• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should marijuana be legalized?

Should we legalize pot?

  • Total voters
    113
The federal government shouldn't be able to make marajuana illegal. They don't have the constitutional power to. The states can do what the people of their state like.

I personally think most drugs should be illegal, esp the stronger ones. After doing daycare for years I have seen the repercussions of people's private recreation. Tobacco and weed differ in how they affect the person's level of awareness.
 
Fiddytree said:
Decriminalized? Perhaps.

Legalized? I would rather not.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement. It definitely don't think anything that alters your state of mind for a period like that should be legal. Maybe there should be an intoxication level like with alcohol.
 
There's no real reason for pot to be illegal. One of the reasons why the medical marijuana people want to get pot taxed is so that it will cement it into law. The government doesn't like losing money, it's why they won't let tobacco go under. A pack of cigs is 80% tax. They're not giving up that money train.
 
ds4159 said:
The federal government shouldn't be able to make marajuana illegal. They don't have the constitutional power to. The states can do what the people of their state like.

I personally think most drugs should be illegal, esp the stronger ones. After doing daycare for years I have seen the repercussions of people's private recreation. Tobacco and weed differ in how they affect the person's level of awareness.
Click to expand...

Tabacco is much worse than pot. Nicotine hyguuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu (darn cat) is the most addictive substance on earth. Some cig addicts smoke forty bomber type smokes a day, whereas a pot head will only smoke less than a quarter once per week.

I heard about a cig addict who spent five hundred dollars a month for government sanctioned tabacco out of his six hundred per month SS check. The government is making a killing off of killing by even selling the stuff in the first place.

Criminalize tabacco not pot!
 
Last edited:
ds4159 said:
I agree with this statement. It definitely don't think anything that alters your state of mind for a period like that should be legal. Maybe there should be an intoxication level like with alcohol.
Click to expand...

I used to drink alcohol many years ago. Some times I would get kind of tanked. I used to smoke a joint to help me sober up.:)
 
Health consequences are good reasons why MJ shouldn't be used. They are not good reasons why MJ should be illegal.

Probably 95% of the prohibitionist arguments are refuted by one simple fact: drug laws have virtually no known effect on the rate of drug use. Doomsday scenarios in the face of that are the result of overactive imaginations.

What does have an effect on the rate of drug use is social acceptance. Removing legal penalties does not mean social acceptance, but it can open that door. So when MJ is legalized, its use should remain marginalized and not glamorized.

The burden should be on prohibitionists to support their position, because right now their arguments are weak and do not hold up under scrutiny.
 
Virginia Legislature Considers Decriminalizing Marijuana

NORML is pleased to announce that House Bill 1134, which seeks to amend marijuana possession and cultivation offenses, has been pre-filed for the 2010 legislative session.

This measure seeks to amend present criminal marijuana penalties in several ways.

The bill would reduce minor marijuana possession penalties from a criminal misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail, to a civil infraction punishable by a fine-only.
The bill would create a rebuttable presumption that a person who grows no more than five marijuana plants grows marijuana for personal use and not for distribution, an offense punishable by a $500 civil penalty. Under present law, marijuana cultivation in any amount is classified as a felony offense, punishable by between 5 and 30 years in jail and a $10,000 fine.
The bill removes the two-year mandatory sentence for those found guilty of the distribution of less than one ounce of marijuana. House Bill 1134 also removes the the five-year mandatory minimum sentence for those found guilty of the distribution of more than one ounce of marijuana.
The bill also raises the quantities necessary for punishment of possession with intent to distribute so as not to punish amounts that may be possessed for personal use.
Passage of HB 1134 would spare minor marijuana offenders from criminal arrest and incarceration, as well as the emotional and financial hardships that follow. The measure would allow also law enforcement, prosecutors, and the courts to re-allocate their existing resources toward activities that will more effectively target serious criminal behavior and keep the public safe.

Please contact your state representative and urge him or her to support HB 1134. For your convenience, a pre-written letter will be e-mailed to your state House member when you visit here:

Contact Officials - NORML

NORML looks forward to working with its state affiliates and other allied organizations in favor of these common sense reforms.

Thank you for your support of NORML’s marijuana law reform efforts in Virginia.

Sincerely,
The NORML Team


Thiis is an email I received from norml today.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
You are using an assumption like an assertion.:roll:
Click to expand...

How are you doing today Mr. Pot, are you enjoying your converesation with Senor Kettle?

ds4159 said:
The federal government shouldn't be able to make marajuana illegal. They don't have the constitutional power to. The states can do what the people of their state like.
Click to expand...

I like your thought, but its dealing in the realm of hypotheticals and not reality. Reality is currently they do and it runs askew of state laws. To do as you say, the Federal government would at the very least need to pull back and remove their bans and laws against it.

ds4159 said:
I agree with this statement. It definitely don't think anything that alters your state of mind for a period like that should be legal. Maybe there should be an intoxication level like with alcohol.
Click to expand...

Mind altering, at least in the way marijuana does it in the majority of people, isn't too far off from the mind altering ability of alcohol yet that is allowed. I don't see why saying "its okay do use this mild mind altering drug but not this other one"

LiberalAvenger said:
I used to drink alcohol many years ago. Some times I would get kind of tanked. I used to smoke a joint to help me sober up.:)
Click to expand...

Well, thank you for another worthless anecdote that just furhter reinforces damaging pothead stereotypes, spreads useless anecdotal misinformation, and further damages the legitimate chance that such a movement has to take off. Otherwise known as the majority of your posts on this subject.
 
That's your opinion Zypy. Opinions are like butt holes. Everyone has one.
 
angrybeaver said:
It alleviates depression is about the dumbest thing that I have seen today, congratulations.
Mentally crippling is having the potential to make you so mentally ill that you are crippled, couldnt you work that out for yourself?

Its pretty well documented that cannabis can exacerbate mental illness .
Reefer madness has got nothing to do with it.
Apparently you seem so stupid that you cannot see the risk you are taking.
Idiots who claim that there is no danger at all in taking a drug..no matter what drug it is are inherently stupid and cannot make their own decisions.
You belong in that category of idiot.
Click to expand...

You keep talking about the dangers of marijuana but you fail to consider the most important point, that is, it's none of your damn business what I put in my body.

There's this thing, dunno if you've heard of it, which is called individual liberty that people have a right to in this country. Your authoritarian stance on marijuana is anti-American and anti-liberty. How about instead of worrying so much about what I smoke or drink, you concentrate on your own life and just leave me the hell alone. I'm tired of nosy, busy-bodies like yourself who think they have some kind of moral obligation to save me or guide my life decisions.

I neither need nor want your input, so get out of my face and mind your own business.
 
ds4159 said:
The federal government shouldn't be able to make marajuana illegal. They don't have the constitutional power to. The states can do what the people of their state like.

I personally think most drugs should be illegal, esp the stronger ones. After doing daycare for years I have seen the repercussions of people's private recreation. Tobacco and weed differ in how they affect the person's level of awareness.
Click to expand...

More precisely, the Constitution does not grant the federal government the authority to regulate "substances".

Period.

The state governments can be as asinine as they like, and often are, but the Constitution forbids the federal government authority in this arena.
 
Ethereal said:
You keep talking about the dangers of marijuana but you fail to consider the most important point, that is, it's none of your damn business what I put in my body.

There's this thing, dunno if you've heard of it, which is called individual liberty that people have a right to in this country. Your authoritarian stance on marijuana is anti-American and anti-liberty. How about instead of worrying so much about what I smoke or drink, you concentrate on your own life and just leave me the hell alone. I'm tired of nosy, busy-bodies like yourself who think they have some kind of moral obligation to save me or guide my life decisions.

I neither need nor want your input, so get out of my face and mind your own business.
Click to expand...

Well said.

We also have a thing called freedom of speech. You have a right to say anything you like as long as it does not put anybody else in harm's way.
 
So much progress has been made recently related to cannabis that I'm having a little trouble keeping up-to-date with my news. This was a good week too since California's legalization bill (AB 390) passed the Public Safety Committee. Washington state also started hearings on a legalization bill. It's going to be a very busy year ahead too.. Many states are looking into decriminalization, medical use, and legalization.

I'm pretty sure California's bill will pass the legislator, but their governor is a Republican.. :doh
 
American said:
You can tell who the potheads are by their fervent defense of legalization.
Click to expand...

This coming from the guy who couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag.
 
Phantom said:
So much progress has been made recently related to cannabis that I'm having a little trouble keeping up-to-date with my news. This was a good week too since California's legalization bill (AB 390) passed the Public Safety Committee. Washington state also started hearings on a legalization bill. It's going to be a very busy year ahead too.. Many states are looking into decriminalization, medical use, and legalization.

I'm pretty sure California's bill will pass the legislator, but their governor is a Republican.. :doh
Click to expand...

Yipes! :shock: So is our governor in Virginia.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
Yipes! :shock: So is our governor in Virginia.
Click to expand...

That is excellent news for Virginia, LiberalAvenger. I did not know you were from Virginia. You need to join the Whigs to help us define our platform and recruit members. Home | The Modern Whig Party of Virginia.

[edit] I just wrote the Hon. Plum in support of this measure and emailed the page link to 6 family and friends. Please do the same, folks!
 
Last edited:
LiberalAvenger said:
Virginia Legislature Considers Decriminalizing Marijuana

NORML is pleased to announce that House Bill 1134, which seeks to amend marijuana possession and cultivation offenses, has been pre-filed for the 2010 legislative session.
Click to expand...

This will not pass in Virginia, unfortunately. But I did just write my delegate in support.
 
We seem to have a bunch of Virginians on this board
 
lol yep :mrgreen: , and I'm the only one from Louisiana?
 
Ethereal said:
You keep talking about the dangers of marijuana but you fail to consider the most important point, that is, it's none of your damn business what I put in my body.

There's this thing, dunno if you've heard of it, which is called individual liberty that people have a right to in this country. Your authoritarian stance on marijuana is anti-American and anti-liberty. How about instead of worrying so much about what I smoke or drink, you concentrate on your own life and just leave me the hell alone. I'm tired of nosy, busy-bodies like yourself who think they have some kind of moral obligation to save me or guide my life decisions.

I neither need nor want your input, so get out of my face and mind your own business.
Click to expand...

Bravo!!:applaud
 
reefedjib said:
That is excellent news for Virginia, LiberalAvenger. I did not know you were from Virginia. You need to join the Whigs to help us define our platform and recruit members. Home | The Modern Whig Party of Virginia.

[edit] I just wrote the Hon. Plum in support of this measure and emailed the page link to 6 family and friends. Please do the same, folks!
Click to expand...

It sounds good to me. Being a viet nam era vet makes it even better.

I went to register, noticed that there was no register link, so I could not do it.

I don't know much about computing but there was an error message on the bottom that said:

atal error: Call to undefined function t() in /home/vawhigso/public_html/home/sites/all/modules/devel/performance/performance.module on line 167:confused:
 
So Modern Whig Party supports cannabis legalization? :)
 
LiberalAvenger said:
It sounds good to me. Being a viet nam era vet makes it even better.

I went to register, noticed that there was no register link, so I could not do it.

I don't know much about computing but there was an error message on the bottom that said:

atal error: Call to undefined function t() in /home/vawhigso/public_html/home/sites/all/modules/devel/performance/performance.module on line 167:confused:
Click to expand...

Damn. I see the error you are talking about. I changed the configuration and that hopefully solved the problem. Let me know if you are still experiencing it.

As far as Login and account creation goes, you should still be able to move forward. Under the User Login widget on the right hand side, below the Login button, is a link to Create new account. Click that and you will be taken through the registration process.
 
Phantom said:
So Modern Whig Party supports cannabis legalization? :)
Click to expand...

Well, it is a little more complicated than that. Since the Modern Whig Party is a moderate party, we have moderate right and moderate left members. As a result, there are some policy platforms that have split support. Therefore, the Party does not have a policy platform at this time.

I am the chairman of Virginia. I just started Dec 14th and I am the first chairman. We have very few members. I have my personal positions on issues. I am for drug legalization. However, I don't want to assert my positions as the party's positions, thereby excluding otherwise interested members. So, Virginia follows the national party's lead with no policy platform at this time.

Now, my objective is to determine a policy platform. To do that, I want at least 100 voting members (I have a polling center capability in the website that does Instant Runoff Voting) and a list of policy questions and initial answers. As members vote IRV, they can add write-in answers which are then displayed as a legitimate answer for subsequent members voting. If the IRV to a particular question has a supermajority (of the 66% variety), then it becomes a policy position. If a question does not pass super-majority, then the top 2 or 3 answers will be listed with percentages as a split decision position.

Hopefully, this policy will both elucidate agreed positions as well as display platform variety in the electorate. We aim to define ourselves yet not exclude moderates with varying positions. We will probably redo this voting at 1000 members and so on and evolve our own understanding of our positions.

In the meantime, prior to the establishment of sufficient voters for the voting, I have a forum for policy discussions at the state and national levels at Virginia Whigs Forums - Powered by vBulletin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom