Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

nicely done draconias, you've shown that you not only cannot formulate a decent rebutal but also that you are unable to properly comprehend an argument

At 12/29/05 02:56 PM, Draconias wrote: Marijuana is exceptionally easy to home-grow. There is nothing keeping the drug within government control except the same police expenses we already have.

the thing is it would also be legal to grow, but it would also be sold eliminating the need for large grow-ops. this would allow individuals to grow their own that they would consume themselves or with friends. why would you spend thousands of dollars to produce a product in large quantities if you can get at a store, do you see people creating grow-ops for tobacco or illegal breweries for alcohol?

What you miss is that the processing is what makes Alcohol and Tobacco good! It's the aging and the vineyards that make Wine good, and the specific bacteria strains that make beer popular. It's the fields and fields of tobacco and the processing into cigars or cigarettes that produces the taste and feel so popular in Tobacco.

well thats where the marijuana cultivators and packers would come in. marijuana grows well as a field crop and in large numbers and as you said its easy to grow so why can't it be adapted for large-scale production?
another thing; tobacco does not need to be grown in large quantities and the commercial processing it goes through to be good. if you really want to you can grow it and dry it yourself

That's not how Marijuana works. It's the leaf itself that you seek to buy, and processing means essentially nothing.

nicely done showing your knowledge of marijuana. you do not smoke the leaves; you smoke the buds and the resin (hash) processing is the process through which it would be cultivated, dried, packaged (and possibly roled like cigarrettes) it would have nothing to do with what the product does since marijuana only needs to be dried to be able to be smoked, all the chemicals are in the plant.
so that actually proves my statements to still be correct.

Since there is already an entirely illegal system running for the growth, distribution, and sale of marijuana, what makes you think legalizing it and then taxing it would make them stop? It's cheaper to continue long-standing arrangement outside of taxes than it is to buy things post-tax. To make it worse, taxes on vices (like Alcohol) are generally much higher than taxes on necessary items (like vegetables).

people can easily grow their own vegtables and avoid taxes yet they don't...strange...

Also, you need to factor in the costs of planning, setting up, and maintaining this large system of government monitoring and distribution control. Where is that money going to come from? You also need to consider the costs of setting up and mass producing marijuana for companies; is it worth it to begin selling the stuff legally when we don't want a large market increase?

you seem to have not realised that alcohol and tobacco producers are all private corporations making the cost to set up production and distribution roughly nothing at all. the only thing that would cost money would be fixing laws, creating new ones, expanding police patrols to check for people under the influence of marijuana as well as alcohol as well as having the FDA (i think it is in america) check on whether or not the marijuana from certain companies is fit for human consumption.
as to where that money would come from i think a good place would be from the prison and judicial system which would no longer be burdened by people having to serve mandatory sentences for simple posession.

Also, what about the moral issues involved and the massive societal backlash against both the politicians and companies? I know at least 100 million people who absolutely don't want marijuana legal...

i no at least 100 million people who don't support abortion, who don't support gay marriage, etc. what people think, especially if it isn't a majority in an election is irrelevant. if you don't wanna smoke don't smoke its that simple.

2. the use of marijuana will be "controlled" like alcohol is since it is a mind altering substance:
-driving under the influence of marijuana would be an offence

That doesn't stop ten of thousands from doing it every year and killing thousands of innocent people and creating untold amounts of havoc and suffering. And it counter-acts the positive of releasing most marijuana-based criminals from jail.

i doubt that the number of marijuana users would increase that dramatically once legalized and since such i tiny minority of accidents are marijuana related i highly doubt havoc and suffering will increase like you believe.

So how exactly can you control this stuff? If people hide the use constantly and already have illegal networks of distribution and use... what's encouraging them to play by your rules and limit themselves like that unnecessarily?

if we keep in mind that illegal networks would collapse due to lack of profitablility then it would be policed like alcohol: no drinking on the in public and no driving under the influence they test you and you're taken off the road and dealt with.

So in other words... legalize it, then figure out if we just screwed ourselves over, again? Why don't we get the Netherlands to do the research and screw them over instead of ourselves, or legalize it for research only until we actually know the effects.

you seem to have misinterpretted what i said. research has been done and shown its benefits, whereas it wasn't on tobacco until recently. these to substances have been treated oppositly. as far as further research what was meant was further research into what it can do not how it will kill you.

4. [Would help hemp]

Well, we don't exactly need to legalize marijuana to help hemp.

it would help hemp because most people immediatley associate hemp to marijuana and potheads, this would possibly help its image since it is legal.

Have you considered second-hand inhalation?

sweet jesus you idiot, thats why it would be banned from publice places like alcohol is from most public places and how smoking is slowly been banned from public places because of second-hand smoke (or at-least in quebec). i stated this in my outline, learn to read before you attempt to contradict me.

why don't i list the things that would be done if marijuana would be made legal so you morons stop saying "but if they smoke and drive there are gonna be more accidents...etc"

1. production and distribution of marijuana would be controlled by the government like tobacco or alcohol:
-companies would grow it/proccess it/ship it
-its quality and proccessing would be monitored by the government so nothing gets put in it that shouldn't be there and that its safe for consumption
-it would probably be taxed like cigarrettes are bringing in profit for the government
-stores may need liscences to sell marijuana
-you will most likely have to be over 18/21 depending on where you are to buy marijuana
**chances are it will then be legal to grow your own marijuana if you like, but just like some people grow tobacco it will be for personal use not to sell to others like some of you think people will do. when there is a market for a product that you can get with no problems at a store why would you try to illegally purchase something legal?

2. the use of marijuana will be "controlled" like alcohol is since it is a mind altering substance:
-driving under the influence of marijuana would be an offence
-you wouldn't (may depend on company policy) be allowed to smoke during office hours
-if its treated like cigarrettes are being treated here; you wouldn't be able to smoke in a public place ie: pub, club, store...
+and if treated more like alcohol you wouldn't even be allowed to smoke out on the street

3. once legal it would allow for even further study of its effects and benefits and would be more freely used as medicine
-it has been shown to be an effective pain killer, relaxant, appetite increaser (not sure of the correct word) and to have even more benefits for metal health
+this would allow it to be used freely in hospitals or for medecine that would isolate the benefits of the THC (which is not only the chemical that makes marijuana what it is but shown to have the most medicinal use)
-would allow for a more free, unbiased research into how it affects health, be it negatively or positevely
+tobacco was once thought to be very good for you and was used medicinally, look at whats happened now, further research may further disprove much of what was once thought of marijuana

4. would help boost the amount of materials available for products by removing the stigma that was put on hemp by marijuana and the campaign against it
-hemp provides many products such as paper, ropes, fiber and oils among other things
-hemp is easy to grow and does not remove as much nutrient from the soil as other crops do
**one of the reasons hemp lost popularity because of the connections people made between it and its smokeable cousin (you can't get high on hemp). though hemp was legal and was a great source of material many farmers stopped growing it because of pressure from ignorant people. hemp is once again regaining popularity as an enviro-friendly crop and the legalization would help its producers and its image.

there is possibly more so feel free to add, but all in all marijuana is not that bad a substance, i understand if you are against using it but there is no need to ban it from being legal, if you don't want it, don't smoke it, its legalization would probably not affect you

At 12/27/05 04:20 PM, Jinzoa wrote: how can we say killing is wrong we have never killed before?

...
...
did i miss something here? since when did smoking marijuana, or using any other drug, ever get to be on par with murder?
this has absolutley nothing to do with this argument. get the hell out of here and come back when you know how to formulate a proper argument or rebutal to someones argument.

i know, but...ach nevermind, there isn't really much to argue anyways

no they prbly wont bust him out, theyll either lynch him or continue killing of his lawyers, which is what the international trial would prevent, he has the right to be defended, and his lawyers have the right to be kept safe

whatever happened to international justice, war crimes, crimes against humanity? he should have been tried at the Hague before an international court. but i'm guessing america is too proud of its catch it wants to justice itself since it can't follow international rules.

i think everyone here has pretty much mentioned everything that needs to be said. i'd like to add that marijuana really isn't that bad, i'm gonna say no more just so that we stay on topic. people are fucked up as everyone said get over it, and wuts wrong with your friend being wiccan? you some little god fearing christian boy who can't even think about other religions or else he'll go to hell? (thought i'm guessing shes wiccan to try and be cool *sigh*).

so to summarize, you gotta get used to the real world, and note to the wise; if you wanna survive in the real world and be taken seriously in an argument stop sayin y'all, your not in kansas anymore

well personally i agree with the idea that there are to many humans for the world to support but once again (just like why everyone hates peta) they have taken these ideas into an odd and creepy direction. though euthanasia may be a good thing supporting suicide doesn't seem a very appropriate action, just like becoming vegan (cannibalism is cool)...hmmm do u think maybe theres a link between them and peta? well anyway things should be done about our population and its relation to the world but willingly killing people of seems a little morbid and slightly unethical, i think the world will do that for itself, another few natural disasters, epidemics and voila! sharp decrease in human.

p.s. why sodomy? has no one heard of birth control methods?

fuck i forgot the quotes, well i was talking bout the_tanks comment and 1winged dragon ur a friggin idiot

haha, oh god i'd love to see that, mainly cause of the sudden death that would be brought down upon you. i guy from my school wore a kilt to his grad, obviously cause he was scottish (cool guy too), and i think insulting him or his heritage would result in severe pain if not disembowlment...or then again he just wouldn't bother having to prove himself to an idiot.

i think the idea of a terrorist group starting WWIII is ridiculous since they are groups present around the world, for now they have no "home" country that can be attacked to be able to beat them, but that may change if a country were to declare itself in alliance or suomething of that nature with a group.
another thing is that there are many reasons as to why the US would want to annex Canada one being the massive amounts of natural resources still available that haven't been depleted like they were in the US. we have water, lumber, minerals, unexploited or built up land that would be extremely useful for many reasons, as well as the arctic which would be useful for bombing the USSR if it were still around. unfortunatley we have actually signed over our water and electricity to the US incase a "major emergency" ever occured there, i say unfortunately because this power could be taken advantage of to gain control of this country.

i seriously think that meat eaters/fur and leather coat wearers should have their own organization to beat down on peta, especially when they satrt pissing u off ass you're about to bite into a delicious "murdered" animal or as you're wearing your favorite dead animal

to redbob86 and gunter45, srry i hadn't realised it was sarcasm, i was too into blasting peta to really notice how ridiculous it was (after all peta activists seem to present that mentality). so yes, i was pumped and angry, so once again sorry for ruining ones humour

many reasons have been posted as to why it should be legal as well as scientific research and proof that disproved most of the negative effects of marijuana that others have used in their arguments against the legalization of marijuana as well as proof that it is actually beneficial to ones health. yet no one seems to acknowledge or argue against those posts, all of you people who keep arguing against its legalization keep bringing up the same disproven facts or simply argue against some of things the more ignorant "marijuana advocates" have posted (these people don't deserve to smoke or argue in favor of anything and should have no say in an intelligent debate).

all joking aside there are plans in the US senate to create one big north american country, so far force isn't part of the plan but after manifest destiny you never know

personally i get the impression the "war on terror" is based on race and religion, so ya kinda see your point along with all that stuff with the KKK, neo-nazis ppl all around the world randomly getting pissed at minorities

when are the americans comin for canada? i wanna fight im fucking ready! I'M FUCKING PUMPED, WHERE THEY COMING!?!?!?

or was it ELF, or is there both?

or was it ELF, or is there both?

At 12/22/05 08:19 PM, dacheat900 wrote: I disagree.. just because they will try heroine or cocaine next.

who are they, what is the proof that "they" will so <Iundoubtedly> try heroine or cocaine next?

At 12/22/05 08:19 PM, dacheat900 wrote: I disagree.. just because they will try heroine or cocaine next.
Also, people are allowed to smoke cigs in a car. So what about weed? Way to may DUI's and the whole thing of "well smokins legal"

no one seems to remember that once legalized it would still be considered an intoxicant like alcohol similar laws would be set up regarding safety such as no driving while stoned, smoking in public possibly. i don't understand why no one looks past the simple good bad issue of marijuana

OMG, but animals were here first! What right do we have to progress our own society forward if it means exploiting them?!!! We should all kill ourselves and let all the animals have a huge happy orgy in a meadow.

srry to tell you that we humans are animals as well, and animals kill animals, and theres that little fact that we've evolved abilities that make us superior to animals. speaking of being here first, why don't we argue about the native populations of people around the world that were practically anhilitated by the european settlers? they are our equals yet we treated them worst then animals, but what am i talking about, you like your animals more than those poor people

another thing, anyone remember the ALF? animal liberation force. basically a terrorist group that attacked reasearched centers to free animals, peta supported them, shows something eh? save the animals but hurt the humans, oh peta how can't we love thee?
and about guiltless cookies, no one factors in the hundreds of field animals killed while grain and other plants are harvested

srry bout restating things u said IllustriousPotentate i didnt see that, or was typing

see the thing is that humans are omnivores and we are the most powerful creatures on earth, yes its fair not to abuse and torture animals but if i want to eat or wear an animal's skin thats my business. the reason most people are pissed off at peta is becase they don't seem to know when to shutup and let people enjoy their steak or other animal products. in religions such as hinduism and buddhism some of the most pious members choose not to eat meat since it would be better not to harm an animal but they don't go around bitching about how other people still eat meat because they know its normal. another thing that pisses me off is how they only pay attention to animal suffering, for example that later to the late Yassir Arafat, it was about a donkey being used to kill people. did they say anything about how horrible it was that people got killed, no they bitched about how a fucking DONKEY got blown up. not only this but did you know that the president of peta is diabetic, and that her drugs were derrived from animals and animal testing? is it not funny how they'll tel people what they can and cannot do but they don't actually give a shit? how bout that they want to make having a pet illegal, even things like police dogs, and seeing eye dogs? so you're going to protect hundreds of animals but increase human suffering immeasurably. thats nice thats fucking beautiful no? have fun being righteous assholes

At 12/22/05 03:23 PM, 1WingedDragon wrote: Hate to break it to yall, but look at most of the people who are against the death penalty. A bunch of pussies too busy sucking off their own ideal of "Utopia" to realize the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

so its an effective deterrent despite the fact it has been shown to change very little...what happened, did i miss something here

At 12/22/05 12:40 PM, x_Toadenalin_x wrote: Most Christians eat meat. To eat meat you have to kill an animal. Killing is always against the Ten Commandments. Is eating meat wrong?

the animals and plants of this earth were given to us by god, we are their masters pretty much meaning we can do as we wish with them, and the ten commandements refer to sins in regard to god and people it has nothing to do with animals, vegan bastards

ya the system is pretty fucked but at least we don't have to deal with idiots sueing each other because some guys garbage can was too sharp (or some other ridiculous bullshit people pull out of their ass in the US) but despite this i think its better we stay without a death penalty for the reasons other people have stated. if its wrong to kill then why is killing the killer any better?

aye, you're right, Islam is completley against terrorism and wtv goes with it. though i'm not muslim i've looked into things regarding Islam and i've read part of the Qur'an and indeed murder, suicide, the degradation of women, harming civilians and the so called jihad do not follow the teachings of Islam. its very much like Christianity so you can think of it that way mostly all the same rules aply. most muslims do not believe that terrorists are muslims or even Islamic-fundamentalists/extremists since it their teachings are supposed to be incompatible with Islam. they do not believe that there is such a thing as a "jihad" or holy war, but there are actual rules that muslim ARMIES are supposed to follow out of respect for the opponent some of those include the fact that civilians should not be targets of an attack. though it does say that warriors will be rewarded after death many don't think this applies to suicide bombers since they have killed themsleves and often civilians as well

At 12/22/05 12:29 AM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 12/19/05 01:12 PM, peedee wrote: I don't think God would be too happy knowing you are altering your moods with a subdstance...

Anyway, I figured you were a pot-head from your posts

;
If god didn't want us to hav ePOT.
He wouldn't have created it!!!
He created everything according to some of what I have been told here at NG

the greatest way to look at pot is the way Rastafarians do (they smoke canabis indicca and not sattiva like most people sell) its an herb given from god to protest against babylon (white society and the rules it imposed on them) and meditate with god...i might be a little off and im part of that white society but thats not my point.
actually all i wanted to say some see it as a gift from god, i got sidetracked