When recreational drugs are legal...

[ballen0351]

I cited the fact that drugs have become cheaper and more potent since the inception of the War on Drugs. How does this fact lead you to believe the policy is actually working?

Your "Facts" are wrong Marijuana prices for high grade designer strands are selling for as much and sometimes more then Crack. I personally have paid more for a 1/2oz of designer Marijuana $450 then I have for a 1oz bottle of PCP $375. There are documented cases of High Grade Marijuana traded Kilo for Kilo for powder cocaine. So they are not cheaper. If your talking about mexican Cartel Ditch weed then yes it is cheaper and more potent. Im not sure what your point is. Your claiming the existance of crime as proof of a failed law. Well if thats the case then all laws fail because the only reason there is a crime is because its against the law.

 

[ballen0351]

A really simple analogy:

Let's say you have a goal to lose 20lbs.

You come up with a diet plan hoping to lose 20lbs.

After 4 months on this new diet plan, you actually gain 20lbs.

Do you continue with that diet plan or do you re-evaluate it and change it?

You dont want to chage it tho you just want to say well that was hard oh well I give up on diets they fail.

Im not against changing the laws to enforce them better I already gave my suggestions as to ways to bring down drug use.

 

[Tgace]

"Designer Weed" from Ca is going between 3-4K a lb in my part of the state.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Your "Facts" are wrong Marijuana prices for high grade designer strands are selling for as much and sometimes more then Crack. I personally have paid more for a 1/2oz of designer Marijuana $450 then I have for a 1oz bottle of PCP $375. There are documented cases of High Grade Marijuana traded Kilo for Kilo for powder cocaine. So they are not cheaper. If your talking about mexican Cartel Ditch weed then yes it is cheaper and more potent. Im not sure what your point is. Your claiming the existance of crime as proof of a failed law. Well if thats the case then all laws fail because the only reason there is a crime is because its against the law.

They're not "my" facts. Unlike you, I'm not making things up or basing my points on personal opinion. This seems to be an alien concept for you. BTW.... "your" is indicative of ownership. I belive you intended to use the contraction for "you are" which is "you're".

The War on Drugs purpose was to diminish drug use. Fact. It has not done so. Fact. Just because you wish it were otherwise does not change anything. You can wish the sky were pink if you liked, it does not change the fact that it is blue nor does your support of a failed policy change the fact that it is indeed a failed policy. Or is that concept also too hard for you to wrap your head around?

 

[ballen0351]

They're not "my" facts. Unlike you, I'm not making things up or basing my points on personal opinion. This seems to be an alien concept for you. BTW.

If I have purchased marijuana at a higher price then I have PCP then that's is not a personal opinion that's a fact. I have an actual working knowledge of the topic and have been deemed an expert in many drug related topics by courts so my personal opinion in the courts view hold more weight then some cool little factoid you found on the internet
Also thank you for the English lesson I didn't know my thoughts on a martial arts forum were being graded I will try harder to pass your test next time.

The War on Drugs purpose was to diminish drug use. Fact. It has not done so. Fact. Just because you wish it were otherwise does not change anything. You can wish the sky were pink if you liked, it does not change the fact that it is blue nor does your support of a failed policy change the fact that it is indeed a failed policy. Or is that concept also too hard for you to wrap your head around?

Everything we do in law enforcement has the goal to diminish that activity. We have aggressive driving campaigns, DUI tatgeted enforcement speed enforcement and guess what we still have all thoea things so should we just give up on police work in general? There is no way to tell how successful the war on drug is because we don't know what the numbers would have been without it how high the drug use number would be. I'll just keep plugging along doing my job until they change the laws and I'm happy knowing some of the very bad people I've put away for a very long time so in my little part of the drug war my war I'm winning.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Gents, tone down the heat level a bit please? Some of the comments have been a bit borderline. Debate's fine and all, but stick to the issues.

Thank you.

 

[Steve]

I think if you go on some Marijuana review website that review different strains and see some of the major factors used to rate the High include catagories like "Couch Lock" "numbness factor" and "brain haze" You will see marijuana from today is much different then 20 years go and people are buying these hybrid strains of high grade marijuana just to get "baked"

And if it were legal, the strength/potency would be regulated. Round and round the merry go round we go.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ballen0351]

And if it were legal, the strength/potency would be regulated. Round and round the merry go round we go.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How do you stop progress people are going to keep pushing the envelope its what we do. We always look to push things how fast can I get me car to go, ect are we going to ban people from growing
he weed themselves? We don't know the effects of say 70% thc content would do to the human body do we address it now or wait and see
And hope it doesn't make bath salt look like something you actually take a bath with

 

[elder999]

Datura, alchohol, fly agaric, ayahuasca, Benadryl, valium, nutmeg, Hawaiian baby woodrose, heavenly blue morning glory, hell- hand disenfectant?

Recreational drugs are legal.

 

[Steve]

How do you stop progress people are going to keep pushing the envelope its what we do. We always look to push things how fast can I get me car to go, ect are we going to ban people from growing
he weed themselves? We don't know the effects of say 70% thc content would do to the human body do we address it now or wait and see
And hope it doesn't make bath salt look like something you actually take a bath with

The sky. Look. In spite of all the evidence to the contrary, i believe that this time it's really going to fall!

Ultimately, if you are determined to believe that the 17.4 million people who smoke weed are dangerous, or at least more dangerous than the 100 million or so who drink alcohol and AS dangerous as the fraction who abuse meth, coke, or heroin, or the second most significant block under weed, which is the illicit use and abuse of legal, prescription medication, we will never convince you otherwise. Reefer madness is upon us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[celtic_crippler]

If I have purchased marijuana at a higher price then I have PCP then that's is not a personal opinion that's a fact.

You can't wrap your head around the basics, I'm not even going to attempt to teach you anything about economics. And here again, you prove that you simply can not reason outside of your own limited little world. It's all about you and your persceptions, facts be damned. (You know, those little tid bits of info I keep posting from other sources that you continue to ignore)

I have an actual working knowledge of the topic and have been deemed an expert in many drug related topics by courts so my personal opinion in the courts view hold more weight then some cool little factoid you found on the internet

We could already tell you were part of the problem and not the solution. But thanks for confirming that it's on a grand scale. You obviously are the be-all-end-all expert on the subject, right? And know more than the experts that make up the Global Commission on Drug Policy, Harvard University, The National Research Council Committee on the Data and Research for Policy on Illegal Drugs, over 500 Economist including nobel prize winner Milton Friedmen, as well as data supplied by the FBI, the US Defense Department, and any other number of government and privately funded think tanks and data collection agencies ad nauseum... Yeah, I'll defer to you on this subject and not them. ROFLMAO... you really have a seriously inflated view of yourself.

Also thank you for the English lesson I didn't know my thoughts on a martial arts forum were being graded I will try harder to pass your test next time.

That's the spirit! Never give up! Never surrender! :-D

Everything we do in law enforcement has the goal to diminish that activity.

You've failed. Use has increased... a lot. So now what? More of the same? The gasoline isn't doing much to put out the fire. Perhaps you should try something different? Don't suppose that ever occured to you?

We have aggressive driving campaigns, DUI tatgeted enforcement speed enforcement and guess what we still have all thoea things so should we just give up on police work in general?

There's another part of the flaw in your thinking; policing isn't always the right answer to a problem. Data shows, and it has also been proven, that a healthcare apporach, that treatment is much more effective at diminishing drug use than policing. Therefore, if your true goal were really to reduce drug use in this country, then you'd support that approach. But it seems your agenda has nothing to do with actually reducing drug use based on your posts so far.

There is no way to tell how successful the war on drug is because we don't know what the numbers would have been without it how high the drug use number would be. I'll just keep plugging along doing my job until they change the laws and I'm happy knowing some of the very bad people I've put away for a very long time so in my little part of the drug war my war I'm winning.

All those non-violent offenders... glad you're spending valuable resources putting them away. And the rapist, murderers, child molesters, etc. are also glad you're not wasting time on them.

Yeah, you're winning all right... and so is society as drug use continues to escalate, as innocent people are killed as collateral damage in your little war. Yup... big win there.

 

[ballen0351]

It must be so hard for being the smartest guy you know huh I can't imagine how hard it must be to need to live among us mere mortals. You live in a fantasy and believe all we need to do is legalize dope and all crime will end. Thankfully the rest of the country does not believe this. So I'll just keep doing my job the best I can and make a difference in peoples lives while you keep reading about what I do on the internet. Its Sunday I'm off to church then to eat some crabs so you have a great day try to stay out of the heat its a hot one on the east coast today.

 

[ballen0351]

Steve I don't believe 17 million pot heads are dangerous if they kept smoking today's weed my concern is the more powerful stuff in the future. I see no reason to make drugs legal it serves no purpose. You bring up alcohol well I see no purpose for it either and would not care if they banned it as well. Since every pro-pot argument always ends with how bad alcohol is for you so ban it too it tears people and families apart.

 

[Tez3]

The sky. Look. In spite of all the evidence to the contrary, i believe that this time it's really going to fall!

Ultimately, if you are determined to believe that the 17.4 million people who smoke weed are dangerous, or at least more dangerous than the 100 million or so who drink alcohol and AS dangerous as the fraction who abuse meth, coke, or heroin, or the second most significant block under weed, which is the illicit use and abuse of legal, prescription medication, we will never convince you otherwise. Reefer madness is upon us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think it depends on what you mean by dangerous. Dangerous as in rampaging criminals or dangerous as in driving under the influence of something, or perhaps performing surgery while 'high', perhaps an air traffic controller who's high? I think much of the discussion is taking a sweeping view of drugs as in they are either harmless or they are totally evil, we probably need to come in closer and decide what is a danger and what isn't?
http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20...marijuana-pot-driving-under-the-influence.htm

I am hugely against drinking and driving, drunk drivers I'm afraid make me quite murderous for a lot of reasons. However whether drug laws are changed or not, I really want to see driving under the influence of anything be illegal whether it's 'recreational' drugs, prescribed drugs or alcohol.

From what I've read we seem to deal with drug offences a bit differently here so I can't comment on the 'war on drugs' aspect of the discussion.

 

[ballen0351]

I think it depends on what you mean by dangerous. Dangerous as in rampaging criminals or dangerous as in driving under the influence of something, or perhaps performing surgery while 'high', perhaps an air traffic controller who's high? I think much of the discussion is taking a sweeping view of drugs as in they are either harmless or they are totally evil, we probably need to come in closer and decide what is a danger and what isn't?
http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20...marijuana-pot-driving-under-the-influence.htm

I am hugely against drinking and driving, drunk drivers I'm afraid make me quite murderous for a lot of reasons. However whether drug laws are changed or not, I really want to see driving under the influence of anything be illegal whether it's 'recreational' drugs, prescribed drugs or alcohol.

From what I've read we seem to deal with drug offences a bit differently here so I can't comment on the 'war on drugs' aspect of the discussion.

I would hope even the pro-drug crowd are not considering making drugged driving legal. I think everyone agrees that's a bad idea.

 

[Makalakumu]

Datura, alchohol, fly agaric, ayahuasca, Benadryl, valium, nutmeg, Hawaiian baby woodrose, heavenly blue morning glory, hell- hand disenfectant?

Recreational drugs are legal.

You know this whole discussion is irrational when you can go to the booze dealer and buy 190 proof Everclear and you can't go to a weed dealer and buy a bag. Everclear will kill you deader then a hammer, for christ sakes...but somehow society can handle that freedom. Why is it different for other substances?

 

[celtic_crippler]

It must be so hard for being the smartest guy you know huh I can't imagine how hard it must be to need to live among us mere mortals. You live in a fantasy and believe all we need to do is legalize dope and all crime will end. Thankfully the rest of the country does not believe this. So I'll just keep doing my job the best I can and make a difference in peoples lives while you keep reading about what I do on the internet. Its Sunday I'm off to church then to eat some crabs so you have a great day try to stay out of the heat its a hot one on the east coast today.

Way to duck, dodge, and ignore the facts... again. Typical of someone in denial...

Ya know... something just occured to me... I believe I can see why you feel you have no choice but to maintain the mindset that you do. Your job defines you, to question that would be to question your worth as a person and to question what you contribute to society as a whole. Don't know how I missed that before... guess I was too wrapped up in beating you over the head with facts. You know, supporting treatment over policing really wouldn't diminish your self-worth. It would probably make you feel better if you gave it a try. You know, offering a helping hand instead of hand cuffs. Maybe your priest could help counsel you on this while you're at worship... wouldn't hurt to ask them for guidance.

You know this whole discussion is irrational when you can go to the booze dealer and buy 190 proof Everclear and you can't go to a weed dealer and buy a bag. Everclear will kill you deader then a hammer, for christ sakes...but somehow society can handle that freedom. Why is it different for other substances?

Using logic in an attempt to reason with the irrational is a doomed endeavor. This too has just occured to me.

 

[Tez3]

Surely the rules of MT mean that one should attack the message not the messenger. Celtic Crippler, your points may have merit, they may not but anything you write is nullified by the abuse you seem to like to throw around, it's pointless, if you are correct in your views why do you feel the need to call people names and be quite so obnoxious? Surely your opinion is worth the dignity of writing in such a way that you point your point across without calling people stupid or irrational. The only thing I see that is irrational is your posts, any good points you have to make are swallowed up in the abuse you like handing out. Others are posting opposing views on here without the hysterical name calling you do, is it too much to ask that you post your opinion without actually attacking posters? It makes hard reading when one has to wade through the name calling, the bluster and the sheer hatred you appear to have for certain posters, anything you might want to convince people of just goes down the drain.

 

[Steve]

Surely the rules of MT mean that one should attack the message not the messenger. Celtic Crippler, your points may have merit, they may not but anything you write is nullified by the abuse you seem to like to throw around, it's pointless, if you are correct in your views why do you feel the need to call people names and be quite so obnoxious? Surely your opinion is worth the dignity of writing in such a way that you point your point across without calling people stupid or irrational. The only thing I see that is irrational is your posts, any good points you have to make are swallowed up in the abuse you like handing out. Others are posting opposing views on here without the hysterical name calling you do, is it too much to ask that you post your opinion without actually attacking posters? It makes hard reading when one has to wade through the name calling, the bluster and the sheer hatred you appear to have for certain posters, anything you might want to convince people of just goes down the drain.

I agree but it's not fair go call only celtic out. There has been a fair amount of slinging on both sides.

It's a good reminder for all involved.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tez3]

You know this whole discussion is irrational when you can go to the booze dealer and buy 190 proof Everclear and you can't go to a weed dealer and buy a bag. Everclear will kill you deader then a hammer, for christ sakes...but somehow society can handle that freedom. Why is it different for other substances?

Not legal here, you can try and import it but HM customs will confiscate it as a hazardous substance