Drug Legalisation too Slow: Cause for Revolution?

by **The Great Devourer of All** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 2:46 pm

Oh hell. It finally happened. Infected Mushroom has become a militant.

by **Benomia 3** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 2:54 pm

The Norgan Alliance wrote:
Benomia 3 wrote:Cartels literally only exist because of prohibition. Legalize drugs and the cartels disappear.

Couldn't Cartels just set up shop as "legitimate businesses"?

Yes, but then they would no longer be cartels.

by **The Norgan Alliance** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:01 pm

Benomia 3 wrote:
The Norgan Alliance wrote:Couldn't Cartels just set up shop as "legitimate businesses"?

Yes, but then they would no longer be cartels.

Either way they're part of an organized crime syndicate. They could just set up a drug store here in the USA, then send their profits to their bosses in Mexico (or elsewhere) to fund whatever illegal acts are going on there.

by **Benomia 3** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:28 pm

The Norgan Alliance wrote:
Benomia 3 wrote:Yes, but then they would no longer be cartels.

Either way they're part of an organized crime syndicate. They could just set up a drug store here in the USA, then send their profits to their bosses in Mexico (or elsewhere) to fund whatever illegal acts are going on there.

And as they have loyalty to extabusinessal entities, they would quickly lose their market share to domestic markets.

by **Wallenburg** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:57 pm

Novaja Zemlja wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:I cite drug cartels as counter-evidence. I am also confused why you mention domestic violence when the study refers to aggression.

Cartels spread drugs and criminality, not the substance self that causes aggressiveness.

I know. It causes it and it also does not. As an agent on the body, it doesn't cause much aggression. As an agent in society, it causes crippling violence.

Because the study was specifically meant for domestic violence but came to the conclusion that aggression in general is not caused by drugs.

That's a highly unscientific conclusion.

by **White Chrobatia** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:57 pm

I don't think anything outside of getting rid of a genocidal regime is really cause for revolution, since like The Who said, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". If it's not drug legalization, it's something else. Change through legal ways should always be preferred to violence.

by **Wallenburg** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:59 pm

Benomia 3 wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:I cite drug cartels as counter-evidence. I am also confused why you mention domestic violence when the study refers to aggression.

Cartels literally only exist because of prohibition. Legalize drugs and the cartels disappear.

That's a bit of an exaggeration but it has some truth behind it. I'm not sure why you are saying this to me, though. I already support decriminalization.

by **Wallenburg** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:59 pm

White Chrobatia wrote:I don't think anything outside of getting rid of a genocidal regime is really cause for revolution, since like The Who said, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". If it's not drug legalization, it's something else. Change through legal ways should always be preferred to violence.

Tell that to the Founding Fathers.

by **White Chrobatia** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:03 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
White Chrobatia wrote:I don't think anything outside of getting rid of a genocidal regime is really cause for revolution, since like The Who said, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". If it's not drug legalization, it's something else. Change through legal ways should always be preferred to violence.

Tell that to the Founding Fathers.

I would were I an American

Eh

by **The Petrias** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Simply because a movement moving is progressing too slowly does not justify a rebellion. Movements ought to be fought through debate and civil discourse, not through violence. I realize that it is frustrating to take time to discuss something so incontrovertible. However, this is how it is always been done. Democracy is not failing. If anything, it is thriving. Even though you say people voices are not being heard, this contention is false. States are slowly accepting the message of this movement. For now, patience and continued pressure on government officials is key.

by **Wallenburg** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:05 pm

White Chrobatia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:Tell that to the Founding Fathers.

I would were I an American

Eh

There is no world beyond The Greatest Country on Earth.

by **GreatestBanks** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:05 pm

This guy wants to spy on all cars and establish a police state yet he thinks marijuana should be legal.

by **Benomia 3** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:07 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
White Chrobatia wrote:I would were I an American

Eh

There is no world beyond The Greatest Country on Earth.

San Marino?

by **The Wolven League** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:07 pm

Benomia 3 wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:There is no world beyond The Greatest Country on Earth.

San Marino?

No, Sealand.

by **The Petrias** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:07 pm

GreatestBanks wrote:This guy wants to spy on all cars and establish a police state yet he thinks marijuana should be legal.

The two are not contradictory.

by **Imperializt Russia** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:08 pm

Gauthier wrote:
Benomia 3 wrote:
Yeah and bartenders would be theoretically opposed to prohibition because that would lower the income they could make off of patrons. Both of these statements are true, and both are equally irrelevant to the topic at hand.

And how many organized crime families are making money off bootlegging today?

Plenty.
Make cheap booze to sell wholesale, and you make a packet by avoiding taxes.

Of course, much less than it used to be during prohibition. And obviously, it only affects unscrupulous wholesalers.

by **GreatestBanks** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:10 pm

The Petrias wrote:
GreatestBanks wrote:This guy wants to spy on all cars and establish a police state yet he thinks marijuana should be legal.

The two are not contradictory.

Yes, but he is an extreme authoritarian on almost all issues, why is he pro legalization for this one thing?

by **White Chrobatia** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:10 pm

GreatestBanks wrote:
The Petrias wrote:
The two are not contradictory.

Yes, but he is an extreme authoritarian on almost all issues, why is he pro legalization for this one thing?

because he wants to smoke the devil's lettuce

by **GreatestBanks** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:11 pm

White Chrobatia wrote:
GreatestBanks wrote:Yes, but he is an extreme authoritarian on almost all issues, why is he pro legalization for this one thing?

because he wants to smoke the devil's lettuce

He wants to get high in his house as he is being spied on by the govt?

by **White Chrobatia** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:12 pm

GreatestBanks wrote:
White Chrobatia wrote:because he wants to smoke the devil's lettuce

He wants to get high in his house as he is being spied on by the govt?

He wants the government to know how high he's getting

by **The Petrias** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:20 pm

GreatestBanks wrote:
The Petrias wrote:
The two are not contradictory.

Yes, but he is an extreme authoritarian on almost all issues, why is he pro legalization for this one thing?

While I do not defend his choice to reign with an authoritarian rule, I do see some logic in it. Legalizing drugs has rarely led to an increase in crime. In fact, in several states, crime has decreased as a result of legalizing marijuana. This would actually make it easier for law enforcement agents to control citizens. All I am stating is that there truly is no major justification to oppose legalization, therefore it's not going to have any effect on how he controls his surveillance.

by **Yumyumsuppertime** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:21 pm

I'm actually for drug legalization, but IM's threads are causing me to rethink that position.

by **The Petrias** » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:24 pm

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:I'm actually for drug legalization, but IM's threads are causing me to rethink that position.

Infected Mushroom represents a radical branch of the drug legalization movement. You should not be swayed by these extremist threads.

by **Politicoandrous Anthronegative Proplex** » Tue Dec 29, 2015 12:37 pm

The Petrias wrote:
Yumyumsuppertime wrote:I'm actually for drug legalization, but IM's threads are causing me to rethink that position.

Infected Mushroom represents a radical branch of the drug legalization movement. You should not be swayed by these extremist threads.

Doesn't he/she make radical threads about every week?

by **Ifreann** » Tue Dec 29, 2015 12:44 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
White Chrobatia wrote:I don't think anything outside of getting rid of a genocidal regime is really cause for revolution, since like The Who said, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". If it's not drug legalization, it's something else. Change through legal ways should always be preferred to violence.

Tell that to the Founding Fathers.

The Founding Fathers didn't just up and start killing redcoats one day.

Drug Legalisation too Slow: Cause for Revolution?

Who is online