Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 4 of 6
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Have you ever smoked marijuana?
Yes
60%
 60%  [ 21 ]
No
40%
 40%  [ 14 ]
Total Votes : 35

Author Message
FrankD





Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Reputation: 12.6
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The reason why decriminalization is not a solution is that decriminalization is still a form of prohibition. Prohibition is what is causing the problems...

"The continued prohibition of Cannabis jeopardizes the health and well-being of Canadians much more than does the substance itself."
- Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs, 2002

If supply is left in the black market the harms caused by prohibition remain.

If stricter sentences for trafficking are imposed then prices go up. With increased risk those willing to continue supplying the substance are narrowed down to only those willling to take on that increased risk (hardened criminals and gangs).

To put it simply, more prohibition = more harms.

Decriminalization might sound like it's a step in the right direction, but only a legal, regulated environment will address the significant harms associated with prohibition.

The costs associated with prohibition:
costs nearly $2 billion every year in enforcement, court, corrections, and stolen hydro
subsidizes organized crime to the tune of about $12 billion every year
diverts valuable police time and resources from more serious issues
makes for huge police budgets and sweeping powers
encourages corruption
reduces the civil rights and civil liberties of Canadians
clogs our courts and over-fills our jails with non-violent "criminals"
ruins tens of thousands of lives every year
makes drugs easier for kids to get than either alcohol or tobacco
prohibition is not achieving its objectives and has no end in sight.

-FD


biggie rection wrote:
I think most people agree that decriminalization for mere posession is the way to go.. lets make money off these people, not spend it locking them up..
This would allow its use in your home(its illegal to drink in public places too ;) )
But lets get real; if you have any more than about 3 grams of pot on you, you have a problem, or you're moving it..

but i think [decrim] should go hand-in-hand with much stricter sentences for trafficking.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The costs associated with prohibition:


costs nearly $2 billion every year in enforcement, court, corrections, and stolen hydro

(decriminalization and fines can pay a good chunk of that) - stolen hydro?? do you believe for a moment those people who have grow ops now will stop if its legal!? how many people do you know who smoke smuggled/illegal cigarettes? because I know a tonne..

subsidizes organized crime to the tune of about $12 billion every year

Its not like they won't find another cash-cow.. and its not like those people are going to stop selling the drug - they just make sure its cheaper than "market" prices...

diverts valuable police time and resources from more serious issues

It also directs Police towards more serious issues - ie. gangs. Many hard criminals are brought down due to drugs every year.

makes for huge police budgets and sweeping powers

sweeping powers!? The powers of police have been so limited because of "civil rights". Ever heard of illegal search and seizure?

encourages corruption

how? Corrupt people will be corrupted by something else in its stead...

reduces the civil rights and civil liberties of Canadians

How exactly? Your civil right and liberties are determined by the laws of the land, not by some divine right.

clogs our courts and over-fills our jails with non-violent "criminals"

Hence my argument for decriminalization

ruins tens of thousands of lives every year

and saves tens of thousands as well

makes drugs easier for kids to get than either alcohol or tobacco

The nature of the plant is in itself the reason for this - its much easier to grow pot than it is to make alcohol.

prohibition is not achieving its objectives and has no end in sight.

neither is jailing murderers - they still exist
rapists - still around
lets just give up any sensibility and let anarchy reign...
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

with the way you talk, you'de think that the Netherlands was a crime-free country..

guess again.
JDot





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 727
Reputation: 63.5
votes: 5
Location: Ontario(GTA)

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Weed will steal your ambition, and that is the only negative I can come across. :wink:
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thats a pretty huge negative....

I guess you'de have to see that impact first hand to understand..
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As an aside, I often wonder how the grow op people can be so stupid. They use the power, power consumption is always monitored, and they are always caught. Why don't they use their own power plants? No one checks up on how much diesel you are buying. Maybe there is a reason I have no problem functioning in society, and they are relegated to the fringes.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would it not be prohibitively expensive to operate?

I have a good friend who is in the generator design business... and to listen to him speak, to generate the kind of electricity you would require would likely cost you more in fuel than your return.

but i don't know enough about electrical consumption for a project like that..
Donald Hughes





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 166
Reputation: 16.2Reputation: 16.2
Location: Libertarian socialism

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
As an aside, I often wonder how the grow op people can be so stupid. They use the power, power consumption is always monitored, and they are always caught. Why don't they use their own power plants? No one checks up on how much diesel you are buying. Maybe there is a reason I have no problem functioning in society, and they are relegated to the fringes.
Hahaha... no. Anyways, they aren't "always" caught. In fact, it is a huge business for the precise reason that most people are not caught, at least not until they do it at a high industrial level for many years. I think I've read that marijuana is a bigger industry in BC than forestry. If you do want to attract police attention, probably running your own generators on large quantities of regularly purchased diesel is a great way to do so.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know.... I don't think any half-intelligent business owner would call the police and say

"this guy is buying an incredibly large quantity of diesel fuel, you might want to check it out"

even if they did, I'm sure they would receive a smart ass remark followed by laughter.
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"But lets get real; if you have any more than about 3 grams of pot on you, you have a problem, or you're moving it.. "


Give me a break, we have already established that it is cheaper if you buy larger ammounts. Just because I buy an ounce at a time so I don't have to go searching for it 2-3 times per week and pay triple the cost does not mean I have a problem, or that I am planning on selling it. Thats like saying if you have more than 3 beers in your fridge you must be a bootleggeror a lousy drunk. It's just not a very well thought out idea.

"Strangely, I know a lot of users who are against outright legalization... "

If they are growers or dealers of course they would be against legalization, it would cut their profit margin down to about 1/4 of where it is now.

Decrim is the absolute worst way to go, a half measure typical of the Lieberals. All this would due is widen the net and encouage cops to charge more people. You want to make money of "THESE PEOPLE"?? then what is wrong with taxing it, and setting some rules regarding who can buy it? The senate recommended that it be legal for anyone over 16 and I tend to agree with their assessment.

"but i think it should go hand-in-hand with much stricter sentences for trafficking."

It makes absolutely no sense to say ok its ok to have 3 grams but not allow for a legal means to buy it. That would increase demand and tighten supply making it more profitable for organized crime and forcing the small mom and pop operations out of the business, ensuring that people would have to deal with dangerous people to get a non-dangerous product. You have to admit that would be pretty foolish.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the links, I'll check those out.

Quote:
If supply is left in the black market the harms caused by prohibition remain.

As I've consistently demonstrated, there will always be a black market for marijuana, even were it to become totally legal. Its likely that organized crime would continue to control 30% or more of the market.

Thus, many of the problems you contribute to prohibition,
Quote:
subsidizes organized crime to the tune of about $12 billion every year
makes for huge police budgets and sweeping powers
encourages corruption

will continue following legalization. The problems of organized crime and general criminality will not be solved, or even reduced, through the end of prohibition. However, this does not mean that it shouldn't happen.

Quote:
clogs our courts and over-fills our jails with non-violent "criminals"
ruins tens of thousands of lives every year


Hyperbole and rhetoric. You would have us believes that tens of thousands of people are sitting in jail for simple possession or private production of marijuana?

Quote:
costs nearly $2 billion every year in enforcement, court, corrections, and stolen hydro


Again, these numbers arise from busting criminals who just happen to have drug-related offences as a small part of the reason they've been put in jail. Also keep in mind that following legalization the regulation and enforcement of the industry, as well as the drive to remove organized crime from it, will continue to cost millions and millions of dollars, year after year. In short, there really isn't much of a 'reduced cost' to legalization. Increased tax revenues is another matter.

Quote:
makes drugs easier for kids to get than either alcohol or tobacco


Because telling people that kids can't have drugs doesn't work, but telling people that kids can't have smokes or booze does? This is like saying its easier for me to buy a full-auto AK47 than to buy a single-shot .22 .

It is no harder for young teenagers to get their hands on alcohol or cigarettes than drugs - lots of times, they get them from the same source. Illegality always makes something harder to get, but that doesn't mean people will stop getting it.
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"It is no harder for young teenagers to get their hands on alcohol or cigarettes than drugs "

Again you seem out of touch with reality. Ask any teenager and you will find out that pot IS much easier to get than tobacco or alcohol. A bar or gas station ID cards people if they look young, an illegal dealer rarely would. Why would they? Its just as illegal to sell a 40 year old medical user a gram of weed as it is to sell it to a 12 year old.

If your attitudes are typical of the conservative party logic, then We might as well be trying to educate a brick wall. Keep on thinking like that and more and more people will move away from your party. Younger voters will eventually have their way, it is only a matter of time until the crusty old control freaks die off. More and more Canadians are choosing pot over alcohol every year(wise choice) and we will not stand for the government trying to control our bodies. Prohibition's days are numbered.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for responding to my points with more and more insults. Its clear we're not going to agree, but I'm not out of touch with reality. I know plenty of teenagers who use marijuana, and smoke, and drink ... they're really quite capable of getting their hands on all of it if they want any of it, with no significant difficulties.

Also, keep in mind that I'm not actually arguing against legalization - I'm for it. I just think your efforts would be more successful if you stuck to claims and arguments that aren't so easily refuted, and quit attacking police officers and anyone else who disagrees with some points.
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not just insulting police officers, I am saying that it is silly to trust the assertions of people who benefit so much from prohibition. When the police stop telling lies, maybe one day I will respect them again. Liars do not deserve my respect, and wearing a uniform does not automatically make you worth respecting. The majority of those who are vocal proponents of prohibition benefit financially from its continuance, that is a fact.

Have you ever heard the story of the "dangerous chemicals" used in grow ops? When did miracle grow become a dangerous chemical? Why is not dangerous when its used on non-cannabis houseplants? There are more dangerous chemicals under most people's kitchen sinks than there are in most grow rooms.

How about the funny stories about dangerous black mould caused by growing pot indoors, because of the "high humidity" desired by pot growers? Anybody who knows anything about growing pot knows that humidity is your enemy if you want potent buds. The crystals that form on the leaves containing the active ingredient THC are formed to prevent the leaves from drying out, and will not develop in a high humidity environment. You would be more likely to find black mould in your bathroom shower than in a cannabis garden.

Prohibition was founded on lies, fearmongering and scapegoating and those same lies, plus a few new ones, are all that keep it alive.
PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I promised I would post a link to the actual court "findings of fact" regarding cannabis proving that it was a lie that Canadian judges had concluded that pot was just as harmful as tobacco and alcohol so here it is from R vs Clay.

2. The Trial Decision
[10] The trial judge heard two weeks of evidence, including
evidence from some of the leading experts on marihuana. He was
also referred to government and scientific studies and the
reports of various law reform bodies. On the basis of this
evidence, the trial judge concluded that previous concerns about
marihuana use are exaggerated, but that there are certain health
and public dangers associated with its use. In my view, these
findings are founded in the evidence. They are set out in full
below from pp. 360-62:
From an analysis of their evidence I am able to
reach the following conclusions:
1. Consumption of marijuana is relatively
harmless compared to the so-called hard drugs
and including tobacco and alcohol;
2. There exists no hard evidence demonstrating
any irreversible organic or mental damage from
the consumption of marijuana;
3. That cannabis does cause alteration of
mental functions and as such, it would not be
prudent to drive a car while intoxicated;
4. There is no hard evidence that cannabis
consumption induces psychoses;
5. Cannabis is not an addictive substance;
6. Marijuana is not criminogenic in that
there is no evidence of a causal relationship
between cannabis use and criminality;
7. That the consumption of marijuana probably
does not lead to "hard drug" use for the vast
majority of marijuana consumers, although there
appears to be a statistical relationship between
the use of marijuana and a variety of other
psychoactive drugs;
8. Marijuana does not make people more
aggressive or violent;
9. There have been no recorded deaths from the
consumption of marijuana;
10. There is no evidence that marijuana causes
amotivational syndrome;
11. Less than 1% of marijuana consumers are
daily users;
12. Consumption in so-called "decriminalized
states" does not increase out of proportion to
states where there is no decriminalization;
13. Health related costs of cannabis use are
negligible when compared to the costs
attributable to tobacco and alcohol consumption.
http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca.....y/clay.htm
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 4 of 6

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


The legalization or decriminalization of marijuana

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB