»

[shaun]

what's the likelyhood of cannabis being legalised in aberdeen?

[KimyReizeger]

Originally Posted by Pierre Von Mondragon

I am not interested in what you believe, believe in faries at the bottom of the garden for all I care, and if your concern is for government money misspent, fine, call for a complete alcohol ban. Ultimately an individuals brain/body chemistry is for them alone to control, and is not the jurisdiction of the state*. Lets debate the use of all drugs if you wish, but as this thread is exclusively about cannabis, and your statements are false, and based on falsehood, we can safely assume you have not researched the issue. Your beliefs should not and will not affect my freedoms. .

There is nothing false about my statement. It's simply an opinion of mine that I don't think the majority of people could endure a pot-smoking existence and come out sane on the other side. Without going too far into the subject of 'what is sane', let's just call it a state of mind built up over centuries of habit, custom and tradition, an ingrained equillibium required to function in this particlar society at this particular time. THUS, maybe it would be better for me if everyone got stoned, as this situation would inevitably allow me to rise above the lot...but a nation is only the sum total of its inhabitants, and it might possibly just be necessary to protect people from harmful drugs - whether they like it or not - for the general well-being of us all.

None of us exist alone. Every person affects the rest, and its unfortunate if you feel generalised along with the majority of pot-smokers. It's quite ridiculous to believe you have the only voice over your own actions and thoughts, that you act as an individual without affecting others, and by arguing against this restriction you ultimately argue against an entire ideology, within which pot-smoking is a mere trifle.

I smoked throughout the best part of my teens, could get it whenever I wanted, was caught in possession twice yet never charged. What exactly is the problem?

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

As a Libertarian Socialist I am quite aware of my responsibilities towards society thank you very much, and your comments on 'feeling generalised' are about as wide of the mark as is possible. As a Libertarian I agree with the concept of Cognitive Liberty Cognitive liberty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in regards to the socio-cultural framework of humanity. As a socialist I do not adhere to the theory that the economy should be free and unregulated, but that is another issue.

As for the issue of falsehood, I see no evidence of the damage you assert that Cannabis causes, no reputable research, just a personal anecdotal viewpoint, one of which is owned by everyone. If instead you looked into the issues in question, and read some of the literature, eg as far back as the LaGuardia Report is still relevant; La Guardia Committee Report - Table of Contents and a biased, but rooted in factual research, report from Jack Herer Jack Herer - Chapters
read for yourself what has happened over the centuries, as the context to current prohibition, and why prohibition is inherently fascist, in its correct definition. Not that I am saying all prohibitionists are fascists, not even according to internet law, but the concept of prohibition clearly is.

[KimyReizeger]

Originally Posted by Pierre Von Mondragon

As a Libertarian Socialist I am quite aware of my responsibilities towards society thank you very much, and your comments on 'feeling generalised' are about as wide of the mark as is possible. As a Libertarian I agree with the concept of Cognitive Liberty Cognitive liberty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in regards to the socio-cultural framework of humanity. As a socialist I do not adhere to the theory that the economy should be free and unregulated, but that is another issue.

As for the issue of falsehood, I see no evidence of the damage you assert that Cannabis causes, no reputable research, just a personal anecdotal viewpoint, one of which is owned by everyone. If instead you looked into the issues in question, and read some of the literature, eg as far back as the LaGuardia Report is still relevant; La Guardia Committee Report - Table of Contents and a biased, but rooted in factual research, report from Jack Herer Jack Herer - Chapters
read for yourself what has happened over the centuries, as the context to current prohibition, and why prohibition is inherently fascist, in its correct definition. Not that I am saying all prohibitionists are fascists, not even according to internet law, but the concept of prohibition clearly is.

Given that that the aim to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies (wikipedia definition of libertarian socialism) is still just an aim, do you seriously think that the legalisation of drugs is in line with the current order of society? Is it not just wishful thinking to assume a society based around control over the individual would benefit from allowing profoundly altered states of consciousness? Your complaint appears to be much deeper than this single issue and based more around ideological revolution than practical solutions to a specific, current 'problem'.

By the way, what is the crux of the opposition to prohibition? Maybe the progentior of the thread can answer this? Do you all feel the same way as Mondragon?

[Stripey]

Originally Posted by Pierre Von Mondragon

Hey Stripey, No-one smokes Soapy anymore, gak-tastic, and it is possible to hold down a job, so none of those delightful all-dayers you mention, but I was wondering how you spent your time. To recap; its no-ones fucking business if someone wants to alter their brain chemistry, mildly in this case. 100 years of prohibition adds up to fuck all in the history of humanity, but some still think that their remit runs to the contents of an individuals consciousness. This is a disgusting concept born of authoritarianism.

Yeah I fully agree, what you do to your own brain chemistry is nobodys business but your own. I do think the vast majority of potheads are a bunch of dull, easily entertained pseudophilosiphising idiots though.

Also I've personally seen 2 people suffer drug-induced psychotic breakdowns, which took them months to recover from and were forever altered by the experience. The only drug they ever took was weed. So I'm afraid the "it's harmless!" stuff doesn't wash with me atall.

[scottyboy]

Originally Posted by KimyReizeger

By the way, what is the crux of the opposition to prohibition? Maybe the progentior of the thread can answer this? Do you all feel the same way as Mondragon?

I do. (8 chars)

[The Kernel Loaf]

Originally Posted by shaun

what's the likelyhood of cannabis being legalised in aberdeen?

Exactly. This will be a complete waste of time.

[Sue Denim..]

What an absolute gift for the local police. Sit and watch the march, clock a few faces and just wait until the weekend and lift them.

That's why you won't be seeing me on any march. .... oh, and also I just can't be arsed.

[Lucky Rathen]

This has got boring, lets get back to making fun of stoners.

[Bear]

Originally Posted by shaun

what's the likelyhood of cannabis being legalised in aberdeen?

About the same as the chances that section 28 was going to be repealed any time soon, or that gays were going to be allowed to serve in the military around the time I left school in the early 1990's. In other words zero, in the short term.

In many ways the opposition to the war on drugs reminds me of the gay rights lobby back then. It seemed like a hopeless cause. The majority of people really didn't have a problem with gay rights but they were to scared to openly support them due to fear of being labelled as a homosexual in the closet, just as people automatically assume that I'm 'obviously just a stoner' for arguing for an end to the war on drugs and pragmatic policies to replace prohibition. The whole opposition to gay rights back then was based on prejudice and a desire to see the state legislate private morality, and the bigots appeared to be winning...