Legalize Pot
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Monday, July 20, 2026 00:53
VIEWED: 2708
PAGE 2 of 4
I'm still of the opinion that the govt should take all of the illegal drugs it seizes from all the stops along the drug pipeline from production, deliver, distribution, and possession and simply reintroduce those drugs back into the general market AFTER having laced them with a variety of deadly poisons.
It seems to me that poisoning the supply of illegal drugs would go a long way to dealing with illegal drugs and would cut demand to such an extent that legalization would not be necessary.
Sure, some people would get upset, but since most drugs are a form or poison already, simply increasing general lethality would not dramatically change the nature of the product. Instead it would merely speed up the inevitable conculsion. This would save time and effort allowing us to devote our resources to people who truly want to get clean (ie, avoid certain death).
H
Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Outlawing what people do to their own bodies with chemicals is the e-pit-o-me of arrogance/hubris. Try a citizen the same for what they DO, even if under the influence (or in need of said chemicals).
This bs didn't work with prohibition, hasn't worked now.
"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I honestly don't understand why tobacco can be legal but marijuana is not. Makes no sense to me.
Tobacco doesn't have as potent an effect on the user as does pot , maybe?
Alcohol certainly does.
I know folks can get 'baked ' on smoking weed, but it seems far easier to down a drink and a few shots , on an empty stomach, and be completely blitzed. Even with weed getting more potent ( Niki. am I right ? ) than it was, a couple of decades ago.
Seems to me that pot would be between alcohol and tobacco in terms of immediate, mind altering effects. Just my observation.
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Madame Geezer was commenting on this last week. If you don't have a field test for pot analogous to a breathalyzer - that not only shows you've been using, but how impaired you are - how could you cite someone for driving under the influence of pot? You'd also have to determine at what level you're impaired, like the pretty standard .08 for blood alcohol level. So looks like both technical and legislative hurdles to be jumped.
we have random drug testing for drivers here, same as booze. I think they use a saliva test, then blood test if positive.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
MD... I don't keep track of this stuff, but are you in Australia ?
Everyone I know who has been there, lived there, says the Auzzies drink a LOT more than most Americans, on average, and yet my guess is y'all have less of a problem w/ drunks getting behind the wheel than we have here in the US. Stricter laws, and an over all awareness that if you get nailed for doing something so stupid, it'll result in far worse than losing your license for 6 months, am I right ?
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
One sticking point as far as working or driving after imbibing pop, though - it tends to stay in your system for quite a while afterwards. In other words, if you get hurt on the job and they do a drug test (Workers' Comp requires such in Texas; not sure how it works elsewhere), pot can show up in your system weeks after you used it. How do you prove you weren't high when it happened, or how do they prove you were? Same thing with driving - how do they prove you were actually *under the influence* if it shows up two weeks later in a piss test?
Madame Geezer was commenting on this last week. If you don't have a field test for pot analogous to a breathalyzer - that not only shows you've been using, but how impaired you are - how could you cite someone for driving under the influence of pot? You'd also have to determine at what level you're impaired, like the pretty standard .08 for blood alcohol level. So looks like both technical and legislative hurdles to be jumped.
Well, once upon a time there were no breathalyzers or blood tests for alcohol, and they still managed to bust people for driving under the influence if they were clearly impaired.
But yeah, it's a bit of a thorny issue - if you bust someone and they appear on dashcam to not be wasted, how do you uphold the charge against them?
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I honestly don't understand why tobacco can be legal but marijuana is not. Makes no sense to me.
Tobacco doesn't have as potent an effect on the user as does pot , maybe?
Alcohol certainly does.
I know folks can get 'baked ' on smoking weed, but it seems far easier to down a drink and a few shots , on an empty stomach, and be completely blitzed. Even with weed getting more potent ( Niki. am I right ? ) than it was, a couple of decades ago.
Seems to me that pot would be between alcohol and tobacco in terms of immediate, mind altering effects. Just my observation.
I can actually drive a car functionally after a couple shots or beers (I've been tested); I cannot functionally operate a motor vehicle after a couple hits of pot.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I honestly don't understand why tobacco can be legal but marijuana is not. Makes no sense to me.
Tobacco doesn't have as potent an effect on the user as does pot , maybe?
Alcohol certainly does.
I know folks can get 'baked ' on smoking weed, but it seems far easier to down a drink and a few shots , on an empty stomach, and be completely blitzed. Even with weed getting more potent ( Niki. am I right ? ) than it was, a couple of decades ago.
Seems to me that pot would be between alcohol and tobacco in terms of immediate, mind altering effects. Just my observation.
I can actually drive a car functionally after a couple shots or beers (I've been tested); I cannot functionally operate a motor vehicle after a couple hits of pot.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
One big difference is that alcohol, while it impairs ability, it tends to impair judgement as well, which is why many who are too drunk to drive insist they're not impaired. With weed, the user tends to be entirely aware of how impaired they are, and judge accordingly.
Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by STORYMARK:
One big difference is that alcohol, while it impairs ability, it tends to impair judgement as well, which is why many who are too drunk to drive insist they're not impaired. With weed, the user tends to be entirely aware of how impaired they are, and judge accordingly.
Good point. I've actually had those conversations in the parking lot of a bar - me and a friend throwing the keys back and forth at each other, both insisting we were entirely too wasted to drive. We both were. We ended up taking a cab. :)
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I understand pot is good for pain. Maybe I should give it a try and see if it works. If it did I would definitely pursue a prescription, which is quasi-legal in California. What I don't understand is why the laws consider it so much worse than Oxycontin, something doctors are allowed to freely prescribe anywhere in the country. Really? They can prescribe hard narcotics, but not pot? How strange is that?
But overall, I have as much or little a problem with pot as a freely obtainable substance as I do with alcohol and tobacco. In every population there are some people who will become addicted. Alcohol and tobacco purveyors know that and spend lots of money glamourizing their product, in order to hook that fraction of people. Legalized pot wouldn't be any different.
I think they should all be sold by the government at cost to anyone with a prescription (heroin, XTC, speed, etc as well), out of drab little stores in drab little containers. No pushing, no profit motive, no glamour, just an addict and their fix of choice. Nothing like watching a person nod off drooling with a needle in their arm to provide a realistic perspective on what it's really like. If you're going to decide to try it, at least you'd have an idea what could be ahead.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME