Marijuana

Originally posted by Mairuzu
I'm high as we speak.

Tell us when you are not high. 😛 😉

Originally posted by King Kandy
Have you ever used it?

yes

Originally posted by King Kandy
Do you still use it?

yes

Originally posted by King Kandy
How has it impacted the culture where you live?

There is a fairly well represented pot culture in most canadian cities. Stores dedicated to paraphanaila and the like are common even in reletively small towns, and almost 99% of the time, it is ok to smoke outside. Maybe that is an exageration, I just moved away from a town of ~100 000, pretty conservative, and you'd get busted if you were smoking, but like, parks and stuff were normally safe. Big cities, you can basically smoke on the streets, and cops have better things to do than bother you, as long as you aren't doing anything to disrupt people. I'm not worldly, so I don't know how much this differs from other places.

Nationally, the legalization/decriminalization debate comes around now and again, so it is in the news. There is a "marijuana party" that runs in federal elections, and they get press.

Obviously it is still illegal, and thus crime surrounds the industry. There are lots of "mom and pop" operations at all levels though, so its not all supporting organized crime, or not necessarily the majority of it. That being said, one of the major impacts on culture is through crime.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Do you think its effects are positive, negative, neutral?

it can be all. like personally, I would have more money if I didn't smoke, but overall, I'd say it has been positive, for me at least. I mean, I figure I'm doing well

Originally posted by inimalist
There is a fairly well represented pot culture in most canadian cities. Stores dedicated to paraphanaila and the like are common even in reletively small towns, and almost 99% of the time, it is ok to smoke outside. Maybe that is an exageration, I just moved away from a town of ~100 000, pretty conservative, and you'd get busted if you were smoking, but like, parks and stuff were normally safe. Big cities, you can basically smoke on the streets, and cops have better things to do than bother you, as long as you aren't doing anything to disrupt people. I'm not worldly, so I don't know how much this differs from other places.

Nationally, the legalization/decriminalization debate comes around now and again, so it is in the news. There is a "marijuana party" that runs in federal elections, and they get press.

Obviously it is still illegal, and thus crime surrounds the industry. There are lots of "mom and pop" operations at all levels though, so its not all supporting organized crime, or not necessarily the majority of it. That being said, one of the major impacts on culture is through crime.

I know what you're saying with the crime aspect. One of the things people say where I live is that you should never smoke anything that wasn't grown by someone you know. Obviously that's not going to happen for most people, but getting in on the small businesses is usually the best way to do it imo.

have used, still do from time to time. only acquire it from hippie communes of friends of mine who grow it themselves so as to avoid supporting drugdealers and their criminal networks.

huh, you guys must know way more or bigger time growers than I do. 🙂

lol, I don't know what its like elsewhere, but in Canada, there are mom and pops that get as big, if not bigger than major crime organizations, so a lot of the time traditional models of organized crime don't fit our marijuana growing system. Like, where I used to live in Southern Ontario, there were Vietnamese families that would grow sort of "low end" hydroponics in homes they bought (fish-weed), and that was connected directly to larger criminal organizations, but at the same time, individuals or groups who specialize in pot growing, and only commit other crimes related to that, make up potentially a majority of our weed. For instance, I used to sling some high grade stuff, and tbh I didn't know exactly where it was coming from, but I'd be willing to put money on it not being from bikers or other crime organizations. Maybe this is the exact same as the "hippie commune" thing 753 was talking about, but Ive known a lot of people in this same position, or in the opposite (they clearly bought from local gangsters). Maybe it is a matter of quantity as well, because any "hippie" growers I have met havn't had the ability to supply enough pot for even the limited clientel I had, and certainly not for the person who supplied me. My experience is that, the higher the grade of weed, the less likely it is to be supporting traditional organized crime, and that the people who deal with the high grade stuff are way less likely to be involved with "gangsters" and the like anyways... you know, chill potheads and all that.

Misha Glenny has done some work for the BBC on the BC pot industry, and it says sort of the same thing, so I tend to think my suspiscions are correct, but I can't say I know for sure.

that being said, stuff has totally changed now that I am in winnipeg. I'm stuck buying stuff of the street from people who gladly talk about enforcing their "turf" and other crap.

Alcohol is far worse than weed, but you can tax that🙂 People can grow their own weed, try and tax that.

I´m more into Salvia personally but people should be able to do what they want, as long as the "stuff" isn´t addictive like cocaine.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Alcohol is far worse than weed, but you can tax that🙂 People can grow their own weed, try and tax that.

I´m more into Salvia personally but people should be able to do what they want, as long as the "stuff" isn´t addictive like cocaine.

Why draw the line at "addictive" rather than "causes violence"?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why draw the line at "addictive" rather than "causes violence"?

Good point, alcohol definetly causes violence especially in certain people ie the British.

Mind you when you consider the South Europeans who like a glass of wine here and there and don´t cause any problems it would be wrong to ban it outright.

marijauna doesn´t make people violent, but the smoke is obviously unhealthy for the lungs.

I suppose the big question which gets to the heart of things is, do we want a nanny state to decide what´s good for us?

alcohol is tied to violence everywhere, specially domestic violence and youth violence. your idillic vision of southern europeans drinking habits is far too optimistic, although countries like russia and england reallydo have worse than average levels of chronic binge alcoholism.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Good point, alcohol definetly causes violence especially in certain people ie the British.

Mind you when you consider the South Europeans who like a glass of wine here and there and don´t cause any problems it would be wrong to ban it outright.

marijauna doesn´t make people violent, but the smoke is obviously unhealthy for the lungs.

I suppose the big question which gets to the heart of things is, do we want a nanny state to decide what´s good for us?

I don't mind a nanny state that can cite valid studies taking an interest in the health of citizens via taxes and PSAs. Certainly the primary purpose of taxes on legalized drugs should be to mitigate problems associated with them (but then I'm a big fan of public option health care).

I never take interest in it. ❌ 😂 🤣

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I don't mind a nanny state that can cite valid studies taking an interest in the health of citizens via taxes and PSAs. Certainly the primary purpose of taxes on legalized drugs should be to mitigate problems associated with them (but then I'm a big fan of public option health care).

then the first thing they should ban is tobacco and unhealthy food. These things cause a massive burden on the health system.

Weed probably helps people, definitely brings stress down.

by that logic, the first thing we should ban are cars 🙄

replacing private with public transportation is a pretty good idea indeed.

if you insist, Komrad

Originally posted by inimalist
by that logic, the first thing we should ban are cars 🙄

I was just reading something that pointed out we could save thousands of lives every year by just making it illegal to drive over 5mph.

Originally posted by inimalist
if you insist, Komrad

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was just reading something that pointed out we could save thousands of lives every year by just making it illegal to drive over 5mph.

I rarely attempt to use comparisons of marijuana to other, more dangerous things, simply because, as illustrated above, the logical end result is, in fact, an increase of government intervention into people's lives. While I do support the idea that someone who does something stupid deserves to be treated for any injury they might incur, I really don't think that in turn justifies the state telling people they can't do things that might lead to injury.

Your point is perfect in terms of this example. If we argue that the role of the state is to prevent people from hurting themselves, it follows that driving over 5mph is an excess, not a liberty people should have due to personal freedom and all that.

that is a funny stat though, where did you find it?

Originally posted by 753
I do 😄

even Mussolini couldn't make the trains run on time

would this cover all transportation? like, land, sea and air? are all forms of private transportation illegal, or only motorized kinds?

EDIT: what about freight or shipping? is that now state run as well, or do corporations get to violate the law and have private trucks?

Originally posted by inimalist
I rarely attempt to use comparisons of marijuana to other, more dangerous things, simply because, as illustrated above, the logical end result is, in fact, an increase of government intervention into people's lives. While I do support the idea that someone who does something stupid deserves to be treated for any injury they might incur, I really don't think that in turn justifies the state telling people they can't do things that might lead to injury.

Your point is perfect in terms of this example. If we argue that the role of the state is to prevent people from hurting themselves, it follows that driving over 5mph is an excess, not a liberty people should have due to personal freedom and all that.

Only if we say that the state must protect people from harm at all costs. It's not inconsistent to say that safety and liberty are both good.

Originally posted by inimalist
that is a funny stat though, where did you find it?

Skeptical Inquirer article on global warming.

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/lets_keep_our_cool_about_global_warming/

Originally posted by inimalist

even Mussolini couldn't make the trains run on time

would this cover all transportation? like, land, sea and air? are all forms of private transportation illegal, or only motorized kinds?

EDIT: what about freight or shipping? is that now state run as well, or do corporations get to violate the law and have private trucks?