happy 420 ^~^

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by BravelyKegger, Apr 20, 2019.

  1. @SolitaryScribe I don't see the relevance. Weed is accepted and utilized by a large margin of people of different gender, color, etc
  2. SolitaryScribe

    SolitaryScribe Fapstronaut

  3. Sick communication skills my dude
    SolitaryScribe likes this.
  4. I knew you were white the second you said you were 6'8 and couldn't dunk hahaha
    Deleted Account likes this.
  5. 6'7 but yes, forreal. #raporgototheleague
    EatCake and Deleted Account like this.
  6. Ive been using personal experience, not others experience.
    Okay well then I'm assuming you just want to vent or state your side.
    Yeah good thing. Then people would actually see the truth and not what the gov tells them
    It is the point bc if you're only had it a handful of times then, no offense, you can't really speak on the matter w certainty. It's somewhat similar to if I started to go off talking about snowboarding, when I don't snowboard. People would be like, why would I trust anything youre saying if you don't even snowboard.
    I see issues with it. The benefits do outweigh the costs though. Just like with anything, if you do too much, then it can be bad for you. I find weed to be something that if you're smoking all day, every day, then you become somewhat boring or dull. It's a very lazy drug for me, which isn't what you always want. And personally, I don't like smoking weed and going out to bars or heavily crowded areas. Could be bc I'm already so tall that I stick out and the weed makes me overthink but idk. And like you said earlier, your lungs will get affected. But it's not anywhere near the way cigarettes do, plus weed has no active addictives within THC.
    Maybe you have bad weed where you live. Weed is illegal where I am so weed smoke isn't in the air 24/7 as you explained. I wish it was bc weed smells delicious, top 2 favorite smells (rain is the other). But if its the same quality, you are the 2nd person I've met or know of that actually dislikes weed smoke. The other was a lady cop on livepd.
    So I'm assuming it's legal or decriminalized where you live. Bc you don't see that here. So either it's legal or people are savages out there.
    Ahh... see.. I disagree. I think the stigmas on drugs are completely inaccurate. And I didn't actually realize this until after doing drugs. The stigmas are outdated and exaggerated to get others not to try it. As far as allowing it to be sold, at least in the US would be wild. Basically the nation would save so much $ when they get rid of the useless DEA and patrol cops don't waste time or resources in pursuing criminal investigations into drugs. Here's an important thing I've learned.

    There'll be alot less problems w drugs if they were allowed versus not allowed. This has been shown throughout time
    We'll that's something. The reasoning would be bc jails are becoming overcrowded and a large majority of the prisoners are non violent drug users (even just some weed blazers in there). These people (talking harder drug users, the weed smokers shouldn't be in there period) should be incorporated into society instead of being driven further away (prison & being able to not find a job after).
    And you don't have an issue w people getting drunk?
  7. Same here
    Never heard of that and I actually know alot of people that smoke weed personally as well as myself, you can stop at anytime. The problem is do people want to stop.
    For some. It varies from person to person. Just like why people drink. Some is to mask the pain they go through, most drink socially to get drunk. Just like w porn. Some people use porn to mask their pain while some use it as a "treat" every once in a while. It's the same as anything. Exercise. A majority of people exercise to keep themselves fit/organized, some do it to take away the pain. It's not as cut and dry
    They could live in an apartment complex or with people that disapprove of it. They could enjoy smoking outside in public. There's alot of factors.
    A short answer.. yes. It's alot better than being threatened to not do it. People make mistakes and learn. There'll be a definite learning curve but it's the right thing to do. Same with prostitution, but that's a convo for another day
    I don't see why not
    You dont know that. It will reduce crime drastically. Other enterprises will continue like; human trafficking, illegal gun dealing, etc. Which are all worse than drugs, obviosuly. But a majority of crime of that level reside in drugs.
    We'll it seems as if you have a problem w everybody partaking in substances. So idk what you tell ya. But it was nice talking w you
  8. Because there's no point of both parties aren't open-minded on the issue and/or have strict stigmas told to them by parents and authority figures.
    I have no problem with a person doing cocaine. How is somebody doing cocaine affecting me negatively? I'll be at the bar and people a few feet away snort coke off their key. Not phased.
    Yes. And although I think what you said is mainly due to propaganda dating back to the "war on drugs" in America w Ronny Reagan to restrict illegal drug inflow into america, it was cool chatting.
  9. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    There is little evidence to back that up, honestly. I'm not saying this as a user (never did any kind of drug. Only drink a beer once every two months or so), but as a law student with focus on criminal justice in Germany. Criminalisation of drug delinquency was one of the most disasterous ideas ever from a criminal justice point of view. There is literally no point in punishing drug users. It helps nobody.
    Deleted Account likes this.
  10. vulture175

    vulture175 Fapstronaut

    Guys, help me, i just ate a edible chocolate bar and i i feel so numb, disconnected. I don't wanna talk to anyone. I can't sleep or focus on anything. I just wanna walk or run outside forever. Wth is this effect?
  11. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    No, I do not actually. There is basically little to no evidence to suggest such a thing. There a quite a few countries, which not only decriminalized drugs, but legalized at least some of them (the difference is trivial in my opinion) and they are even better than they were before. Also, you shouldn't look at it that way. You have to compare the consequences of criminalisation and decriminalisation/legalization with one another. Criminalisation influences the whole criminal justice apparatus negatively, as as well as the users, their families, and society as a whole. The consequences of it are much more complicated than it meets the eye. You could literally fill entire liberaries about the topic.

    To be fair, this thread is mainly about weed. Weed is not a hardcore drug by any means.
    Deleted Account likes this.
  12. I used to be a hardcore legalization supporter, I believed in allowing the use of everything from cannabis to heroin. But then I had my experience with porn which we're told is not a drug at all and that changed my mindset a bit. I'm definitely not a Puritan (yet) but my confidence in the "I should be able to do whatever I want to as long as it doesn't directly hurt someone else" mantra sustained some heavy beating. A powerful influence on me is this man:
    Deleted Account likes this.
  13. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    Well, if you want to talk about drugs as a whole, fine. Doesn't really make much difference. At least from the criminal justice perspective. I'm not talking about the drugs effect on the user. I have way to little experience to have an opinion on that matter. But I have experience about criminalisation of drugs and I can confidently say, that it doesn't work. They vast majority of consequences are desasterous.

    Decriminalisation/legalisation of drugs isn't the same as promoting it as "good". It's more like cigarettes: Everbody, who is old enough, can legally buy them. Nevertheless, nobody will say things like "Smoking is great". Not even the tobacco industry does it anymore.
    Deleted Account likes this.
  14. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    To answer your question, let’s go a little more in depth with the consequences of criminalization first and compare them to (potential) effects of legalization:

    1) In Germany, crimes connected to cannabis make up 3.2% of all crimes known to the police annually. If you add all other drugs, the number increases to 4-6% (depending on the definition). I think this indicates, how much time the police and the criminal justice apparatus has to spend on drug users. Time, they could spend on other more important things. German courts are overloaded with work. They don’t even know where to start. The hundreds of thousands of drug cases generate a huge workload, which the courts can’t keep up with. The effect is the following: Important crimes don’t get investigated and/or prosecuted, because of a lack of time and staff. This a) sends a horrible signal to criminals, and b) leads to distrust of society in the criminal justice apparatus.

    2) All crimes included in the german criminal code have one thing in common: They all ask for a victim, or at least for a person in immediate danger. None of these two applies to drug delinquency. The only “victim” is the user himself. This is highly problematic from a constitutional point of view. Obviously, other countries have different constitutions, so this isn’t necessarily true for every country.

    3) If drug users get prosecuted, and they go to jail, they do not get better. They will not stop using cannabis. If anything, they will switch to other (more harmful) drugs, because they get in contact with them in prison. Prisons are flooded with drugs. Anybody, who believes otherwise, is very much mistaken.

    4) People, who go to prison because of drug delinquency, meet people there, which are not a good influence on them at all. A lot of times, the inmates leave the prison filled with more criminal energy than before the imprisonment. They often end up in prison again for much more severe crimes in just a short amount of time.

    5) Drug users, who go to prison, get socially branded. They don’t find jobs easily anymore. Their social circle gets disrupted. They often lose their connection to close people. All of these are high risk-factors for future crime of higher intensity. So, if anything, criminalization of drugs creates even more crime than there was before. It basically does the opposite of what it was designed to do.

    So, now lets look at the (potential) consequences of legalization:

    1) More people would try out drugs, since they are now legal. If we look at cannabis in certain countries, this is true. But does this implicate a problem? Not necessarily. After a short amount of time, the numbers of users in such countries generally decreased compared to before a legalization.

    2) A real market for drugs might evolve. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily. A demand for drugs creates competition. Competition leads to better quality and/or better prices.

    3) Quality standards must be guaranteed. So, the drugs you can buy, are no longer in danger of containing other things, which are seriously dangerous for the user.

    4) More people would become addicted? Not necessarily. Addiction isn’t as simple as that. This is related to point 1): Availability is not the same as more use.

    5) All of the point in the first part of my response would disappear.

    I think it’s pretty clear, which one of the two options is the better choice. Spend all the money used for criminal justice enforcement in solid educational programs about drug use and you’re far better off than before. And this list of effects is not even close to be finished. As I said before, you can fill entire libraries about the topic.
  15. @IR254 that's a very nice writeup but you avoid the main question: is smoking dope a bad thing? Meaning whether is it something we should seriously try to eradicate. And it seems to me that you think that it is on the one hand sort of bad but also not bad enough to do anything drastic about.
    Deleted Account likes this.
  16. IR254 likes this.
  17. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    Yes, I avoid that question because I'm not competent enough to talk about it. I never tried weed, nor am I some kind of medical expert. I have not enough knowledge about the effects of weed (or drugs in general) on the user.

    I only have expertise about the effects of criminalization, because I come from a criminal justice background. What I say is mostly: You can not eradicate drug use, even if you want to. Trying to eradicate it doesn't work. The negative consequences such an attempt brings, are much more severe than the potential positive effects (if such a thing even exists).

    Made me laugh, honestly. Thanks, I guess haha
    Deleted Account likes this.
  18. This is where I disagree. Is it really impossible for us to get rid of an unwanted phenomenon via law? It almost looks as if you're arguing against punishment and prisons in general which is quite something when it's coming from a future lawyer.
  19. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    Short answer: Yes.

    I understand, that it could seem that way, but actually that's not completly right. In order to understand that somewhat confusing statement, you have to ask yourself one question: What purpose does punishment have?

    I'm not lying, when I say: There are hundreds of books about this question alone. Nowadays, there are mostly 3-4 theories, that get discussed.

    1) Theory of positive & negative special prevention: This theory argues, that punishment should a) "scare" criminals with punishment and b) better the perpetrator via punishment. What criminology showed us over and over again, is that criminals generally do not care about a potential punishment. You can literally punish drug delinquency by death, it would make no difference in numbers (look at the Phillipines for an example). I already explained, why criminals do not become better in prison above.

    2) Theory of positive & negative general prevention: This theory is similiar. Instead of focusing on the criminal himself, it focuses on the society as a whole. People should be a) scared by punishments and b) strengthen the societies trust in state and law. The "scaring" part doesn't work for the same reason. The second part has something to it.

    3) Theory of "revenge": This theory argues, that punishment only has one purpose: Revenge. The society has a need for revenge after injustice takes place. You can see examples of this every time a rapist or murderer gets convicted. People scream for harder punishment and all sorts of things. I believe, that this theory is quite strong.

    4) Theory of retributive general prevention: This is basically a combination of the second part of theory 2) and the entire theory 3). It makes the most sense to me.

    Since I believe, that theorie 3 or 4 is the best, I think punishment for drugs is extremely bad, since there is no victim. When there is no victim, there is no need for revenge.
    Deleted Account likes this.
  20. Hasn't happened yet

Share This Page