A conservative that finally gets it

[breadbox]

I would rather have a lifetime doing "illicit drugs" than anything from big pharma with unknown side effects(even your doctors usually have as much information as their representative provides, assuming they even ask for more information) which if your doctor is getting wined and dined by drug reps who knows what medicine you will be "recommended" next. Pharmie commercials drive people to the doctor so they can be on it too. Except that big pharma reports drug studies on a voluntary basis and often submit positive reports and burn bad ones, so if that is the drug world you want fine.

I know what my illicit drug do because they have been used for hundreds of years.

Even LSD which was discovered within the last 100 years is fine for rec use.

[breadbox]

Now I know a few kids who just smoke pot an nothing else. But MOST do go onto to stuff like shrooms, lsd, even speed because they want something different, something stronger. Hell we have had Oxycotin busts this year in the school. Just on friday 3 kids (in my grade) were suspended for getting drunk in the middle of school and one was so drunk he threw up in the middle of the hallway. I know a kid who I used to be friends with, good kid, great parents. Then the kid started smoking pot. That was 7th grade, now he's a mess. In November he was high, skate boarding in his driveway and a kid walked by and for no reason he beat the $#!T out of him and he had to go to court. Now hes coming to school on speed snorting ridilin and all this other stuff, just because he started smoking pot. Now, this may not happen in all cases, but in many instances it does.

In these instances Cannabis definitely seems not to be a factor. Getting high in no way makes you aggressive, unless you are borderline skitzo, but then your skitzo, you have other problems.

These drunk kids with parents who are probably not responsible drinkers.

You start to say "harder drugs like shrooms, LSD, and speed."

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said they want to try something different. That doesn't make drugs a problem or a stepping stone to other drugs, its all in preference. I used to drink like a fish, then I started smoking weed and now I don't drink. I prefer to relax with one substance over another. My friend loves coke but ruins her life so she avoids it.

Kids are gonna get messed up, adults are going to get messed up, making it illegal just makes them criminals in our s***ty court system.

[intermilanrox]

This is the main issue I have with most anti-drug people. It wasnt "just because he started smoking pot". It was because his parents weren't doing their job. Its NOT the governments job to raise your kids. Its not society's job to teach them right and wrong. Its the parents' job. When a kid is playing with a gun left unattended and shoots his friend, its not the guns fault. Its his parents' fault. The lack of accountability in this country amazes me.

I agree completely, parents are getting extremely lazy when it comes to raising kids, they go off to work leaving kids home alone or with a nanny. But, it wasn't really his parents fault. I mean his sister is the complete opposite of him. Now, if his parents did spend a little more time with him, maybe he wouldn't be sooo experimental, but he would definately still be doing drugs. You can't blame the parents ALL the time, but most of the time things would be completely different. As for the government controlling everything, I just thing that it would be much safer if it was left up to the government to just ban it and let it be. (This is coming from someone who thinks as a whole the gov't needs to step out) Kids are going to do stupid things, and with alcohol many unfortunatley loose their lives. So why just give them more opportunity to put themselves and others at risk?

Breadbox:I know that he was smoking pot before hand, but he could have been doing other things as wel. As for it being the stepping stone, from what I've seen thats true. Most kids smoke pot then start doing shrooms or lsd. Other then go to harder drugs, but not most. On top of that, most kids really start slacking in school afterwards, which can lead to s***ty grades, and then bad colleges, and so on and so forth.

[breadbox]

I don 't believe the stepping stone theory. That's like saying apartments are stepping stones to houses. Bicycles are stepping stones to cars.

Breadbox: Most kids smoke pot then start doing shrooms or lsd.

Most kids are afraid to try marijuana because of anti-drug scare tactics, but have no problem popping any pill the doctor/parent tells them they should.

On top of that "most" kids can't find shrooms and LSD, like they can alcohol, tobacco, MJ, and Prescriptions.

Hell, you know how hard it is to get shrooms for a good price nowadays?

End prohibition and then see who the real criminals are.

[wawazat8402]

As for the government controlling everything, I just thing that it would be much EASIER if it was left up to the government to just ban it and let it be.

I modified your statement to reflect my view.

I think its ultimately the parents' responsibility because they are, or should be, an active part of the child's day-to-day life and should ultimately be held responsible for the child's actions until the kid is 18. If a parent waits until the kid is a teenager and experimenting with things, ITS TOO LATE. My values of right and wrong were instilled when I was old enough to start getting into s***, so about 3yo haha.

Same goes for underage drinking or anything else. Our parents teach us our basic concept of what is moral and ethical. They shouldn't have to address each and every topic on a case by case basis, because we already have the basics down on how to tell right from wrong. I simply have no tolerance for parents claiming they could not prevent whatever crime their child has committed, be it a misdemeanor or a felony.

In short, it's not the government's job to raise our kids. If we do decide it's their job then we should switch to kids beginning military schools at the age of 5. At least then, the government has control of the things they're being held accountable for.

[480sx]

OP - Win

Legalize it all and let the shallow end of the gene pool dry up. Break into my house because you are too stoned or high to keep a job and you may just be shot. Gov needs to simply let people start learning the hard way.

Lol @ Win

End prohibition and then see who the real criminals are.

Massive win.

For Nicotine they stand out in the cold to smoke and slowly destroy their health and lungs

Time to double the tobacco tax

To clarify why i think this is a win.. Our health care premiums are inflated because of tobacco related health problems. At least with this idea, there is more incentive not to smoke and it might ease the pain of health care premiums.

So much fail in this thread, i had to highlight some win. You all should know who the FAILS are directed at.
Modified by 480sx at 12:32 PM 3/4/2009

[Jacko3]

To clarify why i think this is a win.. Our health care premiums are inflated because of tobacco related health problems. At least with this idea, there is more incentive not to smoke and it might ease the pain of health care premiums.

So much fail in this thread, i had to highlight some win. You all should know who the FAILS are directed at.

Modified by 480sx at 12:32 PM 3/4/2009

Healthcare costs and tobacco related health problems???? How???? I am very confused at this remark. So that i don't take it apart, could you help us understand the correlation and/or cause and effect between healthcare costs and tobacco related health problems? I am all ears.

[AZhitman]

Good Lord.

Jacko, do your own research. The answer you seek goes without saying.

[audtatious]

To clarify why i think this is a win.. Our health care premiums are inflated because of tobacco related health problems. At least with this idea, there is more incentive not to smoke and it might ease the pain of health care premiums.

So much fail in this thread, i had to highlight some win. You all should know who the FAILS are directed at.

Modified by 480sx at 12:32 PM 3/4/2009

Smoking is bad but smoking pot is good?

OK, got it....

[intermilanrox]

I agree 100%, it should be ultimatley up to the parents to teach their kids right from wrong. In many cases, this is not done or is done poorly and the results aren't the greatest. But that doesn't mean that controlled substances should be legal. My parents were the same way. They taught me and my brother and sister at a really young age not to do stupid stuff.Drinking, wasn't a big deal however. My mom was born and Italy and tehre it was custom to drink wine so when my family makes wine, we get to taste test, but thats once a year, and barely a sip, while being supervised. My dad is alot stricter though, he would FLIP out if he ever caught any of us drinking/drunk, so none of us do.

Anyway, the parents should have the responsibilty, but unfortunatley, many parents don't do these things, so when it comes to controlled substances, leave that to the government.

[OriginalWheelman]

so when it comes to controlled substances, leave that to the government.

You mean the government of the people for the people that should be doing what the people want? If the people want the drug laws changed, they should change. Blindly doing what anyone tells you to do is a bad idea. Think for yourself.

[intermilanrox]

Are you telling me that I don't think for myself. That I haven't taken all these different experiences and made my decisions based upon them along with my morals.

My decision still stands: It should be up to the parents, but unfortunatley parents these days don't do such a great job in that area. So to avoid a mess of potential problems if pot and other drugs are legalized from parents who don't do a good job raising their kids, let the government control that area, and keep pot and other controlled substances illegal.

[OriginalWheelman]

You're argument is "Because it is, it should be." I don't believe that's a valid argument for anything.

[intermilanrox]

Well things are never perfect. In a perfect society, it'd be awesome to leave decisions to the parents because they are all responsible adults and will teach their kids what is right and what is wrong. However it is not the case, and that's not going to change. It's like saying I want world peace, it's a nice idea but its just not realistic.

So why not leave it to the government, let them keep things as they are and keep pot and other substances illegal. Its not just because its easier, but it's also the only REALISTIC way to get around this problem.

[audtatious]

Telco and the NYTimes will show us the way.....Only they know the path to the true GOD

[OriginalWheelman]

Well things are never perfect. In a perfect society, it'd be awesome to leave decisions to the parents because they are all responsible adults and will teach their kids what is right and what is wrong. However it is not the case, and that's not going to change. It's like saying I want world peace, it's a nice idea but its just not realistic.

So why not leave it to the government, let them keep things as they are and keep pot and other substances illegal. Its not just because its easier, but it's also the only REALISTIC way to get around this problem.

This system doesn't work. The laws have created a sub culture and means to subvert the government. The Feds spend billions a year to LOSE the war on drugs. This system is f***ed. It needs to be reevaluated.

[DJ Raijin]

Wow I can't believe the moral outrage on this forum about medicinal marijuana. Do you have any idea of how DIFFICULT it is to get medical marijuana? You need to be dying. Yes, dying. You need to be TERMINALLY ILL to get prescription pot. So it's legal for you for your last 6 months of life. Whoopty doo! And not only that, you have to have a sympathetic doctor that is NOT on a pharmaceutical company's payroll to prescribe it to you. Good luck on that one. Who would give up free fancy meals and big trips just to prescribe someone some pot over whatever strychnine based junk a representative sold you on?

I'm sure these people on chemotherapy who are fed intravenously because they can't lift a spoon, are going to be breaking into your house, raping your wife, murdering your kids and kicking puppies around.

"All Hell Will Break Loose". Yes, I'm sure the tectonic plates will be torn asunder and the polar ice caps will melt, drowning billions in a combination of lava and tidal waves, while everyone is out rioting, mugging, looting and pillaging because people wouldn't be getting arrested for smoking some pot.

What would really change? THINK REALISTICALLY ABOUT IT. Nothing. Nothing at all. The prisons would lose some inmates. Snack food sales would jump. Cops can focus on much dirtier drugs like prescription pharmaceuticals, opiates, cocaine, crack, methamphetamine, pcp...these are the drugs that make people mug old ladies, break into houses, shoot innocents and mow down pedestrians to get their fix. Not Pot. These are the things we should crack down on to make life safer.

As to the whole gateway drug theory, it's just that, a theory. Experimental people do experimental things. Some shoot dope, some shoot propane tanks with high powered rifles, some shove burning candles in their anus, some build 2JZ powered 1G Ford Probes. No one smokes a bowl and says "I think I'm ready for crack".

[breadbox]

So why not leave it to the government, let them keep things as they are and keep pot and other substances illegal? Its not just because its easier, but it's also the only REALISTIC way to get around this problem.

So you are saying the only solution to a problem is avoidance?

The cure for cancer is never getting it?

The Schaffer Commission's report had almost nothing to do with the plant itself, but focused on the social stigmas of being a "weedsmoker" and how the prohibition of the plant has caused more irreparable harm then the drugs themselves could the the individual or society.

[intermilanrox]

I'm sorry I'm not following your logic. The only solution to a problem is avoidance?

When did I say I was avoiding things. I said that parents do a sh***y job teaching their kids nowadays, so let the gov't control illegal substances, because parents don't do their jobs. What is that avoiding. As I said it's the only REALISTIC solution to this problem.

As for your example of not getting the cure for cancer, a better one would be: So since world peace will never be possible, we shouldn't try for it?

[DJ Raijin]

I'm sorry I'm not following your logic. The only solution to a problem is avoidance?

When did I say I was avoiding things. I said that parents do a sh***y job teaching their kids nowadays, so let the gov't control illegal substances, because parents don't do their jobs. What is that avoiding. As I said it's the only REALISTIC solution to this problem.

I believe what breadbox is saying, is that, by just leaving it to the government, you're not dealing with the problem at all. You're ignoring it. Just like they do. If you aren't saying something about a problem and let someone else handle it who IS ignoring it, then you're just as guilty.

And letting the government handle it is not a realistic solution. Open your eyes. What are they doing to handle it? Putting people in prison, right? Guess how those prisoners get fed. Out of YOUR taxes. So would you rather have them staying at home, spending their own money on food and rent, working and paying taxes? Or would you rather arrest them, toss them in prison and then you pay for their food and rent?

I've tried seeing this from the "pot is evil" viewpoint and quite honestly, it's all fear and ill logic.

Just as a side note...let me lay some logic on all of you that will blow your mind:Laws create criminals.

[intermilanrox]

Alright, so let's go with your idea.Let pot become legal. Some parents would take it up as their right to teach their chidren about it, many would not, just like it is now. The only difference is, now we have a country full of pot heads. So now instead of being in jail, they're sitting at home smoking a blunt. Sure some might be productive and have a good job and be of use to society. Many will smoke and become lazy and then what, we got a bunch of pot heads working at McDonald's or worse on welfare, which I'm paying for anyway.

If they are in jail, they are doing no harm. Are they able to sell to kids, are the out there driving putting others in danger, are they sitting at home being un-productive members of society.

[DJ Raijin]

Alright, so let's go with your idea.Let pot become legal. Some parents would take it up as their right to teach their chidren about it, many would not, just like it is now. The only difference is, now we have a country full of pot heads. So now instead of being in jail, they're sitting at home smoking a blunt. Sure some might be productive and have a good job and be of use to society. Many will smoke and become lazy and then what, we got a bunch of pot heads working at McDonald's or worse on welfare, which I'm paying for anyway.

If they are in jail, they are doing no harm. Are they able to sell to kids, are the out there driving putting others in danger, are they sitting at home being un-productive members of society.

You're gonna have deadbeat parents no matter what. It's liberal notions like this that push us ever so closer to a socialist state. The belief that no one can take care of themselves and has to have the government intervene and hold their hand for every little thing in life is absurd at best.

If a parent is too lazy to teach their kid right from wrong, the legality or illegality of anything is not going to matter. Parents and schools beat the dangers of cigarette smoke into a kid's head from little up. Yet people still smoke cigarettes. There are anti-pot commercials on tv in every commercial break and yet people still use it. So your nanny state ideas only work on paper.

What you're failing to understand is that, if it was legalized, DUI/DWI's will still be enforced and probably in an even stronger way than ever. And plenty of people are driving stoned everyday. Yes their reactions are slowed, but it's nowhere near as severe as legal intoxicants like alcohol or prescription painkillers.

Alcohol instills a false sense of confidence which distorts judgment and makes people speed, whereas cannabis makes people paranoid and makes them think they're doing a lot faster than they are. Yes, they are road hazards and No they should not be driving. But they're a much easier hazard to deal with than a drunk.

Also, should a pothead get cornered by police, they're a lot less likely to do something stupid like try and fight the cop or take his gun like so many drunks do. They're more inclined to curl up in a ball and cry, making the cop's job much easier.

Your arguments are just as viable against alcohol or tobacco and yet you're not calling for prohibition to be reinstated. Pot heads are the same as Alcoholics. Alcoholics are not very productive yet they're tolerated, so what's the difference? And btw, you're already paying for a lot of potheads who are on welfare, so nothing would change there.

When legalized and controlled, no one will be privately dealing weed because they won't be able to match the price, quality and amount of store bought weed, plus private sales would still be highly illegal without a proper license. It'll be the same for a kid to get cigarettes or alcohol.

Also, once legalized, you'll find a good portion of people quit using cannabis. Once it's not illegal, the rush will be gone for a lot of people and it won't be of any use to them.

[breadbox]

Its not just because its easier, but it's also the only realistic way to GET AROUND this problem.

You said it yourself, avoidance is getting around something without dealing with it.

Pot and its users aren't the ones shooting people, but it seems the ones who get shot.

Totally unbelievable story below.Mom: shot GVSU son'never had chance'Derek Copp not under arrest

Updated: Saturday, 14 Mar 2009, 8:25 AM EDTPublished : Friday, 13 Mar 2009, 1:48 PM EDT

* Ken Kolker

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) - A Grand Valley State University student shot by an Ottawa County deputy told his parents he lifted his right arm to cover his eyes from a bright flashlight when the shot was fired.

He told them he didn't know it was a police officer shining the light.

"He never even had a chance to even see who was coming at him, with a bright flashlight in his face," Sheryl Copp, the mother of Derek Copp, told 24 Hour News 8. "He had no clue. He heard someone knock on his door, and he had no clue."

The bullet entered the right side of Copp's upper chest, broke ribs, ruptured his right lung and went through his liver, his parents said. It remained lodged in his lower back, nearly protruding through his skin, they said.Doctors, they said, were planning to remove the bullet Friday.

Copp, 20, is the middle of three sons of George and Sheryl Copp of Spring Arbor. He hopes to make movies someday, his parents said.

"Derek's a great kid; he's really smart; he's a hard worker," George Copp said. "They portray him as something he's not. He's not perfect, like any kid.

"From what I understand, half the kids in the school may smoke pot, and he does, he may, too, but he's not a drug dealer. He's a good kid and he shouldn't have been shot for that."

Copp told his parents that he and his roommate were studying when police knocked on his door.

The deputy, a 12-year veteran, was among five members of the West Michigan Enforcement Team who raided Copp's apartment at Campus View Apartments just south of the GVSU campus. They had obtained a search warrant to look for narcotics, state police said.

They were entering about 9 p.m. Wednesday through the rear sliding door when the deputy, whose name was not released, fired one shot, police said. That deputy is on paid administrative leave pending the investigation.

Police would not say what kinds of drugs they were looking for or whether they found any evidence of narcotics in the apartment. Copp has not been arrested, nor is there a police guard outside his hospital room.

They said they don't know whether the deputy felt threatened by Copp, who lived in the apartment.

Copp's parents said they didn't learn about the shooting until just before 3 a.m. Thursday -- six hours later. They said a nurse and their son called from the hospital. Copp told his parents he gave police their home number and cell phone numbers. They questioned why police did not call them.

"My son had to call us from his hospital bed that he'd been shot," Sheryl Copp said.

The Copps immediately headed to the hospital from Spring Arbor. "It was the longest two-hour drive of our entire lives."

Copp has no criminal record. "He's a 'today-hippie,'" his mother said. "He's a peace-loving guy who wouldn't hurt a fly if it landed on his nose."

State police continue to investigate the shooting, which they say is going slowly.

"There is a process that has to be followed," said Capt. Gary Gorski, head of the state police Sixth District headquarters. "The process is not necessarily a quick process."

When asked if the Ottawa County deputy who fired the shot was talking with investigators, he said, "Not necessarily. They have rights like anybody else does."

George Copp said his son is awake, but the injuries are considered life-threatening. He's "doing pretty good, considering."

As for Copp, he has been in good spirits since the shooting, his parents said. In fact, he told them, "I'm going to make a movie about this."

His mother said, "He's really funny, and even though he was in such bad shape, he kept his humor. He had everybody laughing."

[intermilanrox]

That's funny beacuse I'm not even close to a socialist on any level.

So by letting the gov't control drugs, I'm being a socialist.I don't feel parents are doing a good job as it is with teaching their kids about right from wrong. So why change the law, to give that right to the parents when as it is they are not doing the job. The only thing that is going to change is that more stupid kids are going to be smoking pot and going to school high. These kids are un-productive.

I AM against cigarettes, and against abusive use of alcohol. But nothing good will come out of banning these. Just look at prohibition, more people drank, and even more died from bad bathtub gin. As for pot, I do believe one thing will benefit, less pot laced with crap. Since these dealers will be competing against larger companies, they will have to supply the best stuff, at a cheap price.

breadbox:great story. The only thing is, i never said that pot heads go around shooting people. I DID say that they tend to drive under the influence, and many would come to school high or be un-productive and lazy.

[HashiriyaS14]

Realize, I'm not anti-pot. I don't care if people smoke pot, snort coke, shoot heroin, etc as long as they do it as consenting and it does not impact myself or my family. Legalize it all and let the shallow end of the gene pool dry up. Break into my house because you are too stoned or high to keep a job and you may just be shot. Gov needs to simply let people start learning the hard way.

+1 to all of this.

Although I don't think potheads break into houses, lol. Maybe only to steal Doritos.

OMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM

[C-Kwik]

I don't feel parents are doing a good job as it is with teaching their kids about right from wrong. So why change the law, to give that right to the parents when as it is they are not doing the job. The only thing that is going to change is that more stupid kids are going to be smoking pot and going to school high. These kids are un-productive.

The fallacy in your logic here is that you are asserting that these kids are unproductive as a result of MJ. While it is certainly possible, I would question the extent of which this might be true as I personally know a number of successful individuals who use regularly. I also know many who don't use and aren't very successful. So the question ultimately becomes; would these unproductive kids you've observed be any more productive if they weren't using MJ?

Edit: Forgot to include the relevant stats.

http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

[DJ Raijin]

That's funny beacuse I'm not even close to a socialist on any level.

So by letting the gov't control drugs, I'm being a socialist.I don't feel parents are doing a good job as it is with teaching their kids about right from wrong. So why change the law, to give that right to the parents when as it is they are not doing the job. The only thing that is going to change is that more stupid kids are going to be smoking pot and going to school high. These kids are un-productive.

It's not so much what you say as your logic behind it. Nanny laws are the product of a socialist mindset. The notion that a nation's citizens are incapable of good judgment and personal improvement is the logic that fuels socialist dictatorships and is the sole grounds of the liberal mindset. Make as many laws as you want, but that won't make better parents. It'll just pack the prison system full of more people that don't need to be there, like non-violent drug offenders.

Moving cannabis into the same class as alcohol and tobacco would ensure a government regulation and taxation of it, which would be perfectly fine. This would put laws in place to keep establishments with proper licensing and permits from selling to minors, to protect the children you're so worried about.

Kids who start smoking pot before they leave high school are still going to go to school high whether legal or illegal. College students who blaze before class, are still going to go to class blazed. Minors under the influence of THC would be treated like minors who go to school drunk or take alcohol to school with them. All of this is happening already, so keeping it illegal to protect the children is a moot point.

As for the notion of people becoming unproductive, that's a person to person basis. I've met people who smoke up and then clean their house top to bottom, and I've met people who smoke up and go to sleep. Same with legal intoxicants like alcohol. Some people drink and wanna go do something, some people take a couple drinks and pass out.

Again, all you have is conjecture and no solid physical proof that legalization would be a bad thing.

Edit: Forgot to include the relevant stats.

http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

That's pretty interesting when you look at the statistics, as it seems like LESS AND LESS high school students are trying cannabis every year.
Modified by DJ Raijin at 2:21 PM 3/17/2009