|
Fragmented posted:Hey gently caress you, i like how you left out the part about my dad being in jail for 4 years for growing for medical card holders and it basically tearing my family apart. I could give gently caress all about a little weed it was just a story that happened to me recently. It's genuinely awful that your family was ripped apart over some misguided policies, rooted in racism, that say a plant is illegal. And yet, in that post you spent one sentence talking about your dad and three paragraphs talking about how the court didn't charge your friend with a felony. I don't know you; if I want to understand what's important to you, all I have to go on is what you choose to write about. If you really want to convince people how awful the war on drugs can be, the story of your family is a lot more convincing than the story of how you got pulled over. And, to go back to your original point - no matter how awful the consequences might have been for your family, it's not proof that DEA agents (or local drug cops, or whatever) are inhuman monsters who want to cause only suffering. I've met DEA agents. They're generally nice people who think that, on balance, they're doing a good thing. Many people in power know police officers and DEA agents, and they get the same impression. If you say "all DEA agents are heartless monsters," they're going to write off what you have to say. If you say "DEA agents and drug cops might think that they're helping society, but they're honestly misguided," then you can get a lot further! Sure, it doesn't let you have that nice "I am a Good Guy fighting the Bad Guys" worldview (which is, incidentally, very popular among cops as well - ask one about "sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs"), but it's a lot better for actually getting meaningful social change.
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
http://myeverettnews.com/2013/07/27/where-can-you-grow-process-and-sell-recreational-marijuana-legally-in-everett/ Here's some super local media coverage of the going ons north of Seattle. Irritates me that people are worried about the smell when I live in a city that can smell like manure, acetone and chlorine depending on where and when.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Preem Palver posted:He's saying that one specific story isn't something to get too worked up about, not that no one has the right to complain about the War on Drugs. "I was pulled over, my weed was thrown away, and I had to show up to court once to get the charges dismissed" is the least loving atrocious result of the War on Drugs. How in the gently caress was this not an atrocity? You were thrown in jail, strip searched, fined heavily, threatened with further jail time, denied your civil rights, could have lost your job, but somehow this is not an atrocity? Do we just have different definitions of the word? Has our definition of what it means to live in a free country become so hosed up that this type of poo poo happening for something as utterly harmless as having a pipe that could have been used to smoke weed in your personal property? You're just further emphasizing the point that the propaganda machine against marijuana has been successful to the point that we can't even call horrific, traumatizing experiences that happened to us personally atrocities. Yes, having your civil liberties violated in an extremely personal and hurtful way is an atrocity, absolutely. Just because atrocities a thousand times worse also exist does not change this fact or make it acceptable in relation. By the way, to further make this point, getting strip searched means one or more men make you get naked in front of you, handle your genitals, make you spread your rear end in a top hat open and cough or even insert their fingers inside you to check, and the whole thing is loving filmed and observed. If two people on the street dragged you into an alley and did this to you you'd want to rip their throats out and pour gasoline on them and set them on fire, but because they were legally allowed to do it, it's not something you should raise a stink about? How could you possibly hold this opinion? You were sexually assaulted by police officers over a tiny pipe in your car. Seriously dude, what the gently caress? empty whippet box fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Russia and China have plenty of resources to do it. Killing slightly few people in the drug war does not end it. And there's absolutely zero chance of the US dropping out of all drug war either - please don't confuse "well weed is ok" with "and so is everything else". International incursions aren't even necessary when there's simple "foreign aid" to have the countries keep fighting drugs and oh by the way if you don't use our foreign aid to help fight drugs we might forget to send it next year. Having the resources doesn't mean willingness to expend those resources on the drug war when there are likely plenty of other productive things that money can be spent on. Caring about drug prevention also doesn't mean they care enough to make up for the U.S spending. The U.S. legalizing means the largest recreational drug market is ensuring a market will always exist legitimately. If the US couldn't win the war then do you really think these countries are going to expect to do better with "maybe only 50% of the funds"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
size1one posted:Having the resources doesn't mean willingness to expend those resources on the drug war when there are likely plenty of other productive things that money can be spent on. Caring about drug prevention also doesn't mean they care enough to make up for the U.S spending. The U.S. legalizing means the largest recreational drug market is ensuring a market will always exist legitimately. If the US couldn't win the war then do you really think these countries are going to expect to do better with "maybe only 50% of the funds"? They have plenty of willingness to fight drugs right now. You don't need to get anywhere close to current US spending to still be executing the drug war and causing most of the problems of said war in the outside countries. Legal market does in no way guarantee any support of drugs from outside the US.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:They have plenty of willingness to fight drugs right now. You don't need to get anywhere close to current US spending to still be executing the drug war and causing most of the problems of said war in the outside countries. I don't think you can extrapolate from a world where every major power has made drugs illegal to one where all but one have. A South American country legalizing drugs with the US as precedent doesn't necessarily have to kowtow to China or Russia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
Jeffrey posted:I don't think you can extrapolate from a world where every major power has made drugs illegal to one where all but one have. A South American country legalizing drugs with the US as precedent doesn't necessarily have to kowtow to China or Russia. A South American country who does that certainly might find encouragement to change their mind in the form of proposed development contracts and aid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:They have plenty of willingness to fight drugs right now. You don't need to get anywhere close to current US spending to still be executing the drug war and causing most of the problems of said war in the outside countries. You're right central american countries would have no reason to produce a good high in demand that can't be produced elsewhere. I must be crazy to think that it would legitimize or encourage their business. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:How in the gently caress was this not an atrocity? You were thrown in jail, strip searched, fined heavily, threatened with further jail time, denied your civil rights, could have lost your job, but somehow this is not an atrocity? Do we just have different definitions of the word? Has our definition of what it means to live in a free country become so hosed up that this type of poo poo happening for something as utterly harmless as having a pipe that could have been used to smoke weed in your personal property? You're just further emphasizing the point that the propaganda machine against marijuana has been successful to the point that we can't even call horrific, traumatizing experiences that happened to us personally atrocities. Actually, yes, you're entirely correct. Jesus, 4 years of rationalizing what happened to me, both internally and with what others have said, have led to me actually defending being sexually assaulted and denied basic civil liberties over a piece of goddamn glass. I realize the preceding sentence may sound sarcastic in some way, but I'm being totally serious. I think it's time to start organizing and campaigning for change locally -- my town and the county that it's located in have a small enough population that a couple hundred people (a few dozen, honestly, for judicial elections and the like) would be able push local elections in their favor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:In theory, the state is allowed to enforce federal laws. That's exactly what happen in Michigan - dispensaries were all raided by state and local police - enforcing federal law. Yeah, it's an extremely bizarre pseudo-legal framework... except it actually just isn't legal. Dispensaries just rely on a calculated hope that the federal government (or douche-ridden state law enforcement) won't raid them. Although I think the ability of the police to enforce federal laws depends upon the way the state law enforcement is structured.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
InsomnicIneptitude posted:Yeah, it's an extremely bizarre pseudo-legal framework... except it actually just isn't legal. Dispensaries just rely on a calculated hope that the federal government (or douche-ridden state law enforcement) won't raid them. Although I think the ability of the police to enforce federal laws depends upon the way the state law enforcement is structured. Federal law supersedes state law, there isn't any grey-area here it's just basic fact.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Federal law supersedes state law, there isn't any grey-area here it's just basic fact. I've heard rumors that there are different police organizations responsible for enforcing different laws. You seem to be an expert; are there?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
size1one posted:You're right central american countries would have no reason to produce a good high in demand that can't be produced elsewhere. I must be crazy to think that it would legitimize or encourage their business. A good in high demand, except there's no or almost no legal way for it to get from there to the market. Even with legalization in the US, there's no guarantee foreign suppliers are allowed in on the party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng...A+Pharyngula%29 Pretty good...
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:If the US were ever to legalize all drugs, they'd still likely maintain a really big preference for domestic production. Because of this there would be incentive to not allow import, or to only allow import under restrictive tariffs or similar things. Most international intercepts the DEA does are drugs being imported to America. By people who coincidentally aren't interested in paying the proper tariffs and taxes even if it were legal - we still have all sorts of tax evading smugglers for all sorts of products. Why yes, the violence related to tax evasion for cigarettes and alcohol and enforcement of said tax evasion are totally comparable to the violence associated with the war on drugs, and furthermore a change in drug policy to mirror those substances would in no way reduce the resources allocated to and violence associated with international interdiction. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
quote:The Economist I submit this as evidence that Latin American leaders are interested in adapting new methods of dealing with the drug trade. quote:Spain’s approach now rivals that of the pioneering liberal Dutch. Though selling is illegal, buying is not. One result is hundreds of cannabis “social clubs”, which allow members to pool their purchases. These range from small co-operatives where new members must wait six months for new cannabis to be grown before joining, to huge semi-commercial organisations, with thousands of “members” buying cannabis. One in Barcelona even made a €1.3m ($1.74m) deal with the country town of Rasquera to grow supplies on local land, better known for its almond trees. Similar experiments are under way in France, Belgium, Italy and Germany, says Tom Blickman of the Transnational Institute, a think-tank based in Amsterdam. In much of Britain, especially its big cities, the risk of prosecution for those using small quantities of soft drugs is vanishingly low. I submit this as evidence that other wealthy countries are interested in new methods of dealing with the drug trade. quote:USA Today If you are going to suggest that other major countries are interested in funding the Latin American drug war its up to you to make that argument rather, than just post vague insinuations. How much money do they spend on international drug efforts now? And why would they focus on South America rather than on Burma and Afghanistan which produce drugs which actually affect their citizens. Simply saying 'international law' is not enough, there is nothing forcing them to take any particular action. I would further suggest that the USA has a unique political-economy built up around anti-drug efforts which is self sustaining to a degree through voter priorities, interlinking between private industry (prisons, security companies) and National Government. This doesn't exist in other countries therefore they have less incentive to take the same actions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:15
|
|
|
NurhacisUrn posted:But Warchicken...didn't you listen to Leonhart being grilled by Jared Polis? "All...illegal...drugs...are...bad." The clear and willful ignorance amazes me when you have a congressman begging you to just GLANCE at some science and facts. Ok so what's up with that lady. Is that exchange just driven by her personality and people like her naturally rise to power in the DEA or is there some legal reason why she wouldn't say anything more about the differences between the drugs? Obviously she knows, as Jared says, she is the expert.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
"If I acknowledge in any way, shape or form, that some illegal drugs are less harmful than others, that will give these guys a reason to cut my budget. No, I better just toe the company line and keep my big mouth shut. I need my annual pay raise and pension bump to afford that lake home I'm planning on retiring at." You know, so she can sip her margaritas in peace while her husband smokes his cigars. DRUGS R BAD.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:"If I acknowledge in any way, shape or form, that some illegal drugs are less harmful than others, that will give these guys a reason to cut my budget. No, I better just toe the company line and keep my big mouth shut. I need my annual pay raise and pension bump to afford that lake home I'm planning on retiring at." The first and most avidly pursued goal of any institution is to prolong its own existence, and that is pretty much the entire reason for everything the dea does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:A South American country who does that certainly might find encouragement to change their mind in the form of proposed development contracts and aid. Ah, now I realize why I found your posts in this thread so irritating. You're speaking in an obnoxiously confident tone about a very speculative topic with little evidence of your claims. Though I guess the whole topic is fanciful anyway and your make-believe is about as plausible as those dreaming of black tar herion over the counter at their local cvs. Cheers 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 07:34
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Ah, now I realize why I found your posts in this thread so irritating. You're speaking in an obnoxiously confident tone about a very speculative topic with little evidence of your claims. Though I guess the whole topic is fanciful anyway and your make-believe is about as plausible as those dreaming of black tar herion over the counter at their local cvs. Cheers No one is gonna buy tar when you can get powder. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Because we have a long standing habit of "protecting" domestic industries and growers for our own benefit. Again: we impose ridiculously high tariffs on sugar, and that was just for the benefit of the farmers who grew sugar beets. It will take a while to figure out how to get commercially significant amounts of cocaine growing in the Ozarks to the point of meriting tariff protections.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:He is so dreamy. I think she monetarily benefits from prohibition and is ignorant to the truth and sufferings of her fellow man. The sad thing is I do not think she does know the real toll she inflicts on humanity, sir. All she understands is enforcement at this point. Not reason or logic to be found in that fascist little head of hers. I am to the point I think anyone who has arrested someone for this should have their badge stripped and be declared an enemy of the Constitution of the United States of America. This poo poo violates the Fourth Amendment, not to mention the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is hard to pursue happiness when Crohns disease is ravaging your bowel and you are not allowed to treat your condition with a holistic and therapeutic substance with ZERO addictive properties and no LD50 that is proven to be beneficial. As a former medical professional, I see the problem of addiction and Western Medicine, that is why there is a clear collusion to have this suppressed. With zero medical conditions which could benefit, I am not a consumer of the substance, but for gently caress sake the amount of people that could benefit is staggering, yet there is so little concern for those folk who are suffering. The incarceration and treatment of cannabis users is bad, but the lies and suppression of a substance that would benefit patients who are suffering with many maladies is just inhuman and should merit all the outrage and anger in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
NurhacisUrn posted:It is hard to pursue happiness when Crohns disease is ravaging your bowel and you are not allowed to treat your condition with a holistic and therapeutic substance with ZERO addictive properties and no LD50 that is proven to be beneficial. As someone who has been in this exact position, I agree, and can attest that it really does help a lot. I'm probably one of the few people I know with an actual severe medical condition that totally warrants getting a medical card so I can treat it and live a normal life, and I even considered getting one (mainly just to have a reliable place to buy it). But I held off just in case Amendment 64 passed, and welp 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
The Maroon Hawk posted:As someone who has been in this exact position, I agree, and can attest that it really does help a lot. I'm probably one of the few people I know with an actual severe medical condition that totally warrants getting a medical card so I can treat it and live a normal life, and I even considered getting one (mainly just to have a reliable place to buy it). But I held off just in case Amendment 64 passed, and welp That makes me very happy for you my friend. I used Crohns because I have a friend who suffers terribly from it, so I know how bullshit the western medicine mentality is for treating Crohns. I also know how horrific of a condition it is. I am quite glad you'll finally feel some respite. I feel so passionately about all this because I have seen some research that shows it has possible promise in slowing Alzheimers, and many people in my family have fallen to that horrific malady.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
NurhacisUrn posted:That makes me very happy for you my friend. I used Crohns because I have a friend who suffers terribly from it, so I know how bullshit the western medicine mentality is for treating Crohns. I also know how horrific of a condition it is. I am quite glad you'll finally feel some respite. Well, I'm actually on very powerful immunosuppressants now (the pot only made it bearable, it didn't bring it anywhere near "normal") but I think I can accurately say that my last flare-up would have been several times worse if I hadn't used cannabis to treat the symptoms while waiting for my immunosuppressant prescription to clear and to get the first dose. And I still use it for when the occasional cramp gets through. So it isn't exactly a miracle drug for Crohn's, but it certainly brings it to a point where I can live with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:A South American country who does that certainly might find encouragement to change their mind in the form of proposed development contracts and aid. Right, and those developments might be burned down and the contractors kidnapped and/or raped and/or murdered by well-trained and financially encouraged death squads. I don't think that the U.S. legalizing drugs would so radically upturn the whole state of international relations as you are saying it would.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Well it looks like Uraguay is on it's way to full legalization! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23516966 quote:Members of Uruguay's House of Representatives have passed a bill to legalise marijuana.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 11:22
|
|
|
Just curious but does anyone remember that jazz playing goon from TCC that came from Britain and had his medicinal marijuana taken away from him by the government before being arrested? What ever happened with that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
I remember someone from the UK under the username fuctifino. Not sure if that's who you are referring to. Or should I say reefer-ing to. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
devmd01 posted:Well it looks like Uraguay is on it's way to full legalization! Thank you Monsanto!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:I remember someone from the UK under the username fuctifino. Not sure if that's who you are referring to. Or should I say reefer-ing to. Might have been him, I distinctly remember the thread in TCC about him and was just wondering what ever happened after he got arrested for possessing cannabis while claiming medicinal use.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
devmd01 posted:Well it looks like Uraguay is on it's way to full legalization! quote:Uruguay’s proposed law would break new ground by legalising the entire business, from cultivation to consumption, across the whole country. If the bill becomes law, Uruguayans will be allowed to cultivate up to six cannabis plants per household, or join cooperatives licensed to grow up to 99 plants each. Private firms will be allowed to grow weed too, but only to sell to the government, which will sell it to customers through pharmacies. Each person will be allowed to buy up to 40g (1.4oz) per month, enough to fuel most habits. Minors will be excluded, and driving under the influence will remain a crime. Foreigners thinking of booking a holiday to Uruguay should be warned that only Uruguayan citizens will be eligible to use the pharmacies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 09:31
|
|
|
Countdown to the US cutting any and all funding to Uraguay and taking military action.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
I wonder what the immigration requirements to Uruguay are
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
I'm pretty drat sure they'll write a million loopholes into the law to ensure that only Uruguayan citizens (not even naturalised immigrants) can take advantage of the dispensaries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
That's the opposite of a loophole, but probably. On the one hand, they probably do want North American and European immigrants with job skills to move down there. On the other hand, the kind of people who'd move across the globe just for weed probably aren't the cream of the crop...
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
I'm not sure about naturalised immigrants, but yes, only Uruguayan nationals can make use of it. Nobody - except some people in the Netherlands - likes drugs tourism
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Crosscontaminant posted:I'm pretty drat sure they'll write a million loopholes into the law to ensure that only Uruguayan citizens (not even naturalised immigrants) can take advantage of the dispensaries. Why wouldn't they want to make money? e: /\/\ Fair enough
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
You should wait until it passes the Senate (which I'm sure it will) and a little longer to see if the law stands. Polls don't give this law much support (63% against) and it's pretty easy for the people to turn a law down in this country. You just need to get a couple hundred thousand signatures of people against it and then the Government has to call a referendum to let the people decide. Happens all the time, with the latest example being people against the abortion law (which stood because nobody showed up to vote).
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 17:42
|
|