Another Great Victory in the War on Drugs.

[Gandalf]

Would potheads be needed to be stopped with guns?

Ofcourse not. Just wave a cookie in the air and they'll do most anything.

Mmm cookieeeee

Wave a box of Krispy Kremes, and you're basically God to us...I mean them...

You'd be God to me.

[RedImperator]

And the best part is, the police found nothing at all. So instead of coming off looking like jackboot fascist thugs, they came off as inept jackboot fascist thugs. There's a few hundreds kids who are going to hate cops for the rest of their lives now, for no gain at all (even by the WoD's skewed standards of gain and loss).

That's certainly true, but even you can see the need to keep drugs out of schools, it's no different from alcohol in that respect. It has no place and school, period.

Of course drugs shouldn't be in school. Neither should cigarettes or alcohol. Drugs (all kinds of drugs) are for adults, and the last time I checked, high school students aren't adults yet. The difference is, nobody would ever dream of a police raid complete with weapons drawn and students handcuffed for contraband Marlboros. And I hate to sound like I'm beating a dead horse, but legalization would push the drug market aboveground and make it easier to prevent drugs from getting into the hands of kids--Joe the drug dealer doesn't care who he sells pot to, because the risk is the same no matter what, but Joe the marijuana club owner DOES, because he can get a profitable business shut down by selling to kids. It's not an exaggeration when kids say they can get pot and coke more easily than they can beer, and prohibition, ironically enough, is the reason why.

[Tsyroc]

Would potheads be needed to be stopped with guns?

Good point. I would think it'd be more fun to beat the shit out of them. Maybe throw in little pepper spray and even some taser action.

[Xenophobe3691]

Would potheads be needed to be stopped with guns?

Good point. I would think it'd be more fun to beat the shit out of them. Maybe throw in little pepper spray and even some taser action.

If this is at night, get a whole box of laser pointers, and shine em at the ground around em, on each other, and on themselves!!!

[Andrew J.]

Would potheads be needed to be stopped with guns?

Ofcourse not. Just wave a cookie in the air and they'll do most anything.

Mmm cookieeeee

Wave a box of Krispy Kremes, and you're basically God to us...I mean them...

Hmm...something you and Dalton have in common, then?

[HemlockGrey]

That's certainly true, but even you can see the need to keep drugs out of schools, it's no different from alcohol in that respect. It has no place and school, period.

Everyday when I come to school there's about two dozen kids a block away smoking cigarettes. The SWAT teams have yet to show up.

[justifier]

Those morons. The drug dealers could see the cops coming and drop their drugs. We need to surprise them, and crash tanks right through the classrooms!




Who keeps Atlantas off the maps, who keeps the Martians under wraps, we do, we do!

[Sea Skimmer]

Everyday when I come to school there's about two dozen kids a block away smoking cigarettes. The SWAT teams have yet to show up.

That's cause there busy helping burn down entire city blocks in Phily.

[Death from the Sea]

Of course drugs shouldn't be in school. Neither should cigarettes or alcohol. Drugs (all kinds of drugs) are for adults, and the last time I checked, high school students aren't adults yet. The difference is, nobody would ever dream of a police raid complete with weapons drawn and students handcuffed for contraband Marlboros. And I hate to sound like I'm beating a dead horse, but legalization would push the drug market aboveground and make it easier to prevent drugs from getting into the hands of kids--Joe the drug dealer doesn't care who he sells pot to, because the risk is the same no matter what, but Joe the marijuana club owner DOES, because he can get a profitable business shut down by selling to kids. It's not an exaggeration when kids say they can get pot and coke more easily than they can beer, and prohibition, ironically enough, is the reason why.

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again. legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't. And if you think for one second that if pot were legalized that big cigarette companies wouldn't put the same chemicals in pot cigarettes as in their tobbacco ones you are sorely mistaken.

[RedImperator]

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again.

Why not? People a hell of a lot more competent than you haven't managed to refute it yet.

legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't.

This statement seems to assume that getting pot is difficult now, which the numbers show is manifestly untrue. What legalization would do is allow marijuana sales to move aboveground, where they can be tracked and regulated--and the threat of stiff fines and the loss of liscensure for legal dealers could be used to control sales to kids, as they are now to partially control alcohol sales to minors. It wouldn't STOP underage marijuana sales, but neither will prohibition, and resources being wasted now on throwing grown adults in jail for smoking pot could be put towards drug education and cracking down on the remaining underground details.

And if you think for one second that if pot were legalized that big cigarette companies wouldn't put the same chemicals in pot cigarettes as in their tobbacco ones you are sorely mistaken.

Pointless and wrong. Let me count the ways:

1. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with the subject of drug use in schools whatsoever

2. Why would tobacco companies sell marijuana? Tobacco companies sell tobacco.

3. The chemicals added to cigarettes are there to deliver nicotine to the bloodstream more efficiently, to make them more addictive. This isn't necessary with pot because 1) THC is non-toxic, so the potency of marijuana can be increased by breeding for higher THC concentrations, as opposed to nicotine, and 2) THC isn't addictive enough for it to matter anyway.

4. Even if they did, and one joint became the equivilant of, say, 10 tobacco cigarettes in terms of carcinogenic content, the overwhelming majority of heavy pot smokers would still be getting less exposure to carcinogens than a pack-a-day cigarette smoker.

5. Did I mention this has nothing at all to do with the point of this discussion?

[Vympel]

Not to mention with legalization you could tax the living fuck out of it ... money money money money!

[RedImperator]

Not to mention with legalization you could tax the living fuck out of it ... money money money money!

That's only the half of it. Remember, not only would you be making tax money, but you'd be freeing up the money that would otherwise be spent on enforcement--including figures not usually counted like the cost of imprisoning nonviolent drug offenders.

[Xenophobe3691]

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again. legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't.

Please, tell me how old you are. I'm a fucking COLLEGE STUDENT, and I can tell you that alcohol is much harder to come by than pot. Any college student'll tell you the same thing.

[Drooling Iguana]

Echelon loves drug war discussions, you have all been noted for your anti-government, and frankly, terroristic, views. In not supporting the heroes of law enforcement, you have shown yourselves to be terrorist scum! :twisted:

I think its funny that people think echelon actually does what they claim. If it monitors all electronic communications world wide, why didn't they catch the bit about flying planes into the World Trade Center? :roll:

The terrorists must've encoded their transmissions using 1337-5p34k.

[Uraniun235]

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again. legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't.

Please, tell me how old you are. I'm a fucking COLLEGE STUDENT, and I can tell you that alcohol is much harder to come by than pot. Any college student'll tell you the same thing.

Pfft... depends on where you are. People down the hallway get drunk every week and (with the exception of one) they're certainly not of age. I'm not going to say pot's harder to get, but it's not any fucking challenge at all for people in my dorm to go get drunk.

[Xenophobe3691]

Pfft... depends on where you are. People down the hallway get drunk every week and (with the exception of one) they're certainly not of age. I'm not going to say pot's harder to get, but it's not any fucking challenge at all for people in my dorm to go get drunk.

Well, for us, the thing is we only know one or two people who are able to get alcohol. I know of at least 8 offhand that can get me weed. Two people can get tied up in a hurry, 8 is pretty damn hard to do...

[kojikun]

The terrorists must've encoded their transmissions using 1337-5p34k.

That is why they employ the l33t Russian h4xz0rs that code in b1n4ry and make all their art p1x3l by p1x3l.

[Xenophobe3691]

The terrorists must've encoded their transmissions using 1337-5p34k.

Holy Shit...that could actually work in some circumstances...

[Death from the Sea]

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again. legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't.

Please, tell me how old you are. I'm a fucking COLLEGE STUDENT, and I can tell you that alcohol is much harder to come by than pot. Any college student'll tell you the same thing.

My sister at age 19 had easier access to booze than I did when I turned 21 and as for me before I turned 21 (I am 26 now)I knew plenty of people who could get me beer, and I didn't know anyone who could get me pot, in fact I still don't. So your personal example is not exactly universal. by the way I am a college student too, so no not any college student will tell me the same thing.

[RedImperator]

please not the "legalizing pot is the right thing to do" speech again. legalising pot is not going to make it any harder for kids to get, kids get booze and cigarettes easy enough, why would pot be different? it wouldn't.

Please, tell me how old you are. I'm a fucking COLLEGE STUDENT, and I can tell you that alcohol is much harder to come by than pot. Any college student'll tell you the same thing.

My sister at age 19 had easier access to booze than I did when I turned 21 and as for me before I turned 21 (I am 26 now)I knew plenty of people who could get me beer, and I didn't know anyone who could get me pot, in fact I still don't. So your personal example is not exactly universal. by the way I am a college student too, so no not any college student will tell me the same thing.

Yes, sadly, Xenophobe only provided anecdotal evidence, which is next to useless. Bad Xenophobe. No cookies for you. Of course, you didn't provide anything but anecdotal evidence to counter it, so how about some numbers now?


SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey, Youth interviews, spring 1993.

Interesting, no? In 1993, the average American 9th grader felt he could get marijuana just as easily as he could alcohol (we'll assume the 1% difference in favor of marijuana is trivial enough to ignore). Keep in mind that this equal availability comes despite:

1. Alcohol's widespread legal availability and aboveground distribution network

In theory, alcohol should be easier to get because you don't need any special connections to get it--liquor stores have very helpfully put out signs for potential patrons, and even light them up at night. If you don't know a drug dealer (or know someone who can introduce you to a drug dealer), you're stuck. But then again, a liquor store can be forced out of business for selling to kids, and it can't very well sell on school grounds. A marijuana dealer is going to jail no matter who he sells to, so why not sell to a 16 year old kid--and a large number of dealers are actually students who have free access to the entire student body all day.

2. Far higher rates of alcohol versus marijuana use among the general population

This doesn't need any explanation, I don't think.

3. An intense marketing campaign for alcohol across all media

Again, self-explanatory.

4. Widespread social acceptance and tolerance for alcohol

American culture is virtually soaked in alcohol. It's generally understood that it's okay to drink, as long as you do it in moderation. Marjuana, on the other hand, is still regarded by many as "the demon weed"--though attitudes seem to be shifting. Still, America has a long tradition of being an alcohol-consuming nation, while pot has only come into widespread recreational use this century. Yet pot is as easily available as alcohol in schools, according to the students who go there.

5. Disproportionate punishment for marijuana versus alcohol use (both illegal for high schoolers).

Get caught drinking underage, you get a fine, and maybe get your driver's liscense suspended (regardless of whether you were near a car or not). Get caught smoking marijuana, you're getting probation and possible jail time in many states. Yet again, marijuana is as easy to get as alcohol.

Prohibition has failed as a strategy to keep marijuana out of schools. My solution is to legalize the drug, move the market aboveground, shut down the freelance dealers who have nothing to lose by selling to kids, institute honest drug education, and not do things like send SWAT teams into high schools on drug raids. Yours, apparently, is to stick your fingers in your ears and shout "Drugs are bad, mmmmkay!" at the top of your lungs.

Speaking of shouting, I'm still waiting for your reply to my last post. Do you actually plan on addressing the points I made, or shall I just put another tick in my win column right now?

[Mr Flibble]

Get caught drinking underage, you get a fine, and maybe get your driver's liscense suspended (regardless of whether you were near a car or not). Get caught smoking marijuana, you're getting probation and possible jail time in many states. Yet again, marijuana is as easy to get as alcohol.

I know this is off topic, but does that punishment occur regardless of the circumstances of the underage drinking in the States? Here in South Australia, if a minor drinks alcohol on private property (meaning family homes and not including licenced premises, etc) nothing is done. And I know for cigarettes here it is illegal for a minor to buy them or an adult for to buy cigarettes for a minor, but it is not illegal for them to smoke, the minor would not be punished in either circumstances (other than confiscation) but the adult, or retailer would be fined. I believe the situation is similar for alcohol, but I am not sure.

[RedImperator]

Get caught drinking underage, you get a fine, and maybe get your driver's liscense suspended (regardless of whether you were near a car or not). Get caught smoking marijuana, you're getting probation and possible jail time in many states. Yet again, marijuana is as easy to get as alcohol.

I know this is off topic, but does that punishment occur regardless of the circumstances of the underage drinking in the States? Here in South Australia, if a minor drinks alcohol on private property (meaning family homes and not including licenced premises, etc) nothing is done. And I know for cigarettes here it is illegal for a minor to buy them or an adult for to buy cigarettes for a minor, but it is not illegal for them to smoke, the minor would not be punished in either circumstances (other than confiscation) but the adult, or retailer would be fined. I believe the situation is similar for alcohol, but I am not sure.

Enforcement varies by jurisdiction. I would imagine the vast majority of underage drinking busts are made on college campuses in the United States, and at least in the town where my college was, most of the time the police were content to fine the offender and let the college handle the rest of the discipline (penalties started at a big fine, probation, alcohol counseling, and a letter home, and ended at expulsion).

Busts in private homes would usually come where police break up parties, and the punishment will usually include a big fine and possibly suspension of driving privleges. If adults are home, they're charged with distribution to minors, a serious charge, and if they're not (the classic "My parents aren't home let's have a kegger" situation), the party guests all can get tresspassing on top of everything else, depending on if the homeowner wants to press charges. Note that this is in the case of a big party that made enough of a neighborhood disturbance that the police came out. If a 17 year old was just having a beer with his dad in the garage or something, nobody's going to get charged with anything--the police can't just knock on your door and demand to know if any minors are drinking inside, and the courts have better things to do with their time anyway.

[Mr Flibble]

Enforcement varies by jurisdiction. I would imagine the vast majority of underage drinking busts are made on college campuses in the United States, and at least in the town where my college was, most of the time the police were content to fine the offender and let the college handle the rest of the discipline (penalties started at a big fine, probation, alcohol counseling, and a letter home, and ended at expulsion).

Busts in private homes would usually come where police break up parties, and the punishment will usually include a big fine and possibly suspension of driving privleges. If adults are home, they're charged with distribution to minors, a serious charge, and if they're not (the classic "My parents aren't home let's have a kegger" situation), the party guests all can get tresspassing on top of everything else, depending on if the homeowner wants to press charges. Note that this is in the case of a big party that made enough of a neighborhood disturbance that the police came out. If a 17 year old was just having a beer with his dad in the garage or something, nobody's going to get charged with anything--the police can't just knock on your door and demand to know if any minors are drinking inside, and the courts have better things to do with their time anyway.

Ok to me these punishments seem hugelky excessive. And for comparison what you described is apporximately the punishment level for possession of pot here (although in some cases a little harsher even i believe).

[RedImperator]

Ok to me these punishments seem hugelky excessive. And for comparison what you described is apporximately the punishment level for possession of pot here (although in some cases a little harsher even i believe).

It's all a symptom of America's puritan complex when it comes to bodily pleasures, combined with a tradition of relying on stiff punishments to deter crime, rather than prevention before the fact. Underage drinking laws are about as effective as drug laws, just by the way. I DO agree with throwing the book at anyone who distributes drugs, alcohol, or tobacco to minors--drugs are for adults, and giving them to kids is just plain irresponsible AND makes it harder for adults to enjoy their vices.

[Death from the Sea]

This statement seems to assume that getting pot is difficult now, which the numbers show is manifestly untrue. What legalization would do is allow marijuana sales to move aboveground, where they can be tracked and regulated--and the threat of stiff fines and the loss of liscensure for legal dealers could be used to control sales to kids, as they are now to partially control alcohol sales to minors. It wouldn't STOP underage marijuana sales, but neither will prohibition, and resources being wasted now on throwing grown adults in jail for smoking pot could be put towards drug education and cracking down on the remaining underground details.

You assume that legalizing sales will move 100% of the marjiuana sales into the newly legalized channels; But what do you think that the street dealers are going to to? buy the license to do the thing they have been doing for years without one? I doubt it. You seem to think that those selling marijauna would be law abiding citizens if it weren't for weed being illegal but that is not really the way it is.

Pointless and wrong. Let me count the ways:

1. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with the subject of drug use in schools whatsoever

never said it did

2. Why would tobacco companies sell marijuana? Tobacco companies sell tobacco.

why wouldn't they? it is in their market, no not tobbacco but smoking. And even if Camel and all the other cigarette companies didn't sell it then those who did would. After all you are the one saying we should make it a big business like tobbacco and alcohol, someone is going to start a big marijauna cigarette company if it is legalized, and they are going to want to make sure that they have customers just like the tobbacco does.

3. The chemicals added to cigarettes are there to deliver nicotine to the bloodstream more efficiently, to make them more addictive. This isn't necessary with pot because 1) THC is non-toxic, so the potency of marijuana can be increased by breeding for higher THC concentrations, as opposed to nicotine, and 2) THC isn't addictive enough for it to matter anyway.

you don't think that they would add chemicals to marijuana to make them addictive? right because the cigarette companies are so just and honorable and would never want to get people addicted to their products.

4. Even if they did, and one joint became the equivilant of, say, 10 tobacco cigarettes in terms of carcinogenic content, the overwhelming majority of heavy pot smokers would still be getting less exposure to carcinogens than a pack-a-day cigarette smoker.

you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if marijuana is more or less likely to give you cancer, the fact that it could is just icing on the cake. The reason that Marijuana is illegal is because it a minda altering drug. Yes alcohol is too, but it takes more than one drink to get you legally intoxicated, how many joints or even puffs off of a joint does it take to get stoned? I don't know because I have never smoked pot but I would bet one joint will get you stoned if not less than one joint. If you are going to legalize marijauna why not acid or cocaine or crack they are more expensive and could draw more tax dollars. I will tell you why, because like it or not mind altering drugs are harmful and we don't want a bunch of people running around fucked up and doing stupid shit because they are high. If marijuana was legal how long would it be before someone high on marijuana committed a crime and then claimed since they were high they are not responsible for their actions?

5. Did I mention this has nothing at all to do with the point of this discussion?

did I mention I never claimed it did, I was just stating my opinion and it spilled over into what I said.