Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**YaelTheGreat** · 09-17-2011, 07:24 PM

LOL^^

**shakur420** · 09-17-2011, 07:29 PM

lol, legalizing weed is incredibly difficult for one reason. At least one reason I see that's a huge hurdle. It's criminalization makes the wealthy extremely wealthy. Jails, uniforms, handcuffs, foodservice, batons, guns, police vehicles. People make profit off this shit. I think I read once (and posted around here somewhere) a breakdown of how many people are in the system on marijuana related charges/convictions. Might have been high as alike 40% or something if I'm remembering correctly. Now, that includes in custody, on parole and probation, but still. Think about that. Do you think people who own/run prisons, manufacture "security devices" (weapons, handcuffs, etc.) and uniforms, belts and boots, vehicles, etc. would just simply allow such a big portion of the reason their revenue exists to just walk out of the system? We're talking about the loss of big business. Same reason why no big companies were coming out with electric or hybrid cars for so long, even though the technology existed, same reason why the internet and downloading, digital media was demonized for so long. Until these companies, the wealthy, can ensure that they can profit off the new model, the new industry, why would they support the shift? In terms of legalizing marijuana, companies who supply the food for jails, the uniforms for guards and police, how are they going to profit off of regulated, legal marijuana? It's not an overnight task to start producing and selling that shit. They're just going to give up their profit? Of course not, so anyone who makes money of the criminalization of marijuana will throw money and support behind political candidates who oppose it. It's in their interests to do that, regardless of whether they smoke more weed than I do. But, fuck, this is getting off topic...

**TheMythOfSisyphus** · 09-17-2011, 07:36 PM

Guns don't kill people, but neither do people. Bullets kill people, therefore we should change the bullets to be filled with the magic and hope and dreams of all our good intentions.

**shakur420** · 09-17-2011, 08:43 PM

Bullets don't pull the trigger. Like how hammers don't independently strike nails.

**TheMythOfSisyphus** · 09-17-2011, 08:47 PM

So then take away the trigger and you take away the problem. Sounds good to me Shakur :3.

**NWOkiller** · 09-17-2011, 09:20 PM

(09-17-2011 08:47 PM)TheMythOfSisyphus Wrote: So then take away the trigger and you take away the problem. Sounds good to me Shakur :3.

This sounds good in theory but what about criminals that get guns anyway?

**Younes** · 09-17-2011, 09:30 PM

^
They don't need to use them if their "victims" dont have them...

**NWOkiller** · 09-17-2011, 09:33 PM

What about the people's right to defend themselves?

**Younes** · 09-17-2011, 09:35 PM

(09-17-2011 09:33 PM)NWOkiller Wrote: What about the people's right to defend themselves?

Having a gun just like the dude that tries to get ur vallet doesn't equal selfdefence, looks more like 100% chance of some one getting shot and maybe killed..

**Asshole** · 09-17-2011, 09:38 PM

on a more serious note

(09-17-2011 12:16 PM)Younes Wrote: You are putting this up too theorytically... people are a threat to each other aswell... so they will shoot at eachother, and having a gun haven't proved shit as selfdefence against government raping you... Look at USA, you are being raped by your government, yall got acces to military type gats, but still shoot at each other, costs like 10.000 lives a year, and there is like 16.000 murders a year... Guns aint the answer, as far as I remember the revolution in Tunesia and Egypt didn't acquire guns...

As far as I know guns are only a justification to shoot at each other...

Imagine if the guys doing the uprising had guns in Egypt and Tunesia? wouldn't the bloodbath have been far bigger and more slaughter? plus the government got the best weapons, they would have won that one maybe... cuz they got the perfect justification to open fire at anyone they want to...

the most successful revolutions were armed

a famous example and rather terrific for my cause is the bolshevik revolution. the bolvsheviks, because they had a firearm monopoly, were able to take petrograd and the white palace in a bloodless storm

in fact, a filming of the october revolution resulted in more injuries than the actual revolution

imagine if it had been the other way around

imagine if instead of gandhi winning india's independence, singh
did

a lot of attention has been paid to the middle east revolutions and the firearmless revolutionaries, but only two revolutions (tunisia and egypt) accomplished an overthrow. and apart from that, not much has been accomplished. compare that to yemen or saudi arabia

a peaceful revolution will never truly topple an armed oppressive force.

i know that more guns does not result in less crime. i know a gun society results in super machoism and a fascination with violence. but the alternative is a defenseless proletariat

(09-17-2011 05:28 PM)1871 Wrote: Black Panthers knew first hand the damage that gun culture created since it was black communities who suffered most.

i'm glad you mentioned them. self defense and gun ownership was a pillar of their organization and belief system. they are probably the best example, besides the bolshevik revolution, of how an armed proletariat vs a disarmed proletariat is better

(09-17-2011 03:08 PM)YaelTheGreat Wrote: Actually, he did 1871. He was starting a revultionary upheaval of Rome with machetes and shit, before they crucified his ass. Guns should be put in the hands of those who have shown they are responsible and not "revolutionary" assholes.

whoa whoa. new thread. let's not go off topic here

**Younes** · (This post was last modified: 09-17-2011 09:47 PM by Younes.)

^
Yemen isn't peaceful, Yemen have more gats than any place in the middle east except Lebanon and Iraq, and if you know, there is a civil war like situation with tribes getting at each other, Al-Qaeda militias from the south taking over two major cities...

Saudi Arabia is because its still not set for a revolution, the ones conducting the protests are mostly Shias from the southwestern part of the country, they are a minority...

**shakur420** · 09-17-2011, 09:43 PM

(09-17-2011 08:47 PM)TheMythOfSisyphus Wrote: So then take away the trigger and you take away the problem. Sounds good to me Shakur :3.

I agree. What do we do in the meantime, while the triggers are still around?