5 ms·

Well, at risk of being banned for saying things people don't like... lol... To answer your question, the reluctance is because I would rather we just take the

by Manu40 4y ago

Well, at risk of being banned for saying things people don't like... lol... To answer your question, the reluctance is because I would rather we just take the criminal element out of it all by just decriminalizing it. I would much rather we not give governments any sort of incentive to introduce more 'sin taxes' essentially. Decriminalization gives us all those benefits you bring up, without enabling our governments to be worse than they already are. I have already witnessed this on a lower level because of marijuana legalization in Canada. Hence why I bring it up at all. Paul Martin was going to decriminalize it, but it got squashed, and the more popular opinion that I am aware of is that the other powers that be didn't like they wouldn't be able to profit off of it as easily. Not like how they can now, with enacting arbitrary rules like "can only grow 4 plants per household" etc, etc.

thomastjeffery 4y ago
If your argument is about legalization vs. decriminalization, then you should say so. You've been all over the comments arguing, but this is the first time I've seen you mention it. In a group conversation, you can count on people remembering what you were talking about, but the structure of comments isn't like that. We can only expect people to know what's written in the parent comments of the tree. Remembering that can help us talk to each other instead of past each other.
- Manu40 4y ago
  With all due respect, I would think that with the amount of times I have differentiated the terminology of legalization and decriminalization, that it should have been obvious at this point. I guess not. Anyways, thanks for the input. I'll keep it in mind to be more precise on what I am saying. P.S If you look carefully, you'll see that I was merely replying mostly to people who replied to me. At least after the first few comments to others. Not sure why you needed to portray it as "arguing with people all over the place", but I wanted to make that precisely clear.
  - thomastjeffery 4y ago
    Maybe you did somewhere else in the thread, but not here. That's entirely my point. Look at all the parent comments from this one, and you will see what you have and haven't said. Picture this: you are at a party, and told someone something on one side of the room, and expected the rest of us to have heard it. It just doesn't work that way.

by Manu40 4y ago

thomastjeffery 4y ago

If your argument is about legalization vs. decriminalization, then you should say so. You've been all over the comments arguing, but this is the first time I've seen you mention it. In a group conversation, you can count on people remembering what you were talking about, but the structure of comments isn't like that. We can only expect people to know what's written in the parent comments of the tree. Remembering that can help us talk to each other instead of past each other.

Manu40 4y ago
With all due respect, I would think that with the amount of times I have differentiated the terminology of legalization and decriminalization, that it should have been obvious at this point. I guess not. Anyways, thanks for the input. I'll keep it in mind to be more precise on what I am saying. P.S If you look carefully, you'll see that I was merely replying mostly to people who replied to me. At least after the first few comments to others. Not sure why you needed to portray it as "arguing with people all over the place", but I wanted to make that precisely clear.
- thomastjeffery 4y ago
  Maybe you did somewhere else in the thread, but not here. That's entirely my point. Look at all the parent comments from this one, and you will see what you have and haven't said. Picture this: you are at a party, and told someone something on one side of the room, and expected the rest of us to have heard it. It just doesn't work that way.