Quote:
Originally posted by Desert_Rat:

NYMM, this is another example of where my posts weren't read. You're typically very good at backing your arguments with facts and documentation, but that's been gloriously absent from this argument, probably because you're an ex cop and can't accept the fact that something you enforced for X number of years might not have been worth enforcing. You bought into the anti drug propoganda machine hook, line, and sinker. You, of all people should be able to see through that, and look at facts (not US government studies with skewed results either) to back your arguments.

Just like alcohol, if you don't want to do it, you don't have to. Health effects of long term drinkers are considerably more severe than your pot heads and stoners. You're naiive to think that even those who are daily smokers are unproductive members of society. I know a lot of people between leading the SWANKy club, running my own website similar to XOC (nissan4wheelers.com), and working for a huge corporation. You'd be surprised who smokes pot. I'm not saying this to justify right vs. wrong; I'm simply refuting your factless arguments. I respect your opinions normally, so show me something convincing the other way.

Legalization takes the criminal element out of the picture. I don't think anyone disagrees that organized crime benefits from it being illegal. The US Government and its people certainly do not. The economic impact alone should be argument enough to leglalize it, but unfortunately, our politicians and a good chunk of the populous bought into the government propoganda that's been spread for over 60 years that it's an evil drug.
You are doing exactly the same thing you are accusing me of doing.

The pro-legalization arguments are just as lame as the pro-illegal arguments are accused of being. Most of the pro-legalization arguments and not based on proven fact. Much of it is mostly suppositions and emotions.

I'm not saying that neither side is absent of any of it's own propaganda, but there are flaws to both sides of the argument.