TBD

stevewizzle wrote:

Hexenjagd wrote:
I quit a couple of years ago.  It was hard, but worth it.  I was sick of being addicted to something that really doesn't do anything but feed the addiction.

cigarettes, that is? good for you, either way.

Yes, cigarettes.

Hexenjagd wrote:
I quit a couple of years ago.  It was hard, but worth it.  I was sick of being addicted to something that really doesn't do anything but feed the addiction.

Smoked heavily from about 1985 to 2000.  Stayed quit until 2009 when I was going through a divorce.  Stopped again in 2011.  Started again this past September when the ex died, that was some serious shit to deal with…high high drama for a few weeks.  Anyway, just quit again for new years.  Been pretty easy so far.  Then again, I was not smoking very heavily this last go-round.

One of the best things about having parents who were smokers was watching the health problems that their cigarette smoking was causing them. That alone convinced me at a young age that I would never take a puff. And I never did.

James wrote:
One of the best things about having parents who were smokers was watching the health problems that their cigarette smoking was causing them. That alone convinced me at a young age that I would never take a puff. And I never did.

Didn't work that way for me.  They smoked.  We smoked.  Pops didn't suffer for it until many years later.  but boy oh boy how he is suffering now.

Most of my grandparents smoked.  The only one that is still alive is the non-smoker.  I never was able to have an adult conversation with either grandfather.

My wife had one grandparent who smoked. She outlived the three who did not. Though she did die of lung cancer and probably suffered more than the others.

Hexenjagd wrote:
Most of my grandparents smoked.  The only one that is still alive is the non-smoker.  I never was able to have an adult conversation with either grandfather.

i love, the progression, of threads, around here

walkonby wrote:
i love, the progression, of threads, around here

Yeah this is pretty depressing.  Both  my father and grandfather died of lung cancer in their 70's.  Though my father quit smoking in his 50's but he started probably in his teens..  He did also have cancer related to agent orange and another cancer. 

My grandmother who smoked lived to be 94 and was pretty feisty and happy/healthy until just about the end. 

On the other hand, my dad has COPD, terrible circulatory issues and had two strokes…one in his 40s and one in his 50's.  The last ten years have been hospitalization after hospitalization and now he's been in the nursing home for about 2 years.  He started hospice care about 6 months ago. He's come down with pneumonia this week and obviously will not be hospitalized this time.  It's a pretty sad situation  ???

He smoked heavily and never stopped once, drank heavily, never exercised, just took horrible care of himself. 

No more smoking for me. 

James wrote:
Are you trying to say that blacks smoke pot at the rate of eight times that of whites? God, you're a fucking retard.

The point is that blacks are arrested at a rate of eight times that of whites for something that they likely do at the same rate.

RatBastard wrote:
Wow to think I thought Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson were the two biggest racists on the planet.  This guy wins hands down.  The whole debate of legalizing pot to any degree is irrelevant to the racists reasoning he used to cast his vote…  (Personally though I could not care less who smokes what.)

http://news.yahoo.com/washington-d-c-panel-weighs-decriminalizing-marijuana-120117751.html

"Eight times more blacks than non-blacks in Washington are arrested for pot possession, and committee Chairman Tommy Wells said the measure's goal was fairness and reducing law enforcement costs.

'This is a social justice bill that addresses disproportionate impact,' said Wells, who is among nine candidates for mayor."


So according to him, since blacks break a certain law at a rate eight times that of non-blacks, the law needs to be repealed because of the "disproportionate impact" of the law.  By his logic rape should be decriminalized since far more men are arrested for rape and their is a disproportionate impact against men.  Did the people who live in DC actually vote this douche bag into office?  (Yes I did intentionally leave out the part of the article that states his political affiliation as it is irrelevant.)

According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate.  This could be a result of any number of factors, none of which are relevant to the point being made.  It is not mutually exclusive that all segments of society break a given law in the same rate, and at the same time in pure numbers one of those segments have a very high proportion of violators.  Again all irrelevant to the discussion.  Please try to respond to the point being discussed from now on.

RatBastard wrote:

James wrote:
Are you trying to say that blacks smoke pot at the rate of eight times that of whites? God, you're a fucking retard.

The point is that blacks are arrested at a rate of eight times that of whites for something that they likely do at the same rate.

RatBastard wrote:
Wow to think I thought Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson were the two biggest racists on the planet.  This guy wins hands down.  The whole debate of legalizing pot to any degree is irrelevant to the racists reasoning he used to cast his vote…  (Personally though I could not care less who smokes what.)

http://news.yahoo.com/washington-d-c-panel-weighs-decriminalizing-marijuana-120117751.html

"Eight times more blacks than non-blacks in Washington are arrested for pot possession, and committee Chairman Tommy Wells said the measure's goal was fairness and reducing law enforcement costs.

'This is a social justice bill that addresses disproportionate impact,' said Wells, who is among nine candidates for mayor."


So according to him, since blacks break a certain law at a rate eight times that of non-blacks, the law needs to be repealed because of the "disproportionate impact" of the law.  By his logic rape should be decriminalized since far more men are arrested for rape and their is a disproportionate impact against men.  Did the people who live in DC actually vote this douche bag into office?  (Yes I did intentionally leave out the part of the article that states his political affiliation as it is irrelevant.)

According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate.  This could be a result of any number of factors, none of which are relevant to the point being made.  It is not mutually exclusive that all segments of society break a given law in the same rate, and at the same time in pure numbers one of those segments have a very high proportion of violators.  Again all irrelevant to the discussion.  Please try to respond to the point being discussed from now on.

I am sure African Americans have a much higher murder rate than white people in DC.  We could have long discussion why but I agree with Ratbastard that they shouldn't change laws just because one group is charged with it more than another group of people.  I am sure income level between the two groups is way apart as well and highest education level achieved.  It could be that people who have marijuana arrests could not be the primary reason they were arrested.  I believe people shouldn't be arrested for drug use unless they are driving or taking care of children. 

ratbastard, so regardless of the the this article and what tommy wells said (i.e., removing the political "rationale"), what's your opinion? should we legalize it?

chaz wrote:

On the other hand, my dad has COPD, terrible circulatory issues and had two strokes…one in his 40s and one in his 50's.  The last ten years have been hospitalization after hospitalization and now he's been in the nursing home for about 2 years.  He started hospice care about 6 months ago. He's come down with pneumonia this week and obviously will not be hospitalized this time.  It's a pretty sad situation  ???

sorry to hear that.. i know how tough that is…

RatBastard wrote:


According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate. 

It's a logical deduction if you assume that the police forces and the justice system in general does not give preference to whites and people with $$.  In actuality, the percentage of blacks and whites who smoke weed are nearly equal.  But if you are black and you smoke, you are 4 times as likely to be arrested for it than your white counterparts.

These numbers are national.  I don't know how it breaks down for DC. 

Logical, but completely naiive and uninformed.

chaz wrote:

RatBastard wrote:


According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate. 

It's a logical deduction if you assume that the police forces and the justice system in general does not give preference to whites and people with $$.  In actuality, the percentage of blacks and whites who smoke weed are nearly equal.  But if you are black and you smoke, you are 4 times as likely to be arrested for it than your white counterparts.

These numbers are national.  I don't know how it breaks down for DC. 

chaz wrote:

RatBastard wrote:


According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate. 

It's a logical deduction if you assume that the police forces and the justice system in general does not give preference to whites and people with $$.  In actuality, the percentage of blacks and whites who smoke weed are nearly equal.  But if you are black and you smoke, you are 4 times as likely to be arrested for it than your white counterparts.

These numbers are national.  I don't know how it breaks down for DC. 

There could be all sorts of reasons for this.  Blacks could be smoking it on the street.  White people could be smoking it a rural area in their house.  Black people could be committing another crime in higher numbers and get caught with weed on them.  Black people could be getting into arguments with the police more when being caught than white people.   You can't just say because they get arrested more there is racism.  Anyway I don't see how this has anything to do with the legality of something. If you feel the law is wrong change it. If you think one group is not being arrested for breaking law, change enforcement so you get everyone who is doing it.

atomic wrote:
 Anyway I don't see how this has anything to do with the legality of something. If you feel the law is wrong change it. If you think one group is not being arrested for breaking law, change enforcement so you get everyone who is doing it.

u say a bunch of things lately that make sense and i hate you for it.

Arthur Burnett Sr., a retired judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, said his 40 years on the bench showed him that police concentrate their numbers in black communities. It's easier to catch people with marijuana in communities where there are "open-air" drug markets, rather than looking in homes, basements or country clubs, said Burnett, the CEO of the National African American Drug Policy Coalition.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/04/race-marijuana/2389677/

atomic wrote:

chaz wrote:

RatBastard wrote:


According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate. 

It's a logical deduction if you assume that the police forces and the justice system in general does not give preference to whites and people with $$.  In actuality, the percentage of blacks and whites who smoke weed are nearly equal.  But if you are black and you smoke, you are 4 times as likely to be arrested for it than your white counterparts.

These numbers are national.  I don't know how it breaks down for DC. 

There could be all sorts of reasons for this.  Blacks could be smoking it on the street.  White people could be smoking it a rural area in their house.  Black people could be committing another crime in higher numbers and get caught with weed on them.  Black people could be getting into arguments with the police more when being caught than white people.   You can't just say because they get arrested more there is racism.  Anyway I don't see how this has anything to do with the legality of something. If you feel the law is wrong change it. If you think one group is not being arrested for breaking law, change enforcement so you get everyone who is doing it.

atomic wrote:

chaz wrote:

RatBastard wrote:


According to the cited source, blacks in DC are arrested at a rate eight times that of non-blacks.  A logical deduction is that blacks in DC break the underlying law at a similar rate. 

It's a logical deduction if you assume that the police forces and the justice system in general does not give preference to whites and people with $$.  In actuality, the percentage of blacks and whites who smoke weed are nearly equal.  But if you are black and you smoke, you are 4 times as likely to be arrested for it than your white counterparts.

These numbers are national.  I don't know how it breaks down for DC. 

There could be all sorts of reasons for this.  Blacks could be smoking it on the street.  White people could be smoking it a rural area in their house.  Black people could be committing another crime in higher numbers and get caught with weed on them.  Black people could be getting into arguments with the police more when being caught than white people.   You can't just say because they get arrested more there is racism.  Anyway I don't see how this has anything to do with the legality of something. If you feel the law is wrong change it. If you think one group is not being arrested for breaking law, change enforcement so you get everyone who is doing it.

I'm sure there are situational factors that effect this statistic as you suggest.  But my opinion is that they do not account for the entire discrepancy that the stats show.  I've been alive long enough and seen enough to conclude that racism and socioeconomic discrimination exists and that is is widespread across the justice system as well as all facets of society.

And I agree that a law should not be repealed just because one class of people is prosecuted at an inordinate rate, whether that rate is skewed by discrimination or not.  But I do think the societal effects of the law's enforcement is very relevant to the discussion - specifically whether or not the harm done to individuals, families and communities via that enforcement far exceeds the harm that the substance in question inflicts upon society.

Edit:  And no, I do not smoke weed.

well the issue of why marijuana should be legalized , to me, has nothing to do with race.


it should be legalized because there's nothing really that bad about it….