Germans oppose pot legalisation by more than 2:1

[Franzl]

I don't think hifly has ever provided a substantive argument for anything here. But I suppose we should just take him at his word that he's thought the issue through and knows best, given his academic achievements.

At least he's not arrogant or anything about his superior intelligence.

[PJ]

Just imagine the positions of a 75 year old Southern Baptist... you've got hifly... but give him this, it must be rare to think he's on the winning side of an argument for once.

Are you insane? One could not think of a worse comparison; apart from on maybe 2 issues I don't see how I would have anything in common with a 75 year old Southern Baptist (I assume a white conservative one). And on the limited issues we would agree on our reasoning would be entirely different. Would you also compare Julia Gillard to a Southern Baptist?
I oppose the casual use of all drugs. I also oppose smoking tobacco and persistent alcohol consumption.

This isn't a public policy argument. It's the unilateral decree coming from someone with a tyrannical mindset. If large portions of the population want to use relatively benign drugs, who are you to say otherwise? Your opposition to liberalization of drug laws strikes me as an aesthetic judgement rendered as ethics. The same goes for your positions on gay marriage. You offer no explanation behind your preferences that goes beyond saying "I don't want that".

It's called living in a democracy; I am allowed to not support casual drug, tobacco and persistent alcohol use, because all allow for a damaged society. And the vast, vast majority of the German population does not want to allow for casual use of drugs either, as evidenced by this poll.
I've already clearly offered my argument against redefining marriage numerous times.
And my stances against drug, tobacco and alcohol use have clearly not been a hindrance, as my academic achievements are way beyond those of most who lurk this forum.

… Prohibition has always damaged society. Prohibition against alcohol, the Drug War, etc. It simply doesn't work. Your ideas on how we should deal with controlled substances won't get rid of them, even though why you believe that alcohol damages society is beyond me. As DeadFlag said, it has been a social occasion to drink in our society for years, and criminalizing that activity will create a black market for these drugs and simply make this problem worse. But of course you won't dane to be around anyone who is involved in the black market. You went to Oxford, and everything else is beneath you. Well, congratulations. I don't think I've ever met anyone who simultaneously is a communitarian and an elitist, but you're doing a great job with it.

But another problem with your view is that you believe that whichever side has the majority on their side is automatically the superior side. This is an extremely flawed mindset. Were the Nazis in the right when the majority of the German public supported them in the 30's? I'm not comparing marijuana to fascism, but I'm simply showing you that whether or not your side is "winning" in the polls is irrelevant.

Another issue that confuses me is your insistence that we are all beneath you because of your education. You're an economic leftist. Now act like one. Believing that you're superior because of your education has to be one of the most idiotic positions I've ever heard from anyone on this forum. First of all, it has nothing to do with the matter at hand. You're avoiding giving us an answer on marriage equality and prohibition because you believe we don't deserve one, from the tone of your posts. If we're all so "inferior" that we can't get to your level of thinking, what are you even doing here?

[Zioneer]

Just imagine the positions of a 75 year old Southern Baptist... you've got hifly... but give him this, it must be rare to think he's on the winning side of an argument for once.

Are you insane? One could not think of a worse comparison; apart from on maybe 2 issues I don't see how I would have anything in common with a 75 year old Southern Baptist (I assume a white conservative one). And on the limited issues we would agree on our reasoning would be entirely different. Would you also compare Julia Gillard to a Southern Baptist?
I oppose the casual use of all drugs. I also oppose smoking tobacco and persistent alcohol consumption.

This isn't a public policy argument. It's the unilateral decree coming from someone with a tyrannical mindset. If large portions of the population want to use relatively benign drugs, who are you to say otherwise? Your opposition to liberalization of drug laws strikes me as an aesthetic judgement rendered as ethics. The same goes for your positions on gay marriage. You offer no explanation behind your preferences that goes beyond saying "I don't want that".

It's called living in a democracy; I am allowed to not support casual drug, tobacco and persistent alcohol use, because all allow for a damaged society. And the vast, vast majority of the German population does not want to allow for casual use of drugs either, as evidenced by this poll.
I've already clearly offered my argument against redefining marriage numerous times.
And my stances against drug, tobacco and alcohol use have clearly not been a hindrance, as my academic achievements are way beyond those of most who lurk this forum.

At least you are consistent, even if you're full of it.

Also, prohibition doesn't work with drugs.

[Cory]

Socially? You're left out of the foundational ritual of western civilization: drinking at social occasions. Of course your life is probably already pretty bereft of social activity because you're an arrogant ass.

I think we're getting to the root of this.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Hitler was a meth addict, wasn't he?

[Hifly]

Socially? You're left out of the foundational ritual of western civilization: drinking at social occasions. Of course your life is probably already pretty bereft of social activity because you're an arrogant ass.

I think we're getting to the root of this.

Could not be further from the truth.
Cory clearly weed has had an undesirable effect on yourself. Maybe if you didnt use it so much you wouldn't want to kill people with AIDS, among other things.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Socially? You're left out of the foundational ritual of western civilization: drinking at social occasions. Of course your life is probably already pretty bereft of social activity because you're an arrogant ass.

I think we're getting to the root of this.

Could not be further from the truth.
Cory clearly weed has had an undesirable effect on yourself. Maybe if you didnt use it so much you wouldn't want to kill people with AIDS, among other things.

Please go away.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Socially? You're left out of the foundational ritual of western civilization: drinking at social occasions. Of course your life is probably already pretty bereft of social activity because you're an arrogant ass.

I think we're getting to the root of this.

Could not be further from the truth.
Cory clearly weed has had an undesirable effect on yourself. Maybe if you didnt use it so much you wouldn't want to kill people with AIDS, among other things.

Okay.  If you knew anything about pot, you'd know that it certainly doesn't influence the way a person thinks.

I'd expect better from an Oxford graduate.

[Peter the Lefty]

Socially? You're left out of the foundational ritual of western civilization: drinking at social occasions. Of course your life is probably already pretty bereft of social activity because you're an arrogant ass.

I think we're getting to the root of this.

Could not be further from the truth.
Cory clearly weed has had an undesirable effect on yourself. Maybe if you didnt use it so much you wouldn't want to kill people with AIDS, among other things.

Okay.  If you knew anything about pot, you'd know that it certainly doesn't influence the way a person thinks.

I'd expect better from an Oxford graduate.

Lol how much do you want to be he isn't?

[Franknburger]

Hilfy, you are missing a number of points here.
First of all, look at the question that was asked: "Are you supporting complete legalisation of marihuana"? A pretty vague question - doesn't make clear whether its legalisation to anyone, or only adults, whether any kind of government control (taxation, no advertisement, quality standards etc.) shall be included, etc. On such a vague question, even I, a strong supporter of controlled legalisation, might have answered "no". This poll was asking a crappy question, we have got a crappy result, and actually still don't have a clue what the German population (or even the hopefully representative sample that was polled) really wants. [And if you are in social science, you should know that - check your source first, before you build your argument on it.]

Secondly - what is the situation in Germany now? Marihuana is illegal, but tolerated. Does that keep anybody from using it? No. The only effect is police having to record anybody who is found possessing marihuana, sending the case to the prosecutor's office, who then turns it down and sends a letter to the incriminated that his case will not be prosecuted further. What a great way to throw taxpayers' money out of the window... [To the American readers: This is one of the reasons why most people in Germany don't bother about the legalisation issue - there is no prosecution or criminalisation].

Thirdly - Drugs damage society. No, damaged people abuse drugs, but the damage has come from somewhere else (I am talking 'mild' drugs here, not Heroine or LSD, there I agree with you). Ever heard of chocolate abuse? Gaming addicts? People spending too much time on the internet? Yeah, let's ban it all. People will find something else (nutmeg is also a mild narcotics, there's cola nuts, various mushrooms, etc.). Doesn't solve anything.

Fourthly - the real danger is with drugs that are not quality controlled and standardised - the "home-distilled, but unfortunately includes methanol" case. Shoe-shine used to be popular for stretching dope. Most drug-related deaths stem from overdosing, because the stuff was purer than expected. These are real, substantial health risks that legalisation can remove.

Finally - the drug market is there, its large, and, when illegal, it creates a huge demand for money-laundering, and nourishes organised crime. Arms smuggling is a great way of balancing the trade flow, especially when it comes to supply sources such as Pakistan and Afghanistan. Ever thought about the social structures such illegal international trade networks create? Devote your academic qualification on a bit of research about how international terror finance works, and then come back here..

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I thoroughly apologise hifly.... to Southern Baptists, you're far worse.

[Cory]

Lol how much do you want to be he isn't?

[Hifly]

I thoroughly apologise hifly.... to Southern Baptists, you're far worse.

Well obviously because as I have a centre-left political perspective I have hardly anything in common with conservative Southern Baptists, as I have previously stated. This is a good thing in my opinion.

@TheDeadFlagBlues the notion that if one doesn't smoke weed he can't have a social life is something quite bizarre and also something I have yet to witness. It could not be less of a hindrance on my social life (also, why is this relevant?).

And for those who are complaining that I'm not providing a proper argument against Marijuana, this forum is absolutely filled with people who fail to provide any reasoning whatsoever for supporting various causes and figures. Yet for some reason only my stance on this seems to be an issue. I don't recall anyone questioning the integrity of my argument when I just recently stated I supported water fluoridation or poured vitriol over me by suggesting that my ancestors must have been avid Hitler supporters because of it. I'm surprised many of you let people get away with suggesting the latter, yet you throw hissy fits when I mention the O word.

[Franknburger]

And for those who are complaining that I'm not providing a proper argument against Marijuana, this forum is absolutely filled with people who fail to provide any reasoning whatsoever for supporting various causes and figures. Yet for some reason only my stance on this seems to be an issue. I don't recall anyone questioning the integrity of my argument when I just recently stated I supported water fluoridation or poured vitriol over me by suggesting that my ancestors must have been avid Hitler supporters because of it. I'm surprised many of you let people get away with suggesting the latter, yet you throw hissy fits when I mention the O word.

Hifly, I am with you when it comes to speculation on your ancestors, which is clearly inappropriate. I tried to address it mildly, but a more explicit statement might have been required:

Before anybody starts celebrating victories or emerges on socio-psychological analysis of "Germans", let's put this poll into context.

OTOH, generalisations like "this forum is absolutely filled with people who fail to provide any reasoning whatsoever", or boosting on your academic qualification is also not really helping discussion.

I assume that you have taken notice of the arguments in my previous post and will comment on them later on.

[PJ]

And for those who are complaining that I'm not providing a proper argument against Marijuana, this forum is absolutely filled with people who fail to provide any reasoning whatsoever for supporting various causes and figures.

Hifly, by criticizing others for not providing arguments for their stances, you once again fail to provide arguments for your stance. All of these posts are reasonable arguments as to legalization of marijuana in response to your claims:

Beautiful. We Germans aren't deluded unlike the idiot libertarians who plague America.

No, you Germans just haven't had a War on Drugs that shows the absolute folly of criminalizing pot.

Beautiful. We Germans aren't deluded unlike the idiot libertarians who plague America.

Not wanting people thrown in jail to rot for harming no one than arguably themselves is not simply an "idiot libertarian" position, its simply the conclusion that most people with a heart and brain have come too after witnessing the utter failure of our war on a plant and those who use it.

Also, though I get the funny feeling you will not be swayed by facts and statistics, I'll leave this here anyways.

Beautiful. We Germans aren't deluded unlike the idiot libertarians who plague America.

You've yet to explain why you oppose marijuana legalization in any substantive way.

America is more in favor of marijuana legalization because marijuana is a key part of American culture. Marijuana consumption is much higher here than in Europe, we have an active marijuana culture that transcends classic counter-culture vs mainstream divides (there's a negative correlation between marijuana use and income) and the image of the drug is less polarizing now that the memory of the 60s/70s is fading away. This has little to do with America's penchant for libertarianism or Germany's authoritarianism. It's cultural. In the states, jocks, teachers, hipsters, parents, Democrats and Republicans all smoke marijuana. It's been normalized to an astonishing degree.

If you think marijuana legalization is due to the unpopularity of the War on Drugs, I have a bridge to sell you. The punitive aspects of marijuana's illegality have hardly impacted white America outside of inconveniencing them, which is enough to change public opinion.

Beautiful. We Germans aren't deluded unlike the idiot libertarians who plague America.

No, you Germans just haven't had a War on Drugs that shows the absolute folly of criminalizing pot.

^^^^

Also, calling the people on the other side of the issue deluded idiots isn't going to win you any support on this.

Marijuana Consumption: Annual Prevalence by country

Germany 4.8 (2009)

Netherlands 5.4 (2005)

United Kingdom: England and Wales 6.6 (2010), Northern Ireland 7.2 (2007), Scotland 8.4 (2009)

Spain 10.6 (2010)

United States of America 13.7 (2009)

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2011/StatAnnex-consumption.pdf

Beautiful. We Germans aren't deluded unlike the idiot libertarians who plague America.

No, you Germans just haven't had a War on Drugs that shows the absolute folly of criminalizing pot.

^^^^

Also, calling the people on the other side of the issue deluded idiots isn't going to win you any support on this.

Poll results are over 2 to 1 against. My side wins unambiguously.

Not here in America.

I'm not an American citizen. Where I am a citizen I'm winning.

The fact that your side is "winning" should not be relevant. The fact that the majority of Germans support needlessly jailing people and creating a black market for a nearly harmless drug does not make your side right. Facts proving the success of prohibition would make your side right. Unfortunately for you, those facts do not exist.

Just imagine the positions of a 75 year old Southern Baptist... you've got hifly... but give him this, it must be rare to think he's on the winning side of an argument for once.

Are you insane? One could not think of a worse comparison; apart from on maybe 2 issues I don't see how I would have anything in common with a 75 year old Southern Baptist (I assume a white conservative one). And on the limited issues we would agree on our reasoning would be entirely different. Would you also compare Julia Gillard to a Southern Baptist?
I oppose the casual use of all drugs. I also oppose smoking tobacco and persistent alcohol consumption.

This isn't a public policy argument. It's the unilateral decree coming from someone with a tyrannical mindset. If large portions of the population want to use relatively benign drugs, who are you to say otherwise? Your opposition to liberalization of drug laws strikes me as an aesthetic judgement rendered as ethics. The same goes for your positions on gay marriage. You offer no explanation behind your preferences that goes beyond saying "I don't want that".

It's called living in a democracy; I am allowed to not support casual drug, tobacco and persistent alcohol use, because all allow for a damaged society. And the vast, vast majority of the German population does not want to allow for casual use of drugs either, as evidenced by this poll.
I've already clearly offered my argument against redefining marriage numerous times.
And my stances against drug, tobacco and alcohol use have clearly not been a hindrance, as my academic achievements are way beyond those of most who lurk this forum.

But they don't allow for a damaged society, and you have no evidence suggesting otherwise.  What does allow for a damaged society is when the government spends billions of dollars a year jailing people (mostly minorities, even though they use drugs at the same rates as whites) for possession of a plant.  And no, you've never offered a solid argument for either your positions on gay marriage or marijuana legalization.

I have to say, you are one of the worst posters on this forum.  I have never met someone so arrogant and egotistical as you.  You look down on literally everyone who doesn't enjoy the same academic achievements as you.  Well, guess what?  I have two full college scholarships and an above average IQ.  You don't see me bragging about those things, ever, because I have some sense of humility.  And at least I can back my opinions up with facts - something that you've never done, probably because you're afraid of facts undermining your case.

Ran out of space, so also these:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=185387.msg4012154#msg4012154
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=185387.msg4012884#msg4012884
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=185387.msg4012919#msg4012919

Meanwhile, you state your opposition to "deluded American libertarianism" and your support for the poll results, claim that you win because you're side is "winning," responded to accusations that your family supported Hitler and that you don't go to Oxford, responded to Polnut's comparison between you and Southern baptists, claimed that you win because we're all inferior, accused Cory of being on weed, and responded to DeadFlag's claim that you aren't socially successful because you don't smoke weed. Despite all of that, you fail to specifically address a substantial reason to maintain the status quo on banning marijuana. Picking and choosing your arguments doesn't work, and I'd like to see genuine responses to these posts, specifically Jbrase's and Franknburger's. I doubt you'll do that however, and instead you'll either avoid this post entirely or find a way to change the subject.

[Velasco]

Actually, I didn't reply hifly but posted those stats in reply to other poster, who seemed to be sceptical on the major prevalence of marijuana consumption in the USA with regard to European countries.

As to hifly, I have little to say but those suggestions on the political past of his ancestors are totally out of place. I'm waiting to read his argumentation, if he cares to provide one.