First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Prop 19 has failed
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10


Resources and money yes, human bodies? No. If the states around the world let marijuana be legalized, the only people that would enforce it would be federal government agents, not the state police. And there aren't nearly as many federal agents as state policemen. And there definitely wouldnt be enough federal peeps to enforce it around the U.S.

But if we are just talking about California, then yea, Im sure they could enforce it easily

Posted 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:

I didnt denounce my own claim. Your reading in too much.

If you can't understand what I said, then I can't help you
When Proposition 19 claimed to regulate marijuana grow-up, you just claimed that "All the resources to just find California growers, would cost a ton of resources. " According to the utilitarianism morality, which is the greatest good for the most people at the least cost, that's not a good enough reason to support Proposition 19, when marijuana regulation is going to cost more than prohibition based on your own claim, not mine.


superluccix wrote:



Resources and money yes, human bodies? No. If the states around the world let marijuana be legalized, the only people that would enforce it would be federal government agents, not the state police. And there aren't nearly as many federal agents as state policemen. And there definitely wouldnt be enough federal peeps to enforce it around the U.S.

But if we are just talking about California, then yea, Im sure they could enforce it easily
What is human resource.

And why should only the government enforce the law? When it's the potheads who should be responsible for their own recreational marijuana usage. Are you suggesting that somehow the potheads can't be trusted with following their own rules? If so, why?
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10


First off, your first quote of me had nothing to do with what you said for that quote. Second, I NEVER said that the government not having the manpower to find the marijuana growers is a reason to support Prop 19.....I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. 3rd, you then say that I said that marijuana cost is going to cost more than Prohibition, which I NEVER said that. Why are you trying to put words into my mouth that I clearly never said in the first place? And lastly on the first quote, I DO NOT CARE about this " utilitarianism morality". That has absolutely no weight in this arguement. Plus, its your own beliefs, not what every human in the world must go by.

And now your second quote.

What is human resource? Exactly what it sounds like, Resources in the form of humans. Human bodies.

Why should only the government enforce the law? Well if a state has legalized it, then the state police won't be arresting people regarding marijuana use, only the federal government agents would, and since they couldnt possibly has enough manpower to stop all the states if they legalized this law, it would go unpunished for the majority.

And the potheads be responsible for their own recreational usage? YES OF COURSE! Thats what they WANT! They want to be able to control what they do with marijuana usage in their recreational time. They want to simply smoke during their free time, and not have to be bothered by police when they aren't doing any harm.

Am I suggesting potheads can't follow their own rules? What the heck are you talking about? I dont even know how to respond to this question since I never even said anything remotely like this. Ill go out on a limb and just reply with something...........Marijuana users SIMPLY want to smoke in their free time, THAT IS ALL. Nothing more than that. They dont want to be able to go to work high, they dont want to be able to drive on the roads high, they simply want to get high in their recreational time, whether that be at a friends house, or in some sort of back alley, or anyplace in general.

Also, Logic>Morals.
Posted 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:



First off, your first quote of me had nothing to do with what you said for that quote. Second, I NEVER said that the government not having the manpower to find the marijuana growers is a reason to support Prop 19.....I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. 3rd, you then say that I said that marijuana cost is going to cost more than Prohibition, which I NEVER said that. Why are you trying to put words into my mouth that I clearly never said in the first place? And lastly on the first quote, I DO NOT CARE about this " utilitarianism morality". That has absolutely no weight in this arguement. Plus, its your own beliefs, not what every human in the world must go by.

And now your second quote.

What is human resource? Exactly what it sounds like, Resources in the form of humans. Human bodies.

Why should only the government enforce the law? Well if a state has legalized it, then the state police won't be arresting people regarding marijuana use, only the federal government agents would, and since they couldnt possibly has enough manpower to stop all the states if they legalized this law, it would go unpunished for the majority.

And the potheads be responsible for their own recreational usage? YES OF COURSE! Thats what they WANT! They want to be able to control what they do with marijuana usage in their recreational time. They want to simply smoke during their free time, and not have to be bothered by police when they aren't doing any harm.

Am I suggesting potheads can't follow their own rules? What the heck are you talking about? I dont even know how to respond to this question since I never even said anything remotely like this. Ill go out on a limb and just reply with something...........Marijuana users SIMPLY want to smoke in their free time, THAT IS ALL. Nothing more than that. They dont want to be able to go to work high, they dont want to be able to drive on the roads high, they simply want to get high in their recreational time, whether that be at a friends house, or in some sort of back alley, or anyplace in general.

Also, Logic>Morals.
Morality is logic, and laws are derived from morality, while your own circular argument based on entitlement claim is starting to make yourself sound like an immoral religious fundamentalist:

In the adult or adolescent convert, the self-esteem deficit already exists, and the individual gravitates toward a group that fits and reinforces their world-view—that they are inadequate and in need of a god to fix them and relieve them of the liability for their unhappiness. This faulty syllogism—I am bad; God can fix me; God says I am bad; ad infinitum—traps the believer in a loop of circular reasoning from which escape requires a thorough self-analysis and an almost Herculean effort to negate the unhealthy tenets and their unpleasant side-effects. The results of all-out dependency upon faith and scripture as taught by the fundamentalist interpretation of the New Testament can include: "...indecision, procrastination, doubting, perfectionism, and obsessiveness—that is, repetitive, inflexible, personally tormenting ways of thinking...diverse forms of hostility, hatred, and violence"

Fundamental Christianity with its defilement of self-image, unwavering demand for obedience to authority, and sole reliance on faith diminishes the individual by eating away at the heart of human dignity. It entraps its followers by obliquely instilling in them a sense of powerlessness under the guise of salvation, and it holds them fast to the fold through intimidation of the soul. It teaches that misery and sin constitute the bedrock of personality and that the only way to liberation is to accept this thought as truth and to cry out for forgiveness for having been born. It entreats its followers to abandon logic and to stop thinking altogether—the ultimate form of control. These distorted messages are delivered and accepted by those who frame their reality and their character with the tools of fear and guilt, and in each generation these messages spread like a virus, infecting the vulnerable.(citation)
When you can't come up with rational argument based on objective morality stemmed from reasoning, you subsequently failed at convincing the majority that are not recreational marijuana users to believe in your ideology. Thereby your own refusal to adhere to logic is the reason why I will not trust you to follow any set of rules.
64156 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / Right behind you.
Offline
Posted 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:

Why should only the government enforce the law? Well if a state has legalized it, then the state police won't be arresting people regarding marijuana use, only the federal government agents would, and since they couldnt possibly has enough manpower to stop all the states if they legalized this law, it would go unpunished for the majority.



Thats not how the law would work, if proposition 19 had passed, the law would be declared unconstitutional due to the fact it would be going against federal law. Just because the state says its legal, it doesnt make it so, due to the fact Federal Law supersedes state law. State police would still have to prosecute people to the full extent of the law. They could argue against it in court, but realistically by the time a set court date came to pass, the law would have been declared unconstitutional and there would be nothing people could use to argue against their infraction. Even if the state police didnt have to prosecute people who smoked weed, after the law was overturned it would still fall back onto their hands. The most they would gain would be a month of not having to worry about it. As long as the federal government considers it illegal, no state can declare it legal.
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10


Morality stems from logic. Let me give you an example of what Im trying to get it when I mean Logic>Morals.

Illegal Immigration. Morality will tell us it is nice of us and the proper thing to do to help others, however logic tells us they are breaking the law and are criminals, thats what I was getting at.

I am using pure logic and a tiny bit of morality, however in the example I said earlier, Logic>Morals.

I cant come up with a rational arguement? I have been this entire time telling you the pure logic. YOU on the other hand have this ENTIRE TIME been saying how people shouldnt run away from problems by smoking pot. YOU were the one spouting your Ideologies. I havent once said anything of the sort of Ideologies. Im telling you it makes NO SENSE...no LOGICAL SENSE that marijuana should be illegal.
I have not once spouted anything that seems like an ideology.


The bottom line is this. The people who said NO to Prop19 had no logical arguements at all. It was all about peoples morals, and morals should never exceed logic
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10


I dont have anything to support my claim on this one....except casually seeing 1 website about it....so that means nothing for my claim.....but wouldnt there be a reason as to why California would even try to pass this bill? I mean surely if what you said is true (And Im pretty sure it is), why would California even bother to try and pass the bill?

Edit: Wait....I keep reading every site that I go to that the federal law enforcement CANNOT MAKE local and state law enforcement to make them go after the marijuana users. Im starting to think what I originally said is correct now
Posted 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:



Morality stems from logic. Let me give you an example of what Im trying to get it when I mean Logic>Morals.

Illegal Immigration. Morality will tell us it is nice of us and the proper thing to do to help others, however logic tells us they are breaking the law and are criminals, thats what I was getting at.

I am using pure logic and a tiny bit of morality, however in the example I said earlier, Logic>Morals.

I cant come up with a rational arguement? I have been this entire time telling you the pure logic. YOU on the other hand have this ENTIRE TIME been saying how people shouldnt run away from problems by smoking pot. YOU were the one spouting your Ideologies. I havent once said anything of the sort of Ideologies. Im telling you it makes NO SENSE...no LOGICAL SENSE that marijuana should be illegal.
I have not once spouted anything that seems like an ideology.



The bottom line is this. The people who said NO to Prop19 had no logical arguements at all. It was all about peoples morals, and morals should never exceed logic
That's red herrings logical fallacy, when immigration law has nothing to do with how you failed to generate sufficient justifications to cross the threshold between marijuana from a medical drug with limited benefits for unhealthy patients, to a recreational drug with mostly positive benefits that maximizes human social flourishing. For example, I can drink tea with moderation for recreational purpose because there are real positive benefits for myself to do so. Just like I can drink red wine with moderation for recreational purpose because there are also real positive benefits for myself to do so.


superluccix wrote:



I dont have anything to support my claim on this one....except casually seeing 1 website about it....so that means nothing for my claim.....but wouldnt there be a reason as to why California would even try to pass this bill? I mean surely if what you said is true (And Im pretty sure it is), why would California even bother to try and pass the bill?

Edit: Wait....I keep reading every site that I go to that the federal law enforcement CANNOT MAKE local and state law enforcement to make them go after the marijuana users. Im starting to think what I originally said is correct now
And there you go again, contradicting your own entitlement claims without factual proofs. As in you didn't cite the website that supports your claim.
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10



By your own logic, the only things that can be defined as recreational activities are things that directly benefit you in some way. I don't even need to bother saying how stupid that is. Recreational means free time. Where the heck did you get the idea you need to gain benefits from it.

And no, I havent contradicted myself at all, ever. Why do I need to cite my website? Just go to google and type in anything with the words "Prop19" and "federal goverment" and you will see the sites I used. The law states that federal government can override state law, however if all the states passed something like prop19, then the federal goverment doesnt have nearly enough agents to enforce its laws. This is a hotly debated topic, thats why I dont bother bringing in these "Factual Proofs", because nobody knows exactly how this would play out.

You don't make any logical sense. You only spout your ideology on how everyone should live their lives

Edit: Here, let me make it easy for you. Give me Logical reasons as to why Marijuana should stay illegal. And don't spout ANY of your ideologies, like how people should live and the like, since that differs from person to person and is totally IRRELEVANT.
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:




By your own logic, the only things that can be defined as recreational activities are things that directly benefit you in some way. I don't even need to bother saying how stupid that is. Recreational means free time. Where the heck did you get the idea you need to gain benefits from it.

And no, I havent contradicted myself at all, ever. Why do I need to cite my website? Just go to google and type in anything with the words "Prop19" and "federal goverment" and you will see the sites I used. The law states that federal government can override state law, however if all the states passed something like prop19, then the federal goverment doesnt have nearly enough agents to enforce its laws. This is a hotly debated topic, thats why I dont bother bringing in these "Factual Proofs", because nobody knows exactly how this would play out.

You don't make any logical sense. You only spout your ideology on how everyone should live their lives

Edit: Here, let me make it easy for you. Give me Logical reasons as to why Marijuana should stay illegal. And don't spout ANY of your ideologies, like how people should live and the like, since that differs from person to person and is totally IRRELEVANT.
That's not what the word "recreation" means at all:

Recreation

Definition of RECREATION
: refreshment of strength and spirits after work; also : a means of refreshment or diversion : hobby

Examples of RECREATION

1. The fields next to the school are used for recreation.
2. <decided to take a bike tour of the island for recreation and relaxation>

Origin of RECREATION
Middle English recreacion, from Anglo-French, from Latin recreation-, recreatio restoration to health, from recreare to create anew, restore, refresh, from re- + creare to create
First Known Use: 15th century(citation)

What's more, not only that you were making false claim on the meaning of the word "recreation", you were making more false claims on Proposition 19 based on uncertainty. Now how irrational is that? None, according to yourself.
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 11/11/10 , edited 11/11/10


Recreation is an activity of leisure, leisure being discretionary time.[1] The "need to do something for recreation" seems to be an essential element of human biology and psychology.[2] Recreational activities are often done for enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure and are considered to be "fun". The term "recreation" implies participation to be healthy refreshing mind and body.

From Wikipedia. Notice the enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure part and are considered to be "Fun".

Why did you even have to look up the word recreational? What the heck do you think people meant when they wanted it for recreational use? Its obvious what they meant, and they meant to use it in their free time.

And just in case you somehow got stuck on the "implies to be healthy" part, there is something called medicinal marijuana, which isn't necessarily a different form of marijuana. So your arguement is finished.

This entire arguement I have been making key logical points on Prop19 and marijuana in general, and now when I gave a "Maybe" answer to one of these questions, you dismiss my entire arguement. *sigh*. Peace
Posted 11/11/10

superluccix wrote:



Recreation is an activity of leisure, leisure being discretionary time.[1] The "need to do something for recreation" seems to be an essential element of human biology and psychology.[2] Recreational activities are often done for enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure and are considered to be "fun". The term "recreation" implies participation to be healthy refreshing mind and body.

From Wikipedia. Notice the enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure part and are considered to be "Fun".

Why did you even have to look up the word recreational? What the heck do you think people meant when they wanted it for recreational use? Its obvious what they meant, and they meant to use it in their free time.

And just in case you somehow got stuck on the "implies to be healthy" part, there is something called medicinal marijuana, which isn't necessarily a different form of marijuana. So your arguement is finished.

This entire arguement I have been making key logical points on Prop19 and marijuana in general, and now when I gave a "Maybe" answer to one of these questions, you dismiss my entire arguement. *sigh*. Peace
Since when is one being sick and unhealthy, there by one needing "medicine" is "refreshment of strength and spirits" aka being "recreational"? Are potheads simply people who are sick, thereby they need "medical" marijuana?

Definition of MEDICAL
1
: of, relating to, or concerned with physicians or the practice of medicine
2
: requiring or devoted to medical treatment
— med·i·cal·ly\-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

Examples of MEDICAL

1. He has a dangerous medical condition.
2. The report was published in a leading medical journal.
3. Her recovery was a medical miracle.
4. He opened his own medical practice.
5. an important advance in medical science

Origin of MEDICAL
French or Late Latin; French médical, from Late Latin medicalis, from Latin medicus physician, from mederi to remedy, heal; akin to Avestan vī-mad- healer, Greek medesthai to be mindful of — more at mete
First Known Use: 1646(citation)
47115 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Arnold Maryland
Offline
Posted 1/28/11
Just because someone is high, does not mean they are sick and unhealthy.

Medical Marijuana exists, therefore that means there are some problems that can be dealt most effectively with marijuana
36195 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Cloud 9.
Offline
Posted 2/2/11
Prop 19 needs to be re-written. I'm sure a lot of people don't know this but there was a GRIP of fucking loop holes in the written bill that would have let police or any other enforcement to perceive it as they will. I'm glad it didn't pass.

As an active marijuana user [daily] I am pro weed but a bit on the fence about it becoming illegal and what not. Weed is already rather easily obtainable with the uprise of medical facilities, ease of access to a card, or shit even your local dealer. But I wouldn't mind it being legalized so I could smoke my joint outside at work with the rest of the cancer stick smokers.

Yes, marijuana should be illegal. Smoke 30 joints and see how you feel afterwards. Then eat 30 McDonald's hamburgers and see how you feel afterwards. Tell me which one makes you feel horrid, and tell me which one is the most unhealthy for you.

The ONLY reason marijuana is illegal is because of Nixon. He was presented with the facts from many scientists from studies performed on many people. Marijuana was NOT harmful. What did he do? Told them to throw the papers away, never looked at them, and declared weed to be illegal. You tell me what's more unjust than that?

Weed deserves to have a chance to be legal. There's a difference between people who Grow up and people who Grow old. And that my friend is the problem with cannabis in USA. Plenty of people are growing old, but not enough are growing the fuck up.

It doesn't cause brain damage, it doesn't make you beyond lazy, it doesn't do a lot of the things rumors tell you. I work full time, and I was going to school full time for a year while working too. All while being completely lifted. People are going to be lazy with or without cannabis, and that's the truth.

Legalization of the weed would change many things.
For one, taxes, the amount of tax dollars that we WASTE on stopping drug trafficking from Cuba/Mexico/Canada is ridiculous. The tax money we could benefit from making cannabis legal is in the millions, if not billions. If spent correctly we could bring ourselves out of this huge depression pit and become one of the greatest countries in the world again.

Death toll. Abusing marijuana does not cause death, it has NEVER been reported in history to do so. You know what does cause death though? The countless people dying from drug trafficking, cultivating, drug wars, etc. If we were to legalize marijuana there would be a decrease in death rates from the adverse effect of it being illegal.

Jobs. We would see a huge increase of employment if they allowed hemp/marijuana to be legalized here in California. Essentially Cannabis is a weed, it's not hard to grow. Having farms across CA, distributors, ad campaigns etc, all of this could give jobs to the many unemployed right now stimulating our economy.

I honestly could go on about the pro's and cons, but really there aren't too many cons. All in all, legalization isn't a bad thing, in my eyes.
Posted 2/3/11
The real reason why weed is illegal is because it'd benefit South America and Africa very much economically. America and Europe like it how South America and Africa are poor so we can rape them off their ressources ^_^
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.