Is this a contradiction on Drugs?

[Buoy]

OK, we've got two threads going about drug laws, and I've got a little battle going on in my little brain and wanted to throw this out for discussion.

Legalize Marijuana - I'm for it. Tax and regulate it. I've never been a pot smoker, but If it's handled like alcohol, I don't really have a problem with it. I'll still stick to my beer.

Drug test for welfare - I'm all for this too. If I have to pee in a cup to get a job, they should have to pee to get the free money and sit at home watching Jerry Springer.

Anybody else seeing this as contradicting myself? I'm not sure.
But, a change to either of these has a huge effect on the other...

And what this all really comes down to is $$$.
I was listening to a talk radio station today, and there was some lawmaker pushing for mandatory breath analyzers in all cars/trucks, and further lowering the DUI limit, and trying to play it off as safety. This is no longer about safety, it's about $$$.

And that's where the legalise/or pizz in a cup battle comes in.
Which one would make more money for the Govmt,City, state? Create more jobs (LE), more courts, lawyers, court recorders, jails...

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

Nope. Not a contradition. If you categorize MJ with beer (legal intoxicant) then say that people should be drug tested for illegal intxicants, seems pretty linear to me.

It only really becomes contradictory if you approch it from a moral linkage rather than a practical linkage. If you believe that drugs are bad and evil, and that people should do good in order to be assisted, but you want to legalize a drug so that we can make money off of it, then I'd say you're being a bit hypocritical.

But you've stated that you don't have a moral opposition to it, even if it isn't for you... so like I said, seems logical to me.

 

[Buoy]

OK Sean, but then that affects the pee test for welfare.
I would certainly think that the most common drug used in America is MJ. So now, you can smoke MJ, and still collect welfare.
See where I'm going with this?

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

Currently MJ is illegal. So, as long as it's illegal, if people fail the pee test for illegal drugs, they're SOL. If they make MJ legal, then it's not an illegal drug any more.

They're going to get the money if they find alcohol in their system right? Again, a matter of what's legal and what's illegal, not what's right vs wrong.

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

If the rules say you can do something, you can do it. If they say you can't you can't. That's about as black and white as it gets...

Heck, maybe they should also be tested for alcohol and if they can't take their welfare piss test seriously enough to show up sober, they don't get the money either...

With stuff like this, it's all about how the rule is drawn. Suspension of logic is required...

 

[Buoy]

You're absolutely right.
But, what I'm saying is how making it legal negatively affects the whole idea of not allowing welfare recipients to collect the money if they are using.

If we make it legal, then we continue paying out all the welfare money.
Gov't loses money by still paying out - But gains in tax money, not sure where the balance comes in and which way the scale tips.

If we don't make it legal, and don't test for drugs, Gov't is still handing out the $$ just as it has always been.

If we make it legal, and test, the Gov't still turns around and gives the $$$ to them.

It all comes back to the money.
If anyone thinks that the Gov't is actually looking out for anyone's well being, I'm not in agreement. It is a business, just like any other business. It is there to make money.
And I guess I just got to thinking about it, and wondered if both of these bills were on the ballot, how would I vote for each. Seems like if you voted yes for both, you're basically canceling your own vote for the Gov't vs $$ topic. Either way, the $$ is still gonna come out of your pocket.

I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around both concepts taking place at the same time, and thought I'd bring it up for discussion and free thinking.

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

Funny... Emminence Front by the Who just came on as I started reading this...

I couldn't agree with you more on the business of politics and the business of social welfare...

I do think that there are many other drugs out there that cause a lot more disfunction and a lot more harm that marihuana. Meth and Crack for example. I don't believe that marihuana is physically addictive. I don't believe that marihuana use promotes the mindset for committing acts of violence. I think that the harm it causes is at worst analogous to alcohol. So, I'd say that if it's legal then it's a non-issue (aside from my thoughts about people being loaded on whatever legal substance, when the show up for the test).

Just my personal opinion based on what I've seen in my days on this planet. Not saying I'm right.

 

[Tommy Gun]

I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around both concepts taking place at the same time, and thought I'd bring it up for discussion and free thinking.

I suggest smoking some bud and then go hang out at the social services office for the afternoon. That should clear it up for you.

 

[cuda]

Alcohol is the most abused drug in history, and has killed more people than all other drugs put together. It just hasn't killed me...............yet!

 

[Bobcat]

I think there is no way in hell that Buoy and Dude!Sweet! could have this conversation without being stoned to the bejesus on kentucky bluegrass, and my drug of choice is caffeine .

 

[Buoy]

I think there is no way in hell that Buoy and Dude!Sweet! could have this conversation without being stoned to the bejesus on kentucky bluegrass, and my drug of choice is caffeine .

You just haven't known me long enough.
About every three to six month's I come up with something like this that sparks a debate.
The rest of the time, it's pretty much nonsense.
You are almost 100% nonsense, and I think that is why we relate so well.

 

[BBB725]

The problem with legalizing marijuana is the test, they can tell if you have THC in your system but can't tell how much, unlike booze.

 

[Buoy]

The problem with legalizing marijuana is the test, they can tell if you have THC in your system but can't tell how much, unlike booze.

Right.
And booze is gone in a short time.
THC hangs out for awhile.
But my question lies more in the system.
To give the money or not.
And under what circumstances, or stipulations.

 

[cigdaze]

It's not the dude smoking a little weed I'm concerned with...it's the crack whore with 7 babies and no daddies. And if you legalize MJ, then that's one less test they have to do, save a few bucks per test!

 

[cigdaze]

Oh, and to make the distinction, I don't care if someone smokes a little dope on the weekends while doing everything else right...I know quite a few who have good gigs, successful businesses and can still unwind on the weekends with a little smoke.

If, however, someone is collecting welfare paid for with my tax dollars, then no they shouldn't be doing anything except looking for work, and that includes drinking and tobacco. If I'm paying for their existance, then they don't get to buy beer, either.
My $0.02.

 

[Tony]

Oh, and to make the distinction, I don't care if someone smokes a little dope on the weekends while doing everything else right...I know quite a few who have good gigs, successful businesses and can still unwind on the weekends with a little smoke.

If, however, someone is collecting welfare paid for with my tax dollars, then no they shouldn't be doing anything except looking for work, and that includes drinking and tobacco. If I'm paying for their existance, then they don't get to buy beer, either.
My $0.02.

Those are pretty much my exact thoughts on the subject. No Lotto tickets either.:ack2:

 

[Sea-Dated]

Oh, and to make the distinction, I don't care if someone smokes a little dope on the weekends while doing everything else right...I know quite a few who have good gigs, successful businesses and can still unwind on the weekends with a little smoke.

If, however, someone is collecting welfare paid for with my tax dollars, then no they shouldn't be doing anything except looking for work, and that includes drinking and tobacco. If I'm paying for their existance, then they don't get to buy beer, either.
My $0.02.

Those are pretty much my exact thoughts on the subject. No Lotto tickets either.:ack2:

Couldn't agree more.....

 

[ZBODaytona]

CigDaze has it right for me...

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

Tim, I got it figured out for ya!

This is a contradition...

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

And THIS is a contradiction on drugs...