Legalize It!

[Midnight Marauder]

legality is nothing more than a matter of status. This can be changed. I disagree with your opinon. My evidence is the nature of the beer industry before, during and after prohibition.

Be that as it may, by strict definition you are right. I just don't happen to count illegal activity as "industrious" and "self-supporting," strictly. I count it as nefarious cheating, that anyone can do. It takes no special talent, no education, no real hard work. Therefore the money made is stolen, not earned.

I bootlegged beer myself, as a youngster. It's a rite of passage here where I'm from. And still goes on. Because NM and OK have 3.2 beer, we here in Texas have the 6 point. I made boo-coo bucks all through jr. high and HS bootlegging Texas beer to NM and OK on the weekends.

It wasn't industrious, wasn't self-supporting, it was nefarious cheating that anyone who knows these backroads, knows all the tendencies of every LE officer in the area, and who has a fast car couldn't do. ('69 Charger, by the way.)

 

[Oddball]

I get that the NORML numbers are greatly exaggerated, but there's practically no doubt that ending the stupid "war" on (some) drugs would go a long way to help ease prison overcrowding.

How do those two statements reconcile? If the numbers are greatly exaggerated, then legalizing marijuana would do little to ease overcrowding. Correct?

Keep in mind I'm sticking to just marijuana here.

The exaggerations by NORML come in the form of "jailed for merely smoking pot", which is a joke. Most of the people in prison for pot are in fact there for trafficking....But that's still a nonviolenbt offense.

 

[Fatality]

I get that the NORML numbers are greatly exaggerated, but there's practically no doubt that ending the stupid "war" on (some) drugs would go a long way to help ease prison overcrowding.

How do those two statements reconcile? If the numbers are greatly exaggerated, then legalizing marijuana would do little to ease overcrowding. Correct?

Keep in mind I'm sticking to just marijuana here.

The exaggerations by NORML come in the form of "jailed for merely smoking pot", which is a joke. Most of the people in prison for pot are in fact there for trafficking....But that's still a nonviolenbt offense.

and the ones there for possesion are mixed in wiht murderes etc, i mean shit really? why provide killers with fodder for rape. let the dope heads go, execute the killers.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I get that the NORML numbers are greatly exaggerated, but there's practically no doubt that ending the stupid "war" on (some) drugs would go a long way to help ease prison overcrowding.

How do those two statements reconcile? If the numbers are greatly exaggerated, then legalizing marijuana would do little to ease overcrowding. Correct?

Keep in mind I'm sticking to just marijuana here.

The exaggerations by NORML come in the form of "jailed for merely smoking pot", which is a joke. Most of the people in prison for pot are in fact there for trafficking....But that's still a nonviolent offense.

Non-violent and in most cases, not a felony. So most of them are doing county time.

If they catch you with 100 pounds of the shit, yeah. That's felony trafficking. But that wouldn't change if it were legalized, except it would be federal charges.

See?

So their whole argument is full of shit, unless they want it de-criminalized totally, completely unregulated, untaxed, all of that. And that's an unreasonable position, will never happen.

Both sides of this argument need to moderate their views a little, meet somewhere near the middle, for anything to change.

Agree?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

How do those two statements reconcile? If the numbers are greatly exaggerated, then legalizing marijuana would do little to ease overcrowding. Correct?

Keep in mind I'm sticking to just marijuana here.

The exaggerations by NORML come in the form of "jailed for merely smoking pot", which is a joke. Most of the people in prison for pot are in fact there for trafficking....But that's still a nonviolenbt offense.

and the ones there for possesion are mixed in wiht murderes etc, i mean shit really?

Really not. Prisons separate offenders by class. They don't put the confirmed non-violent folk in with the hard cases. That's movie stuff.

 

[Fatality]

The exaggerations by NORML come in the form of "jailed for merely smoking pot", which is a joke. Most of the people in prison for pot are in fact there for trafficking....But that's still a nonviolenbt offense.

and the ones there for possesion are mixed in wiht murderes etc, i mean shit really?

Really not. Prisons separate offenders by class. They don't put the confirmed non-violent folk in with the hard cases. That's movie stuff.

well i hope youre right

 

[Midnight Marauder]

and the ones there for possesion are mixed in wiht murderes etc, i mean shit really?

Really not. Prisons separate offenders by class. They don't put the confirmed non-violent folk in with the hard cases. That's movie stuff.

well i hope youre right

I've done my share of time in county back in my younger years, they always separated by class there too. Have a half-brother who's a career, in and out inmate at state, he's never been violent and has never been around the violent inmates. Got some friends who are prison guards, they say it's quite strict which inmates you mix together. CAC of course, being the most segregated and protected ones.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I'll add to the above -- I've spent probably a little over 2 years total in various jails in my lifetime, yet have never been convicted of any crime.

How do you like that?

 

[Oddball]

Non--violent and in most cases, not a felony. So most of them are doing county time.

If they catch you with 100 pounds of the shit, yeah. That's felony trafficking. But that wouldn't change if it were legalized, except it would be federal charges.

See?

So their whole argument is full of shit, unless they want it de-criminalized totally, completely unregulated, untaxed, all of that. And that's an unreasonable position, will never happen.

Both sides of this argument need to moderate their views a little, meet somewhere near the middle, for anything to change.

Agree?

For the most part.

But the illegal trafficing of huge amounts would practically evaporate overnight under decrim, since there would be little to no money in doing so. Ditto all the violent crimes associated with the drug trade.

 

[necritan]

Oops....my bad....I thought this was a prostitution thread.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Non--violent and in most cases, not a felony. So most of them are doing county time.

If they catch you with 100 pounds of the shit, yeah. That's felony trafficking. But that wouldn't change if it were legalized, except it would be federal charges.

See?

So their whole argument is full of shit, unless they want it de-criminalized totally, completely unregulated, untaxed, all of that. And that's an unreasonable position, will never happen.

Both sides of this argument need to moderate their views a little, meet somewhere near the middle, for anything to change.

Agree?

For the most part.

But the illegal trafficing of huge amounts would practically evaporate overnight under decrim, since there would be little to no money in doing so. Ditto all the violent crimes associated with the drug trade.

It might depend on the potency of the "legal" stuff, that the government allows, and how punitive the tax on it is.

We bootleg 6 point beer here. Just because two neighboring states allow only 3.2 to be sold. The market was created and is serviced!

 

[Shogun]

but, isn't that just indicative of a market not being services locally? legally?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

but, isn't that just indicative of a market not being services locally? legally?

It's what typically happens when government fucks around with shit -- they create the black markets.

No reason to think that legalizing weed wouldn't.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ahh.... I see you've never been poisoned by bad home brew. Or been slipped any wood alkie, that some less then honest liquor bootleggers make and mix in with corn liquor...

Today we have drug dealers cutting smack and coke with ecstasy, or who knows what else.

This is the public safety part of regulation. To ensure quality and relative safety.

You would be able to prosecute for fraud if that occurred.

Please. That's a civil case.

If you're really an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, just say so. There's nothing wrong with that position.

What's wrong with a civil case? You'd be compensated accordingly.

I don't know that I've ever considered myself an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, and I certainly don't if you're thinking of anarchy leading to chaos. I am for legalizing all drugs because I don't think the government has the right to tell anyone what they put in their own bodies, but I don't think that would lead to chaos. I think it would completely undermine the drug black market as it currently stands and be a huge positive.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

You would be able to prosecute for fraud if that occurred.

Please. That's a civil case.

If you're really an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, just say so. There's nothing wrong with that position.

What's wrong with a civil case? You'd be compensated accordingly.

When civil cases wind up with someone going to jail for losing, then we have a related topic.

I don't know that I've ever considered myself an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, and I certainly don't if you're thinking of anarchy leading to chaos. I am for legalizing all drugs because I don't think the government has the right to tell anyone what they put in their own bodies, but I don't think that would lead to chaos. I think it would completely undermine the drug black market as it currently stands and be a huge positive.

You don't know what potency the "legal" drugs would have, don't know the taxation, don't know the regulation that legalization might entail.

Therefore there is really no way to know what black market there would be. But history serves to show us there would be one.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Please. That's a civil case.

If you're really an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, just say so. There's nothing wrong with that position.

What's wrong with a civil case? You'd be compensated accordingly.

When civil cases wind up with someone going to jail for losing, then we have a related topic.

I don't know that I've ever considered myself an anarchist as far as drugs are concerned, and I certainly don't if you're thinking of anarchy leading to chaos. I am for legalizing all drugs because I don't think the government has the right to tell anyone what they put in their own bodies, but I don't think that would lead to chaos. I think it would completely undermine the drug black market as it currently stands and be a huge positive.

You don't know what potency the "legal" drugs would have, don't know the taxation, don't know the regulation that legalization might entail.

Therefore there is really no way to know what black market there would be. But history serves to show us there would be one.

Why does someone need to go to jail for committing fraud just because it's with drugs or alcohol?

Well I'm all for the government getting out of the way and letting the market work so I don't see why there would be a black market.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Why does someone need to go to jail for committing fraud just because it's with drugs or alcohol?

That's not what I said or inferred at all. I am trying to keep this somewhat on-topic, therefore civil fraud isn't an issue, since it doesn't overcrowd prisons.

Well I'm all for the government getting out of the way and letting the market work so I don't see why there would be a black market.

There can only be a black market if the government is involved, you are correct. Just like we have them today. My point is that de-criminalization, making marijuana just like alcohol, taxed and regulated, won't do much to stop a black market, or to stop arrests for illegal weed.

Again, we seem to be getting the terms crossed, "legalization" and "decriminalization."

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Why does someone need to go to jail for committing fraud just because it's with drugs or alcohol?

That's not what I said or inferred at all. I am trying to keep this somewhat on-topic, therefore civil fraud isn't an issue, since it doesn't overcrowd prisons.

Well I'm all for the government getting out of the way and letting the market work so I don't see why there would be a black market.

There can only be a black market if the government is involved, you are correct. Just like we have them today. My point is that de-criminalization, making marijuana just like alcohol, taxed and regulated, won't do much to stop a black market, or to stop arrests for illegal weed.

Again, we seem to be getting the terms crossed, "legalization" and "decriminalization."

Sorry, I thought you were inferring that you'd prefer to see them put in jail for committing fraud. I'm still not sure I know what you were saying.

I agree. It wouldn't stop a black market or stop arrests for illegal weed. I simply don't think there should be illegal weed.

 

[JBeukema]

If we took out all nonviolent drug offenders that would be a significant number of people and would certainly help our overcrowding problem.

You repeat the same myth, the same lie. And fail to realize that "non violent drug offenders" would still be arrested and jailed if drugs were legalized and taxed. Just like any other bootlegger be it alcohol or cigarettes and other tobacco products. Except that's a federal crime, with much harsher sentences. If you make or grow or brew and then sell the shit without a tax stamp, you're looking at 10 years in federal prison.

I don't think you can get past the mantra to even realize what you're saying. Legalizing marijuana or any of the other recreational drugs won't stop arrests. Folks illegally dealing in these will face federal charges instead.

Do you get it yet?

So there you have it, legalizing drugs will NOT have any effect on prison overcrowding. One because the issue is greatly exaggerated, as I pointed out earlier, and two because the "legal" drugs will be regulated and taxed, and if you're caught bootlegging it your ass will go up federal.

So please, drop the mantra? It is regurgitated, stale old kool-aid that doesn't advance the discussion.

Thank you.

Legalizing./decriminalizing marijuana will have the same effect as with alcohol.

 

[JBeukema]

Wrong. You don't ever hear about bootlegging arrests because they're not "sexy." It's boring, blase ATF stuff. But it happens daily. And it's stiff FEDERAL FELONY charges, not misdemeanor pay your ticket crap like we have now for weed possession.

You really think there won't be a black market? Folks will be growing their own weed because it will be legal to do so. But just like booze, they will start selling it, without the tax stamp, and that's where the hammer will be coming down.

Right now, I can brew my own beer at home. It's legal to do so. What do you think would happen to me if I got caught selling my home brew to friends, neighbors, anyone who wanted it?

Use your noggin.

Well, this is the way I see it. Why would I buy beer from a bootlegger when I can just walk to the corner store? I feel that the same would apply for weed.

To avoid the massive, punative taxation and buy the shit for about half or more what you would pay in the store.

We have a massive black market on cigarettes too, always have, and they bust folks for that too.

That's a very effective argument against the sin tax, not against decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana