[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Why aren't they pushing those drugs now? What market is there for those other drugs just waiting to be exploited, that they're not exploiting now? They already push other drugs - you think they're just not applying themselves diligently enough? What is this big demand for other drugs that's going unfulfilled now? Are there voices in the wilderness crying "please, Mr Gangster, quit selling pot and sell me **&%^ instead"?

If you had a clue about how gangs operate, you'd get it. Unfortunately, you can't learn that from Google.

I mean, how did gangs ever survive before weed? They must have been standing at the food bank with you.

andyt andyt:

I already think X should be legalized and regulated. Reduce harm doing that over kids dying from dirty X.

You're retarded.

andyt andyt:

what do you know about gangs? You know, but the cops and attorneys general that say it would reduce gang activity don't?

What do I know about gangs? Enough that I understand how this works and that your claims are laughable when it comes to crime reduction.

Funny how you believe authority figures only if it supports your point. Would you take their word if they didn't support your pot smoking dreams? Hell no.

[OnTheIce]

raydan raydan:

I'm just sick of the fact that we have to make laws to protect people from themselves. Don't blame the producers, don't blame the dealers... blame the idiots that abuse.

That's how society works.

Some people don't have the sense they need to take care of themselves and point them in the right direction.

People like andy would love to coddle these people and make it easier for them to make poor choices.

[Brenda]

raydan raydan:

Brenda Brenda:

raydan raydan:

No, the other laws are there to protect people from other people.

Suicide is illegal too...

Nope...
Suicide is not a crime in Canada,

, Oh ok, learned something new today thanks

$1:

but physician-assisted suicide is considered illegal.
It's also illegal for anybody to help or counsel someone to commit suicide.

THAT I knew

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

If you had a clue about how gangs operate, you'd get it. Unfortunately, you can't learn that from Google.

I mean, how did gangs ever survive before weed? They must have been standing at the food bank with you.

Really? Gangs were as big before weed as they are now?

andyt andyt:

what do you know about gangs? You know, but the cops and attorneys general that say it would reduce gang activity don't?

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

What do I know about gangs? Enough that I understand how this works and that your claims are laughable when it comes to crime reduction.

Funny how you believe authority figures only if it supports your point. Would you take their word if they didn't support your pot smoking dreams? Hell no.

You understand how it works but the cops and attorney's general don't? How'd you get to be the authority? If I thought prohibition worked, as I've said before, I'd be all for prohibition - especially of dangerous drugs like booze.

[Thanos]

Even if it were legalized it would have done nothing to prevent the property of the landlord from getting ruined by some scumbags. All that it would have meant would that he wouldn't even be able to go to the police about it with the smallest hope they might find the fuckers and charge them. He'd still be stuck with the remediation costs and the fees from the city inspection offices. It might not be a "crime", with that word having been apparently re-defined into worthlessness, but it still wouldn't have been victimless. Some guy gets hit up for $50K in repairs for something that wasn't even his fault. Some other guy gets to sit on his couch conched out of his fucking skull on his favourite inhalable product while he's watching SpongeBob Squarepants. Same ol' same-ol', except that the moral goalposts have been moved that much closer to total existential disintegration.

Trade off time: legalize the growing but make the act of stealing power from the local electrical system, which we all know is exactly what these fucktards are going to continue to do, worth 10 years in the can minimum.

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Really? Gangs were as big before weed as they are now?

You mean, you don't know? Surely you've Googled that.

andyt andyt:

You understand how it works but the cops and attorney's general don't? How'd you get to be the authority? If I thought prohibition worked, as I've said before, I'd be all for prohibition - especially of dangerous drugs like booze.

Cops and political figures have opinions. Doesn't mean they're always right.

I have gained knowledge through experience, not Google.

[andyt]

Experience in how to bullshit.

[andyt]

Thanos Thanos:

Even if it were legalized it would have done nothing to prevent the property of the landlord from getting ruined by some scumbags. All that it would have meant would that he wouldn't even be able to go to the police about it with the smallest hope they might find the fuckers and charge them. He'd still be stuck with the remediation costs and the fees from the city inspection offices. It might not be a "crime", with that word having been apparently re-defined into worthlessness, but it still wouldn't have been victimless. Some guy gets hit up for $50K in repairs for something that wasn't even his fault. Some other guy gets to sit on his couch conched out of his fucking skull on his favourite inhalable product while he's watching SpongeBob Squarepants. Same ol' same-ol', except that the moral goalposts have been moved that much closer to total existential disintegration.

Trade off time: legalize the growing but make the act of stealing power from the local electrical system, which we all know is exactly what these fucktards are going to continue to do, worth 10 years in the can minimum.

If you want, Thanos. But why would people bother to grow in houses, when they could grow in greenhouses on agricultural land for much cheaper?

[Thanos]

Your unshakable belief that an activity that's conducted by a bunch of organized crime dirtbags is going to be re-staffed overnight after legalization by some happy mom-n-pop farmers is simply astounding. You should have been an evangelical preacher because you've got that I'm-always-right-regardless obstinate faith in yourself running at about 1000 RPM.

[andyt]

$1:

This brief report outlines the links between cannabis prohibition in British Columbia (Canada) and the growth of organized crime and related violence in the province, and is the first report of a coalition of concerned citizens and experts known as Stop the Violence BC. The report also defines the public health concept “regulation” and seeks to set the stage for a much needed public conversation and action on the part of BC politicians.

British Columbia has long been a key centre of illegal cannabis cultivation in Canada. While historically this activity was believed to be dominated by “hippies” growing cannabis in remote outdoor locations, the last two decades have seen the trade progressively characterized by high tech indoor grow operations that are increasingly under the control of organized crime groups. The scale and impact of this market should not be underestimated. A recent Fraser Institute report, which concluded that the cannabis trade should be legalized to address the harms of cannabis prohibition, estimated that the value of BC’s illegal cannabis market was worth up to $7 billion.

In response, significant law enforcement resources have been used in an attempt to suppress cannabis’s contribution to organized crime in BC. However, as was observed with the emergence of a violent illegal market under alcohol prohibition in the United States in 1920s, the vast illegal market that has emerged under cannabis prohibition has for many years proven resistant to law enforcement’s efforts, while unintended consequences have similarly emerged.

Specifically, in the wake of fears following the emergence of widespread cannabis use in the 1970s, there has been a longstanding and very costly effort to reduce cannabis availability and use through drug law enforcement. Despite more than an estimated $2.5 trillion having been spent on the “war on drugs” in North America during the last 40 years, cannabis is as readily available today as at any time in our history. Rates of use are up over the last decade, cannabis potency has increased and price has decreased. In fact, by virtually every metric, cannabis prohibition has clearly failed to achieve its stated objectives. This policy failure alone is reason enough to urgently explore alternatives, but cannabis prohibition has been more than simply ineffective. Despite these serious concerns, the ineffectiveness and unintended consequences of anti-cannabis laws are rarely publicly discussed by policy makers.

In fact, while business, social and political leaders may speak privately about the concerning role that cannabis prohibition has played in fuelling organized crime and related violence in British Columbia, the province’s leaders have largely been silent on this issue in public. Worse, other leaders have been outspoken in supporting an endless cycle of new drug law enforcement interventions, without any mention of the fact that the cannabis prohibition laws themselves set the stage for the enrichment of organized crime and related violence. This status quo must end.

Conclusion

From an evidence-based perspective, cannabis prohibition has clearly failed to achieve its stated objectives and has resulted in a range of harms, not the least of which is the growth of organized crime in British Columbia and the all too common violence that has been linked to the cannabis trade.

Many misconceptions exist regarding the actual impacts of cannabis prohibition, and special interests contribute to public confusion by commonly making false or misleading statements about the alternatives to the status quo. This report therefore concludes with a questions and answers section addressing many of the common questions about cannabis prohibition and its alternatives.

http://undrugcontrol.info/en/issues/har ... he-silence

[andyt]

Thanos Thanos:

Your unshakable belief that an activity that's conducted by a bunch of organized crime dirtbags is going to be re-staffed overnight after legalization by some happy mom-n-pop farmers is simply astounding. You should have been an evangelical preacher because you've got that I'm-always-right-regardless obstinate faith in yourself running at about 1000 RPM.

I would expect growing pot would be a business like growing tobacco is, except that a lot more people will grow it for their own consumption, as I assume they already do. How are the dirtbags going to compete with legal pot - and what would be the point?

[Brenda]

So why are all pot users not growing their own pot now?

[OnTheIce]

Brenda Brenda:

So why are all pot users not growing their own pot now?

Excellent point.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

So why are all pot users not growing their own pot now?

Too much effort would be my guess. If you only smoke once in a while, are you going to invest in growing equipment? Same reason that most beer and wine drinkers don't make their own either. At $200 an ounce current price, you'd think most pot users would grow their own. Wouldn't that actually solve all the problems - if everybody grew for their own little need, so much for gangs completely.

What do you and OTI think the reason is? And OTI, you realize Brenda is for pot legalization, don't you? But I guess you'll jump on anybody's point to help your cause?

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Experience in how to bullshit.

Says the guy sitting on CKA in anonymity who came here to start shit.

You're the master of bullshit.

Amazingly enough, some of us actually have experience in real world situations that you have no clue about. We have education and experience that extends beyond Google, or your mom's basement.