[Public_Domain]

[mtbr]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

It's a drug and hippies use drugs and I hate hippies so therefore I hate people using marijuana and want to make it illegal forever.

Don't worry, it'll never be legal in Moral America. Just would not fly.

oh really?

they are one step ahead of Canada.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n276.a05.html

[robmik43]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

.....Secondly, why do these neo-teetotalers always resort to argumentative fallacies? Who's supporting driving "high"? Why is this somehow linked? No one is advocating leniency on intoxicated drivers anymore than they'd support drunk drivers, drivers high on prescription drugs, overtired drivers, overstimulated drivers, etc.

So, someone who doesn't agree with you is somehow a "neo-teetotaler" ????
I don't consider all pot smokers to be dangerously irresponsible,
just annoyingly irresponsible, especially when they whine.
My worry is that decriminalization will lead to much greater pot use.
Greater pot use [to me],will mean greater potential for the type
of situations that concern me, especially amongst young drivers.
Perhaps your position is that there would be the same
number of pot users in a decriminalized environment, they'd just
be less worried about trips to the hoosegow, fines and criminal stigma ?

BTW, I made my share of stupid mistakes in my younger days, yet I am
still not a teetotaler, not even the made-up "neo" kind.

[Public_Domain]

[2Cdo]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

America is far too Christian to be sane enough to ever legalize pot. To moral. To hopped up on their confused idea of "good" vs. "bad".

And they are much farther behind us, if you just look at the pathetic "war on drugs".

And Canada (Ontario atleast) used to be pretty damn close. Legalization was even brought up to the Liberals.

Then that was swept under the carpet... And to the disappointment of millions, Harper declared that there would be no way in hell that he would make it legal.

Decriminalization was brought up, not legalization. There is a big difference between the two. The rest of your post is just more "America bad" rhetoric.

[Robair]

Prohibition creates Al Capones. I'm all for legalization and I don't even use the stuff.

I'd rather Canada collect tax off it, than spend my taxes trying to get it off the street.

[Mustang1]

robmik43 robmik43:

So, someone who doesn't agree with you is somehow a "neo-teetotaler" ????

Nope, someone who exhibits extreme view on intoxicants is "neo-teetotaler". That includes relying on argumentative fallacies - which I noticed you conveniently avoided addressing - to make points.

$1:

I don't consider all pot smokers to be dangerously irresponsible,
just annoyingly irresponsible, especially when they whine.

Who's a "pot smoker" and who's whining? It seems someone is being annoying irresponsible in their commentary.

$1:

My worry is that decriminalization will lead to much greater pot use.

Do you possess the same worries regarding alcohol? I hope your consistent in your assertions.

$1:

Greater pot use [to me],will mean greater potential for the type
of situations that concern me, especially amongst young drivers.

Firstly that's a fallacy of extension and an argument from adverse consequences.

Secondly, how's it different from prescription drugs (do you have any idea as to their abuse?) or alcohol? It's already happening - not to condone, but merely to acknowledge it - so how is your potential argumentative fallacy anymore legitimate if it's decriminalized?

$1:

Perhaps your position is that there would be the same
number of pot users in a decriminalized environment, they'd just
be less worried about trips to the hoosegow, fines and criminal stigma ?

That's not my position, but thanks for yet another argumentative fallacy.

$1:

BTW, I made my share of stupid mistakes in my younger days, yet I am
still not a teetotaler, not even the made-up "neo" kind.

Uh...okay, but how does address the fact that "decriminalization" is likely going to happen? Again, many of your points mirror the same kind of temperance stuff that prohibitionists argued and it didn't work then, and doesn't wash now. What i find truly remarkable is how people condemn pot use and champion its criminality but say little about alcohol and its societal, medical and legal effects (it's not entirely legal either)

[Pseudonym]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

It's a drug and hippies use drugs and I hate hippies so therefore I hate people using marijuana and want to make it illegal forever.

Staunch defender of freedom, aren't you?

Meh, I really haven't developed a strong position on the issue. I don't know enough about its effects and don't care to know. I find it interesting how they draw the line arbitrarily between alcohol and nicotine as drugs versus THC and heroin as drugs. I can't really figure out a position that I would consider solid between these lines, so I tend to just stay out of this mess.

[Wally_Sconce]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

It's a drug and hippies use drugs and I hate hippies so therefore I hate people using marijuana and want to make it illegal forever.

Staunch defender of freedom, aren't you?

more so than hippies, they were draft dodgers

[Benoit]

Pot: Why not legalize it? Read the article, the answer is obvious.

[snuggles61]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

You think so?? This is what made Harper such a joke.His 'tough on crime policy' consisted nothing more than increased penalties for marijuana(growing it and giving police the means to check for impairment of it while operating a vehicle).Remember Stockwell Day stating that "Small marijuana growers are nothing more than persons who wish they were large growers?" And as a result on two occasions in the past two years people made the Leader-Post newspaper just for growing their own pot in a closet!I mean I hope you're right but it's not forthcoming with either the liberals or conservatives.

[mtbr]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

America is far too Christian to be sane enough to ever legalize pot. To moral. To hopped up on their confused idea of "good" vs. "bad".

And they are much farther behind us, if you just look at the pathetic "war on drugs".

And Canada (Ontario atleast) used to be pretty damn close. Legalization was even brought up to the Liberals.

Then that was swept under the carpet... And to the disappointment of millions, Harper declared that there would be no way in hell that he would make it legal.

Decriminalization was brought up, not legalization. There is a big difference between the two. The rest of your post is just more "America bad" rhetoric.

[Benoit]

snuggles61 snuggles61:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

You think so?? This is what made Harper such a joke.His 'tough on crime policy' consisted nothing more than increased penalties for marijuana(growing it and giving police the means to check for impairment of it while operating a vehicle).Remember Stockwell Day stating that "Small marijuana growers are nothing more than persons who wish they were large growers?" And as a result on two occasions in the past two years people made the Leader-Post newspaper just for growing their own pot in a closet!I mean I hope you're right but it's not forthcoming with either the liberals or conservatives.

"Legalizers contend that marijuana laws do far more harm than marijuana does. They love to conjure up an image of prisons stuffed with innocent kids who were caught with a J or two. But that's a myth. Simple possession has been decriminalized in practice, if not in law. Under the Young Offenders Act, no kid gets a record for a drug offence. And cops don't bother to lay possession charges against adults, unless they also catch them doing something else."

[Robair]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

Meh, I really haven't developed a strong position on the issue. I don't know enough about its effects and don't care to know. I find it interesting how they draw the line arbitrarily between alcohol and nicotine as drugs versus THC and heroin as drugs. I can't really figure out a position that I would consider solid between these lines, so I tend to just stay out of this mess.

Heroin is bad, bad stuff. No comparison to the other three IMHO.

Didn't the biggest push to ban Mary Jane originally come from industries that had to compete with hemp paper, hemp rope etc etc?

[snuggles61]

Benoit Benoit:

snuggles61 snuggles61:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

You think so?? This is what made Harper such a joke.His 'tough on crime policy' consisted nothing more than increased penalties for marijuana(growing it and giving police the means to check for impairment of it while operating a vehicle).Remember Stockwell Day stating that "Small marijuana growers are nothing more than persons who wish they were large growers?" And as a result on two occasions in the past two years people made the Leader-Post newspaper just for growing their own pot in a closet!I mean I hope you're right but it's not forthcoming with either the liberals or conservatives.

"Legalizers contend that marijuana laws do far more harm than marijuana does. They love to conjure up an image of prisons stuffed with innocent kids who were caught with a J or two. But that's a myth. Simple possession has been decriminalized in practice, if not in law. Under the Young Offenders Act, no kid gets a record for a drug offence. And cops don't bother to lay possession charges against adults, unless they also catch them doing something else."

That may be the case for simple possession but as I've stated on two separate occasions charges were laid just for growing weed in a closet and they actually made the newspaper.The most recent one this man was charged with only thirteen plants in various stages of growth and with no previous criminal record he was sentenced to one year house arrest as well as being subject to random drug tests.