SaltyCajun.com http://louisianaofficesystems.com/

Notices

Go Back   SaltyCajun.com > General Discussion Forums > General Discussion (Everything Else)

General Discussion (Everything Else) Discuss anything that doesn't belong in any other forums here.

View Poll Results: Should Louisiana Legalize Drugs?
Marijuana only, and only for adults. Still a felony to provide to minors. 26 48.15%
Marijuana only for adults, reduced penalties for access to minors. 5 9.26%
Legalize all drugs for consenting adults. 6 11.11%
No changes to current Louisiana drugs laws. 15 27.78%
Reduce penalty for first time marijuana users: no jail time. 2 3.70%
Voters: 54. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:50 PM
MathGeek's Avatar
MathGeek MathGeek is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,931
Cash: 4,353
Default Answering the Libertarian argument for drug legalization

Please forgive any offense because I am branching this discussion off of the Dr. Dobson discussion. It really is a new topic worthy of its own thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceArcher
Either way my opinion falls perfectly in line with theirs.. I will go so far as to say Thank goodness the do want to legalize. Understand something, I am a non user.. (well there was that one time in college sneaking out with a girl who enjoyed an occasional smoke) but i digress....

The war on drugs has done nothing but make hundreds of drug king billionaires, incite what amounts to basically open warfare south of our border, and provide fuel to hasten the stripping of own our citizens rights.

IMO its the proverbial 900lb gorilla in the room.... everyone knows that they are gonna have to recognize it sooner or later.... but no one wants to be the first to do so. Drugs will be legalized in our lifetime, there is simply to much science showing that it MUST be done.

Sadly, there is so much $$$$$$ wrapped up in continuing the "WAR" that it means millions more people are going to pay unnecessary penalties, fines, and prison terms before the nonsense will end. You simply cannot regulate what someone is going to do with there own body. You would think that we would have learned that lesson from prohibition.
Legitimate criticisms on how drug laws are enforced should be separated from the questions of whether drugs are illegal in the first place, which drugs are illegal and for who are they illegal. Suppose that laws against shoplifting were brutally enforced with blatant disregard for Constitutional rights, would this support a case to legalize shoplifting?

There are certainly a lot of problems with current drug laws and their enforcement. Among these: Most federal drug laws are an overreach of federal power far beyond congressional authority to regulate interstate commerce. In most cases, drug laws should be a purely state issue. Furthermore, laws allowing agencies to confiscate property before anyone is convicted of a crime perpetuate and encourage bad behavior on the part of government officials. Finally, the US Constitution is the supreme law if the land, and government employees who violate it should face stiffer penalties (as corrupt officials) than the alleged offenders who they are purportedly trying to catch.

My case that drugs should remain illegal is framed around three basic ideas:
1. Many recreational drugs do harm that goes far beyond the individual user and greatly increase the likelihood that the individual user will become an undue burden on his employer, his family, his insurers, his landlord, his creditors, other associations (school, sports, religious), and society as a whole. Making and enforcing effective laws against driving under the influence is a particular challenge.
2. Laws train the conscience of young people, and many teenagers approach adulthood with the notion that if an act is truly wrong or dangerous, then it is against the law. Once legalized, there will be many more users both because the conscience will more easily accept drug use, and because drugs are more widely available.
3. As a practical matter, substances that are legal for adults are much more easily acquired by minors. Laws against alcohol and nicotine use by minors are very rarely enforced, and I would hate for those providing marijuana to children to face no more penalty or effective enforcement than those providing cigarettes.

In a libertarian utopia where insurers, parents, sports teams, schools, employers, and other interested parties could contractually insist on drug testing, and there would remain criminal penalties for fraud or theft by deception for lying/cheating on drug tests, a society might still maintain sufficient safeguards. But legalizing recreational drugs in the current nanny state where many insurers, employers, traffic enforcement, and other parties which have interests in limiting exposure to drug users cannot fully protect their interests is a likely disaster.

I remember a high school principal once almost fired me (as a math teacher working in the school), because I overheard students in class talking about their weekend drug use, I told their parents, and I suggested their parents use widely available at home drug tests to monitor and bring correction to their children's behavior. I am confident I would have been fired had I not resigned first. 80% of the seniors at this high school were regular recreational drug users. The school resource officer, the principal, the school nurse, and most of the teachers either did not care, or had been manipulated into not acting by their desire for a paycheck. Effectively teaching math, physics, and chemistry was impossible.

Any path to drug legalization certainly needs to empower any and all associates of possible drug users (parents, schools, sports teams, employers, coaches, traffic enforcement, insurers, etc.) to implement effective drug testing programs (if they choose) as a condition of ongoing association. I would certainly want my daughter's prom date to pee in a cup before allowing my daughter to ride in his car! I would also want our military to retain the power to restrict drugs under the UCMJ.

I am curious if your view of libertarian ideals would grant all associates of possible drug users the rights to choose and limit their associations (if they wished) by insisting on drug testing as a condition of association. After all, what justification is there in limiting civil contracts not to permit drug testing under any relationship where one of the parties feels it may be necessary or desirable?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:13 PM
PotLikinisAhabbit's Avatar
PotLikinisAhabbit PotLikinisAhabbit is offline
Tripletail
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: lafayette
Posts: 707
Cash: 1,111
Default

Let them smoke their knee caps off if they want too. Darwinism at its finest. Prohibition failed just as the current drug policies are failing miserably.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:45 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

My case that drugs should remain illegal is framed around three basic ideas:
1. Many recreational drugs do harm that goes far beyond the individual user and greatly increase the likelihood that the individual user will become an undue burden on his employer, his family, his insurers, his landlord, his creditors, other associations (school, sports, religious), and society as a whole. Making and enforcing effective laws against driving under the influence is a particular challenge.
2. Laws train the conscience of young people, and many teenagers approach adulthood with the notion that if an act is truly wrong or dangerous, then it is against the law. Once legalized, there will be many more users both because the conscience will more easily accept drug use, and because drugs are more widely available.
3. As a practical matter, substances that are legal for adults are much more easily acquired by minors. Laws against alcohol and nicotine use by minors are very rarely enforced, and I would hate for those providing marijuana to children to face no more penalty or effective enforcement than those providing cigarettes.

In a libertarian utopia where insurers, parents, sports teams, schools, employers, and other interested parties could contractually insist on drug testing, and there would remain criminal penalties for fraud or theft by deception for lying/cheating on drug tests, a society might still maintain sufficient safeguards. But legalizing recreational drugs in the current nanny state where many insurers, employers, traffic enforcement, and other parties which have interests in limiting exposure to drug users cannot fully protect their interests is a likely disaster.

I remember a high school principal once almost fired me (as a math teacher working in the school), because I overheard students in class talking about their weekend drug use, I told their parents, and I suggested their parents use widely available at home drug tests to monitor and bring correction to their children's behavior. I am confident I would have been fired had I not resigned first. 80% of the seniors at this high school were regular recreational drug users. The school resource officer, the principal, the school nurse, and most of the teachers either did not care, or had been manipulated into not acting by their desire for a paycheck. Effectively teaching math, physics, and chemistry was impossible.

Any path to drug legalization certainly needs to empower any and all associates of possible drug users (parents, schools, sports teams, employers, coaches, traffic enforcement, insurers, etc.) to implement effective drug testing programs (if they choose) as a condition of ongoing association. I would certainly want my daughter's prom date to pee in a cup before allowing my daughter to ride in his car! I would also want our military to retain the power to restrict drugs under the UCMJ.

I am curious if your view of libertarian ideals would grant all associates of possible drug users the rights to choose and limit their associations (if they wished) by insisting on drug testing as a condition of association. After all, what justification is there in limiting civil contracts not to permit drug testing under any relationship where one of the parties feels it may be necessary or desirable?[/QUOTE]

Rebuttal. ( only in regards to Cannabis)

1. Wayyyy safer than alcohol. And people should have the right to chose what the do their own body. As far as the burden on employer. How does a person smoking a dobbie on the weekend any different than getting hammered which so many almost seem to encourage. ( not that I have a issue with that do what you want as long as it doesn't harm others )
They already have laws against driving under the influence. DUID. I know 2 people that got duids for weed and they had no magic blow in this test.

2. " What about the children "
Tobacco use and alcohol use among teens had dropped significantly in the last decade through education programs and you didn't have to jail a single adult to protect a child.
It was way easier to get weed in school than booze. You had to corrupt an adult to get booze. Drug dealers don't card.

3. Snitching did no good. Drug test have spawned a whole new class of synthetic drugs that are way more harmful than their natural counterparts.

You can not repeal the law of supply and demand. From kids spinning in circles to get dizzy and light headed to the Heroin addict people want to be intoxicated.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:51 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

No mandatory minimums for rapist or molesters but are prisons are over run with no violent drug offenders because of these.

Asset forfeiture fuels these bad laws and fuels police corruption. Ie junction Texas and many other places where corrupt cops steal people's money and claim that it had to be from drugs. In this country you are innocent until proven guilty. Your possessions on the other had are guilty until proven innocent.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:58 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

And how many of you worked with a good/great guy hard worker did everything right and then smoked a joint and got popped on a UA and people just throw up their hands and say well he shouldn't have been stupid. I saw 2 30 plus year guys lose their jobs at Halliburton like this and everyone was shocked. " you mean that guy does drugs ". People use the argument " my brother was awesome then he smoked weed and now he's a loser " like there is no chance a loser could be in your family. I finish my rant by quoting bill hicks

" Drugs done some good things for us and if you don't believe they did go home take all your records all your CDs And burn them because the people who made that great music that enhanced your life over the years were rrrrrrrreal f)$)(;: high on drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:08 PM
southern151's Avatar
southern151 southern151 is offline
Blue Marlin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gonzales
Posts: 8,705
Cash: 3,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampy View Post
And how many of you worked with a good/great guy hard worker did everything right and then smoked a joint and got popped on a UA and people just throw up their hands and say well he shouldn't have been stupid. I saw 2 30 plus year guys lose their jobs at Halliburton like this and everyone was shocked. " you mean that guy does drugs ". People use the argument " my brother was awesome then he smoked weed and now he's a loser " like there is no chance a loser could be in your family. I finish my rant by quoting bill hicks

" Drugs done some good things for us and if you don't believe they did go home take all your records all your CDs And burn them because the people who made that great music that enhanced your life over the years were rrrrrrrreal f)$)(;: high on drugs.
Can't argue that one!...

Willie Nelson
Johnny Cash
Phil Anselmo
Lane from Alice in Chains
Motley Crue (the whole dang group!)
The list goes on and on...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:08 PM
Bluechip's Avatar
Bluechip Bluechip is offline
The Camp Cook....
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sulphur, La.
Posts: 10,295
Cash: 13,175
Default

Free the weed!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:17 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

Could have just posted this I guess.
Even cops say legalize even though they say all drugs. I can advocate meth use but a reform on the punishment is in order. When someone gets busted even once they can lose student loans and it follows them forever they can't get a real job do then what are they to do.

" I went in with bachelor in marijuana and graduated ( jail) with a doctorate in cocaine " - George Jung

Cop Says Legalizing Drugs Will Protect Kids from Gangs http://t.co/umVogAQqV1
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:17 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

I can't ** can't * advocate meth. Sorry about that.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:25 PM
southern151's Avatar
southern151 southern151 is offline
Blue Marlin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gonzales
Posts: 8,705
Cash: 3,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampy View Post
I can't ** can't * advocate meth. Sorry about that.
LOL! Thanks for the clarification!

I'm on the fence on legalization of weed and, the effect it would have on kids. See, when I was a kid, we were told NOT to smoke cigarettes and, it was illegal to buy them under 18 years of age. Those two factors (to me, anyway) made it that much more appealing to do it. Yeah, I was a bit of a rebellious kid. Today though, it seems like a good number less kids take to cigarettes and, I know it's still illegal under 18 but, due to education, it's not nearly as "cool" as when I was a youth. I'm not sure that the legalization of weed would make it less or more sensationalized. I think it would be less but, I have no hard data to back that up. Instead, I'm trying to remember the triggers I had as a kid and, seeing it through those eyes.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:27 PM
mr crab's Avatar
mr crab mr crab is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Bridge City, TX
Posts: 2,725
Cash: 7,865
Default cmon mg

My case that drugs should remain illegal is framed around three basic ideas:
1. Many recreational drugs do harm that goes far beyond the individual user and greatly increase the likelihood that the individual user will become an undue burden on his employer, his family, his insurers, his landlord, his creditors, other associations (school, sports, religious), and society as a whole. Making and enforcing effective laws against driving under the influence is a particular challenge.
2. Laws train the conscience of young people, and many teenagers approach adulthood with the notion that if an act is truly wrong or dangerous, then it is against the law. Once legalized, there will be many more users both because the conscience will more easily accept drug use, and because drugs are more widely available.
3. As a practical matter, substances that are legal for adults are much more easily acquired by minors. Laws against alcohol and nicotine use by minors are very rarely enforced, and I would hate for those providing marijuana to children to face no more penalty or effective enforcement than those providing cigarettes.



I agree with the #1 point about testing for dui of drugs. I don't want someone influenced by coke, weed, or heroin driving around any more than I want someone under the influence of alcohol driving around. I think the lack of an effective analyzer for a "right now" yes/no wether a person is high is the #1 roadblock for drug legalization. Like Clampy said.....smoking a joint on saturday night far less negatively impacts my ability to do my job effectively on monday morning than drinking a 12 pack on sunday evening does. But I can drink the brews because my employer a definitively tell if I am under the influence of alcohol RIGHT NOW.


Your #2 point is something I disagree with. I raise my kids to be moral...not all laws are based on morality. I would much rather a child be able to make decision based on what they think is right or wrong morally, than to have a child follow all laws blindly.

Your #3 point is simply inaccurate. Kids get ticketed and prosecuted all the time for violating alcohol/nicotine laws.

And the thing about making the prom date pee in the cup......are you gonna make him take a breathalizer under this same logic?


BTW MG....I almost always agree with you...just not on this one bruh. Way to many good and potentially productive members of our society are imprisoned for non-violent drug law violations. And I'm sick of footing the bill for that incarceration
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:38 PM
Goooh's Avatar
Goooh Goooh is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Broussard
Posts: 5,660
Cash: 7,166
Default

Why is marijuana illegal in the first place?

I'll open a beer.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:40 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by southern151 View Post
LOL! Thanks for the clarification!

I'm on the fence on legalization of weed and, the effect it would have on kids. See, when I was a kid, we were told NOT to smoke cigarettes and, it was illegal to buy them under 18 years of age. Those two factors (to me, anyway) made it that much more appealing to do it. Yeah, I was a bit of a rebellious kid. Today though, it seems like a good number less kids take to cigarettes and, I know it's still illegal under 18 but, due to education, it's not nearly as "cool" as when I was a youth. I'm not sure that the legalization of weed would make it less or more sensationalized. I think it would be less but, I have no hard data to back that up. Instead, I'm trying to remember the triggers I had as a kid and, seeing it through those eyes.
Plenty of things are bad that we don't want our kids to do. I got a little girl coming in December and I don't want her smoking pot until her 20s ( if she chooses to do so & and I hope she doesn't ) but she needs to be able to make an informed choice based on science not fear. Portugal dicrimed all drug use and use went down. Rates of pot use among teens in holiday is lower per capita than us and its widely available. They effectively made pot uncool and not some rebellion symbol. Not to mention the medical use of cannabis in regards to seizures and nausea is unmatched. The fact that Canbabis is in schedule 1 along with heroin is a complete joke.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:40 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goooh View Post
Why is marijuana illegal in the first place?

I'll open a beer.
Don't do this to me man
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:46 PM
southern151's Avatar
southern151 southern151 is offline
Blue Marlin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gonzales
Posts: 8,705
Cash: 3,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampy View Post
Plenty of things are bad that we don't want our kids to do. I got a little girl coming in December and I don't want her smoking pot until her 20s ( if she chooses to do so & and I hope she doesn't ) but she needs to be able to make an informed choice based on science not fear. Portugal dicrimed all drug use and use went down. Rates of pot use among teens in holiday is lower per capita than us and its widely available. They effectively made pot uncool and not some rebellion symbol. Not to mention the medical use of cannabis in regards to seizures and nausea is unmatched. The fact that Canbabis is in schedule 1 along with heroin is a complete joke.
In short, the highlighted is my suspicion as well. With kids, at least those who acted like me, if it wasn't "bad," it wasn't fun to do. I would likely never have touched it if it weren't such a socially hated substance. Really, from the first time to the last time I ever did it, I didn't care for it. I just did what was "cool." Now, the Dorito company probably hated the day that I decided it wasn't cool any more!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:47 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

Prohibition of alcohol ended in 1933 prohibition of pot started in 37'. Effectively giving the Prohibitionist new jobs. William Hurst saw hemp as threat to his giant paper mills. Up until 37' hemp was too hard to separate the fibers to make paper so he had nothing to worry about until the invention of the decordicator.
After that Harry Ansliger and hurst made the movie reffer madness and started a smear campaign with such infamous statements like " the devil weed that makes negros seek relations with white women "
I can go on but
In short the answer would be stupidity.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:48 PM
Clampy's Avatar
Clampy Clampy is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Flats
Posts: 3,509
Cash: 5,450
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by southern151 View Post
In short, the highlighted is my suspicion as well. With kids, at least those who acted like me, if it wasn't "bad," it wasn't fun to do. I would likely never have touched it if it weren't such a socially hated substance. Really, from the first time to the last time I ever did it, I didn't care for it. I just did what was "cool." Now, the Dorito company probably hated the day that I decided it wasn't cool any more!
Ha ha. That's the only thing it's a gateway to. Doritos.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:49 PM
southern151's Avatar
southern151 southern151 is offline
Blue Marlin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gonzales
Posts: 8,705
Cash: 3,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampy View Post
Ha ha. That's the only thing it's a gateway to. Doritos.
And, mass quantities of Dr. Pepper!

MASS QUANTITIES!...You hear me?!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-15-2013, 05:58 PM
southern151's Avatar
southern151 southern151 is offline
Blue Marlin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Gonzales
Posts: 8,705
Cash: 3,396
Default

I'm going to put myself on blast here for a minute and say, "Yes, I was somewhat of a follower as a youth." I did take to a less-than-savory crowd for reasons that I still don't understand today. I didn't feel like we were bad people and, for the most part, we weren't. We were just kids that liked to "paint outside of society's lines."

Did we stop at herb use only? No. Many of the guys I ran with, myself included did things that were far more sinister beyond that. I don't believe, not even for a second that one lead to the other though. It was just the times and, place we lived in.

Did these experiences do me any good? Yes and, no. Yes because, I learned some very valuable lessons about life and, the pitfalls that can come with substance abuse. I learned that, even the worst sins(in the eyes of society) doesn't mean you can't still do good for others. No, it did not make me a greater athlete. No, it did not motivate me. It also didn't make me want to rob a store either.

Of all the guys I ran with, more than 50% of us own businesses now and, are doing well with them. Another is the GM for a huge Harley dealer. Two more are operators in plants. Yeah, a couple wound up on the loser train but, I truly don't believe that had anything to do with substance abuse. It had to do with their home life or, lackthereof.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-15-2013, 06:00 PM
Goooh's Avatar
Goooh Goooh is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Broussard
Posts: 5,660
Cash: 7,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampy View Post
Prohibition of alcohol ended in 1933 prohibition of pot started in 37'. Effectively giving the Prohibitionist new jobs. William Hurst saw hemp as threat to his giant paper mills. Up until 37' hemp was too hard to separate the fibers to make paper so he had nothing to worry about until the invention of the decordicator.
After that Harry Ansliger and hurst made the movie reffer madness and started a smear campaign with such infamous statements like " the devil weed that makes negros seek relations with white women "
I can go on but
In short the answer would be stupidity.
Ahhhhh yes, thank you for the abbreviated version.

I can understand heroin and crystal being illegal, but pot? Come on...

MG, how much pot have you smoked? Have you smoked enough to know that tracking it down can't be any easier than it already is? To be honest, when I was pre 18 and smoking pot, it was waaaaaay easier to get it than it was for me to go get dip and cigarettes. So, I vehemently disagree with the theory that it would become more obtainable to minors if made legal.

It seems the ban is still being upheld by the same types of folks that know nothing about the drug, except for what they heard and read. Exactly the same way the ban came into effect back in the 30's.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 PM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - [ARG:3 UNDEFINED], Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
SaltyCajun.com logo provided by Bryce Risher

All content, images, designs, and logos are Copyright © 2009-2012,
Salty Cajun, LLC
No unathorized use is permitted
Geo Visitors Map