[Gunnair]

Unsound Unsound:

Based on, very broad, generalizations and assumptions about Gunny's morality, he should also refuse anything made by the bronfman family. So basically any seagrams product. And no doubt, with how incestuous businesses are these days, a whole whack of other products.

Thanks for the retarded addition. Since we're into broad generalizations, based on the fact that you find the morality of opposing the use use of illegal drugs questionable, can we take a leap in logic and assume you support gangs and their violence plus their hold on prostitution as well?

Just asking....

[Curtman]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Unsound Unsound:

Gunnair, do you have just as much contempt for the rum/whiskey/scotch/vodka/beer drinkers of the 20s?

Well, yeah. We've romanticized the hell out of them, bUt they essentially did the thing.

Now, for all those people who grow and smoke their own product, I really don't have much of an issue.

Wouldn't that be nice if the users would just do that. You could keep the trafficking prohibited, and there would be an almost free legal supply that would compete with hyper-inflated prices on the black market. No government revenue, but billions of dollars would stay in the legal economy.

Except mandatory minimums take effect if you are growing in a rented property, or if you are "near" a school. (With no definition whatsoever of what "near" means). So the dumb on crime solution to drug crime is to make growing your own a very very risky adventure.

[Gunnair]

Well, they shut down a grow op in my neighborhood last week. Hope the owner loses the place since he decided to operate it in the middle of a quiet family neighborhood with lots of kids.

My sympathies for you and your cause are zero while you happily indulge the gangs.

[Gunnair]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Try not to forget, Curt, as your begin the monthly crusade, that those millions of drug users are willfully supporting gangs and terrorists as they run out and purchase their pot, coke, etc.

Willfully...

Happily throwing cash at gangsters and terrorists.

Happily....

Yet you blame the government for the gangs and not those who selfishly support them to satisfy their narcissistic needs.

Telling.

Alright...

Then shoppers at virtually every retail store, wearers of most clothing and footwear, consumers of Disney, etc. happily support slave shops...

Many things in our world come from places and conditions we wish they didn't come from, but the facilitation of our wants is streamlined and we are given what we demand, god dammit. And for the most part it is done in utter ignorance. And past that ignorance, if they are aware of it all, done in complete indifference. Or sometimes, as with clothes, done because of difficulty for avoidance.

It's just capitalism, how drugs come about in the black market doesn't really strike me as much more evil than where the clothes on my back sadly came from.

I mean, if we're going to discuss degrading and disgusting organizations supported by narcissistic wants and needs... Why not condemn it all?

No one wants it to be like this, it's just the way it is. We could change it... but that's just hopeless idealism, we're doomed to this apparently. Human nature or something.

So strip naked and return to the trees, brothers and sisters, to end hypocrisy all together.

(P.S.: sober)

Some do, I'm sure. Some pay their relatively skilled employees a reasonable living wage based upon the local economy. Are you suggesting they all make $20 Bucks an hour stitching clothes?

Funny, you're worried about that seamstress in China but you've you've got less problem supporting the local drug dealers trying to hook kids on meth.

Interesting.

[Curtman]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Their own elected officials for the most part didn't really give a shit, and only paid lip service to the law, why should Canadian companies have really cared?

$1:

The government doesn't grow it. They license growers to grow it.

Never said they did. I said those who are issued permits were knowingly violating the terms of their licence, issued by the government...Health Canada.


If you really need to toke that bad, plant 3 or 4 plants at a time, harvest it, smoke it and then plant another 3 or 4.

That's what I'm saying is happening now. People only pay lip service to the law. Why should Canadian "companies" have cared? Why should the growers? Why should the consumers?

You're not going to convince millions of Canadians to grow their own. Most of them are casual users, who couldn't be bothered to any more than they grow their own carrots. You're especially not going to convince them of that with a minimum 18 months in jail.

[Curtman]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Well, they shut down a grow op in my neighborhood last week. Hope the owner loses the place since he decided to operate it in the middle of a quiet family neighborhood with lots of kids.

My sympathies for you and your cause are zero while you happily indulge the gangs.

When did I do that? "indulge the gangs"?

You can't make an accusation like that without providing some details.

[Gunnair]

Curtman Curtman:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Well, they shut down a grow op in my neighborhood last week. Hope the owner loses the place since he decided to operate it in the middle of a quiet family neighborhood with lots of kids.

My sympathies for you and your cause are zero while you happily indulge the gangs.

When did I do that? "indulge the gangs"?

You can't make an accusation like that without providing some details.

I'm willing to bet a buffalo nickel that you have not grown and smoked your own pot for your entire time of indulging.

Secondly, you support the idea of buying drugs from gangs while you rally against prohibition. You support gangs.

If you supported the end of prohibition and rallied behind not imbibing so as not to support the current illegal activities, you'd have my 100 percent support. But you don't.

[ShepherdsDog]

Well unless you're growing a few plants or getting pot from a friend who is only growing a few plants for personal use, you're getting your ganjah from gang run grow ops.

[Gunnair]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Well unless you're growing a few plants or getting pot from a friend who is only growing a few plants for personal use, you're getting your ganjah from gang run grow ops.

Well, just like every Internet hero has a black belt, Porsche, smokin hot trophy wife, and a million dollar house while retired at 35, I'm betting that Curt has done exactly that. Grown his own and only hung around with other like minded guys that grew their own.

[ShepherdsDog]

A friend of mine tried growing a dozen of his own ....planted it in a commercial hemp field. it cross pollinated:lol: .....you could smoke an acre of that shit the next generation and not even get a mild buzz.

[Curtman]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Curtman Curtman:

You can't make an accusation like that without providing some details.

I'm willing to bet a buffalo nickel that you have not grown and smoked your own pot for your entire time of indulging.

Secondly, you support the idea of buying drugs from gangs while you rally against prohibition. You support gangs.

If you supported the end of prohibition and rallied behind not imbibing so as not to support the current illegal activities, you'd have my 100 percent support. But you don't.

You have no idea what you are talking about. If you have some evidence that I've purchased anything from gangs then let's hear it. There is none, so I would be fascinated if you could present some.

I do not support buying drugs from gangs in any way shape or form. For 15 years or so I have devoted a lot of my time to arguing with people about a way to drastically reduce the numbers of people buying drugs from gangs. You can't even pretend to believe that I would support that... Can you?

[Gunnair]

Curtman Curtman:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Curtman Curtman:

You can't make an accusation like that without providing some details.

I'm willing to bet a buffalo nickel that you have not grown and smoked your own pot for your entire time of indulging.

Secondly, you support the idea of buying drugs from gangs while you rally against prohibition. You support gangs.

If you supported the end of prohibition and rallied behind not imbibing so as not to support the current illegal activities, you'd have my 100 percent support. But you don't.

You have no idea what you are talking about. If you have some evidence that I've purchased anything from gangs then let's hear it. There is none, so I would be fascinated if you could present some.

I do not support buying drugs from gangs in any way shape or form. For 15 years or so I have devoted a lot of my time to arguing with people about a way to drastically reduce the numbers of people buying drugs from gangs. You can't even pretend to believe that I would support that... Can you?

So, all the pot you have ever smoked has come from your or a buddies backyard?

As for believing you support gangs, well why not? Based on a forum conversation that I like beer you believe that I'm an alcoholic.

Goes both ways there, Curt.

[Curtman]

Gunnair Gunnair:

So, all the pot you have ever smoked has come from your or a buddies backyard?

As for believing you support gangs, well why not? Based on a forum conversation that I like beer you believe that I'm an alcoholic.

Goes both ways there, Curt.

You can believe whatever you like. It's none of your business.

I attack when I'm attacked, this conversation has been going very pleasantly so far. Lets just skip that stuff this time around?

[Xort]

Curtman Curtman:

The Opium Wars is what you think of when we talk about Legalization? Really?

Why not? I've seen modern day opium addicts, both refined and raw. They haven't changed so it's fair to think defacto and dejure legalization wouldn't have changed either.

$1:

How well did prohibition work out for China?

Took a long time to get it under control. Or maybe it's more correct to say it took the communists to force it under control.

To answer your question directly, it worked out to a degree that under prohibition fewer users were using. Under British trade I think stats were estimated at something over half the adult male population.

[Curtman]

Xort Xort:

Curtman Curtman:

The Opium Wars is what you think of when we talk about Legalization? Really?

Why not? I've seen modern day opium addicts, both refined and raw. They haven't changed so it's fair to think defacto and dejure legalization wouldn't have changed either.

$1:

How well did prohibition work out for China?

Took a long time to get it under control. Or maybe it's more correct to say it took the communists to force it under control.

To answer your question directly, it worked out to a degree that under prohibition fewer users were using. Under British trade I think stats were estimated at something over half the adult male population.

If you're drawing a parallel between marijuana prohibition and the opium wars, the British are the Mexican drug cartels, and the Chinese are us. China did not do well imposing prohibition to fight the British cartel.

$1:

Another Chinese request for peace was accepted and China agreed to all demands. The survivors of the Parkes delegation were returned (General Grant burned and destroyed the Old Summer Palace in reprisal for the mistreatment of the Parkes party, October 24). Ten new treaty ports, including Tientsin, were opened to trade with the western powers, foreign diplomats were to be allowed at Peking and the opium trade was to be regulated by the Chinese authorities. Kowloon, on the mainland opposite Hong Kong Island, was surrendered to the British. Permission was granted for foreigners (including Protestant and Catholic missionaries) to travel throughout the country. An indemnity of three million ounces of silver was paid to Great Britain and two million to France.

This is not a prohibition success story that you are talking about.