Colorado Weed Fest

[CommanderOtto]

Dude- are you talking about weed or cocaine? Theres a really really big difference...
The majority of the marijuana in the US is locally produced. Im not saying the cartels of Mexico dont have a hand in some of it, but you need to do some fact checking.

yeah I know, I edited my post.

But still, I bet the majority of marijuana in the U.S does come from mexico and the rest of south america. I don't know why you said it is mostly homegrown? Although it is hard to know facts since it is illegal, I am pretty sure it comes from the same places in the last map.


Haas, now look at Marijuana trade map I just found by doing a quick google search:



and note, I am just confirming what I know because I come from these countries. I could be wrong in some facts, but I know what I see and I know down south this is an ongoing problem. If it is such a major problem, that's because someone is buying it, and a big chunk is being sold in the U.S. Again Haas, I don't know much about this but I really can't see how legalizing it will diminish organized crime around it.

[WD-40]

I disagree, Otto. The "problem" that will arise is people growing it themselves instead of buying the taxed product.
I can assure you that anyone who regularly uses marijuana has no use for the crap the cartels have a hand in. That would be like buying bathtub gin when you could be drinking something good.

Speaking of Cartels, I wonder what it will take for the Cartels to firebomb the Weed outlets where it's sold. After all, it's cutting into their profits.

[11_Panama_]

The Cartels will simply sell their products cheaper (and tax free) than the "legal" product. They can also make it more potent, so smokers would prefer to purchase their product instead of the "legal" ones. Remember, the Cartels have been playing this game longer than Colorado.

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

Liberté, Liberté chérie... It's important in a nation like ours, one so concerned with the protection of individual freedoms, that we uphold that philosophy at all costs. Are there commodities that require regulation (tobacco, alcohol, etc.)? Yes! But is it the government's responsibility to prevent its citizens from sampling substances that have consistently shown to do no more detriment to the individual or others than other, legal substances? Usually conservatives rail about the scope of government having expanded too far - you have to be consistent if that's the case...

[Duel of Fates]

Liberté, Liberté chérie... It's important in a nation like ours, one so concerned with the protection of individual freedoms, that we uphold that philosophy at all costs. Are there commodities that require regulation (tobacco, alcohol, etc.)? Yes! But is it the government's responsibility to prevent its citizens from sampling substances that have consistently shown to do no more detriment to the individual or others than other, legal substances? Usually conservatives rail about the scope of government having expanded too far - you have to be consistent if that's the case...

One of the most hypocritical pieces of [poo] post I have ever had the misfortune to read. Keep the government out of everyone's business when it comes to weed. But please have the government dictate to us what kind of health insurance you can have. [m'kay] get a clue.

[11_Panama_]

Liberté, Liberté chérie... It's important in a nation like ours, one so concerned with the protection of individual freedoms, that we uphold that philosophy at all costs. Are there commodities that require regulation (tobacco, alcohol, etc.)? Yes! But is it the government's responsibility to prevent its citizens from sampling substances that have consistently shown to do no more detriment to the individual or others than other, legal substances? Usually conservatives rail about the scope of government having expanded too far - you have to be consistent if that's the case...

One of the most hypocritical pieces of [poo] post I have ever had the misfortune to read. Keep the government out of everyone's business when it comes to weed. But please have the government dictate to us what kind of health insurance you can have. [m'kay] get a clue.

You tell em' Duel. Now legalize hookers, keep government out of my bed. ..or my hotel room... or the back of my car.

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

[Deleted, for clarity's sake]

[Duel of Fates]

Wrong. That was my first post on the thread. I did not make a case for or against weed. That is not the point. I am shining a light on your lack of a coherent stance. Much like the libs, you make the case that we are too stupid, unable, or unwilling to take responsibility for our own needs. We, according to you, MUST have the government to save us from ourselves, for our own sakes. And we MUST give up our Constitutional Rights in order for the government to care for us.

. . . unless the government is messing with our weed. Then it is government intrusion. Government over reach.

Get a [m'kay] ing clue. You cannot walk both roads. It shows you once again regurgitated the left party line like a mindless zombie. You might be a good guy, but you have no [m'kay] ing clue about what you speak. .

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

I apologize for not being clearer. My first post on this thread was a sarcastic comment making a small jab at WD for his belief in severely limited scope of government as well as the criminalization of recreational drug use. I lend my support to legalization not because it is a er of principle, but because I feel it that its criminalization has placed undue burden on our court systems and has flooded our prisons with non-violent offenders sentenced to incarceration for upwards of 10 years, in many instances. I feel that legalization will help curb violent crime, reduce the role of cartels in Marijuana distribution, and generate much more taxable income for the state. Am I firmly rooted in my stance? Heavens no! This is a topic I know so little about (comparatively) I can't, in good conscience, claim to have developed a fully-informed opinion.

[Duel of Fates]

I apologize for not being clearer. My first post on this thread was a sarcastic comment making a small jab at WD for his belief in severely limited scope of government as well as the criminalization of recreational drug use. I lend my support to legalization not because it is a er of principle, but because I feel it that its criminalization has placed undue burden on our court systems and has flooded our prisons with non-violent offenders sentenced to incarceration for upwards of 10 years, in many instances. I feel that legalization will help curb violent crime, reduce the role of cartels in Marijuana distribution, and generate much more taxable income for the state. Am I firmly rooted in my stance? Heavens no! This is a topic I know so little about (comparatively) I can't, in good conscience, claim to have developed a fully-informed opinion.

And yet you advocate Obamacare, which will place an even greater burden upon our healthcare system, our economy, our growing government debt and spending, and the loss of our personal liberties and freedoms? It is this kind of liberal logic that frustrates and befuddles. It is not logical. In fact it is the highest order hypocrisy.

Oh, and erasing your posts to "clarify" your stance is very progressive of you.