Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

So your answer is???????

   

My answer is regulation. Not prohibition.

   

Ok explain how that's going to work, and what restrictions there would be, if any.

   

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, most people who are negatively polarized on the issue refuse to discuss it with me.

I for one would start with marijuana, and allow anyone to grow up to 3 plants in their own home. I would even support mandatory minimum sentencing for taking it off of your own property. Caught driving while high you lose your license until you can pass a piss test.

   

Ok, let's start with grass.

Any age restrictions for use? If so, what if your neighbour gives your 8 yr old a couple of joints?

How are we going to test for impairment on the roadside where it could be enforceable in court. We have no method of measuring roadside impairment. A cop may pull someone over for poor driving, but impairment must be proven. We do not have a standard for impairment like the .08 for alcohol. A regular user of grass is just as dangerous on the road as a drunk. How do we deal with them?

   

Ok, let's look at what happens now.. Which is? Probably nothing, if someone gets caught doing that, what do you think would happen? Maybe they might get hauled in, and put on probation for a while? Why would someone do that? Best possible scenario is the 8 year old comes back looking to raid your stash. There's no money to be made anymore. It's too small of a demographic to just target kids.




The same way the Conservatives think it will work. Hopefully something better than taking people in if they look funny though.

Seriously though, if you can't pass a roadside sobriety test you shouldn't be driving. That probably includes a lot more people who are sick, and taking flu medication than people who are smoking marijuana.

   

You're dodging the questions.

You specified regulation. How? In what way would things be different? How is society served? What benefit do you offer that isn't there now.

   

I'm dodging the question? You are dodging the question about how things would be different by suggesting things would be different that have no reason to be different other than they would impove.

Society is served by reducing crime among gangs fighting for "territory". By reducing dollars spent on fighting a war that can't be won. By not taking people away from their family for doing something to their own body. By eliminating the motivation to push drugs to kids.

The benefit is a society with less violence in it.

   

Enforcing the laws, focusing on the gangs and keeping it away from children IS the answer.

Throwing in the towel because you haven’t controlled it is simply throwing in the towel.

You’re not regulating anything. You’re simply giving it to anyone who wants it. That’s not the answer and opens the door for another substance to have free rein for abuse.

   

80 some years of that has lead us to what? The point where we are debating on what we should do with people who supply drugs to 8 year olds.. You must see how silly this conversation is having an M.D. and all.




You keep saying it's throwing in the towel, but I say it's adopting and effective strategy versus a failing one. You don't have anything to say other than we shouldn't give up on principle? Who's giving what to who now? I'm not suggesting the government should set up a booth on every corner handing out drugs. Do you believe the government gives out alcohol and tobacco to children now? No, they make a healthy profit selling alcohol and tobacco to children.

   

I find your “arguments” naive and irresponsible. Maybe the best advice I can offer is to imagine your children making the same argument to you that you’re attempting to make to me. That's how logical it sounds to me.

This is quickly turning into one of those circular arguments. I’m not interested.

   

I find your "aguments" old and tired, and without any defense.



Yup, that's usually what happens. You don't have any comment on how things would change other than to shout about how the sky will fall if we stop putting people in jail so you give up.

No suggestion on how the strategy could be reformed to alleviate your fears? Or reasonable comments on how your fears would be justified? Just outright rejection.

Oh well, keep claiming the world is flat. The country will outgrow you.

   

Smoking rates are down, particularily among teens and young adults plain and simply because of education and increased government taxation, not regulation.

   

Yes! Now we're getting somewhere. Do you feel smoking would be entirely eliminated by adding it to the list of prohibited substances? Somehow your argument doesn't translate into education and increased government taxation being effective for marijuana, but giving up control of those things entirely is going to pay off some day.

   

Oh yeah, by the way... Education and increased government taxation is regulation.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next