CodyTalks at the...
140 conference smalltown 2011

"We Teach Them to Drive"

Read more
CodyTalks Public Speaking

CodyTalks Radio Show
Sundays at 7a.m. CST - Wednesdays at 10:30a.m. CST

Hot topics going on in your area

Read more
CodyTalks Radio Show

CodyTalks at the...
140 conference NYC 2011

"How the Internet is like a Small Town"
...Twitter is coffee shop of the world... the whole world can now know about the good or bad thing you did just like it's always happened at the small town coffee shop.

Read more
CodyTalks Public Speaking

Marijuana and Assualt rifles.




I think we should legalize Marijuana! Not because it is an ALL good idea, but because it is the smartest option. 

1. The only way to truly put a dent in a illegal market is to create controlled a legal market. 

2. Tax it just like cigarettes and alcohol. Why not put some of the billions into our tax base?

3. Create a completely new legal industry. We need jobs!

I don't want marijuana easily accessible, I want to deal with a portion of our crime problem in a logical way. 




Next question with the same principles and concepts applied:

IS the legalization of assault weapons different in any way from the legalization of marijuana?

27 comments:

  1. I completely agree. Just as in the era of prohibition, the legalization of liquor crippled organized crime. Liquor still creates problems, but as a controlled substance, allows us to collect tax revenue that funds many local, state and federal programs.

    Now on assault rifles. I feel, as in any firearm, in the proper hands are safe. Making them legal should be done as a means to pass harsher punishment for those that are not able to have possession legally, just like marijuana.

    Now, on the flip side, I don't know why there should be a need for assault rifles. What do you hunt with an assault rifle? LOL

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totaly agree, it should be legalized. All of the points Cody made were very valid. It would stimulate the economy, create jobs, and stem the tide of illegal narcotics. On to assault rifles, it is our god given right as an american under the second amendment to bear arms. But there is no logical need for the ordinary citizen to possess such a weapon. If the shit hits the fan and america is invaded, then join the military and you'll have all the assault rifles you can handle. Good topic Cody, really makes you think.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cody,
    Great topic really makes you think...I heard Obama is considering presenting a bill for the legalization of marijuana is this where the topic came from? I look forward to hearing any more news on the subject...definately an advocate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great comments guys I appreciate it.

    Still have a few of the regulars that I would like to see chime in.

    Scott and Lizalde...

    You both make points about "Who needs a assault rifle"

    Who needs Marijuana available from a Kwik Shop???? You both agree to the legalization of marijuana for recreational use and noone asked the question...

    "Who really NEEDS recreational marijuana??"

    It's not about "NEEDS" it's about rights and controlling crime and benefit our tax base instead of benefiting a black market.

    The who really needs an assault rifle argument is not a valid point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't have a problem with the needs argument. Who needs marijuana? Well, people that are sick and in a lot of pain for one. People that want to relax in the privacy of their own home by smoking marijuana also need marijuana.

    Who needs assault rifles? The military clearly needs them. Maybe police forces in certain instances need them. Private citizens? What need is fulfilled by such a weapon? Protection? No. Hunting? No. Staging a revolution? Maybe. Mass murder? Certainly.

    I find the need argument compelling. Cody, can you make a case why someone would need an assault rifle?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nate,

    First thing, I used the word "recreational" because Medical marijuana is a seperate issue. If there is medical benefit (which it seems very obvious there is) it needs to be classified differently and prescribed and regulated as a Prescription drug for that use.

    Ok,

    I don't think there is any need for an assault rifle, that is my whole entire point in my last comment. Just exactly like there is no need for Recreational marijuana. This is not a debate over Needs!!! Take your example of the person that needs to relax in the privacy of their own home. The word "needs" doesn't belong in that sentence. Noone needs marijuana to relax. Their are other ,currently legal, options. If they WANT to use marijuana to relax in the privacy of their own home than I 100% think they should have that right. They should have that right without any risk of being deemed a criminal. They should also have the right to shoot any weapon they choose if it is a source of relaxation, pleasure, adreniline anything. As long as they don't infringe on someone else rights, they should have the rights to shoot a machine gun, or inhale and exhale whatever they want.
    Both sides of these two debates (which kinda tends to run right down party lines, I said kinda!!) Are being closed minded.

    Nate, you don't see a need for assault rifles so in your comment you snidely point out things like revolt and mass murder. Assault rifles don't cause these things, morons cause these things and ruin it for those of us who just enjoy shooting firearms and believe in our right to own them.

    Jolene, (in the first post about legalizing marijuana)

    Doesn't see a need for sitting in her basement smoking marijuana, so.. She points out all the bad things about marijuana... Its a starter drug, crime, second hand smoke etc....

    Marijuana doesn't cause those things, morons cause those things and ruin it for everyone who would enjoy sitting in front of the TV and smoking a little with their friends and not ruining their or anyones elses night, week, or life.

    It's ridiculous that people don't realize that both of these arguments are exactly the same arguments. Its decide by a 2 party system that we refuse to get past and make progress.

    ReplyDelete
  7. We could go down a long list of things we currently enjoy that we don't need. I personally find it hilarious that a private citizen would need an assault rifle. That being said, I agree with the right for them to be legal. As long as the right person owns one, they will do no harm. Reference the movie Distinguish Gentleman. They take Eddie Murphy out duck hunting with assault rifles, they call up some ducks, and open fire. One falls from the sky, and Eddie says.. "must have died from a heart attack" LOL

    The assault rifles should be enjoyed by the person who takes them out to the range to pop off some rounds. Just has marijuana should be enjoyed by the person that uses properly.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What if this were to happen.

    What if the NRA and every member and (insert org that wants to legalize marijuana) and all the people that wanted to legalize marijuana banded together and committed all their money and time to 4 things:

    1. Legalizing marijuana and create an infrastructure (the DEA just shifts its duties) to manage it and create boat loads of tax revenue.

    2. Organizing a movement to stop wasting time and money trying to making certain guns illegal.

    3. Organize a gigantic education campaign for both sides. Why are kids not taught gun safety in school? Drugs are freaking illegal and they are taughts about the dangers of drugs, Guns they can legally get their hands on and we are not teaching them anything???

    4. Then the hippies and the right-winger gun freaks can all sit back smoke a bowl, shoot the hell out of some beer cans with bazookas and bask in the glory of no shit accomplishing something that benefits both sides of the aisle and all Americans. The tax benefits, prison population decrease, the literally billions of lobbyist dollars that wouldn't be needed, crap think of all the time people would have on their hands.

    Its a reach across the aisle, win-win no kidding get something done plan.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's undeniable that, legal or no, people that want marijuana or assault rifles badly enough find a way to obtain them.

    Generally, the people finding illegal marijuana pose considerably less of a threat than those obtaining assault rifles, but whatever. Not a point I even want to argue.

    I'll support any stronger regulation and education on guns, but I won't argue on making any guns illegal. I understand that there are avid collectors out there that really want them, and that's cool with me. Although I can't, for the life of me, understand why any civilian needs a functioning assault rifle, I won't tell them they shouldn't have one, so long as they don't intend on hurting anyone.

    BUT!!!!!!

    I prefer to never again, in my life to hear the "Well, criminals can get assault rifles, so I need one to protect myself!" argument that I've heard in the past. I'm sure you all have at one point or another, too.

    That argument is just not grounded in reality. I'm glad to see that nobody has brought it out in this blog.

    What kind of diluted Rambo-vigilante self image do you have to posses to think that somebody is going to kick in your door with an M16 Carbine and rob you, only to be mowed down by you and the assault rifle you conveniently keep under your pillow?

    You need to be involved in some serious illegal activities yourself to necessitate an assault rifle for protection purposes on a civilian level.

    Anyway, that's my rant on the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I want to point out Cody's lack of credibility on this issue, given his previous sentiments that private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear weaponry.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I vote for legalizing everything. We can all just walk around stoned all day with our ASSult rifles and try not to shoot each other. I still think that making it legal would cause more problems than it solved.

    Assult rifles, really? I have never been sitting home on a friday night and thinking to myself,jeez I wish I had an assult rifle, this measley little handgun just does not have enough bang for my buck. I have no problem with responsible gun ownership, some of my favorite people are avid hunters and thats ok with me, BUT, do you really need an assult rifle? The only reason that I could see that you would is if you were constantly being attacked by ninjas or something else just as deadly.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Karen, Mitchell,

    That fact that you don't agree with someone's opinion for why they want something or if they in fact think they need something, gives zero relevance to the discussion of whether or not they have the right to own it.

    I may think it is just as crazy for someone to be sitting around and all of a sudden jump up and say"Man I really need a joint right now" but... should not be MY call whether or not that is a viable reason for wanting/thinking they need one.

    The closed-mindedness of "Your an idiot for wanting an assault rifle" or "Your a worthless hippie burden on society for wanting to legally smoke marijuana" is what causes the divide between everyone.

    It shouldn't be a discussion of "Your reason for wanting this is stupid".

    If it doesn't affect anyone else... They SHOULD have the right as an American to go get one. If they want a joint cause it makes their hair prettier the next morning or they want an assault rifle cause they fear an alien invasion... Not my place to judge.

    Not any of our places including The Government to decide if their "REASON" for wanting one is legit.

    It IS the Government's responsibility to Govern the sale and licensing of anything and everything, and Guns and Inhaled things should have different rules and regulations than bottled water, no doubt.

    Nate,

    Your right, I don't think there should be a ban on Nuclear Weaponry, I think some private entity may someday find a way to research something about the workings of it for the greater good. If they are properly licensed and inspected and trained they should have access. Thats the key..

    What are they doing with the item... Is the actions they are doing/planning on doing with the item going to break a law or infringe on the rights of another human being.

    Actions should be illegal, Not inanimate objects.

    Drugs/Guns/Cars/Baseball Bats/Knives/Computer Keyboards and even A-bombs don't ever with out a human being behind them hurt anyone, ever.

    Me sitting in my basement smoking a joint, or Nate in his backyard shooting an AK-47 in a safe manner hurts no one and making those items illegal to possess serves no purpose but to create criminals.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You can try as hard as you want to equate smoking a joint and firing an assault rifle, but it's a loser comparison. These things have to be evaluated individually, on their merits. What are the impacts on society? What is the potential for abuse? etc. I think that this thread is ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nate,

    Thats strange less than 8 hours ago you found the argument "Compelling"???

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cody,

    I'm not sure I said all those things but it doesn't really matter, they are often the things people say.

    If you want to talk logistics of legalizing pot, I'll add in the following:

    1. Pot is a cash crop that would likely require heavy security to "farm" at production levels. It's too easily stolen and too easy to sell.

    2. Production farming would be heavily undermined by individuals growing their own. A practice which likely wouldn't generate any tax income or jobs.

    3. Since pot is illegal throughout the world, it would not be a legal export so the market would be limited. In Amsterdam, where many people have the belief pot is legal, it's only been "decriminalized" for those who have a very small amount of it.

    4. Taxation commercial pot production and/or sales would always be undercut by "home growers" and illegal sales. The more you increase taxes on something, the more of an illegal market it creates.

    5. Law enforcement would still have to deal with both the illegal market and legal issues arising with the legal market. Pot is a prime market for theft.

    6. There's going to be social pressure. I would imagine that it'd take very little time for there to be MAPS (Mothers Against Pot Smokers) just as there are strong and vocal MADD chapters.

    7. There will be those who try and legislate "legal responsibility" to those selling the pot just as there are those now who try and hold bartender's and/or liquor stores responsible for selling to someone who is clearly already not capable of driving...or other activites they may deem against the "public good".

    8. If you want to make the "freedom" debate, it'd make more sense to me at least to debate public nudity. Or public sex acts.

    I'm sure I've missed some things since I'm doing this off the top of my head.

    If you want to talk about my personal reasons for believing pot should not be legalized, I lived that era already. Lived it and survived it. Not everyone did.

    It wasn't because I was any smarter than anyone else because once it comes to pickled brain state, nobody is smart at all, despite how much they think they are at the time. I was lucky.

    The hippie generation fried their brain cells long ago. I still know some of them.

    What was the other thing - assault rifles. There was a time when submachine guns were legal on the streets in this country. The gangster era flourished with their help.

    Long ago they outlawed submachine guns because they made things worse for average people and easier for criminals.

    When I was 11 or so, one of my many cousins. who was 12 at the time, came in on the Greyhound. He'd been getting out-of-hand so my aunt put him on the bus to stay with my grandpa that summer.

    Who knows where he got it but when he got off that bus he had an assembled and loaded submachine gun in a paper grocery bag.

    My dad had a fit and said he wasn't coming in the house with that gun. He said he wasn't leaving it behind. So my mom drove him on out to my grandpa's house that evening because he really wasn't coming in our house with a loaded submachine gun.

    My grandpa lived out at Oakhill, Kansas and the bus didn't go there.

    Submachine gun, assault rifle -both serious weapons designed for major impact.

    But never believe that some 12 year kid who was/is too streetwise won't come up with one and have it handy.

    My cousin was definitely not a model citizen. By the time he was 18, he was doing a jail sentence for involuntary manslaughter. He'd killed someone while driving drunk one day.

    By the time he was 21, he'd was done drinking, in the military and he shaped up to be a pretty good guy. Tough as nails though.

    We often don't legislate for those who cause no harm to others. We often legislate for those who do.

    We legislate to set guidelines for morons (since you used the word) who may not make it through without societal guidelines ....and for those they harm along the way.

    ReplyDelete
  16. jolene,

    Your first 6 points, the ones numbered are legit points that would need to dealt with agreed. i think there is some subjectiveness that could go either way.

    The hippies fried there brains argument didnt do much for me, I guess I just don't get the point of it. People are frying their brains everyday on alcohol, are you suggestion we should go back to prohibition? Honest Question!!

    The story of your cousin...?

    Seriously you are one of my favorite and most informed commentors... but I can't even draw any point out of that story at all. Some clarification of why you brought it up would be great. Did your 12 year old cousin legally buy a sub-machine gun while on a bus trip??

    Seriously please believe me, I mean no disrespect... I just don't get it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Cody,
    I am not sure I called anyone an idiot or a worthless hippie burden, although thats a good one so I may start.

    Where do you draw the line? Do you believe that people should be able, legally, to purchase crack or cocaine? When do you say thats enough? You may think that my opinions are close minded, but I think your arguement is weak. It doesn't affect anyone else??? Maybe you should say that it does not affect you, because I gaurentee that there are pleanty of people out there who would disagree. I agree that its not my place to judge anyone else, thats why I am pretty sure that I didn't call anyone a hippie or an idiot. It is my RIGHT as a human being to not think like you and to stand up for what I believe in. To me, it shows extreme closed mindedness (is that even a word?) on your part not to look at the possible social ramifications of legalized drugs. I guarentee that if pot is legalized the next debate will be--well since pots legal lets talk about (insert name of harmfull and illegal drug here). Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Cody,
    I am not sure I called anyone an idiot or a worthless hippie burden, although thats a good one so I may start.

    Where do you draw the line? Do you believe that people should be able, legally, to purchase crack or cocaine? When do you say thats enough? You may think that my opinions are close minded, but I think your arguement is weak. It doesn't affect anyone else??? Maybe you should say that it does not affect you, because I gaurentee that there are pleanty of people out there who would disagree. I agree that its not my place to judge anyone else, thats why I am pretty sure that I didn't call anyone a hippie or an idiot. It is my RIGHT as a human being to not think like you and to stand up for what I believe in. To me, it shows extreme closed mindedness (is that even a word?) on your part not to look at the possible social ramifications of legalized drugs. I guarentee that if pot is legalized the next debate will be--well since pots legal lets talk about (insert name of harmfull and illegal drug here). Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  19. i like to argue so much I posted it twice---so there!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Cody,

    Let me first say there were very few "real" hippies in the hippie generation. Mostly kids heard about the hippie movement and hitchhiked to where they'd heard it was but by the time they got there, it was gone. Soon that sprang into the "pseudo" hippies and largely, when people speak of hippies, they don't even understand there's a difference.

    The hippies themselves largely disappeared from the public eye before anyone even noticed them. They went to live in communes with the goal of building self-supporting groups with personal responsibility. If the larger culture did not embrace their beliefs and their goals, they would create mini-societies where they could live with others in peace and harmony.

    I should have been more specific when I said that the hippie generation already fried their brain cells. Those who embraced the personal responsibility of their belief systems and who lived in communes knew that if you don't get up in the morning and tend to the business of being a self-sustaining community, you were going to get pretty hungry when the crops died and pretty thirsty if no one fetched water.

    One of the caveats of the time frame was "freedom stinks of reality".

    Sustainable communes usually embraced that as inclusion for all with the same mindset and a work ethic for all who lived with them.

    Those outside sustainable communes and pseudo hippies often embraced it as the need to use anger and anarchy as a means to overthrow the chains of the past and to usher in a new reality. A new reality where there were no barriers. Where there were no restrictions.

    Or, at least, as it evolved, there were no restrictions except those imposed by the hippie generation to "rein in" the great evils they wanted to change.

    There was an era where the public use of marijuana was so common, it was much rarer not to see than to see it. Not for the older population of the time frame but for those under 25.

    Those excesses and the common use of marijuana led to almost an entire generation of Americans who personally knew a story of someone in their lives who was "jammed up" in some way by "getting high". Either on drugs or alcohol.

    Also inherent in the same time frame was the shifting among the pseudo hippie culture, which branched out to the broader culture of those under 25, away from "personal responsibility" to "cultural responsibility".

    All of which is at the core of the debate your making.

    You are debating "personal responsibility" and I'm a big fan of personal responsibility so I'm not going to make a debate against it.

    That said, in this day and age, it's very difficult to win any debate without addressing the issue of "cultural responsibility".

    It has indeed become so prevalent in our national discourse that the pain of the "one" is often held up as a reason to take away the freedoms of the many.

    The mistakes of the one or of the few used to take away the freedoms of the many.

    Are you sure you want to go down that path? It's pretty thorny territory and tends to alienate folks along the way.

    Or would you rather debate that the mistakes of the few are things that we should all learn from and find middle ground?

    That particular path acknowledges the pain and experiences of others who have passed this way, in the case of open marijuana use, in their own experience or in the experiences of those they know on a personal level, and seeks to convince them that your freedom should not be sacrificed because of their pain.

    The choice is yours Cody. It largely depends whether or not your a freedom purist, which is a tough road to do well....or whether your a centrist who is working for the best possible solution in an imperfect world.

    Same thing applies to assault rifles.

    ReplyDelete
  21. haven't I read this exact thread before...is it deja vu or a rerun?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'll chime in for a minute

    I agree that marijuana should be legalized for a few reasons. I also feel that if I want to own an assault rifle I have that right.

    1) while statistics show that violent crimes and "illicit substances" are linked with significance most of what I have read point to the harder drugs of cocaine/meth. No where have I read that marijuana is singled out as a contributer. Oh and, IMHO, marijuana is just as much a "gate way drug" as alcohol and narcotic presciption medication; what a BS argument that has been in the "War of Drug" era.
    2) along with my first point our prison systems and jails are filled to the brim with people on non violent drug charges. I wonder how many of these residents are in for a possession charge. Last time I knew possession over an ounce of marijuana brings about the additional charge of "intent to sell" and "no tax stamp". Legalizing marijuana would decrease the pressure on our legal system to pursue and put on trial more serious offenses that actually do have an impact on society.
    4) Marijuana is not physiologically addictive unlike alcohol, crack, meth, cocaine, heroin, tobacco, and a number of other things; even prescription drugs. I know that there are some that will disagree with me but from what I have been taught and researched myself(in a graduate level alcohol and drug class)this is what I hold as a truth. I will say that marijuana is psychologically addictive however which is much different. In other words there are many things, even legal, that are much more addictive than Marijuana.
    3) I hold to the saying that "guns don't kill people...people kill people". I don't think everyone has the right to have a firearm; I believe in the laws that prohibit felons from owning one. I am a responsible gun owner who have and will teach my children responsible usage of a gun. I enjoy shooting assault rifles just like i enjoy shooting pistols and shotguns. Each firearm presents differnt challenges and skill sets which I enjoy. There are appropriate places to shoot assault rifles and if these places are available then I see no reason why, as a law abiding citizen, I shouldn't be allowed use them.
    4) There is always the argument that criminals have more firepower than those protecting us from criminals. While if my home was invaded I would most likely go for my Glock I do have access to a an assault rifle should I need it. I don't like thinking that I would ever be forced into a situation where I had to defend my family, however if someone breaks into my house with an assault rifle I would want the option of leveling the playing field. Oh..and unlike many criminals with firearms I happen to know how to use one.

    My two cents. By the way I haven't smoked marijuana for 13 years so I do not have a personal interest in the legalization of it. :)

    Aaron

    ReplyDelete
  23. Oh and apparently I didn't number my points correctly...thats what I get for trying to edit my post and probably happened because I have smoked weed before haha

    ReplyDelete
  24. Aaron,

    I agree whole heartedly...

    Nate,

    i disagree on the case by case basis of everything. I firmly believe if we took a stance of "Items are not illegal, actions are" we would have an drastically larger effect enforcing the law.

    Don't push people who want to own something, because someone else can do harm with it or on the influence of it. Cars and cigarettes kill more people than guns or marijuana in US every year. Both legal, both should be. People can get the licensing to have a freaking pet tiger... I still contend the "NEED" argument is ridiculous. It's not about what you need. It's about someone else telling you what you can have.

    I truly don't understand how you can seperate the argument of gun control and legalization of dope. They are the same argument, they are both the battle of law-abiding citizens having the right to do things they enjoy as long as they don't create a victim.

    The gateway drug argument is ridiculous... The person makes the choice and they will make that choice whether it is legal or illegal.

    As always i respect everyones opinion on all topics but I really believe we are missing the boat on this subject as a country and If the NRA and NORML would ban together... They could both see more progress for the greater good of the country than any one has in a long time.

    Financial Gain
    Crime Reduction
    Education
    Prison Pop. problems

    all would benefit.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I've been avoiding this one because of your claim of (in my words, not yours): dems want legal pot and reps want legal guns. Really, definitely made me consider the whole thing in a different way. Good choice to do these two in the order you did. Other way wouldn't have worked as well.

    Anyway, after reading all the other comments, one particular statement stuck out. Jolene said "We often don't legislate for those who cause no harm to others. We often legislate for those who do." It's the truth. If everyone had common sense and followed the Golden Rule, we wouldn't need laws. Unfortunately, that will never be the case.

    So in my alternate universe, I've decided to make both of them legal and very regulated. I would be perfectly comfortable with the following:

    Assault weapons are legal. They have to be registered and (somehow) marked to the point they are always identifiable (can't scrape off serials). There are smart people out there. We can do this. If any person/people are killed by YOUR GUN, whether it's you or someone who stole it from you, you're done.
    Jail. Forever. If you think you're going to get robbed, buy a handgun and stay out of the assault weapons. If you want to kill your wife/boss/neighbor/guy on the corner, and you want any chance of ever getting out of prison, don't overdo it with something automatic.

    Marijuana is legal. (For that matter, all drugs, i don't care.) If you crash and someone dies and you're stoned, you're done. Jail. Forever. If you get a speeding ticket and you're stoned, you're done. Forever. If you get caught selling drugs to someone who's underage (whatever that age is), you're done. Go to jail. Never get out. Period.

    If you are capable of managing your hobby and not hurting anyone, more power to you. If you're not, it's prob a good idea to stay out of it, because you're going to pay a hefty price. Get stoned at home. Break down your AK-47, lock it in a half-ton gun safe, and stash the firing pin somewhere else. Use some common sense, and we'll all get along fine.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Scott hits the nail on the head.

    Exactly, I agree, it's the only "Progressive" solution there is.

    or we can just keep spending billions on fighting each side of the battle to never see an end to any of the problems and never gain an inch.

    Please, please, please notice I did not say it was a perfect solution.

    The only perfect solution to never ever ever have to worry about drugs or guns is a police state where both are completely outlawed and a massive military lock-down eliminates both and leads to a revolution. That solution has a few downfalls as well, so... why not protect the freedoms of the responsible and increase some tax revenue and creating new industry and create jobs????

    Ok thanks for commenting this has really been a great one.

    ReplyDelete

I love the discussion in the comments.. so... GO FOR IT!

Other CodyTalks posts you may like