dgp

Joined

• started 200 topics
• posted 2,765 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by dgp

• 
  87

  Regulate Marijuana Like Wine (interesting article)

  by sabastious in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://regulatemarijuanalikewine.com/legal-and-political-analysis-of-regulate-marijuana-like-wine/.

  i am ecstatic to hear that people are attempting something like this.

  i have always thought that using marijuana could be likened to using wine as a medicine.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dgp

  Like I said, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. A Spanish saying goes (sort of) like this: "You give opinions about the fair depending on how you fare on it".

  I think I made it clear that my point of view is not that of an American citizen discussing why he or she would legalize marijuana. My point of view is that of a person who would have no say in the matter, but would feel its effects. Ultimately, what I say or not say regarding this issue will not matter. I don't vote in the United States.

  Sabastious, I don't think you're immoral, and I don't think you're claiming any higher morals either. English being my second language, I may sometimes not make myself understood. I wasn't talking about your own personal morals. But I would question the morals of someone who thinks that his smoking a joint, at this time, does not have any criminal consequences elsewhere. I would also question this person's sense of responsibility. Forgive me, but I don't think that anyone who is only wanting to get high stops to think for a while about the questionable characters and means whereby the drug reaches him.

  By the way, this is not a one-sided thing for me. I also question the morals of the small farmer who works picking coca leaves, for example. He knows full well what the leaves will be used for. I also question the morals of the man who sends the drug to the United States and thinks that, after all, they want the drug and he is just "meeting a need". Whatever drug it is.

  What happened: I was not talking about "any" street vendor. Please bear with me.

  My general point, and I hope this time I make it clear, is that, when the legalization of marijuana is discussed, people are deluded into thinking that they will be taking business away from the bad guys who are currently running it. In my humble opinion, if you have a business that gives you lots and lots and lots of money, and you see someone trying to take it away from you, you won't just wait and see how the money goes elsewhere. You will try to keep that business in your hands; and if you're used to extorting, and killing, and kidnapping, you will certainly use those means to fight the competition.

  My point was also that the people who currently run the marijuana business have other businesses, namely cocaine, designer drugs, prostitution, extorting people who want to enter the United States illegally, killing them after they have drained their every cent, kidnapping. The legalization of marijuana will only give them freedom to operate as a legally established operation while they maintain their other businesses. Sorry, but I would think anyone would see that.

  They are already extorting businesses in Central America. That is where the street vendor comes in, What Happened. Not "EVERY" street vendor. But some "nice" women whose real role is to keep an eye on legally established businesses which are undergoing extortion, in case the owner has such funny ideas as closing the shop or calling the Police.

  In Guatemala and El Salvador, if you drive a bus and you refuse to pay "the fee", you're dead, man. That is the reality. And the legalization of marijuana will give THAT PEOPLE a legal business from which they will derive money to fund their "other" activities, which, by the way, you guys do not bear.

  As to dispensaries, they can be opened, all right, to legally dispense marijuana to sick people. Or to people who just want to use it for their recreation after its use is approved. And who says that the bad guys can't extort those dispensaries and take control of them? That is what I said. I never said that dispensaries are fronts for anything. I did say that they WOULD become fronts. Sorry; I don't think traffickers would just do nothing and just would let the business be taken away from them.

  Suppose, for a second, that I am a drug dealer and I sell ecstasy and coke. I notice that marijuana becomes legal, and I expect some of my customers to use marijuana instead of a drug that would send them to jail. Meaning I would make less money. Would I fight against that? Would I try to go where the money were?

  Let me point out that many advocates of the legalization of marijuana claim that the war on drugs "can't" be won. That means that the Police can't win against those guys. So, I don't want to hear that the Police would control that.

  I think that the point I am making is a simple one. If someone smokes marijuana in his own home, that is hardly my business. But, if legalizing his habit results in my having to coexist with such criminals, then I am concerned. Not that my opinion matters, right?
• 
  87

  Regulate Marijuana Like Wine (interesting article)

  by sabastious in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://regulatemarijuanalikewine.com/legal-and-political-analysis-of-regulate-marijuana-like-wine/.

  i am ecstatic to hear that people are attempting something like this.

  i have always thought that using marijuana could be likened to using wine as a medicine.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dgp

  Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I respect yours, Sabastious. Now, tell me. Whether you have the moral high ground or not, what do you suggest we do about ruthless murderers who would not wait, arms crossed, until their highly profitable business were taken away from them?

  Now that we talk about morals, in the world as it is now, there are enough individuals who know full well that their drug use is also the fuel that keeps those gangs alive, and give them power and money, and they do not refrain from using drugs. Are they only the victims of drug dealers?

  In the world as it is today, each time someone smokes a joint, he or she is supporting that kind of criminals. What does that tell us about this person's moral choice and personal sense of responsibility?

  So many people know that they must not drive under the influence. Just how many accidents happen every year because of drunk driving? Granted, the laws in place cannot prevent those accidents. Would it be better if we did away with traffic laws regarding drunk driving?
• 
  87

  Regulate Marijuana Like Wine (interesting article)

  by sabastious in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://regulatemarijuanalikewine.com/legal-and-political-analysis-of-regulate-marijuana-like-wine/.

  i am ecstatic to hear that people are attempting something like this.

  i have always thought that using marijuana could be likened to using wine as a medicine.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dgp

  144001, I made no secret of my opposition to the legalization of marijuana. I also gave my reasons.

  Where I live, some of us believe that, if the United States were to legalize the sales of marijuana, then the assholes on my neighborhood would have a lot of cash that they would use against the law-abiding citizens. Just as they are doing now.

  Since you wanted me to quote references, Here's one: The Wikipedia. Emphasis added by me.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguments_for_and_against_drug_prohibition#Violence_and_profits_of_drugs_traffickers

  Violence and profits of drugs traffickers

  Prohibition protects the drug cartel insofar as it keeps the distribution in the black market and creates the risk that makes smuggling profitable. [ 93 ] [ 96 ] As former federal narcotics officer Michael Levine states in relation to his undercover work with Colombian cocaine cartels,from Lamar

  "I learned that not only did they not fear our war on drugs, they counted on it to increase the market price and to weed out the smaller, inefficient drug dealers. They found U.S. interdiction efforts laughable. The only U.S. action they feared was an effective demand reduction program. On one undercover tape-recorded conversation, a top cartel chief, Jorge Roman, expressed his gratitude for the drug war, calling it “a sham put on for the American taxpayer” that was actually “good for business”. [ 107 ]

  Critics of drug prohibition often cite the fact that the end of alcohol prohibition in 1933 led to immediate decreases in murders and robberies to support the argument that legalization of drugs could have similar effects. Once those involved in the narcotics trade have a legal method of settling business disputes, the number of murders and violent crime could drop. Robert W. Sweet, a federal judge, strongly agrees: "The present policy of trying to prohibit the use of drugs through the use of criminal law is a mistake". [ 108 ] When alcohol use was outlawed during prohibition, it gave rise to gang warfare and spurred the formation of some of the most well known criminals of the era, among them the infamous Al Capone. Similarly, drug dealers today resolve their disputes through violence and intimidation, something which legal drug vendors do not do. Prohibition critics also point to the fact that police are more likely to be corrupted in a system where bribe money is so available. Police corruption due to drugs is widespread enough that one pro-legalization newsletter has made it a weekly feature. [ 109 ]

  Drug money has been called a major source of income for terrorist organizations. Critics assert that legalization would remove this central source of support for terrorism. [ 110 ] While politicians blame drug users for being a major source of financing terrorists, [ 97 ] no clear evidence of this link has been provided. US government agencies and government officials have been caught trafficking drugs to finance US-supported terrorist actions in events such as the Iran-Contra Affair, and Manuel Noriega but the isolated nature of these events precludes them from being major sources of financing. [ 96 ]

  Corruption

  Human rights organizations and legal scholars have claimed that drug prohibition inevitably leads to police corruption. [ 111 ] [ 112 ] [ 113 ] [ 114 ]

  On 2 July 2010, former Interpol President Jackie Selebi was found guilty of corruption by the South African High Court in Johannesburg for accepting bribes worth $156,000 from a drug trafficker. [ 115 ] After being charged in January 2008, Selebi resigned as president of Interpol and was put on extended leave as National Police Commissioner of South Africa.

  This was published in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/opinion/legalizing-marijuana.html)

  I have spent my entire adult life fighting the war on drugs as a police officer on the front lines. I have experienced the loss of friends and comrades who fought this war alongside me, and every year tens of thousands of other people are murdered by gangs battling over drug turf in American cities, Canada and Mexico. It is time to reduce violence by taking away a vital funding source from organized crime just as we did by ending alcohol prohibition almost 80 years ago.

  Here's another (http://www.balancedpolitics.org/marijuana_legalization.htm)

• Legalization would mean a lower price; thus, related crimes (like theft) would be reduced. All illegal drugs are higher in price because the production, transportation, and sale of the drugs carry heavy risks. When people develop drug habits or addictions, they must somehow come up with the money to support their cravings. Unless a person is wealthy, he or she must often resort to robbery and other crimes to generate the money needed to buy the drugs. Legalization would reduce the risks and thus reduce the prices. There would therefore be less need for the secondary crimes needed to raise money.

You wanted me to produce references, and I have.

Think as a member of the Zetas, for example. You have lots of money, lots of weapons, and the ruthlessness necessary to run their "business" -for that is what it is to them- in the way they run it. Suppose they were to legalize marijuana, and, therefore, they were also free to sell marijuana. Why in the world would they not resort to their "usual ways" to reduce competition?

They would not really need to kill others. It would only be necessary for them to warn you, in the way they usually do.

I assume you guys don't know this, but in countries like El Salvador, people are sometimes very afraid of nice ladies selling vegetables in the street. Say you own a legal business. One fine day, a customer comes in who tells you that you will have to pay "rights" in order to continue to operate. And he warns you that you will not see him again; the nice lady on the other side of the street, however, will use her cell phone if she sees something "inappropiate" happening. Try complaining to the Police, OK? We have them on our payroll too.

I mentioned this elsewhere in this forum, and I will repeat it now. One of my cousins had this boyfriend who was a surgeon. He was kidnapped. The family paid the ransom, and he was returned alive. "Only" he didn't have the fingers of the hand he used to perform surgeries. This was a young man, you know? This is the kind of people who would be given an opportunity to engage in "legal" trade. If they don't hesitate to use this kind of methods, why would they refrain from using them in the future?

Open question: If this kind of people were involved in selling marijuana legally, who of you would open a shop and be THEIR competition?