You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-41         
 
Author Message
17 new of 41 responses total.
other
response 25 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 17:21 UTC 2003

Al Sharpton.  The name alone is a comedy routine.
scg
response 26 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 17:34 UTC 2003

When I moved to California a bit more than three years ago, there were lots
of radio commercials attacking tobacco smoking on the grounds that the tobacco
companies were evil (marketing to children, and all sorts of other things),
and that when you smoke you're supporting to tobacco companies.  The
commercials all ended with the tagline, "this message brought to you by the
tobacco tax."
keesan
response 27 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 17:34 UTC 2003

The government has less incentive to stop the use of tobacco and alcohol than
the illegal drugs because it can tax the former.
dah
response 28 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 18:07 UTC 2003

Just legalise them all and have fun as far as I could care what a care.
gull
response 29 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 18:38 UTC 2003

It will be interesting to see what happens if Canada decriminalizes
marijuana.  If they do, and chaos doesn't ensue, it'll become harder to
argue against it here.  I think that's a major reason the U.S.
government has been leaning so hard on them not to do it.
rcurl
response 30 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 18:45 UTC 2003

Regardless of whether it is tobacco or pot, I think *smoking* is a health
hazard - inhaling smoke from burning vegetation is still toxic. I think
that even if pot were legalized, there should still be a "anti smoking"
campaign and laws. 
lynne
response 31 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 12 21:18 UTC 2003

re 30:  Fine by me.  Seems like anti-pot commercials are keying on the "it
makes you stupid" belief.  I'd accept pot being illegal if they made being
stupid illegal too.  
slynne
response 32 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 13 02:56 UTC 2003

re#30 - YES! There are lots of truthful bad things to say about pot. 
There is not need to lie in advertising. One of my favorites is a young 
couple in a doctors office being told they cant have children. Then, 
the ad says that smoking marijuana decreases sperm count. What they 
dont say is that the sperm count effect is temporary and that it doesnt 
really lower it enough to keep people from having kids. In the back of 
my head, I always wondered if any babies were conceived because some 
dumbass saw that commercial and thought pot would make good birth 
control. 
dah
response 33 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 13 04:15 UTC 2003

"we're running this campaign to prevent stupidity caused by marihuana.  people
so afflicted are our target market."

"you sure know your market, don't you?"

AHAHAHAHA
md
response 34 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 13 13:33 UTC 2003

Old NatLamp news item:  "Disproving the myth that LSD causes genetic 
damage, Grace Slick has given birth to a healthy seven-pound 
wirehaired terrier."
happyboy
response 35 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 14 00:00 UTC 2003

/passes md a mello phat doobie.
tsty
response 36 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 16 05:41 UTC 2003

darwin lives ... and this is a surprise?
i
response 37 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 17 01:39 UTC 2003

From alcoholism to international crime, recreational drugs sure do cause
a huge load of problems.  Spending $Billions$ per year for decades trying
to fight the problem hasn't done much good, either.  (Being a knee-jerk
issue for politicians to posture on doesn't count as "doing good" any 
more than enriching drug lords does.)

If it's legal and big business is behind it, we get loads of advertising
aimed at getting more people hooked on it.

Let's start by making alcohol, tobacco, and similar (quite popular and
not notably nastier than booze or smokes) drugs a goverment monopoly.
Set prices to discourage use somewhat, but too low to make illicit stuff
very profitable.  Minimal "this stuff isn't very healthy" non-advertising
and quality/packaging/spin to make the stuff about as convenient & cool
as generic Preparation H.

This will outrage the upscale/premium/luxury market of course.  So let
them make & sell their fancy beers/wines/smokes/etc. if they're 1) very
small scale, 2) substantially pricier than government-standard stuff, 3)
living within a tight set of regulations on quality, advertising, local
control, buyer age, etc., and 4) paying a substantial tax. 

Not sure what to do about the nastier stuff.  Given all the problems the
users & their supply chain cause, it's tempting to say "all the stuff you
can do is *free*...inside a sex-segregated government facility that you 
aren't ever allowed to leave".  
oval
response 38 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 18 16:43 UTC 2003

things work so well in amsterdam not simply because pot, hash, and mushrooms
are legal. people generally have a more tolerant view on the issues and do
not marginalize or look down upon drug users or drug/alcohol addicts. heroine
addicts are treated for their addiction as a health issue. people don't walk
around preaching or feeling guilt about their actions. everyone's responsible
for their own decisions, and help is there if needed. i actually smoke way
less pot here than i ever did in the states. the tourists smoke more than
anyone, arriving here and diving heaed first into this taboo that has been
kept from them in thier own country. it's sad, really. in my life i have known
maybe 1 or 2 people who i consider to be over-doing it with pot. they've built
up such a tolerance that they continually smoke all day and are still
productive. but they eventually end up getting all hyper and paranoid, but
quitting for a few days/weeks can stop this - as when they smoke again it will
hit them pretty hard. also pot used to be the only thing that remedied my
migranes after trying all sorts of medications etc.

alcohol is a much bigger problem, but i don't think it should be illegal.

people should be free without the state telling them how to live their lives.

it's much easier to make clear decisions if you don't have the fear of
punishment or guilt, or rebellion (in the case of younger people).

happyboy
response 39 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 18 17:45 UTC 2003

did anyone hear how the vote on the 
"pot initiative" went out here in
seattle?   
tod
response 40 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 18 18:00 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

tod
response 41 of 41: Mark Unseen   Sep 18 18:03 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

 0-24   25-41         
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss