Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 19

Author Topic: Cannabis Legalization Discussion  (Read 21448 times)

LordBucket

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #120 on: November 24, 2014, 04:16:25 am »

Would somebody in the "it should be illegal" camp succinctly explain why? I've read through the entire thread, but I haven't really seen any argument for that. I see some floundering about whether it's harmful, or addictive, and if so how much...I see some secondary discussion about how "totally banned" is not the same as "some safety regulations exist." But other than Neonivek's I-think-not-completely-serious hypothetical proposal that all hallucinogens are a unique category of chemicals that should be banned for a reason he didn't speculate on...I don't think I've actually seen anyone put forth a justification for it being illegal.

We do have some people opposed to legalization. For example, TheDarkStar said he was opposed to it, but no real reason was given. "We don't need a third recreational drug." Ok...but that's not a reason for making it illegal. We also don't "need" 400 cable channels, but not needing them isn't an argument for banning cable channels. Then there was thing about it smelling bad, but ok...shall we ban Limburger cheese while we're at it? Nobody seems to be giving reasons for it being illegal that any more weighty than "well, I don't like it." And that's not a very compelling argument for throwing people in prison.

So what the actual reason? What's the justification for marijuana being illegal? I haven't seen one yet.


Also:


Quote from: lordbucket
Well, some particular anti-marijuana people are also anti-alcohol, anti-tobacco, and anti-recreational-drug in general. IIRC some states still have state-run liquor stores, for example. Regardless,  I don't think "Well why don't you want tobacco banned too?" stands as much of a counter-argument.
Are they anti-KFC chicken (in a legislative sense)? Anti-skydiving? anti-motorcycles? Anti-microwaving things in BPA containers? Anti-walking around outside during thunderstorms?
Yes, it's a fantastic counterargument, because unless you support literally everything more dangerous than marijuana being illegal as well, it is hypocritical, and almost everything is.

Incorrectly attributed quote. I didn't say that. alexandertnt did

alexandertnt

  • Bay Watcher
  • (map 'list (lambda (post) (+ post awesome)) posts)
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #121 on: November 24, 2014, 05:37:28 am »

Quote from: alexandertnt
maby KFC should be banned too?
Are you suggesting that?
If not, then your musing about how "maybe they are hypocritical but still correct" rings pretty hollow. "Oh yeah, maybe they're right but I'm not gonna be the one to say it"  ::) No, I don't think anybody on this forum thinks seriously that KFC should be banned.

Or any of the host of other even more ridiculous things that are also definitely more dangerous than marijuana. Like not washing your hands before dinner, for example. Should we legislate that? Not "hypothetically might somebody say that we should" Do YOU think we should legislate that?

I'm... not quite following you here. I never said "maybe they are correct". Infact, I stated I think they are not correct pretty clearly. Im not sure what you mean by "Oh yeah, maybe they're right but I'm not gonna be the one to say it", I think you are suggesting I am suggesting that they may be correct (but don't want to state it outright because... reasons?), but I can't be sure given I (at least thought I) made it pretty clear I do not agree with them.

I decided to do some reading about the dangers of marijuana, and make my own decision about it, rather than just simply following the popular opinion. Unfortunetely, "Would you ban X as well???" is something that comes up far too often, and I don't understand how it's supposed to convince me that the drug is safe to legalize, especially since I am usually not aware of how dangerous the X actually is. I end up spending time looking up the dangers of things that are not marijuana.

I have asked a few of people about the dangers of marijuana, and they dont have any idea how dangerous it is, all they do is repeat something similar to that statement. When I ask them how dangerous X is, they have no idea either, so all to often its just useless rhetoric.

However, I have found actually useful information on the dangers of marijuana, that actually give me some idea of the dangers of marijuana itself rather than simply shifting the focus onto something else, so I have been able to make up my own mind on the matter.

I apologise if my wording was not clear enough, but I will state my position more clearly. I believe Marijuana should be legalized, I do not believe marijuanais enough of a harm to anyone to warrent criminalization, "Criminals" charged of Marijuana related crimes should have their charges dropped, and prison sentinces terminated, If it was put to the vote, I would vote in favour of legalizing, and my previous statements about this particular line of reasoning was just a minor expression of fustration that this argument doesn't help me very much (since it seems to assume I already think marijuana is safe, or that I happen to know the dangers of X and think X is safe), and is very common, and nothing more than that.



I think Neonivek was saying that being hallocinogenic was the reason it was banned, not the reason it should be banned. Neonivek, like usual (and there isn't anything wrong with this) is providing discussion about a subject moreso than arguing for or against a particular stance.
Logged
This is when I imagine the hilarity which may happen if certain things are glichy. Such as targeting your own body parts to eat.

You eat your own head
YOU HAVE BEEN STRUCK DOWN!

GavJ

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #122 on: November 24, 2014, 05:43:22 am »

My point was just that it's a bit silly to discuss hypothetical people making hypothetical arguments. If those people exist, let them post those arguments themselves.

Or link to somewhere people are making an argument clearly.

If neither exists, then I think we should assume by default that the argument is not actually being made or is very unpopular, and not consider it. I.e. unless there are actual, confirmed people saying that walking around in a thunderstorm should be banned, and that washing your hands before eating should be mandatory by law, then we can assume that anybody wishing to ban marijuana for its dangers to users themselves is hypocritical until/if they come out as being also in favor of legislating those more-dangerous-than-marijuana other behaviors as well.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2014, 05:45:32 am by GavJ »
Logged
Cauliflower Labs – Geologically realistic world generator devblog

Dwarf fortress in 50 words: You start with seven alcoholic, manic-depressive dwarves. You build a fortress in the wilderness where EVERYTHING tries to kill you, including your own dwarves. Usually, your chief imports are immigrants, beer, and optimism. Your chief exports are misery, limestone violins, forest fires, elf tallow soap, and carved kitten bone.

i2amroy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Cats, ruling the world one dwarf at a time
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #123 on: November 24, 2014, 06:21:21 am »

Personally I'm morally against any type of drug that influences your perceptions or judgement in any significant negative way, without having a medically significant reason to do so. This includes marijuana (which has been shown to often cause things like paranoia, a distorted sense of time, and slower reactions) as well as things like alcohol (but not cigarettes, whose only problem I have with is that they affect others with secondhand smoke).  Now realistically do I think we're going to outlaw all recreational drinks and drugs? No, look what happened during Prohibition. But that doesn't mean I have to approve of it either.

As for why I'm morally against drugs that influence your perceptions or judgement in a negative way? The way I see it is this. If something has an effect on you in that way then it increases the chances that you will harm others (for example there have been medically sound studies that show your chance of wrecking your car while driving more than doubles if you are high on marijuana). Murphy's Law then comes to play, stating that if it's possible for somebody to do something stupid then somebody is stupid enough to do it. Add in the fact that things that color your judgement abilities in a negative way often make you more likely to do stupid things (like driving while high or drunk) because you can't tell that they are stupid anymore due to your warped perceptions. As such I just don't see any benefits in it, the increased risk to other people isn't worth the "feel good" feeling most of those types of drugs give in my opinion. If you want to feel good you can go exercise, or have a piece of chocolate, or go enjoy a sunset, or do a huge variety of things that don't increase your chances of harming other people by anything near what most perception warping drugs do.

If enough controls were implemented to limit the potential harm to others, like you were only allowed to smoke in regulated facilities and they had to give you a look over before you could leave, or we had some sort of THC breathalyzer thing in the cars of those who wanted to smoke legally, that sort of thing, than I would be totally fine with the legalization of marijuana and other perception and judgement modifying drugs and drinks. But without that I just don't see how the (Still small, but many times bigger than most other things) increased risk to other people can be worth the feeling a single person gets from using something like that.

And yeah, I'd be in for most legislation that would limit people's ability to harm others. (Note: harming yourself is fine, unless it impinges on those around you. You want to go skydiving or walk around in thunderstorm go ahead. You want to force others to go skydiving? That's already illegal, it's called coercion). I'd be fine with something like mandatory breathalyzers in all cars. However I also know how to tell the difference between something that can be changed and something that isn't likely to. Outlawing all perception changing drugs and drinks isn't going to happen, and installing mandatory breathalyzers in all cars isn't going to pass due to the cost to car companies, but something like keeping marijuana illegal might.
Logged
Quote from: PTTG
It would be brutally difficult and probably won't work. In other words, it's absolutely dwarven!
Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead - A fun zombie survival rougelike that I'm dev-ing for.

GavJ

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #124 on: November 24, 2014, 07:44:25 am »

Quote
As for why I'm morally against drugs that influence your perceptions or judgement in a negative way? The way I see it is this. If something has an effect on you in that way then it increases the chances that you will harm others

This is, frankly, a bizarre method of logic to use to get at what you really care about at the end of the day. Why go through this assumption-ridden, overly generalized thought process, when instead you could just measure the number of accidents and assaults and negligent homicides, etc., among sober people versus people under the influence of a list of drugs?

These are completely measurable numbers... and for purposes of policy, we should simply measure them.

For all you know, marijuana DECREASES likelihood of harming others.
Logged
Cauliflower Labs – Geologically realistic world generator devblog

Dwarf fortress in 50 words: You start with seven alcoholic, manic-depressive dwarves. You build a fortress in the wilderness where EVERYTHING tries to kill you, including your own dwarves. Usually, your chief imports are immigrants, beer, and optimism. Your chief exports are misery, limestone violins, forest fires, elf tallow soap, and carved kitten bone.

LordBucket

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #125 on: November 24, 2014, 07:45:16 am »

If something has an effect on you in that way then it increases the chances that you will harm others (for example
there have been medically sound studies that show your chance of wrecking your car while driving

Ok, but isn't that an argument against driving while impaired rather than an argument against marijuana? For example, it's some places it's illegal to talk on your cellpone while driving, for exactly the reason you give: it increaes your chances of harming others. But obviously we're not going to make cellphones illegal just because somebody might drive while using one.

We already have laws against driving while under the influence of alcohol. Why treat marijuana differently?



I'd be against its legalisation, due to the fact that, as stated, we already have two major legalised drugs.

...no? We have countless tens of thousands of legal drugs. Have you never been to a drug store? They're called drug stores because they sell drugs. You don't even have to go to a drug store. You can go into any grocery store and buy drugs. Most people take drugs. You might have had drugs this morning. You probably know children who have drugs every time they go to a restaurant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug

"a chemical substance that has known biological effects on humans or other animals. Foods are generally excluded"

And right there on the wiki page is a picture of a cup of coffee. Caffeine is a drug. It is a mind-altering, psychoactive substance that crosses the blood-brain barrier and chemically alters the way your brain functions. And that's why people take.it. Specifically for the chemically altered mental state that it imparts. Caffeine is also addictive, and anyone who regularly partakes can tell you all about the withdrawal symptoms. In fact, in most offices it's a running joke that people can't function without it.

Do you take aspirin for headaches? That's a drug. Viagra, maybe? Drug. Know any smokers? Nicotine is a drug. Drink alcohol? Drug. Maybe you know somebody who takes Xanax, Zoloft or Prozac? All drugs.

Where do you get this idea that we have two? Why do you arbitrarily mentally categorize some mind altering chemicals as "oh, drugs! Scary!" while you would think nothing of giving an addictive mind-alerting substance like caffeine to a 6 year old?

I think this entire issue is about perception.

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #126 on: November 24, 2014, 08:07:17 am »

But that doesn't mean I have to approve of it either.
Approve of it personally? No, of course not. But if you actually have interest in preventing harm to others, as what the rest of your passage noted, you have a current moral obligation to approve of its legalization or, at the absolute least, its decriminalization. Because the state of things as is is significantly more toxic and harmful to people than just about anything else could be.

Right now, the state of criminalization in regards to marijuana (and, to be frank, a host of other similarly harmful recreational drugs) is doing significantly more harm to the US (which is the country in regards to which this discussion is framed) -- to the people, in the US -- than even the current, illegal, use of the drug is. The lack of regulation resulting in laced or dangerously prepared material, the criminal element involved in its procurement, the incredibly screwed up state of our justice and penitentiary system, including the cultural treatment of ex-cons, resulting in basically catastrophic harm to anyone actually prosecuted for possession... those are just the domestic harms that have come from criminalization.

And that's not getting into the issues abroad which are also being caused by marijuana criminalization -- notably that, instead of it being grown and sold locally and legally, the substance is being used to fund some of the most vicious criminal organizations in the world. Right now, the states' fucked up implementation of the bugshit insane war on drugs is actively aiding in the destabilization of entire goddamn countries.

If ideally you want heavy restrictions and breathalysers and so on, and so forth -- that is also fine. And it's a goal to work towards. But in the mean time, if you genuinely hope to reduce harm to people, your immediate moral goal is the recension of the criminalization of marijuana, probably as part of a larger campaign to decriminalize the possession and use (if not necessarily their production, but frankly, probably that as well -- heavily regulated, but legal, is the functional ideal*) of recreation drugs as a whole. We do not need users in jail. We do not need them economically crippled for life. We do not need them getting sometimes-extra-deadly substances from back-alley dealers. If they need help, we need to get them help -- rehabilitation, instead of imprisonment. If they can function, then they need to be allowed to function, just like we allow alcoholics and chain smokers to function by not throwing them in prison and ruining their chances at work. And so on.

The states have pretty much categorically demonstrated that, at this point in time, we cannot handle criminalizing recreational drug use without doing catastrophically more harm to most users (and society in general) than the use itself. Maybe we'll be able to in the future, but right now? We need to stop -- if not entirely, then certainly mostly -- and seek a better way.

*Not because it's a desirable end, but because criminalization is a significantly worse one, and, as you noted, we don't really have a different tool to use in regard to the situation at the moment. It's either criminalization or some strain of legalization, and of the two there's not actually a choice if you're interested in reducing harm.

---

For the shared personal note? I'm a near complete teetotaler, even to the point of having almost entirely cut of caffeine use (I've had like two caffeinated drinks and shared one two-liter bottle of caffeinated root beer in the last year... and a little bit of chocolate, I suppose.). I wouldn't use marijuana if you paid me to. If there were a way to make the substance just vanish into the aether, I'd pretty much be behind it (providing we had a good replacement for its medical uses). I would say similar things for pretty much every recreational drug on the planet. And all of that is entirely irrelevant to me, because the harm our criminalization of recreational drugs is doing is worse than just about anything we could do short of intentionally addicting our entire population to heroin. From the principle of doing less harm, of approaching the problems inherent in recreational drug use appropriately, we can't criminalize recreational drug use. It's the wrong approach, the incorrect tool. And our insistence on using it is causing genuinely massive harm, far in excess of what harm the drug use itself brings about.
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

anzki4

  • Bay Watcher
  • On the wings of maybe
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #127 on: November 24, 2014, 01:39:37 pm »

Sorry, two major RECREATIONAL drugs, is what I meant. Emphasis on major, BTW.

I know we have things like Nutmeg which is a hallucinogen, but not many people get high off of that. And caffeine's not really recreational, really. More of a stimulant.
Well yes, caffeine is stimulant like cocaine or MDMA or nicotine. And "Recreational drugs are chemical substances taken for enjoyment, or leisure purposes, rather than for medical reasons." So yes, caffeine is recreational drug.
Logged

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #128 on: November 24, 2014, 01:42:24 pm »

As far as I know, there has never been a recorded death from overdosing on marijuana. The first time, the 500th, time, the 7th time you smoke it, never.

Even if there have been one or two I don't know about from some people with deathly allergies or whatever bs, heart disease kills like half a million people directly in the U.S. per year, and KFC is responsible for its fair share of those for sure.

So no, KFC is much more dangerous.

Also, my KFC doesn't come with a chemical analysis report. I live in washington so we actually can buy verified and certified x% THC/CBD MMJ. It's my preferred way now, I can just ask for an analytic report if I want to know the numbers. They are very extensive, and show all parts down to the .01%s.

Pretty sure that's more safe than buying from a random person thanks to it being illegal and ostracized, but hey..
« Last Edit: November 24, 2014, 01:47:34 pm by Mictlantecuhtli »
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

AlleeCat

  • Bay Watcher
  • Black, the beast, descends from shadows...
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #129 on: November 24, 2014, 01:51:30 pm »

I just want to put in my two cents, and say that if anyone thinks that stoners are horrible, lazy people, I live with a guy who smokes weed pretty much every day, and has three jobs. He leaves for work at 6 AM sometimes and doesn't get home until 8. He is the most productive person I have ever met, and he's a complete and total pothead and a pretty nice guy.

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #130 on: November 24, 2014, 01:59:17 pm »

There are two recreational drugs named alcohol and tobacco, that are both used by a large amount of the population which, from my understanding, would probably be banned if it weren't for the fact they're now too deeply entrenched in our culture.

Alcohol was banned because it was looked at as an immoral way to spend your free time and money by a large amount of society. It was reversed shortly after.
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

da_nang

  • Bay Watcher
  • Argonian Overlord
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #131 on: November 24, 2014, 03:14:28 pm »

...damnit, where's the anti-cannabis when you need it?
CERN, but in microscopically small amounts.
Logged
"Deliver yesterday, code today, think tomorrow."
Ceterum censeo Unionem Europaeam esse delendam.
Future supplanter of humanity.

Caz

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:comforting whirs]
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #132 on: November 24, 2014, 03:31:20 pm »

This thread should probably be renamed "Cannabis Legalization Discussion". Marijuana is a pejorative word while Cannabis is the actual scientific name of the plant. Calling Cannabis MJ is like calling Alcohol "hooch" or "rotgut", etc.


Spoiler: such truthiness (click to show/hide)
Logged

Caz

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:comforting whirs]
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #133 on: November 24, 2014, 03:33:18 pm »

Also... I am pretty sure Cannibis has a higher chance of killing you a single time... then eating KFC for lunch.

You're being sarcastic right?
Logged

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile
Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« Reply #134 on: November 24, 2014, 03:36:07 pm »

Are we seriously applying PC to drug name in case the plant is going to be offended now?
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 19