Legalisation
- Auteur de la discussion GOD
- Date de début
GOD- Essentially there are two choices; be patient and wait, or get off our asses.
The governments may have become too big for us to rise up and make them stop....you can look at the historical record of what other oppressed people did when they were persecuted, and it offers a clearly two-forked road;
Get up, off that ass, and have massive, MASSIVE protests, SMOKE-OUTS, outright defiance, everyone QUIT plea-bargaining in drug cases, force them to take EVRY SINGLE CASE, misdemeanor or felony, to a jury trial. Become active, start a medical marijuana initiative in your community, get signatures, just raise all the hell you're able to generate, and DO IT WITH ORGANIZATION.
Organization is what MAKES those fuckers listen. When you have a group of people with purpose, who are driven and passionate, IT CREATES CLOUT.
Some stoner sitting on his ass watching Aqua Teen Hunger Force is never going to have any contribution.
The governments may have become too big for us to rise up and make them stop....you can look at the historical record of what other oppressed people did when they were persecuted, and it offers a clearly two-forked road;
Get up, off that ass, and have massive, MASSIVE protests, SMOKE-OUTS, outright defiance, everyone QUIT plea-bargaining in drug cases, force them to take EVRY SINGLE CASE, misdemeanor or felony, to a jury trial. Become active, start a medical marijuana initiative in your community, get signatures, just raise all the hell you're able to generate, and DO IT WITH ORGANIZATION.
Organization is what MAKES those fuckers listen. When you have a group of people with purpose, who are driven and passionate, IT CREATES CLOUT.
Some stoner sitting on his ass watching Aqua Teen Hunger Force is never going to have any contribution.
Caduceus Mercurius
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 14/7/07
- Messages
- 9 628
Good point.
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
spice a dit:
But... It's so much fun....
The problem in my opinion is that most stoners/psychonauts aren't really into organising/submitting to a higher goal (no pun intended). Creating an organisation to get rid of another organisation (drug laws and the criminal justice system around it) feels weird to a lot of people. And rightly so, I think.
This doesn't mean that we shouldn't do anything or that it is wrong to organize, it just means that it is a bit harder to organize.
Creating an organization to get rid of another organization feels weird to most people, and rightly so....
Maybe you couching it in those terms will make people feel weird who don't already.
Thats not EVEN what this is about....this isn't about 'creating an organization to get rid of another organization'....the goal isn't to destroy anything, it is to ASSERT OURSELVES....
In MY opinion, what you said borders on this statement;
People are gutless lazy fucks who CANT do what you suggest because we have been too conditioned to spread the ass cheeks.
Maybe you couching it in those terms will make people feel weird who don't already.
Thats not EVEN what this is about....this isn't about 'creating an organization to get rid of another organization'....the goal isn't to destroy anything, it is to ASSERT OURSELVES....
In MY opinion, what you said borders on this statement;
People are gutless lazy fucks who CANT do what you suggest because we have been too conditioned to spread the ass cheeks.
Forkbender
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 23/11/05
- Messages
- 11 366
But it is a fact that in 'asserting ourselves' we are institutionalizing some form of transgression of the law, thereby destroying in a certain way the institutions we currently have. On the other hand, governments have enough time and resources (paperwork, burocracy) to make their constricting laws and initiatives go by unnoticed by a lot of people. The change goes slowly and only a few people will notice it, thereby keeping everything in check. Again, I'm not saying that it is a bad idea or that we should not do it, but I have my doubts of the average stoner willing to put effort in it. They are happy that they can score some weed and don't mind breaking the law in doing so.
The average stoner isn't any different than the average person in this respect: zero interest in politics.
This is why where I live such a high percentage of people smoke weed but it is still illegal, and harping Harper is trying to make even more repressive laws..
Props to those who showed up on 4/20.. was reading about the huge weed party in California that like 5000 people showed up to. 5000 people smoking weed. A completely peaceful gathering, no incidents whatsoever. The police call it a "moral slap in the face".. and idiots who don't get it see thousands of people smoking peacefully and still rant about how dangerous it is..
This is why where I live such a high percentage of people smoke weed but it is still illegal, and harping Harper is trying to make even more repressive laws..
Props to those who showed up on 4/20.. was reading about the huge weed party in California that like 5000 people showed up to. 5000 people smoking weed. A completely peaceful gathering, no incidents whatsoever. The police call it a "moral slap in the face".. and idiots who don't get it see thousands of people smoking peacefully and still rant about how dangerous it is..
Forkbender, the law is an evolving body, it is not a stagnant, static force.
It is only destroying the law in the sense that growth destroys youth.
A child must die for a man to have life, is what you're saying, basically....
It is a reality that laws change with custom, and with time.
Examples; Women weren't allowed to smoke tobacco, at all, until early in the 20th century in this country....black people couldn't drink from a water fountain used by whites 50 years ago.....
Simple posession of Marijuana was a felony in ALL STATES in the 70's....
.....the law evolves, it isn't as black and white as 'thats the law and that's that'
That is contrarian thinking.
It is only destroying the law in the sense that growth destroys youth.
A child must die for a man to have life, is what you're saying, basically....
It is a reality that laws change with custom, and with time.
Examples; Women weren't allowed to smoke tobacco, at all, until early in the 20th century in this country....black people couldn't drink from a water fountain used by whites 50 years ago.....
Simple posession of Marijuana was a felony in ALL STATES in the 70's....
.....the law evolves, it isn't as black and white as 'thats the law and that's that'
That is contrarian thinking.
Brugmansia
Holofractale de l'hypervérité
- Inscrit
- 2/11/06
- Messages
- 4 372
It has nothing to do with the lack of an organized opposition.
It's because legal Marijuana would kill the plastic, rope and package industry. And most likely will decrease a certain % of the pharmaceutical wins.
The coca leaves will kill the vitamin industry since chewing the leaves will transspont all the essential vitamins to one's system. And the alkaloids will help, because vitamins from plants are way much better absorpted by the body than pills with merely the active vitamin.
Also, coca is used in hair products, tooth paste and can be a substitute for many ingredients for a wide range of products.
Also, the maffia will lose a significant working branche so if the discussion about legalising rises, those who are trying to realise this, can except a visit from them.
It's because legal Marijuana would kill the plastic, rope and package industry. And most likely will decrease a certain % of the pharmaceutical wins.
The coca leaves will kill the vitamin industry since chewing the leaves will transspont all the essential vitamins to one's system. And the alkaloids will help, because vitamins from plants are way much better absorpted by the body than pills with merely the active vitamin.
Also, coca is used in hair products, tooth paste and can be a substitute for many ingredients for a wide range of products.
Also, the maffia will lose a significant working branche so if the discussion about legalising rises, those who are trying to realise this, can except a visit from them.
People aren't passionate enough, or vocal enough, man.
The few that do organize are always the mellowist, most intellectual examples.
What is needed is for organized opposition to turn out with the enthusiasm of, say, wrestling fans, or Nascar groupies, and....raise...that.....hell with the authorities, en masse, until they have no option BUT to isten.
Passion is a trait that I see expressed in very few people when I look around in this so-called 'real' world. It may be that it has been supplanted by technology and comfortable, modern life. The only thing most people are really passionate about anymore is hedonism.
Nothin' wrong with that, but when the fucking world is turning into 'Fahrenheit 451' right before your eyes, with a healthy dose of 'Brave New World' and '1984' thrown in, its time to DO something, because sitting on our assses only guarantees DOOM, do you understand?
What we have been practicing for many years nowm whether anyone actually realizes it or not, is the classical path of 'passive resistance'. It is how Gahndi
liberated his people, and MLK his.
Those men had what we don't- PASSION and DEDICATION.
It would probably have to border on what many may call 'fanatic', yes.
I think that the leaders of the USA, England, The Netherlands and Canada are
all fanatics, so it is really a mater of 'who are you worried about calling you a fanatic'.
The few that do organize are always the mellowist, most intellectual examples.
What is needed is for organized opposition to turn out with the enthusiasm of, say, wrestling fans, or Nascar groupies, and....raise...that.....hell with the authorities, en masse, until they have no option BUT to isten.
Passion is a trait that I see expressed in very few people when I look around in this so-called 'real' world. It may be that it has been supplanted by technology and comfortable, modern life. The only thing most people are really passionate about anymore is hedonism.
Nothin' wrong with that, but when the fucking world is turning into 'Fahrenheit 451' right before your eyes, with a healthy dose of 'Brave New World' and '1984' thrown in, its time to DO something, because sitting on our assses only guarantees DOOM, do you understand?
What we have been practicing for many years nowm whether anyone actually realizes it or not, is the classical path of 'passive resistance'. It is how Gahndi
liberated his people, and MLK his.
Those men had what we don't- PASSION and DEDICATION.
It would probably have to border on what many may call 'fanatic', yes.
I think that the leaders of the USA, England, The Netherlands and Canada are
all fanatics, so it is really a mater of 'who are you worried about calling you a fanatic'.
whow, quite hard you are, it is still a discussion about legalisation of drugs
I also think, that most part of weedsmokers etc. are quite young and the politicians are quiet old...also, in society people have a quite constant and very negative picture of smokin' junkies...hippies etc. They don't like the idea of legalisation
I really think that most of it is about pictures people have in their minds. E.g. talkng about weed is a taboo, cocaine too though all know that nearly all e.g. businessmen take it. Tobacco is more or less ok, it has a long history in human society although if I remember right, it is more dangerous than weed (or was it alcohol?).
If you can't see the relationship between legalization and social oppresion, then
that's on you.
Erosion of rights, and passivity are contributors to herding us all around like cattle. Whether this amounts to making some kid make tennis shoes in sri laka for eight cents a day, or keeping me from smoking a joint when I go outside into the world, the net effect is the same.....
that's on you.
Erosion of rights, and passivity are contributors to herding us all around like cattle. Whether this amounts to making some kid make tennis shoes in sri laka for eight cents a day, or keeping me from smoking a joint when I go outside into the world, the net effect is the same.....
Maybe I didn't make my point clear...I don't want to say that there is no "herdisation", the people get comfortable, passive and stupid. But I don't think that there is a government that is surpressing a whole nation...or can you somehow give evidence that everyone takes drugs and is for legalisation of these? If yes, you are 100% right.
Or what do you mean by social oppression? That a government is surpressing society or society surpressing the individual (here:drug user)? In the second case there is no social reason for legalisation- law is (in normal cases) (more or less) congruent to the moral image of society or, at least, of the majority. If not, it changes.
So if society is surpressing the individual, then the majority is pro-illegalisation of drugs.
Or what do you mean by social oppression? That a government is surpressing society or society surpressing the individual (here:drug user)? In the second case there is no social reason for legalisation- law is (in normal cases) (more or less) congruent to the moral image of society or, at least, of the majority. If not, it changes.
So if society is surpressing the individual, then the majority is pro-illegalisation of drugs.
PS: I am pro-legalisation because it is the responsibility of every individual to live as he/she wants to. Human beings are responsible enough to know if they want to take drugs or not. So there should be no law taking away this responsibility.
The problem is that the system is designed in such a way that it lumps all drugs together as if they are all the same, and doesn't give users a voice. In fact, by admitting you are a user you are condemning yourself to being ignored.
The system is based on a cycle of pure ignorance.
At one time, experimenting with these chemicals would have been the height of scientific discovery and learning, instead it has been delegated to the back burner by herds of fools who know not and aren't interested in knowing. The laws are designed by politicians, not scientists and hence the DEA tries to bust up medical marijuana users in Cali, because they are self-appointed experts who know more than licensed medical practitioners.
The laws must change.
The system is based on a cycle of pure ignorance.
At one time, experimenting with these chemicals would have been the height of scientific discovery and learning, instead it has been delegated to the back burner by herds of fools who know not and aren't interested in knowing. The laws are designed by politicians, not scientists and hence the DEA tries to bust up medical marijuana users in Cali, because they are self-appointed experts who know more than licensed medical practitioners.
The laws must change.
Here's what *I* am trying to say;
When I made reference to Fahrenheit 451, I am talking about the way government suppresses information by manipulating people. Why burn a book if you can make people DISTRUST THEM???????????
Which is related to st.bot.32 said in his post about Medical Marijuana in California.
The medical evidence that cannabis is effective on MULTIPLE fronts against cancer, glaucoma, chemotherapy, and still other maladies is IRREFUTABLE.....
Scientists are shouting it to the rooftops....the DEA says 'Marijuana is evil'
(War is peace, etc...so there is your explanation for the 1984 reference, as well.)
They asre spouting ignorant, traditionalized dogma, and repeating it often, to keep people on the sidelines, because not everyone is courageous enough to go out on a bare limb.
The 'Brave New World' reference is related to how we use scientific advancement for the wrong reasons.....(see above post to clarify)
I don't know if English is your native language or not, but I thought my statements were VERY clear.
When I made reference to Fahrenheit 451, I am talking about the way government suppresses information by manipulating people. Why burn a book if you can make people DISTRUST THEM???????????
Which is related to st.bot.32 said in his post about Medical Marijuana in California.
The medical evidence that cannabis is effective on MULTIPLE fronts against cancer, glaucoma, chemotherapy, and still other maladies is IRREFUTABLE.....
Scientists are shouting it to the rooftops....the DEA says 'Marijuana is evil'
(War is peace, etc...so there is your explanation for the 1984 reference, as well.)
They asre spouting ignorant, traditionalized dogma, and repeating it often, to keep people on the sidelines, because not everyone is courageous enough to go out on a bare limb.
The 'Brave New World' reference is related to how we use scientific advancement for the wrong reasons.....(see above post to clarify)
I don't know if English is your native language or not, but I thought my statements were VERY clear.
I understand your point perfectly you don't have to offend me. I'm not native but I still understand perfectly. I just didn't know bout the example bout the DEA.
I understand the medical statement but do you (and all the other guys) using it only because it is effective against cancer and so on?
I understand the medical statement but do you (and all the other guys) using it only because it is effective against cancer and so on?
