Rdskns2000

Presidential Election :11/3/2020- Putin's Impeachable Puppet vs The Rise of BootyWalker & some other Dems

Recommended Posts

 

4 hours ago, Larry said:

 

 

Just wondering, when I see polls like this one.  About Warren being too liberal:  

 

Too liberal for the responder?  Or too liberal (in the respondent's opinion) to win the general?

 

Yes

Edited by DoneMessedUp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from earlier this year, pre-presidential aspirations: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/22/politics/bloomberg-stop-and-frisk/index.html

 

Quote

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered a full-throated defense of the New York Police Department's use of "stop and frisk" policing Tuesday evening, attributing the city's declining murder rate during his tenure as mayor to the controversial policy.

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden is just wrong on the issue. Given the era he comes form I don't find it highly unusual that his view on Cannabis would be outdated, but he should probably do a little of his own research and get up to date on the facts before botching an issue that should be a lay up for the Dems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, StillUnknown said:

He out here missing layups 

 

Not even hitting the backboard.

 

If we are going the non-disruptive, establishment route, please let it be Mayor Pete. He might be a shill, but he at least won't bring 1980s thought process into 2020 problems.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

If we are going the non-disruptive, establishment route, please let it be Mayor Pete. He might be a shill, but he at least won't bring 1980s thought process into 2020 problems.

 

Admiring the fact that, among the Dem crop, the "non-disruptive, establishment" candidate is the gay guy.  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Admiring the fact that, among the Dem crop, the "non-disruptive, establishment" candidate is the gay guy.  :) 


Yeah it’s interesting but I think a lot of people, especially younger voters are past the point of viewing a candidates sexuality as a + or - trait. 
 

In Ireland, a gay biracial man is prime minister and his politics is center-right. At some point, completely mundane traits about a persons biology won’t matter here either. Religious weirdos lost the cultural battle on this in the West quite some time ago.

Edited by No Excuses
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

Biden is just wrong on the issue. Given the era he comes form I don't find it highly unusual that his view on Cannabis would be outdated, but he should probably do a little of his own research and get up to date on the facts before botching an issue that should be a lay up for the Dems. 

 

What facts is he wrong on?

 

Are you saying that marijuana isn't a gateway drug?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Are you saying that marijuana isn't a gateway drug?

 

No more than alcohol or tobacco which are "gateway drugs". Both are readily available in our society. 

Edited by clietas
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, clietas said:

 

No more than alcohol or tobacco are "gateway drugs". Both of which are readily available in our society. 

 

This is true.  But our history over the last 40 years has been to do things to reduce the use and availability of alcohol and tobacco.  Not increase them.

Edited by PeterMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

What facts is he wrong on?

 

Are you saying that marijuana isn't a gateway drug?

 

The only thing it is a gateway to is prison, which is why it needs to be federally decriminalized at the least 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PeterMP said:

 

This is true.  But our history over the last 40 years has been to do things to reduce the use and availability of alcohol and tobacco.  Not increase them.

 

Uh you ever been in a grocery store or gas station. They have isles and front desks dedicated to booze and tobacco. 

 

Cannabis should be regulated and sold in stores just like liqour is. No reason it shouldn't. Its far less dangerous than alcohol. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

What facts is he wrong on?

 

Are you saying that marijuana isn't a gateway drug?

 

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-gateway-drug

 

Quote

These findings are consistent with the idea of marijuana as a "gateway drug." However, the majority of people who use marijuana do not go on to use other, "harder" substances. Also, cross-sensitization is not unique to marijuana. Alcohol and nicotine also prime the brain for a heightened response to other drugs and are, like marijuana, also typically used before a person progresses to other, more harmful substances.

 

It is important to note that other factors besides biological mechanisms, such as a person’s social environment, are also critical in a person’s risk for drug use. An alternative to the gateway-drug hypothesis is that people who are more vulnerable to drug-taking are simply more likely to start with readily available substances such as marijuana, tobacco, or alcohol, and their subsequent social interactions with others who use drugs increases their chances of trying other drugs. Further research is needed to explore this question.

 

Given the questionable results of the gateway drug theory in actual practice and given that we arrested 660k for marijuana violations in 2018, of which 600k was for possession, I want more concrete proof before we criminalize marijuana (put another way, it should be decriminalized until and unless government can prove actual harm beyond other legal substances).

 

I'm all for treating marijuana like alcohol and tobacco.  Something responsible adults can legally choose to partake but should be informed of the negative consequences, hopefully leading to voluntary decrease or moderation in usage.  But the government should have something more than mere theories that doesn't bare out in real practice if they want to criminalize it.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, clietas said:

 

Uh you ever been in a grocery store or gas station. They have isles and front desks dedicated to booze and tobacco. 

 

Cannabis should be regulated and sold in stores just like liqour is. No reason it shouldn't. Its far less dangerous than alcohol. 

 

 

The government literally builds booze stores.  In Virginia, we call them ABC stores.  I go to one twice a month.  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

The government literally builds booze stores.  In Virginia, we call them ABC stores.  I go to one twice a month.  

 

 

 

Notice how counselor PB doesn't disclose how much he buys at these trips.

 

Meanwhile, here's a photo of PB getting ready to load his most recent loot.

 

mywine2.jpg?w=980&q=75

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bearrock said:

I want more concrete proof before we criminalize marijuana (put another way, it should be decriminalized until and unless government can prove actual harm beyond other legal substances).

 

From the link WaPo link that started the conversation:

 

"Biden’s plan, unveiled in July, looks to cut down on high rates of incarceration and fix “the racial, gender, and income-based disparities in the system,” including by decriminalizing marijuana and expunging past convictions for possession."

 

I added the italics and underlining for emphasis.  Your post seems irrelevant.

1 hour ago, clietas said:

 

Uh you ever been in a grocery store or gas station. They have isles and front desks dedicated to booze and tobacco. 

 

I have been to grocery stores and gas stations.  My post is true and accurate.  You missed or just ignored my point.

 

(We should be moving towards the further decommercialization of other gateway drugs (alcohol and tobacco) as we have been for the last 40+ years not moving towards the commercialization of marijuana (which is what we are doing).)

Edited by PeterMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

From the link WaPo link that started the conversation:

 

"Biden’s plan, unveiled in July, looks to cut down on high rates of incarceration and fix “the racial, gender, and income-based disparities in the system,” including by decriminalizing marijuana and expunging past convictions for possession."

 

I added the italics and underlining for emphasis.

 

 

 

Well, it appears somewhat tough to have the marijuana debate with Biden because he seems to be a bit all over the map.  The same article:

 

Quote

Answering an audience question, Biden indicated he is not opposed to the drug entirely. He supports the use of medical marijuana and would decriminalize possession of the drug, he said, adding that he wants individual states to make decisions on recreational use.

 

So is he for decriminalization all together or just for possession?  If he is for just possession because marijuana is still bad enough to criminalize distribution, what sense does it make to have states decide on recreational use?  And when he says recreational use, does that literally mean recreational use only or all the attendant growing and selling that comes with recreational use? (If it's the latter, is he just saying that he would allow states to legalize it but not the federal government?)

 

On one hand he appears to be saying that marijuana should remain illegal.  On the other, he seems to be saying that states should decide.  At the same time, it's not clear if he's for decriminalizing all crimes related to sale and use of marijuana or just possession.  If it is just possession decriminalization and if the only thing he's falling back on is the questionable gateway theory, I think he's wrong.  Prove first and then criminalize, not the other way around.  If he's for decriminalizing all aspects of marijuana sale and use, then it's nonsensical to decriminalize and then stop at legalizing (which I guess would mean some type of civil fine).  If he's for decriminalizing all aspects and then leaving the legalizing to the states, I guess he's passing the buck.

 

Back to the original point though, marijuana doesn't seem to be a gateway drug.  At least not in real life practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.