that possessing it or being high in public (unless operating machinery or doing something dangerous) should be punishable at all.

- I DO believe consuming it or selling it in public spaces should be punishable by heavy fines for both the user and the business allowing it. Unless it's in a private space or club. So, Wes Mantooth, feel free to toke up when you're at your local swingers dive looking to happen into a "situation".

- I DO think that people should be allowed to grow or have it for personal use and in small quantities. No farmers cultivating fields of the stuff.

- I do NOT think that stores or business should be selling it to the general public.

- I do NOT believe people should be allowed to grow or cultivate it for a home based business or for sale or distribution outside of their property. So, like, no ADVOCARE for the hippie lettuce.

What's your problem with pot farms?  You have a problem with liquor distilleries?  

[Au165]

(11-04-2015, 05:29 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So you just want to reinforce the illegal drug market and keep dirty dealings on?

I actually think his stance before the last post made more sense....

[PDub80]

(11-04-2015, 05:02 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: We've been indoctrinated.  "Reefer Madness" did it's job.  That said, sugar has been my biggest downfall.  I'm literally addicted to that shit.  

But no worries.  You can't get high off sugar.

Now the pot use makes sense.... Brownies!

(11-04-2015, 05:04 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: With no frame of reference why shouldn't he?

(11-04-2015, 05:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: That's why I had the analogy of a virgin trying to say what sex feels like. He doesn't know. He thinks he knows, but doesn't. He thinks it's much more potent than what it is because he's been conditioned to believe that. It's kind of funny he has such a strong belief about marijuana when he doesn't know what it's really like.

Guys, you don't have to experience something to understand it's relevance on society or potential down falls, or to understand if you wouldn't like it.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-04-2015, 05:28 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Alright, I just got off the phone with one of my buddies who smokes and is a big Bengals fan. When I was talking to him I was able to better verbalize my sentiments....

- I do NOT think that possession of weed should be a criminal act. Nor do I believe that possessing it or being high in public (unless operating machinery or doing something dangerous) should be punishable at all.

- I DO believe consuming it or selling it in public spaces should be punishable by heavy fines for both the user and the business allowing it. Unless it's in a private space or club. So, Wes Mantooth, feel free to toke up when you're at your local swingers dive looking to happen into a "situation".

- I DO think that people should be allowed to grow or have it for personal use and in small quantities. No farmers cultivating fields of the stuff.

- I do NOT think that stores or business should be selling it to the general public.

- I do NOT believe people should be allowed to grow or cultivate it for a home based business or for sale or distribution outside of their property. So, like, no ADVOCARE for the hippie lettuce.

You do see the massive contradiction here right? 

[PDub80]

(11-04-2015, 05:29 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So you just want to reinforce the illegal drug market and keep dirty dealings on?

If harsher penalties were made for selling it, then how would I be reinforcing an illegal drug market?

(11-04-2015, 05:30 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: What's your problem with pot farms?  You have a problem with liquor distilleries?  

Because, under the rules I laid out why would a farmer need a field of weed unless he were to be selling it?

(11-04-2015, 05:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: I actually think his stance before the last post made more sense....

It makes perfect sense. It would not be a business and people can have it and do it all they want in the privacy of their own homes.

[Brownshoe]

(11-04-2015, 05:28 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Alright, I just got off the phone with one of my buddies who smokes and is a big Bengals fan. When I was talking to him I was able to better verbalize my sentiments....

- I do NOT think that possession of weed should be a criminal act. Nor do I believe that possessing it or being high in public (unless operating machinery or doing something dangerous) should be punishable at all.

- I DO believe consuming it or selling it in public spaces should be punishable by heavy fines for both the user and the business allowing it. Unless it's in a private space or club. So, Wes Mantooth, feel free to toke up when you're at your local swingers dive looking to happen into a "situation".

- I DO think that people should be allowed to grow or have it for personal use and in small quantities. No farmers cultivating fields of the stuff.

- I do NOT think that stores or business should be selling it to the general public.

- I do NOT believe people should be allowed to grow or cultivate it for a home based business or for sale or distribution outside of their property. So, like, no ADVOCARE for the hippie lettuce.

Why would you want it like that? The government wouldn't get any taxes from it's sales.

Why wouldn't you be able to open a shop if you are saying you don't care if people sell it in a private space? What difference does it make if someone sells it out of their basement and someone sells it in a store?

You're basically allowing it to be legal except that the general population wouldn't get any kind of benefit from it from taxes.

That stance makes 0 sense

[PDub80]

(11-04-2015, 05:31 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You do see the massive contradiction here right? 

No contradiction...

Keep it out of the public areas, like businesses and schools, parks, etc.

Allow for private personal property use.

Not allowed to be made into a business.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-04-2015, 05:33 PM)PDub80 Wrote: If harsher penalties were made for selling it, then how would I be reinforcing an illegal drug market?


Because, under the rules I laid out why would a farmer need a field of weed unless he were to be selling it?


It makes perfect sense. It would not be a business and people can have it and do it all they want in the privacy of their own homes.

Because you also make it illegal for people to obtain it every other way. 
Harsh penalties for selling drugs will not stop people from doing it.
It hasn't changed since the 1980's it won't stop now.

By keeping it illegal and hard to obtain you only worsen the black market drug trade creating more violence and secrecy 

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-04-2015, 05:34 PM)PDub80 Wrote: No contradiction...

Keep it out of the public areas, like businesses and schools, parks, etc.

Allow for private personal property use.

Not allowed to be made into a business.

Quote:Unless it's in a private space or club

Quote:- I DO think that people should be allowed to grow or have it for personal use and in small quantities. No farmers cultivating fields of the stuff.


- I do NOT think that stores or business should be selling it to the general public.

- I do NOT believe people should be allowed to grow or cultivate it for a home based business or for sale or distribution outside of their property

think long and hard about this......

[Au165]

(11-04-2015, 05:33 PM)PDub80 Wrote: It makes perfect sense. It would not be a business and people can have it and do it all they want in the privacy of their own homes.

Everything about your post is contradictory and promotes illegal drug trade still. The bottom line is liquor is safer and less steeped in illegal activity when it is done by big business and pot would be the same way. People who grow will eventually sell to those who want it but don't grow themselves. This will lead to competition which eventually will lead to more dangerous criminal activity. If your going to allow it the whole thing needs big business and regulation.

[Brownshoe]

(11-04-2015, 05:35 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Because you also make it illegal for people to obtain it every other way. 
Harsh penalties for selling drugs will not stop people from doing it.
It hasn't changed since the 1980's it won't stop now.

By keeping it illegal and hard to obtain you only worsen the black market drug trade creating more violence and secrecy 

lol no one would get in trouble for selling it anyways unless they spend tax money for undercover cops.