Ricky Williams chooses pot over football.

[Bobo Adobo]

God forbid our nations greatest atheletes taking such a performance enhancing drug!



MIAMI (AP) - Retired Dolphins running back Ricky Williams said he failed a third drug test for marijuana use, which would cost him a four-game suspension if he decides to return to the NFL, The Miami Herald reported on its Web site Thursday.

Williams told the newspaper that marijuana played a larger role in his retirement than he indicated when he walked away after just five pro seasons. He said he learned of the failed test and possible suspension days before telling coach Dave Wannstedt last week that he was through playing.




Williams said, however, that there were "a hundred reasons" for his surprising decision to retire, and his desire to continue smoking marijuana was only one of them.

"I didn't quit football because I failed a drug test," he told the Herald. "I failed a drug test because I was ready to quit football."

Williams said he's not addicted to marijuana.

Coach Dave Wannstedt said the Dolphins have received no notification from the NFL regarding a third failed drug test, and Williams' latest revelation caught them by surprise.

"We knew nothing about it," Wannstedt said. "I'm totally surprised and shocked again."

Wannstedt said he's eager to move beyond the Williams situation and open training camp Saturday.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello declined comment when reached by The Associated Press.

In May, three South Florida newspapers quoted unidentified sources saying Williams tested positive for marijuana and faced a fine of at least $650,000 for violating the substance-abuse policy for the second time since joining the Dolphins in 2002.

He told the Herald for Thursday's story that he already decided to quit football before that second positive test. He appealed that fine, but received word last week that his appeal had been denied, the Herald reported.

While the appeal was pending, Williams said, he continued smoking marijuana during a trip to Europe and failed a third test upon his return.

He said he had been using a masking agent to cleanse his system while being randomly tested for two seasons but he didn't do that before the last test.

Williams first failed a drug test soon after arriving in Miami in 2002, the Herald reported. He spent much of his two seasons with the Dolphins in the league's drug program, seeing a therapist weekly and taking eight to 10 random urine tests a month, the story said.

Williams suffers from social-anxiety disorder and was a spokesman for the anti-depressant Paxil. He said marijuana helped him once he had to stop using Paxil because it didn't agree with his diet.

The former Heisman Trophy winner played three seasons for New Orleans and considered retirement while with the Saints, coach Jim Haslett said.

"In 2001, Ricky came in my office and told me he was going to retire and play baseball," Haslett said. "I don't know if we talked him out of it. We told him he wasn't a very good baseball player - maybe that did it."

Williams didn't blossom until he was dealt to the Dolphins in 2002 for two first-round draft picks.

At times, Miami's biggest trade since 1970 looked like a steal. Williams led the NFL in 2002 with 1,853 yards rushing and broke nine team records. Last season he ran for 1,372 yards despite little offensive support.

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2611086?GT1=4244

>:

[El Blanco]

While I do think he's addicted, the only way pot was enhancing his performance is if there was a giant Hershey bar in the endzone.

[ziggytrix]

Pot isn't addictive :rolleyes

[Cosmo Electrolux]

Hershey bars are.....

[AChimp]

Every person that I know who smokes pot regularly is a fucking retard.

1d6 Wisdom primary damage, 2d6 Wisdom secondary damage. >:

[El Blanco]

Pot isn't addictive :rolleyes

Its not? Strange, I know lots of people who have messed up their lives just to get the next joint.

It is addictive, no matter what the your highschool legalization club says.

[ArrowX]

Its not chemically addictive like ciggaretes but its Mentally addictive. or Habitual.

[Ant10708]

psychologically addictive :) :) :) :) :)

[Big McLargehuge]

Every one i know who gets "addicted" to pot we destined for failure one way or the other. I am a regular pot user but still find time to go to school, have a job, and deal with friends and family. I absolutly despise those people who use pot as a way to get through the day. Fuck them and their shitty lives.

[Bobo Adobo]

Rag on pot all you want, but you have to agree it is the drug that never killed anyone...

despite what these dumass drug free america commercials try to tell you.

[the[Hitman]]

Rag on pot all you want, but you have to agree it is the drug that never killed anyone...

despite what these dumass drug free america commercials try to tell you.

not yet semen stain.

[kellychaos]

I'm not a frequent marijuana user but I will concede that alcohol, a legal drug, kills far more people a year than marijuana ever will and, from my experience, alcohol seems to change people's temperment toward violent behavior.

One last question: While I understand the need for the Dolphins to test for performance-enhancing drugs, what basis do they have in testing for marijuana?

[Bobo Adobo]

what basis do they have in testing for marijuana?

I'm not sure, but so many tests have been conducted since the 50's in many universities. To this date there is no conclusive evidence that it causes any real serious health problems. But still somehow the government thinks it still needs "testing", eventhough alcohol and tobacco products have proven themselves to be some of the biggest killers today.

Edit - I also think its funny how other countries like canada/england/rest of the world are going towards decriminalizing the use of the drug, but somehow our administration finds logic in strengthening our laws and wasting countless amounts of taxpayers money to "The drug War".

[Emu]

Rag on pot all you want, but you have to agree it is the drug that never killed anyone...

despite what these dumass drug free america commercials try to tell you.

LUNG CANCER :eek

[Bobo Adobo]

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309

No... >:

[AChimp]

Using pot still makes you retarded.

[Captain Goodtimes]

Pot was invented by Frito-lay.

[Bobo Adobo]

Using pot still makes you retarded.

Tell that to my sister who smoked pot all the way through highschool, but somehow aced here ACT's and got excepted into Johns Hopkins and MIT.

But even if you do believe that, which I do think its not really good for the mind(I wouldn't go as far is to say it makes you retarded), thats still nothing compared to what prolonged use of alcohol and tobacco does.

[conus]

LUNG CANCER :eek

Which is why we have cookies.

[AChimp]

Tell that to my sister who smoked pot all the way through highschool, but somehow aced here ACT's and got excepted into Johns Hopkins and MIT.
Bobo, I am going to direct you to my previous post. Pot destroys your wisdom score, not your intelligence.

There's a guy who was in my software engineering group this past semester. He smokes pot all the time. All talks about is how he wants to go home and smoke a bowl because he's so bored at school. He gets straight A's. We had to explain our system architecture every goddamn day because he'd forget some of it due to the fact that he got blitzed the night before and didn't care about ironing out some details.

You can't have a decent conversation with him because he gets bored, and gets confused by the simplest concepts. I spent a few hours last week explaining what a bounded buffer was to him.

"Blah blah blah. Read the notes, because there's a good diagram of this in there," I said.
"I don't need to read the notes, I understand this now," he said.
*two minutes later*
"Um, could you explain that to me again? I'm bored. This assignment is stupid. I don't want to think about it anymore."
*two minutes later*
"Hey, I just thought of this: why don't we use this <insert complicated data structure here>?"

In high school, I knew guys in graphic arts who were amazing designers, but they all dropped out because school was soooo booooorring. :blah

But even if you do believe that, which I do think its not really good for the mind(I wouldn't go as far is to say it makes you retarded), thats still nothing compared to what prolonged use of alcohol and tobacco does.
Do you see me arguing for excessive tobacco and alcohol consumption? Even then, tobacco and alcohol destroy your body, not your mind.

[glowbelly]

alcohol does destroy your mind :(

pot makes you lazy, for the most part. hence ricky williams quitting football. who wants to run around in the summer heat after smoking a fatty?

[punkgrrrlie10]

If he's made enough money to live comfortably for the rest of his life, and he didn't play the game b/c he loved it - Good Riddance.

[the[Hitman]]

i find that if you care so much about your beloved drug and cant live without debating its importance/side effects, then you are a reliant which means you can fuck off and die.

any idiot knows everything has side effects.

shit smoking wasnt seen as bad for you since the 60s and people have been doing it for centuries.

[ArrowX]

Smoking stuff makes you go on vision quests.

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Chimp, you know nothing. The reason all of the people that you know that smoke pot are retarded, was because they were retarded to begin with and that's why the succumbed to using drugs every day. Pot, like all other substances, should be used in moderation (say once or twice a week), merely because they do affect behaviour whilst under the influence. When you are actually high you do become a bit stupid, and you're more interested in snacking and watching comedy than homework. But it's someone's choice, it's not some long term damage caused by pot. It's short term. If your retarded cohort could sober up for a day he'd probably be fine.

"Do you see me arguing for excessive tobacco and alcohol consumption? Even then, tobacco and alcohol destroy your body, not your mind."

Alcohol doesn't destroy your mind!? :lol Rethink that. As everyone knows, alcohol actually destroys brain-cells, something, I think, pot does not.

[AChimp]

I hear you don't inhale and are only interested in blowing smoke rings to look cool. Besides, I saw your stash. It looked like bad shit, too; all stalk. :lol

As for the retarded cohort, he's like that 24/7, even when he hasn't smoked for a few days. Same with the guys I went to high school with; the quality of their work decreased as their pot usage increased. One of them in particular realized what was happening, so he quit smoking, but he never regained his edge, stopped winning competitions, etc. even after months of being clean. Permanent brain damage.

Alcohol doesn't destroy your mind!? Rethink that. As everyone knows, alcohol actually destroys brain-cells, something, I think, pot does not.
You're right about alcohol killing brain cells. My mistake. The risks to your body are far greater, though, when you consider stuff like immediate effects like drunk driving.

[El Blanco]

As opposed to driving high or under any chemical influence.

[AChimp]

Eh, most people I've seen get high just sit there and have no desire to move, let alone operate heavy machinery. The risk is there but it's balanced by the decreased likelihood of it actually happening. :P

[Bobo Adobo]

pot makes you lazy, for the most part. hence ricky williams quitting football. who wants to run around in the summer heat after smoking a fatty?

I wouldn't go as far as saying hes lazy. He was one of the best running backs in the league. He just didn't really want to play anymore, and I don't blame him. Hes rich as fuck, and sports sorta suck after high school.

PLus Im not really trying agruing that pot is good bad for you. I'm just tired of the gastapo harassing my ass just because I'm smoking plant that wasn't supplied by some pharmy corperation.

And if any of you guys really have a problem with smoking pot, throw away your entire music collection you unimaginative whores. >:

[glowbelly]

fuck that. he's a lazy bitch. he quit his job. he just so happens to have had a job that will keep him financially stable for the rest of his life without having to work ever again.

i would sit at home and smoke pot all day, too, if i had that luxary.

that being said, i don't care if people smoke up or not. i'm much more comfortable around people who are stoned than people who are drunk. i don't do it anymore, but that's just because i grew out of it...and in my case it escalated into other, heavier drug use. i thought it best to just cut all that shit out.

quitting pot and other drugs was easy peasy for me. tabacco i still can't shake. alcohol? it took me a long, long time to stop consuming it to the point where i was almost unconscious every other night. way harder than quitting pot ever was.

[ziggytrix]

I said pot isn't addictive cuz I smoked an everlovin fuckload of it during the past decade, and then I quit. No withdrawl. No cravings. Nothing.

You will NEVER convince me pot is addictive.

People who fuck up their lives "just to get the next joint" have more serious problems than a marijauna habit.

Eating a bowl of ice cream every night is more habit forming than smokin a bowl of weed every night.

[AChimp]

People don't get addicted to the pot itself; they get addicted to the high. This is the same reason why people get addicted to a bowl of ice cream like you said: it makes them feel better.

Feeling better = good, therefore stuff that causes you to feel better is also good. It's a perfect example of classical conditioning.

Some people have a higher conditioning threshold and don't get addicted as easily. The reason why it escalates into harder drug use is because the high from pot isn't enough anymore, or there's the temptation to experience an even higher high (feeling even better > good).

[Perndog]

While I do think he's addicted, the only way pot was enhancing his performance is if there was a giant Hershey bar in the endzone.

ROBIN WILLIAMS RIPOFF >:

[Perndog]

Intelligence score...wisdom score. (referring to REAL LIFE)

Now, which of us should be the feature of freaky nerd comics? >:

[punkgrrrlie10]

I said pot isn't addictive cuz I smoked an everlovin fuckload of it during the past decade, and then I quit. No withdrawl. No cravings. Nothing.

You will NEVER convince me pot is addictive.

People who fuck up their lives "just to get the next joint" have more serious problems than a marijauna habit.

Eating a bowl of ice cream every night is more habit forming than smokin a bowl of weed every night.

hmmmmmm.

http://my.webmd.com/hw/health_guide_atoz/aa52518.asp?navbar=tp17750

Frequent, heavy use of marijuana can lead to needing increasing amounts of it to get the same feelings (tolerance) and possibly to dependence (addiction).

The people at webmd seem to disagree.

[ziggytrix]

I agree about the tolerance, but not about the addiction. The people at webmd are full of shit, quoting people who are quoting people who never did research on a patient who didn't also have an amphetimine addiction.

I'm not trying to suggest that daily marijuana consumption is healthy or even safe, but talking about it's addictiveness like it is as bad as amphetimines is moronic, and diverts attention from serious problems like the rise in meth abuse in this country.

[Helm]

pot destroys brain cells. Yes, yes it does. Which doesn't mean much, because simply breathing and living destroys brain cells, but the truth is the truth.

I personally don't care if pot is addictive either physically or psychologically(although signs point to yes) as much as I care about the whole concept of artificially induced happiness, and the neurotic need of it that every modern man seems to show symptoms on.

[AChimp]

Can we have sex now, Helm? :love :(

[kahljorn]

"It can cause lower sperm counts and increased breast size in males. In females, it can cause menstrual problems." from webmd!

I need to start smoking more.

[Perndog]

pot destroys brain cells. Yes, yes it does. Which doesn't mean much, because simply breathing and living destroys brain cells, but the truth is the truth.

I personally don't care if pot is addictive either physically or psychologically(although signs point to yes) as much as I care about the whole concept of artificially induced happiness, and the neurotic need of it that every modern man seems to show symptoms on.

I used to care, but now I say let the masses have their bread and circuses.

[punkgrrrlie10]

I believe in Social Darwinism. I think all drugs should be legal.

[Geggy]

People don't get addicted to the pot itself; they get addicted to the high. This is the same reason why people get addicted to a bowl of ice cream like you said: it makes them feel better.

is it possible for people to become addicted to masturbating?

[Royal Tenenbaum]

"I hear you don't inhale and are only interested in blowing smoke rings to look cool. Besides, I saw your stash. It looked like bad shit, too; all stalk."

1. I don't smoke pot often, but, when I do, I do inhale. The faggot that told you that really doesn't know anything because he's too lame to even try it.

2. I couldn't blow a smoke ring if I wanted to.

3. I've never had a stash to see, and if I did, it wasn't stalk because it was a very tiny bag. If you want to come over and see the 1/4th of a gram I have and see that it isn't stalk, be my guest.

[AChimp]

is it possible for people to become addicted to masturbating?
I CAN QUIT ANYTIME I WANT!!! >:

[glowbelly]

3. I've never had a stash to see, and if I did, it wasn't stalk because it was a very tiny bag. If you want to come over and see the 1/4th of a gram I have and see that it isn't stalk, be my guest.


THAT'S CAUSE IT'S SHAKE >:

[MRogers]

all this talk about herb makes me wanna go fire up the bong :(

[Helm]

he's too lame to even try it.

haha it's highschool all over again. Don't cry when people insult your weird hair.

and

I used to care, but now I say let the masses have their bread and circuses.

yeah, what would you say? Because your relationship with the 'masses' is such that their capacity for awareness simply does not interest you. It's a political issue I'm not able to discuss with no stable internet connection. Although the truer thing is that I wouldn't check these boards too often even if I had such.

[El Blanco]

I believe in Social Darwinism. I think all drugs should be legal.

Except when that cokehead you want to die happens to be driving the SUV in the lane next to you.

[Anonymous]

It's just as bad as a drunk being next to you, you stupid jackass.

[AChimp]

I think that's the point he was trying to make. :(

[Bobo Adobo]

Actually its a lot better. You can not under-estimate the reaction time of someone raging on an 8 ball. :P

I too think all drugs should be decriminalized. You can kill as many Pablos as you want but the only way really can put em out of business is to make it legitimate. We would have alot more addicts. But addicts are better than blood in the streets up to your anckles.

You think the government would realise that after pulling off a stunt like the alcohol prohibiton.

[AChimp]

Where's this "blood" that you speak of?

[Bobo Adobo]

I'm talking about the rediculous amount of violence in the US.

[AChimp]

Yeah, but not all of the violence is related to drugs. And besides, a drug dealer kills another drug dealer, does anyone really care?

[Bobo Adobo]

Yes, not All of it is. But If you look at the amount of crime after the prohibition end and the amount that skyrocketed during the 70s-today, you would understand that it is related.

And I don't care if drug dealers die. But nobodys born a drug dealer. legalizing drugs would force them to go legit.

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Legalizing drugs would also collect all the money for taxes. In terms of Canadian health care costs, it'd probably be like smoking, where the amount of taxes a smoker pays over their lifetime on cigs is far greater than any amount they'd use of health care.

[ScruU2wice]

Just to play devil's advocate I would like to say I think that legalizin all drugs would be a bad idea. I know people who still take efedra to be better atheletes regardless of the adverse health affects on the heart. They don't know, how bad it is for you they just know that it's so good it's illegal. Know if it was legal they would have far more of it. Similarly legalizing cocaine or heroine would lead to more and more people overusing it.

And legalizing it would take away power to the drug dealers and give more to the heads of the drug industries. I don't know if I want my drug dealers having influence on the government.

[Preechr]

Y'know... Operating a 3,000 pound vehicle at 70 miles per hour five feet away from someone else doing the same thing in the opposite direction is also very dangerous. That's why we get our government to enforce requirements on folks in trade for the priveledge of using the roads we share. We have to take tests and carry a license, which needs to be renewed regularly and can be taken away at the state's option for any reason.

If the War on Some Drugs stretches out another 10 years, we'll have likely spent another $600 Billion with no more results than we have to show for the hundreds of Billions of dollars we've spent on it so far. Any person that reads this could find and purchase just about any illegal drug they wanted within 48 hours of now if they set out to, without having to actually know a "dealer" ahead of time. How are we any safer from prohibition?

The Some Drug War folks know they're fighting a losing battle. They've hidden the true costs of fighting the war by excluding the costs of incarceration and rehab for the violent potheads, etc... their dragnet snares. We're not to question the costs. We're only supposed to believe the myth that the evil drugs must be fought. With the money we spend fighting the good fight, we could buy most if not all of the world's drugs at the source and dump them in the ocean if we wanted. The goal is decidedly NOT to eleiminate drugs here, folks. They have to lie about the costs of their war, as well as the effects of pot and their goals in the war, to keep us from forcing them to "think of the chiddren" in a more responsible fashion.

Yes, yes... Drug legalization could only mean that at midnight all the heart surgeons and judges... even the president probably... would become crack addicts, and the moon would surely crash into to earth and we'd all die, right? Why does no one consider the option of responsibly legalizing and licensing drug use and sales?

Instead of "cracking down" on every single resident of this country (and most others, actually,) we could focus on enforcement for only those wishing to sell drugs to the public. All that energy being wasted on everyone could be focused on only the "dealers." If drugs were sold to an unlicensed or improperly licensed individual, the dealer would be subject to revocation of their seller's license, fines and jail, with no action taken toward the purchaser.

We already have laws against using alcohol while doing anything you shouldn't do while intoxicated. I promise you that if you left your office right now and were caught raging on PCP, driving down the freeway, ramming into random cars, you'd go to jail. Why would that change after the end of the WOSD? If you commit a crime, you pay the penalty. If you are high when you do it, you face a stiffer sentence. All forms of negligence are already subject to laws. The state of a perp's intoxication is only a sentencing factor.

Want to smoke pot legally? Take a class, pass a test and receive a one-year license subject to monthly visits to or by a counselor. Wanna be a junkie? Herion is a much more dangerous drug, so the license requirements would be higher and the term shorter... and I'd assume you'd have to pre-pay for the rehab you'll need with the license fee as well. If the FDA could figure out a recipe for "safe" methamphetamines, I suppose you could get a tweaker license, too, subject to responsible regulation just like the rest.

None of this is to say employers would be barred from testing for drug use, but I'd bet they'd develop policies for weekend usage. Ricky would likely be in the same position if drugs were legalized. I'm also not suggesting total legalization happen overnight. I don't want the moon to crash into NYC any more than you do... All I'm saying is that the WOSD is simply not working and it never will, so to not consider other options is stupid. Is the best thing we can think of to correct a problem declaring war on it? If so, we might as well all get and stay high now.

In case you're wondering, I don't do drugs and wouldn't if they were legal... Well... maybe the occasional bowl or trip. Not every day, anyways... I just don't appreciate the idea that being in the general area of a pot seed should land me in jail, as if pure-evil radiated from drugs somehow, infecting everything within a certain distance. How can we hope to ever live in a responsible free society when the basis for removing anyone's freedom is that there are things you can be near or touch that we are terrified of? We don't prosecute everyone found near a murdered person, do we? It's not yet even a crime to hold a tool capable of ending someone's life. To make effective laws we can't be too scared to look at crime objectively. The War on Some Drugs is running away from the problem, and I worry that it's main goal is to profit from the suffering of others.

[AChimp]

And I don't care if drug dealers die. But nobodys born a drug dealer. legalizing drugs would force them to go legit.

No it wouldn't. You wouldn't be able to regulate any of it. Instead of being the only source for narcotics, drug dealers would become the wholesalers where you can get CHEAPER drugs than you can in the stores, or "better" drugs that you can't buy in stores.

Same with collecting taxes. These are people who are used to flying below the radar. Bobo already stated that they are already responsible for a lot of violence. Do you think that those people would willingly start paying taxes on their earnings?

[Preechr]

The violence is a product of drugs' prohibition. To be a drug dealer, you have to be a criminal. Criminals are not good businessmen by nature. The only reason they make money is that the market... the black one... let's them charge exhorbitant prices for their products, and their business model includes theft and other crime as additional sources of income.

Why is it that we can regulate everything else BUT drugs?

Remember, we'll have over $60 Billion per year to spend on this little project, and a lot of ex-drug-warriors to draw upon for labor... and that's not even accounting for the economic effect of NOT wasting all that money prosecuting non-violent minor drug offenders, which will not only eliminate the costs of their arrests and incarceration but also put them back to work at McDonald's or in construction where they can avoid drug screens, which will increase the tax base by itself.

Most of the cost of illicit drugs is shipping & handling, due to the risk involved. Most "dealers" are small-timers that are only trying to offset the expense of their own drug use, and would gladly give it up. They're not the ones driving Lexi and living large. If you're right, and the big wigs try to continue the black market (even IF they can compete with legitimate enterprise, which is doubtful,) they will be easy to catch. We'll have narrowed the field of criminals to watch over extensively.

[AChimp]

What about supply and demand then? You'd still be relying on drug lords for your shit until you got domestic production up to an acceptable level.

Your legal supply would have a massive pricetag due to it's virtual non-existence. The dealers still come out on top because they are the only ones with enough supply to still sell cheaply, and they won't be paying taxes.

[Ant10708]

Most illegal drugs come from outside of the United States and Canada(except BC bud, thank you guys for that :) ) so regulating it with the drugs being legal would still be hard. It would become like the sweat shops of our modern industries.

The same reason why cigarette selling is popular with oraganized crime rings in the US. They avoid the taxes and still thrive despite competetion from legit businesses.

[Preechr]

What about supply and demand then? You'd still be relying on drug lords for your shit until you got domestic production up to an acceptable level.

Your legal supply would have a massive pricetag due to it's virtual non-existence. The dealers still come out on top because they are the only ones with enough supply to still sell cheaply, and they won't be paying taxes.

Is the better plan to continue the War on Drugs indefinitely, then? Criminalizing behavior doesn't stop it, and in this case, it hasn't even curtailed it. Unless someone makes the personal decision to not do drugs, or they're scared of employer testing, they do drugs. The threat of being caught is not stopping anyone. The only alternatives, short of upping the ante (which won't work,) is regulation and legalization.

Is it the government's job to manage the supply as well? Have they proven themselves successful in that regard so far? Drugs come into this country in boats, trucks and airplanes, just like DVD players and Nike Shoes. The only difference is that the trucks can now be unloaded at a store or a warehouse rather than somebody's basement.

True, the source of the drugs would still be shady folks for a while, but legitimate companies aren't allowed to compete in this industry yet.

As for the mob running a black market on cigarettes, I think that's more prevalent in states like New York, where taxes raise the prices up to close to $5/ pack. Rather than worry that a blackmarket would emerge, I'd ask you what it is the prohibition has already created. Black markets are caused by government sanctions, not free trade. Black markets are free trade, and the most effective form of that is the legal one, not the one where you run a constant risk of jail time.

[kellychaos]

Yes, it took years for alcohol to bounce back out of the clutches of illegitimate gangster into the hands of businessmen with integrity.

[AChimp]

I haven't said that the way they're going about it is good. Worrying about penalizing petty abusers is a waste of time, and the same goes for the street corner pushers. You have to go after the head and destroy the source, which of course requires international cooperation. The US isn't exactly the best at making friends, though.

Legitimate companies would NEVER have a supply equal to the drug lords who have access to countless acres of jungle and one of the cheapest labour forces in the world. Or, you'd end up with drug lords starting up legitimate companies and laundering the money, still not paying any taxes.

Your wonderful cash cow has just gone up in smoke and now you've opened the floodgates for people with no personal responsibility to sue you for making it legal and "hurting them."

The only benefit is that tens of thousands of addicts would OD in the first couple of weeks' celebrations, thus removing themselves from the gene pool.

[Royal Tenenbaum]

"Legitimate companies would NEVER have a supply equal to the drug lords who have access to countless acres of jungle and one of the cheapest labour forces in the world. Or, you'd end up with drug lords starting up legitimate companies and laundering the money, still not paying any taxes. "

But it'd be an issue of quality. Why do people buy a Sony discman when they can go to Chinatown and buy a Sonay for much cheaper? Because Sony is a respectable brand that means quality. Why wouldn't the same be for drugs despite the higher cost for the "good shit?" People can still go buy Moonshine, but they prefer something that they know doesn't have urine in it.

[AChimp]

:lol

Have you read about the crap they were growing in Flin Flon? The current drug lords have already established a reputation, based on the fact that theirs is the only product that people can buy right now.

They have set the bar for the "good shit."

[Preechr]

I haven't said that the way they're going about it is good. Worrying about penalizing petty abusers is a waste of time, and the same goes for the street corner pushers. You have to go after the head and destroy the source, which of course requires international cooperation. The US isn't exactly the best at making friends, though.

*ring*ring*

Hello? Jose the drug lord speaking.

Hello, Jose, this is Juan from the government. While we appreciate all the bribes you have given us over the years, and all the threats and killings have really helped to keep us in line, we regret to inform you that the new Kerry Administration is very friendly and polite, so we will now be friends with them and you, it appears, have to go out of business. Sorry.

Oh, Ok Juan. I understand. There is not much evil people like me can do in the face of an unbeatable power like friendship. Might you have any openings in your government for me? I'm thinking something in security might fit nicely...

Legitimate companies would NEVER have a supply equal to the drug lords who have access to countless acres of jungle and one of the cheapest labour forces in the world.

If those jungles and that labor supply are so superior for drug production, I'm sure much of it is also for sale... cheap, too, as it's seemingly not so good for much else. There's a reason we're down to only 4% of our own workforce in the farm industry: technology. Superior productivity beats the whip any day, and I'm sure you'd agree evil corporations would do anything for a profit, right? I just don't see the supply/demand problem here...

Or, you'd end up with drug lords starting up legitimate companies and laundering the money, still not paying any taxes.

Isn't that what international conglomerates engaged in legal enterprises supposedly do now? [/sarcasm] Are you saying that the only reason all businesses don't break the law is that they're all run by decent, law-abiding folk, or that tax laws are just unenforceable suggestions? Either way, I think you're giving these criminals more credit than they're due. Their power comes from their illegitimacy: they have a monopoly thanks to the law.

Your wonderful cash cow has just gone up in smoke and now you've opened the floodgates for people with no personal responsibility to sue you for making it legal and "hurting them."

Now that's a stretch! http://preechr.net/phpBB2/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif Again, I think we'll be able to work around that... Maybe if the government has to pay some of the kind of lawsuits it allows guys like John Edwards to inflict on private ventures they'll fix their broken system.

The only benefit is that tens of thousands of addicts would OD in the first couple of weeks' celebrations, thus removing themselves from the gene pool.

Maybe so. I'm doubtful that would be a long term problem that would invalidate the gains we achieve by fixing the broken system. I think anyone that wants to do drugs now does, save the folks that are subject to drug testing at work. I doubt those guys would quit their jobs if drugs were legalized... I doubt few people would. I don't believe drug use would "skyrocket" at all, actually... but that's a whole nuther part of the story.

[ScruU2wice]

We should have pot credit cards and people can get all the pot they want on it. Than people with higher tolerance have a higher limit and we could have bong bars where people can take hits just like they can with alchohol.

[ArrowX]

That would make truckloads of money.

[Spasmolytic]

Using pot still makes you retarded.
It doesn't help intelligence while under the influence of it. However, marijuana's effects on short-term memory vanish when people stop smoking.