DesideriScuri -> RE: Why is marijuana [hemp] illegal ? (1/2/2018 10:21:00 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote:
ORIGINAL: WhoreMods That's frowned upon as well, but it would definitely be an option if you didn't have the constabulary confiscating the contents of your greenhouse should you have something that catches their eye growing there, true enough. In Colorado, up to 6 plants per resident is allowable, with up to 3 plants flowering at the same time; there is also a limit of 12 plants per residence. There are also ways you can grow more, but what I listed were "homegrow" rules. You can grow more if you set yourself up with a license for retail sale. I'm for full legalization, including home growing. Will there be more cases like kdsub's? Sadly, yes. Will there be more cases like kdsub's if there is no legalization? Sadly, yes. How many horrible stories are there regarding alcoholics? And that shit's easily available, and there is a 100 gallon/person (200 gallon/residence) limit to the wine or beer a person can annually brew for personal consumption. I'm dubious that legalisation or decriminalisation of dope would lead to more people progressing from dope to more potent downers: they don't seem to have an unusually high number of junkies in the netherlands, to pick out the most obvious case. In that respect your analogy with booze is well chosen: it isn't the easy availability of liquor that causes some people's first taste of beer as a teenager to lead to them drinking meths under a railway bridge twenty or thirty years later, it's a mix of an addictive personality and other psychological and social factors encouraging them to develop a tolerance to a level where they can't manage without a drink. If there was an inevitable progression from enjoying a drink to nonfunctional alcoholism then I'm sure the majority of this board would be self destructive piss artists as most of us are older specimens, and sure we've all had a drink or two at one time or another. My apologies. I wasn't clear on what I meant. I didn't mean there would be a greater frequency of people progressing from pot to harder drugs I meant there would still be people progressing from pot to harder drugs, just as there will continue to be people progressing if pot isn't legalized. I get the point that you're leaning towards there being a decreased frequency as the pot provider (for instance, a government dispensary) has no reason to push you into harder drugs, but there will still be people who will prey on those that smoke pot to get them to try harder drugs.
|
|
|
|