Says legalizing marijuana was a mistake
share
Old fart
share
MovieChat Forums > Elton John Discussion > Says legalizing marijuana was a mistake
He's right.
The drug culture we live in nowadays is disgusting.
They are stoned at work, stoned in the car, stoned walking down the street, stoned when it's time to sleep, stoned when it's time to get up- stoned 24 hours a day, stoned 7 days a week. If these people were strong enough to face real life, they wouldn't need to get stoned in order to take them away from their problems!
Aside from the medicinal properties that it possess (which I am very aware that it possesses) it should not be used to just get stoned! People who use it for that are just plain weak.
I agree 100%
Unimpaired life is REAL life.
You’re acting like people wouldn’t be getting stoned if it was illegal.
shareFewer would be. There would be at least a certain number of people deterred by the legal penalties. We've tried drug legalization, and generally, it hasn't been a success.
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; it even caused more harm than good since it gave such an enormous boost to organized crime. But that's because there is a culture of common, everyday alcohol consumption that stretches back to prehistory. Something that commonly and traditionally used cannot be easily banned; people will resent it, and refuse to obey it. Drug use, even relatively mild drugs like marijuana, don't have anything remotely close to that kind of widespread acceptance and history of daily use. The balance is tipped just far enough against them that unlike with alcohol, decriminalization seems to have done more harm that good.
my you are misinformed and so much wrong in your comment I don’t know where to begin. This is exactly the kind of dumb, blind thinking in congress that makes the USA so backwards. Hard drugs are already illegal and it doesn’t deter anyone, that’s why there’s a drug epidemic. Drug use already stretches back to prehistory. I mean, because more people drink booze and are alcoholics and tobacco addicts that makes it more socially acceptable than marijuana, even though the former are way more harmful?
Btw, alcohol is much worse for people than marijuana, which actually has health benefits. Also marijuana can be grown by anyone in their house, so you might as well try criminalizing people planting flowers. Good luck with that, smh 🤦 not to mention your country being a literal slave state with the highest prison population due to nonviolent drug offenders.
I mean no offense dude, but your logic is seriously stuck in the 1950s
Hard drugs are already illegal and it doesn’t deter anyone, that’s why there’s a drug epidemic.
Okay genius, then explain why, after Oregon decriminalized hard drugs, drug use, drug overdoses, and drug-related deaths all increased, land become a big enough problem the make Oregon repeal the measure, and re-criminalize them.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/oregon-law-rolling-back-drug-decriminalization-takes-effect-making-possession-a-crime-again
Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. In the few posts I've exchanged with you, I've noted that your ignorance is exceeded only by your arrogance. share
Um, it says right there in your article fucktard. Did you even bother to read it? They weren’t able to get the funding out and it was impacted by Covid. The new law isn’t any better either, since it “doesn’t mandate rehab”. So you’ll be exchanging deaths for more crime. I thought your kind preferred criminals killing themselves and solving the problem? Typical republitard logic.
It is not my fault you’re a Republicard. Stop blaming your inadequacies on other people, it’s not a winning strategy kid.
Yeah, I read the article. That's their excuse, and I don't buy it. Politicians always have excuses why their programs fail, and they always shift the blame onto something else. The bottom line is when you decriminalize something, there is always a segment of the population who were formerly deterred by the law, who are willing to try that thing now that they don't risk being locked up for it.
Duh!
The "harm reduction" philosophy of "safely" enabling criminal behavior, on the rationale that "they're gonna do it anyway," is wrongheaded and destructive. Read Michael Shellenberger's San Fransicko to read how it's helped ruin The City by the Bay.
It was always naïve to suppose that most users of highly addictive substances would manage to use their drug of choice responsibly, and that we wouldn't see any dramatic increase in the number of users, regardless of funding or lack thereof. Having drugs largely unregulated was feasible a century ago, when when the most potent things around were opium and crude cocaine; in an era with PCP, ecstasy, heroin, crack and meth, which are all vastly more potent and more addictive... yeah, not so much.
who are willing to try that thing now that they don't risk being locked up for it.
Wrong, they’re just being locked up retard. You’re exchanging people in prison for people getting high. And it’s really not any of your fucking business what people put in their bodies anyway.
The "harm reduction" philosophy of "safely" enabling criminal behavior, on the rationale that "they're gonna do it anyway," is wrongheaded and destructive.
All the countries that have decriminalized possession say otherwise, dumbfuck!
Having drugs largely unregulated was feasible a century ago, when when the most potent things around were opium and crude cocaine; in an era with PCP, ecstasy, heroin, crack and meth, which are all vastly more potent and more addictive... yeah, not so much.
Tell me you know nothing about drugs without telling me you know nothing about drugs, heroin and opium both come from the same plant you idiot. Theres more people addicted to prescription pills prescribed by their Doctor than there are shooting up on the street. Also what politicians are you talking about? It’s the article you cited that says there were problems with funding and COVID-19. So essentially you’re saying the program would’ve worked if the politicians ran the program better? You’re the one who cited the article. So you’re basically admitting I’m right.
Goddamn you’re dumb 🤦
I’m looking forward to your next reply so I can continue to reeducate you and dismantled your REPUBLITARDED logic. Hate to burst your bubble, but you’re just a naive idiot who doesn’t realize “the war on drugs” is a sham to siphon money from taxpayers and funnel it to law enforcement and money laundering for cartels. You’ve been played for the past 40 years kid, share
Wrong, they’re just being locked up retard. You’re exchanging people in prison for people getting high. And it’s really not any of your fucking business what people put in their bodies anyway.
Yeah, because addicts’ behavior never affects anyone else. 🙄 They never steal or resort to prostitution to support their habit. They always manage to hold down stable jobs and earn the money to support their addiction after they’ve drugged themselves insensate. There’s never a cost to society from having addicts around.
In your own words: Goddamn you’re dumb 🤦
All the countries that have decriminalized possession say otherwise, dumbfuck!
Wrong. Thailand has recriminalized cannabis possession. In Europe, decriminalization is slowing down, as “…increase in gang violence and open-air drug use is changing politicians’ minds.”
https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/03/21/drug-decriminalisation-in-europe-may-be-slowing-down
Portugal is the example everyone likes to cite as decriminalization’s success story, but oh look… turns out the Portuguese are reconsidering.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/
British Columbia looks about to follow Oregon’s example, because decriminalization has not had the results promised. share
They never steal or resort to prostitution to support their habit
Are you fucking stupid or what? They also steal and resort to prostitution. When they get out of prison you fucking ignoramus. Where is your proof crime increases from decriminalization? Goddamnit you are so painfully fucking stupid you idiot cunt 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
You’re not even reading your own articles anymore. Decriminalization is still working fine and well in plenty of places, just not your backwater shithole country. You didn’t even read that economist link properly, you’re an idiot, so I’ll ask again: where is your quote from the article with proof crime increases everywhere from decriminalization? I doubt you read it because it’s behind a paywall you idiot.
Europe “considering rolling it back” does not mean anything, again where is your statistical evidence crime increases from decriminalization? You don’t get to make any more attempts to dodge this question,
So far, none of those countries are abandoning decriminalization you fucking clown 🤣🤡 share
Tell me you know nothing about drugs without telling me you know nothing about drugs, heroin and opium both come from the same plant you idiot.
HAHAHAHAHA!!! It’s so funny being lectured and condescended to by ignoramuses. Yes, heroin comes from opium. That’s why it’s called (drumroll please…) an opiate. Heroin also wasn’t synthesized until 1898 you idiot. (Well, technically it was first synthesized in 1874 by an English researcher C.R. Wright, but nothing came of it until it was independently re-synthesized by Felix Hoffmann at Bayer, and only then was it made known to the public and marketed.)
So yeah, as I was saying...
Back when drugs were completely unregulated, these more potent drugs were not available. They didn’t exist yet. Just unrefined opium and crudely refined cocaine. And in fact the first drug laws in the U.S. came along in the very early 20th century, not long after these more potent drugs came onto the market.
Theres more people addicted to prescription pills prescribed by their Doctor than there are shooting up on the street.
And if that is so, it just illustrates how easy it is to lose control of yourself once addicted to drugs, and that’s why we shouldn’t let just anyone take them anytime they want. Thanks for making my point for me.
So essentially you’re saying the program would’ve worked if the politicians ran the program better? You’re the one who cited the article. So you’re basically admitting I’m right.
No. Thanks for proving your reading comprehension skill are as low as your intelligence. I’m saying that when a program fails, politicians find scapegoats and shift the blame. Some programs are bad programs and were never going to be a success, no matter how much money you throw at them. But you can count on the politicians to find someone else to blame, and never admit that they were simply wrong.
share
Back when drugs were completely unregulated, these more potent drugs were not available. They didn’t exist yet. Just unrefined opium and crudely refined cocaine
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
it is so cute how you get all uppitt when getting told off. You clearly don’t even k ow what point you’re making. More people are still getting drunk and crashing their car than they are getting high
I’m saying that when a program fails, politicians find scapegoats and shift the blame. Some programs are bad programs and were never going to be a success, no matter how much money you throw at them.
I don’t think you know what the word scapegoating means. How can they scapegoat their own incompetence? Are you saying the funding wasn’t the issue then? Because it sounds like a simple fix to me, nothing about decriminalizing drugs being bad since it’s shown to work over and over again all over the world, just not your backwater shithole country 😀 share
I don’t think you know what the word scapegoating means. How can they scapegoat their own incompetence?
If you can't understand the concept that when someone comes up with a plan or policy, then that plan or policy fails, then the person who came up with it tries to shift blame onto someone or something else -- i.e. scapegoating, looking for a scapegoat -- then you are not displaying the level of comprehension I would expect of a third grade child.
Now as dumb as you are, I don't actually believe you are that stupid. So this tells me you are being deliberately obtuse, which is a different thing -- this is having so much ego that you won't ever concede a point, under any circumstances. That's been a hallmark of you in ever comment I've ever seen from you.
So... Declare victory. Be my guest. I know you will. I can't stop you. But I'll leave it to any readers who may view this thread to judge for themselves who had the better of the argument. For my part, you're not worth another second of my time, so I'm putting you on the ignore list. share
You are still not understanding what the term “scapegoating” means. They are not scapegoating anyone else, you and them are pretty much admitting they botched the handling of the program. So again, the issue is not the program itself but the execution. You just admitted I’m right.
The Dunning Kruger effect is on full display with you. Keep projecting
"it should not be used to just get stoned! People who use it for that are just plain weak."
I dont want to sound mean but i dont know how to put it another way, this idea is ignorant. The spiriutal journey alone it can provide is reason enough to be legal. It has 100% made me a more patient, empathetic and kinder person (when im not on the internet). As far as recreational drugs go, alcohol is the threat not marijuana.
"Everybody must get stoned." - Bob Dylan
"I have to keep going because I made a bargain with IT a long time ago and I have to keep up my end."
"Who is that?"
"The maser of this world and the world we can't see."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzc09ExGJus
Those are his exact words from the video above- not mine.
That's the guy whose lyrics your taking advice from?
12/27/2024 5:58 PM CST
I will quote your reply in it's entirety because you will probably edit it later in an attempt to not look like an idiot.
[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2463) 2 hours ago
"I have to keep going because I made a bargain with IT a long time ago and I have to keep up my end."
"Who is that?"
"The maser of this world and the world we can't see."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzc09ExGJus
Those are his exact words from the video above- not mine.
That's the guy whose lyrics your taking advice from?
What's a maser? Remember, no fair going back and editing your post like you didn't fuck up your original reply.
And you can't even get the quote right. Those are not his exact words. I think maybe you are stoned.
share
Wow.
You have so little of an argument against me that you practically ignore my comment in order to concentrate on an obvious typo.
Of course, I won't go back and edit it- it's a typo. Typos happen. If you aren't intelligent enough to have known what they actual word was supposed to be, then I suggest you lay off the weed.
The politicians who legalized weed wants it's population sedated and stupid. That's how you control the masses.
shareYeah, too bad the 5-watt bulbs posting here don't understand that...
share"The politicians who legalized weed wants it's population sedated and stupid. That's how you control the masses."
Then youve never smoked marijuana before (once doesnt count). If anything marijuana makes you distrust the gov even more. The whole "sedated and stupid" idea is vastly uniformed and mostly applies to the teenage burn outs in highschool.
If you want your population "sedated and stupid" keep feeding them alcohol. Its a triple threat, sedated, stupid and sick.
No I've never smoked before and never will even if it becomes legal in my state. I have a history of depression and anxiety so it would never be good for me.
share"I have a history of depression and anxiety"
Me too. And I used to feel the same way about smoking it. Smoke enough and that will pass 🤣. Im joking but also very serious.