Marijuana.com

Buzzby

You're fairly new around here, so perhaps you are unaware that Niteshift and phuzz01 are police officers. They're the only frequent posters who are likely to argue against legalization.

I am most certainly not for keeping marijuana illegal, but I question the need for another organization whose approach is a subset of the programs of two long-existing organizations that are always under-funded.

The total membership of the three organizations I mentioned is less than 60,000. It's estimated that there are between 14 and 20 million smokers in the US who are spending upwards of $40 billion a year on pot and smoking accessories. The organizations mentioned get around $7 million, much of that from billionaire contributors. The efforts of smokers to get pot legalized are truly pitiful.

I don't see the value of spreading out this already thin support to yet another organization.

__________________

 

Niteshift

You're fairly new around here, so perhaps you are unaware that Niteshift and phuzz01 are police officers. They're the only frequent posters who are likely to argue against legalization.

What a load of bullsh*t!

I've stated repeatedly over the 4.5 years that I have been here that I DO NOT OPPOSE legalizing mj.

I have been VERY consistent about it. In fact, I have stated that if I had the power to make one substance disappear from the planet and the choices were pot or alcohol, I'd easily choose alcohol.

I think this is pretty damn clear:

"Keep something in mind, I'm not arguing that pot should be kept illegal. I'm discussing only your reasoning here."





You all sound like you want to keep pot illegal! I'm trying to find a pragmatic approach that will actually lead to legalization some day.



nacrypt:

Like Buzzby, you ignore the clearly stated:

Keep something in mind, I'm not arguing that pot should be kept illegal. I'm discussing only your reasoning here.

You say you are looking for a pragmatic approach..........that is what is being discussed, your approach, not the legalization issue.

__________________
A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about. -Thomas Sowell

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is muzzle flash.

Cassius

Even I know that you are not anti-legalization NS, I'm sure Buzzby didn't mean that quite the way he said it.

But regardless, nacrypt you should be grateful for the anti-prohibitionists here playing devil's advocate and telling you the flaws in your logic or your approach. If we, who are for the legalization of marijuana, can point out things like this that don't quite make sense -- what do you think the reefer madness people will have to say about it?

We need each other to point out the flaws in our arguments because together, we can come up with reasoned arguments that no one can contest.

The problem is, our enemy engages in tactics that are very difficult to overcome. Tactics like exaggeration (pot is so much stronger than it was in your father's day!) or misdirection (think of the chiiiiildren!) to outright propaganda.

So the more iron-clad we can make our arguments, the better. In this particular case, I have to agree with Buzzby though -- rather than spending time, energy, and money on creating a new legalization group -- why not devote your time, energy, and money to the several that already exist and are underfunded?

__________________

{ Cassius, Your Humble Narrator }
{ Posting Guidelines | Erowid Drug Information Resource | instantfilehosting.com }

nacrypt

The purpose of the C.S.C. is NOT to replace NORML or the MPP (read the FAQ), but to create a symbol with a clear message that they can both use to not only attract more members but more importantly actually accomplish their common goal of making marijuana legal again.

The MPP has been around for 10 years, NORML has been around for much longer but where are the results!?!? I believe in a basic engineering principle K.I.S.S.: Keep It Simple, Stupid! The C.S.C. has one simple to understand and describe goal that every proponent of legalization can point to, no matter what other organizations they belong to.

I have sent snail mail letters to NORML and the MPP and I hope they will put the C.S.C. flag on their home pages to show solidarity in our cause. Marijuana.com should do the same. We all support legalization, there is everything to gain, what is there to loose by putting an image link on a website?

Mamabudz

Absolutely true

Niteshift has repeatedly claimed that he is NOT against legalization of Marijuana.

He has further stated that Marijuana and Marijuana Legalization are not important issues for him.

Niteshift has even told us that on occassion he has let a potsmoker "go" and reminds us that he has gotten in trouble from his superiors for having done so.

Niteshift has stated in other repsonses that he was invited to this website years ago -- I believe it was by GoodGirl, a former Moderator/Administrator -- to discuss issues in the Protecting Your Rights forum of the Marijuana.com network.

 

Niteshift

Niteshift has even told us that on occassion he has let a potsmoker "go"

routinely, not occassionally. And most cops do the same to one extent or another.

Niteshift has stated in other repsonses that he was invited to this website years ago -- I believe it was by GoodGirl, a former Moderator/Administrator

Actually, Panama was most directly involved. Rick was as well.

Yana Usdi

So far I haven't had reason to comment, but here I do.

NORML and the type have kept the issue alive, if it wasn't for groups like that and people like Jack Herer we'd have lost a lot more ground than we did. They didn't solve it on their own, but they have kept up a good fight and done a lot of good.

As far as a message we can all agree on, I really can't agree with the message there. Since this is a marijuana board I won't go into details here, but I'll say that I wouldn't touch most drugs except to flush them if they were laid free on the table in front of me. In spite of that I do support legalization and regulation, and I can point to thousands of cops and some serving and former Government officials who would agree. Visit the link in my tagline and listen to some cops on the subject.

I've nothing against any group that's just interested in one type such as this web page and NORML is, everyone needs a hobby and there are worse ones, but I can't support any new group that doesn't see the full picture. There's a bigger issue involved than just pot, and it has nothing to do with getting high.

__________________
LEAP Current and former members of law enforcement who support drug regulation rather than prohibition.
Drug Policy Alliance Alternatives to Marijuana Prohibition and the Drug War

Buzzby

Don't blow a gasket NS. I made a mistake. I apologize. I'd hate to be responsible for you having a stroke.

Niteshift

Fine. I just don't want people getting the wrong impression from the staff.

phuzz01

Buzzby,

My analogy was not comparing smoking marijuana to drunk driving. My point was that the argument "it should be legal because lots of people do it" is simply not a good one. There are plenty of things that lots of people do which are wrong and should be illegal. So, as an example of why that argument is bad, my analogy was valid, IMO.