Their responses are varied and typically uncomfortable, but I’m always right.

You can always tell. If you suspect someone, you’re right.

Harmless, riiiiiight…

I’ve always said let people do as they please with their own bodies. When their misguided actions spill over into the lives of others and affect the innocent, apply the law and restrict their rights.

* Only an addle brained liberal would argue for smoking after doing everything to restrict “big tobacco” & CO2.

The video was misleading and intellectually dishonest. The opinions of one MD with an obvious conflict of interest — she earns her living ‘treating’ marijuana use — are hardly persuasive. Why is there no mention of the obvious carnage caused by alcohol use, yet alcohol is legal? Are we supposed to believe that those tender “myelinating” young brains are unaffected by other drugs? Are their no other drugs that are lipophilic”? Pretty thin gruel.

The real question is whether marijuana is so harmful, so lethal, so toxic, or so dangerous that it provides a compelling reason to continue to prosecute those who merely possess it. The answer is no. We ought not to promote its use, but like Prohibition it is time to end the war on ourselves.

DaMav on December 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

That is mostly a specious argument made up of strawmen.

Obvious conflict of interest?
Problems from excess alcohol is not part of the topic.
You find it hard to believe that different drug act differently on the body?
“The real question is_____”
No it is not the real question.

This is how an honest debate works.
If you find fault in the research data and analysis that is being presented and the conclusions based on that science, state specifically where the data is wrong or where you find the scientific method to be flawed..offer your alternative hypothesis and provide your research data/ analysis and conclusions for peer review. If you have none, the you have nothing but opinion and feelings.

JohnGalt23 on December 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM

You’re incredible. You’re having a completely different debate. The points you seem to harp on are not points that I’ve made.
I ask one (1) question:

Why are legal medical marijuana prices higher than street prices if the claim made by medical pot activists is that the expenses of smuggling, lost shipments due to interdiction, the movement to different distribution points, deadbeat customers etc, does not exist for the legal grower. And you answer with ‘oppressed hippie’ boilerplate catechisms and mellow anarchist talking points.
You really do seem to hold this pot thing to a high degree of personal emotionalism that seems disproportionate to the issue. O.K…I get it..you like drugs..good for you. Let your freak flag fly and all that, but try to make more rational arguments to further your cause. The “I get my info from High Times magazine” and NORMAL propaganda is threadbare after 40 years or so.
Just sayin’.

The greatest harm done by the present condition is the mass alienation of young people from American institutions. People who otherwise have no propensity to become criminals watch their friends’ lose rights and freedom over a relatively innocuous act and recoil with hostility at the American system of justice. The very act of procurement results in forced contact and indoctrination with a deliberately criminal subculture which then becomes glorified. The harm to society is deeply ingrained and penetrates generations.

The video was misleading and intellectually dishonest. The opinions of one MD with an obvious conflict of interest — she earns her living ‘treating’ marijuana use — are hardly persuasive. Why is there no mention of the obvious carnage caused by alcohol use, yet alcohol is legal? Are we supposed to believe that those tender “myelinating” young brains are unaffected by other drugs? Are their no other drugs that are lipophilic”? Pretty thin gruel.

The real question is whether marijuana is so harmful, so lethal, so toxic, or so dangerous that it provides a compelling reason to continue to prosecute those who merely possess it. The answer is no. We ought not to promote its use, but like Prohibition it is time to end the war on ourselves.

Your numbers of price per pound is bullshit…unless you are claiming that a person can enter a medical marijuana dispensary and walk out with a pound of pot for 1500.

Mimzey on December 2, 2012 at 4:21 PM

No. Because regulation of dispensaries prevent them from selling customers more than an ounce. Which, if you had any clue about what you were talking about, I wouldn’t have to explain to you.

$1500-2500 is the pound price for top-quality pot from growers. That’s what dispensaries pay for it. Or did you think dispensaries bought their pot from somewhere else?

Or would you like evidence of that also?

Seriously..what IS it you’re trying to prove?

that pot is harmless

No…, I’ve stated that cannabis is not harmless.

that pot laws are unconstitutional

That laws passed by Congress to be enforced by the US government are unconstitutional. If you had any idea about federalism, you would know the difference between the those two statements.

that there is a pot shortage driving prices up

No. That laws passed by the US government implementing criminal sanctions for engaging in the cannabis trade drive legitimate producers from the marketplace, which drives prices to black market levels, which cause all types of problems for society.

that legal medical pot is in fact illegal?

No. That the US Government, in contravention to the US Constitution, is implementing criminal sanctions against the cannabis trade. A trade, by the way, which individual states, as is their proper role, have tried to legitimize.

that drug dealer have escrow accounts for legal fees and THATS why the price is what it is regardless of legal status?

No. That (escrow accounts??? – you really aren’t all that sharp, are you?) the price of cannabis is almost entirely determined by its prohibition by the US government. A prohibition that you have spoken out of both sides of your mouth of.

…what?

What am I trying to prove.

I’m trying to prove that know-nothing blowholes like yourself have opinions on matters of policy, economics, and politics that they really have no business holding. Opinions that drive policies that have eroded our civil liberties, destabilized nation-states in this hemisphere, and corrupted our law enforcement and foreign affairs. I’m trying to prove that the War on Drugs is a failure of monumental proportions that conservatives should be dying to be rid of, if for no other reason than conservatives’ requirement that if we tax people to pay for a program, the very minimum that program would be able to claim is success in its stated goals. And I’m trying to prove that the only way conservatives can defend their support for the War on Drugs is to either feign or actually achieve a level of ignorance worthy only of liberals.

And you have made my final point for me.

In spades…

I can see how you may think that, but I never claimed that. I stated my opinion that many of them are mostly like liberals.

If a libertarian is mostly like a liberal, then they are NOT a libertarian.

Factors affecting supply…

Number of suppliers: The market supply curve is the horizontal summation of the individual supply curves. As more firms enter the industry the market supply curve will shift out driving down prices.

You were saying?…

As far as medical cannabis laws being a farce, only if you have no understanding of a federal system of government. States are supposed to have the authority to decide these matters. You have as much as admitted as such. Well, the states have decided, and yet the US Government is still involved in these matters, with your apparent support. It’s not the state laws that are a farce. It is the extra-constitutional power that the US Government has claimed for itself to prohibit these substances that is, in fact a farce.

So, congratulations. You have now not only proven yourself to be an economic illiterate, but also a political illiterate.

That’s a twofer…

JohnGalt23 on December 2, 2012 at 2:56 PM

What the hell are you going on about?
You seem to obsessed with some position you feel the need to convince yourself about.

No seriously…what the hell are you talking about? You seem to be blithering on about general market forces that have nothing to do with the price of tea in China.
….and then go on to crime stats?..What is that all about?
The only thing I asked for a basis in is the claim of drastic shortages of available medical marijuana….still waiting.

Seriously..why so emotionally invested in this one subject?
Your numbers of price per pound is bullshit…unless you are claiming that a person can enter a medical marijuana dispensary and walk out with a pound of pot for 1500.
Is this what you are claiming?

Its almost like you’re not even reading my posts in context with anything other than your “Crusader For Pot” eyes.
Seriously..what IS it you’re trying to prove?..that pot is harmless..that pot laws are unconstitutional..that there is a pot shortage driving prices up..that legal medical pot is in fact illegal?..that drug dealer have escrow accounts for legal fees and THATS why the price is what it is regardless of legal status?…what?
You’re all over the place with your thought processes. Do you personally smoke pot?..cuz thats one of the “harmless” byproducts of using it, don’tcha know?

The reason the cost is so high is that supply of “legal pot” (which, I’ll remind you again is a sign of your ignorance on this matter) is, in fact, severely restricted, by laws enforced by the US Government.

What are you basing that claim on?
Where are there such shortages of legal pot?…and yes..it is either legal or the medical marijuana laws are a farce.

Can you answer that simple question..what is your information source for that claim?

Mimzey on December 1, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Once again, the economic illiteracy amongst those who claim the mantle of “conservative” never ceases to shock.

Are you really asking me for a source, to prove to you that criminal penalties, prosecuted by the US Government in places like California that have legalized medicinal use of marijuana… criminal penalties, that I remind you, carry mandatory minimum sentences measured out in scores of months of incarceration… prevents cannabis producers from entering the market?

Really?

What part do you want proven? That the sentences exist? Here ya go

Do you want proof that the threat of such sentences prevents producers from entering the market? Here I am. Were I, as a resident of CA, able to grow and sell cannabis without the threat of prosecution by the US Government, for the current market prices of $1500-2500 per pound, I’d do it in a heartbeat. The only thing preventing me from doing so is that threat of prosecuting by the US Government. And the same could be said of every farmer in CA. At $2000/lb, they’d be fools to grow anything else.

Do you want proof that as producers are restricted from entering the market, the market price rises? Here you go The appropriate passage:

Factors affecting supply…

Number of suppliers: The market supply curve is the horizontal summation of the individual supply curves. As more firms enter the industry the market supply curve will shift out driving down prices.

You were saying?…

As far as medical cannabis laws being a farce, only if you have no understanding of a federal system of government. States are supposed to have the authority to decide these matters. You have as much as admitted as such. Well, the states have decided, and yet the US Government is still involved in these matters, with your apparent support. It’s not the state laws that are a farce. It is the extra-constitutional power that the US Government has claimed for itself to prohibit these substances that is, in fact a farce.

So, congratulations. You have now not only proven yourself to be an economic illiterate, but also a political illiterate.

That’s a twofer…

experience Mimzey ;) experience

I’m enjoying this but I gotta go, have fun

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Have a good one Slade…been a fun debate.

Of course I haven’t read everything you said.

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I hope no one would agree with everything anyone said.
Thats why I find Obamatrons so frustrating to try and exchange idea with. The brainwashing is too complete.

What are you basing your claim of “harmless” on? It might help to start with your definition of harmless.

Mimzey on December 2, 2012 at 12:54 PM

experience Mimzey ;) experience

I’m enjoying this but I gotta go, have fun

now you’re just losing sight of the ball. Stay in the game.

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Projection?
There is no game, only objective facts. People have the right to make laws. Like those or not..they are a valid expression of governing via the “will of the people”.
Do you agree with this idea? If not, why not?

weed is harmless and therefore less dangerous than alcohol

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 12:40 PM

What are you basing your claim of “harmless” on? It might help to start with your definition of harmless.

the fact that weed is harmless and less dangerous than the legal drugs – alcohol and nicotine – is a useless argument though. No matter how flawlessly you present those facts, the next guy will say “drugs!” and half the population will run toward prohibition. Ironic considering half the population now feeds kids designer drugs like Ritalin and Adderal that are twice the potency of cocaine.

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I’m guessing that for some reason, you and J the L are missing my point. It may be due to focus bias.
My main point is that the people of a state have the right, under the concept of states rights, to make the laws that they see fit for their state. Some will agree with those laws and some won’t. Regardless of what side one chooses to be on, those laws are a valid expression of the governance by “the people”.

weed is harmless and therefore less dangerous than alcohol

Whats the similarity between nose picking and skydiving?

Mimzey on December 2, 2012 at 12:36 PM

now you’re just losing sight of the ball. Stay in the game.

I pick my nose for example. Most would call that harmless. Being harmless, it’s therefore less dangerous than say…sky diving

Slade73 on December 2, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Whats the connection between picking your nose and skydiving?

Pot and alcohol are both potential intoxicants.
One..pot is only an intoxicant..but they share the similarity of being drugs.

Whats the similarity between nose picking and skydiving?

Stop equating libertarians to liberals. You keep getting stuck on stupid.

John the Libertarian on December 2, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Typical liberalesque position. “Stop saying things I don’t want to hear”.