Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

    Yes yes its that time again. Time for the obligatory weed thread started by me.

    But this is important folks! Colorado and Washington just voted to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana just like we do with tobacco and alcohol. This is a victory for civil rights. During Prohibition, Colorado was the first state to go against the Federal Government and legalize alcohol. It led to many other states following suit which lead to a Constitutional Ammendment protecting the right of Americans to imbibe a dangerous psychoactive substance if they felt they should. That was a win for individual liberty, just as THIS is a win for individual liberty.

    Washington is taxing it 3 times (grower-processor, processor-retailer, retailer to consumer) at a rate of 25%.

    Hadn't seen a thread yet so I crafted one.

    What are yall's thoughts on this? Pro, con?

  • #2
    Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

    Good for them, progress in the useless war on drugs that has changed little yet cost a fortune in lives and dollars.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

      Originally posted by reality View Post
      Yes yes its that time again. Time for the obligatory weed thread started by me.

      But this is important folks! Colorado and Washington just voted to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana just like we do with tobacco and alcohol. This is a victory for civil rights. During Prohibition, Colorado was the first state to go against the Federal Government and legalize alcohol. It led to many other states following suit which lead to a Constitutional Ammendment protecting the right of Americans to imbibe a dangerous psychoactive substance if they felt they should. That was a win for individual liberty, just as THIS is a win for individual liberty.

      Washington is taxing it 3 times (grower-processor, processor-retailer, retailer to consumer) at a rate of 25%.

      Hadn't seen a thread yet so I crafted one.

      What are yall's thoughts on this? Pro, con?
      This is a great first step in reducing crime associated with weed.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

        There are never positives like this without downsides.

        Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

          Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
          There are never positives like this without downsides.

          Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?
          Those who smoke weed drink beer.
          Those who do hard drugs will not be deterred by not starting with weed.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

            Originally posted by reality View Post
            What are yall's thoughts on this? Pro, con?
            Pro. One more step towards ending the pointless War on Drugs. Congrats, Colorado and Washington!

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
              There are never positives like this without downsides.

              Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?
              I think we can safely say that weed, like alcohol is not good for developing minds. According to recent studies before a certain age (I forget exactly which) it prevents positive development of the brain. Needless to say, legal pot should be restricted to adult consumption.

              In fact, in my opinion, all drugs/narcotics/chemicals should be legal to reduce or eliminate the big money involved in criminal distribution. Personal responsibility is the purview of the individual.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                There are never positives like this without downsides.

                Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?
                Well first off, those studies don't take into account many things. A) alcohol is by far the most tried psychoactive substance. Check the statistics. It can also kill you dead or imapir you enough to kill someone else. But it's legal. B) alot of the "gateway" effect is because weed dealers generally also sell something else. Associating with the criminal underbelly exposes one to more and more connections. Make it legal abetted trend will decrease slot. I've got more to say but I'm about to hut class. Later

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                  Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                  There are never positives like this without downsides.

                  Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?
                  IMO, if there is a "gateway drug", it is alcohol. Actually, it may be cigarettes.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                    Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                    Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage.
                    I guess it was for me, kinda.

                    I used marijuana before I used any harder drugs, and I suppose it's arguable that if I hadn't used marijuana I would never have made that leap.

                    You couldn't prove that this would be the case mind you, but you could argue it.

                    If you drill down further through my history of using mood/mind altering substances, though, you'd find that I started with cigarettes and from there proceded to alcohol and only after several years of intermitent alcohol use did I make the leap to marijuana.

                    So by calling marijuana the "gateway" drug you're really missing several of the gates I went through before I arrived at marijuana.

                    I think given this knowledge you could also make the argument that, given my history of using mood/mind altering substances it would have proceded from alcohol to whatever else was available regardless of whether or not marijuana ever entered the picture.

                    Again, you couldn't prove it, but you could argue that marijuana was just one of any number of substances that would have come next in the progression.

                    If you're of the opinion that the use of mood/mind altering substances is bad and that closing the "gateway" is the most effective/reasonable means of combating it, it seems to me that you'd want to nip it in the bud, not arbitrarially break a link somewhere mid-way up the chain.

                    I've known people who smoked marijuana but who never smoked cigarettes so I'd be inclined to believe that cigarette smoking is incidental.

                    But I have NEVER known anyone who has smoked marijuana, or used any harder drug thereafter, who didn't drink alcohol first.

                    I would very confidently state, based on my personal observations and experiences, that regardless of how one's drug use progression eventually pans out alcohol is undoubtedly THE gateway drug.

                    If you Google "alcohol as a gateway drug" you'll find that there's a growing (albeit currently fairly small) body of acedemic research that backs up my opinion.

                    If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur.
                    This kind of implies that our current policy has prevented it from occuring.

                    I would argue that it does not.

                    Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?
                    If you're looking for other downsides, I'd be interested in knowing what you consider to be the first downside?

                    My use of alcohol, marijuana, and other mood/mind altering substances when I was younger was a lot of fucking fun, never hurt anyone, never led to my breaking any laws other than in the posession and consumption of proscribed substances, and doesn't seem to have effected my ability to be a responsible adult.

                    I've served my country, earned a masters degree, hold a job that puts me in the top 2.5% of earners, own my own home, have a happy marriage, get on well with my neighbors, and have succedded by virtually any metric you might use to measure a citizen living in American society today.

                    I realize that not everyone who has used marijuana has shared this degree of success, but I would argue that there are plenty of people who never used marijuana who don't enjoy this degree of success either.

                    I'm curious why you'd point to marijuana, or the use of any drug or substance really, and claim that it is what prevented someone from being successful?
                    Last edited by soot; 11-07-2012, 11:43 AM.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                      The smartest mayors will be rushing to make their cities marijuana tourist destinations. Amsterdam makes a metric ton of money from marijuana tourism. There's a big revenue opportunity here for a smart mayor who gets in early.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                        I really don't see this amounting to much in a practical sense. Because while possession and sales might be legal at the state level now, it is still a federal crime.

                        So while someone might well open up a store selling marijuana and accouterments, they'll always be looking over their shoulder waiting for a DEA agent to put the grab on them.

                        That said, I think it should be legalized and taxed, just like alcohol.

                        Matt

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                          Originally posted by soot View Post
                          I guess it was for me, kinda.

                          I used marijuana before I used any harder drugs, and I suppose it's arguable that if I hadn't used marijuana I would never have made that leap.

                          You couldn't prove that this would be the case mind you, but you could argue it.

                          If you drill down further through my history of using mood/mind altering substances, though, you'd find that I started with cigarettes and from there proceded to alcohol and only after several years of intermitent alcohol use did I make the leap to marijuana.

                          So by calling marijuana the "gateway" drug you're really missing several of the gates I went through before I arrived at marijuana.

                          I think given this knowledge you could also make the argument that, given my history of using mood/mind altering substances it would have proceded from alcohol to whatever else was available regardless of whether or not marijuana ever entered the picture.

                          Again, you couldn't prove it, but you could argue that marijuana was just one of any number of substances that would have come next in the progression.

                          If you're of the opinion that the use of mood/mind altering substances is bad and that closing the "gateway" is the most effective/reasonable means of combating it, it seems to me that you'd want to nip it in the bud, not arbitrarially break a link somewhere mid-way up the chain.

                          I've known people who smoked marijuana but who never smoked cigarettes so I'd be inclined to believe that cigarette smoking is incidental.

                          But I have NEVER known anyone who has smoked marijuana, or used any harder drug thereafter, who didn't drink alcohol first.

                          I would very confidently state, based on my personal observations and experiences, that regardless of how one's drug use progression eventually pans out alcohol is undoubtedly THE gateway drug.

                          If you Google "alcohol as a gateway drug" you'll find that there's a growing (albeit currently fairly small) body of acedemic research that backs up my opinion.



                          This kind of implies that our current policy has prevented it from occuring.

                          I would argue that it does not.



                          If you're looking for other downsides, I'd be interested in knowing what you consider to be the first downside?

                          My use of alcohol, marijuana, and other mood/mind altering substances when I was younger was a lot of fucking fun, never hurt anyone, never led to my breaking any laws other than in the posession and consumption of proscribed substances, and doesn't seem to have effected my ability to be a responsible adult.

                          I've served my country, earned a masters degree, hold a job that puts me in the top 2.5% of earners, own my own home, have a happy marriage, get on well with my neighbors, and have succedded by virtually any metric you might use to measure a citizen living in American society today.

                          I realize that not everyone who has used marijuana has shared this degree of success, but I would argue that there are plenty of people who never used marijuana who don't enjoy this degree of success either.

                          I'm curious why you'd point to marijuana, or the use of any drug or substance really, and claim that it is what prevented someone from being successful?
                          Nothing but anecdotal, which doesn’t really count.

                          A lot of this probably has its roots back in the ‘Weed Madness’ BS back in what? The 30’s or 40’s or something?

                          As with the down side in Amsterdam where just about everything is legal, I was figuring that there must be some sort of downside with this as well, and was just wondering what it might be. Other than that, I have no special or specific knowledge, and I don’t claim any either.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                            Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                            There are never positives like this without downsides.

                            Many studies, of which I've heard and don't know the validity of, assert that weed is a stepping stone drug to harder drugs with greater physiological and psychological damage. If this is indeed the case, we'd be allowing that to occur. Any other downsides that we might be able to predict?


                            Beer is the greatest stepping stone drug. So that argument using pot is not being reasonable, yet it is still around.

                            These studies on pot that asserts this would convict beer if they looked at that too. Truth is, some people who catch a buzz on beer or pot might move on to other drugs. But not all people do. My generation, some of them had another stepping stone drug. Model airplane glue.

                            I applaud Co. and Wa State. We need to see more of this in the quest in getting basic personal freedom back. For god's sake we have such a great example of what making alcohol illegal does. People don't stop drinking. In fact the illicitness of an illegal substance makes some humans who would never partake to do it simply because they don't like being told what to put in their bodies. I sure as hell don't like it because it is gov't instrusion on a fundamental personal freedom.

                            The do gooders, the non partakers are most dangerous to personal freedoms. They would rather take away basic freedom than to allow something to be legal that they personally don't agree with. They are no different than that fat spinster looking lady who would go into saloons with here ax to stop the drinking.

                            Some of us want to dictate the personal habits of others, based upon our own personal habits. What this has done is the same thing it did when they outlawed booze. It creates new criminals because the profits are so high in selling contraband. It starts a war against citizens, breaking apart families, driving up spending in housing these people in prison, and it corrupts police departments more than anything else out there today. As it did when booze was illegal. It creates violence and killing in the drug trade, and it terrorized innocent families each week as the narc bust down the wrong door in the middle of the night. If you get stopped for a traffic violation in my area, the traffic cop turns into a Gestapo, treating a guy with a headlight out like a criminal, searching his car and so on.

                            I despise the DEA and state narcs. Anyone who would be one is a closet Nazi, IMO. Most of our local ones are worst than the pot smokers they bust. We have a problem with drug evidence mysteriously disapearing from the evidence room as cops sell it themselves.

                            Co and Wa didn't even use the medical marijuana argument. They went out and did it right. Make it legal, control it and tax it. It is not your business nor the business of the gov't to dictate what one may use to catch a buzz on. Mind altering substances are as old as mankind is. It only becomes a big problem when you get stupid and make it illegal. But the urge of some to impose their own personal habits on others is the reason we have this prohibition on pot. Like so many other things, it pure emotion involved.

                            I wish that more states would spit in the face of the DEA like this. If enough do it, perhaps we can fix stupid and send all of those dea agents, state and local narcs to the unemployment lines or perhaps send them out to stop the stealing and the killing that is so common today. Stay out of our bedrooms and stay out of our business in what we want to catch a buzz on. In other words, be a decent human being and mind your own business and let others take care of theirs.

                            Here is the deal though, and how this works. There is so much money being made by the justice system, the privately owned prisons, the corrupt cops that all of these oppose legalization. And for no reason but their own personal and financial interests. Oh, they have their studies, the oldest one is that pot is stronger now than it was in the old days. But I heard that same argument being used in the 1980s! Truth is the really good herb of the late 60s and early 70s was just as potent in THC content as the good kind bud of today. Puna Buds from Hawaii, Afghan Kush, Thai Stick, Columbian Gold, Jamaican, Aculpulco Gold, Panama Red, Guerran Violet, are just a few that were high in thc content, as opposed to the common mexican, commercial weed of the 70s. This exponential potency argument is hogwash, and hogwash is common when it comes to these pot studies. Fear mongering done so the justice system, the dea and others can profit from its illegality. And they are powerful with big mouths and will fight it every step of the way.

                            But I expect obama's justice dept to go after these states. At least bush jr mostly left the medical pot folks alone in Ca. Obama has gone after them and he will probably go after these states as well. He must be helping out his attorney friends and lobby, as if you legalized pot a lot of lawyers would lose a great source of income.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: Colorado and Washington vote to Legalize, Regulate, and TAX marijuana

                              Originally posted by Unique POV View Post
                              The smartest mayors will be rushing to make their cities marijuana tourist destinations. Amsterdam makes a metric ton of money from marijuana tourism. There's a big revenue opportunity here for a smart mayor who gets in early.
                              Heard they have stopped tourists from going to those coffee shops. Only citizens can partake today. Not sure where I heard it but it was recently.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X