A cop told me that weed is harmless but it should stay illegal so they have an excuse to lock up pic related...

A cop told me that weed is harmless but it should stay illegal so they have an excuse to lock up pic related. He said the reason the crime rate has been going down for decades is because we have been physically removing millions of blacks from society by imprisoning them. Less blacks = less crime.

Assuming this is true, are weed laws morally legitimate? Even if the law has objectively good results, shouldn't we be honest about why? Is it OK to limit peoples freedom based on the actions of other people? Why don't we make weed legal and ban black people instead?

>physically removing

delete humanities threads

So to speak

untrue

A critical flaw in OP's plan, if the US bans black people, then where will OP find black cocks to suck?

Pretty sure it would be significantly cheaper to just shove them on a boat bound for Africa

We could dump them in Mexico, it would be even cheaper. We have the most powerful military in the world. Mexico will do what we tell them to do.

>what is loss of productivity

There's no Atlantic ocean separating us from Mexico.

There will be a wall. Soon. Besides, fuck Mexico, let them deal with the blacks. The dindus will fuck them up for generations.

Why is this here and not on /pol/? Legitimate question. What makes this humanities and not race politics?

I think we ought to re-instate prohibition.

Why not lock up blacks for the crimes they do commit rather than making harmless activities illegal?

I mean if you insist on using bullshit laws to arbitrarily lock up ghetto thugs they already exist:

>carrying a firearm without a permit
>can't prove ownership of firearm or source its origin
>undeclared business activities and revenue
>doesn't pay taxes on the above
>sells recreative drugs without a permit
>sells controlled substances to minors
>can't prove the safety/quality of the products or source their origin
>driving under influence
>prostitution-related offenses
>insults or assaults law-enforcement officers

If the only reason is jailing blacks, there's no reason for soft drugs to be more illegal than alcohol currently is.

They war on drugs is what turned intercity blacks into criminals

>Saying that Annie Lööfs logic is Swedish logic

för fan

/this

Did you learn about black people from TV?

>He said the reason the crime rate has been going down for decades is because we have been physically removing millions of blacks from society by imprisoning them

But the research doesnt back that up

Pure fear of the black man, no other logical reason.

>blacks were not criminals before war on drugs

Is this bait?

Research doesn't back what up? The crime is indeed down.

Obviously he's either joking or actually retarded

This is a /pol/ thread not a serious humanities thread.

Besides which the history threads are the most dissapointing bit about the board, they have been a horrific failure.

This would probably be labeled under the 'Is X degeneracy?' Category and be removed from /pol/

All humanities threads without exception are shit, /pol/ or not.

Copfag here

It's not harmless, and it's not "not a drug." It's classification doesn't changed based on your sociopolitical beliefs. It impairs a person's judgement and causes them to do stupid shit. The main issues I have with it are it causes car accidents (zero deaths my ass, I've rolled up on countless accidents, many involving death or serious injury, where you can still smell the weed in the driver's car. Pls stop spreading these myths that it's not a drug and they're not impaired by it, this shir could kill your kid one day) and that purchasing it contributes to drug cartels, and that contributes to a hell of a lot more crime than I have the time to go into.

So we should just legalize it right, so we won't be controlled to cartels? We tried it in a couple states. Legal, regulated weed ended up being a hell of a lot more expensive than some guy selling it that doesn't have to pay for taxes, rent for a storefront, security details, and employee salaries.

Like a lot of things there isn't an easy solution, however I'll continue to use discretion (letting your ass off the hook) if you're caught with a small amount and you're not under the influence of it. If you want to use it in the privacy of your own home (HOME, nor apartment where everyone else has to smell it through the vents and off your balcony) then that's your decision. DO NOT get behind the wheel of a vehicle and don't do it where people can smell it, and you should be fine unless you run into officer DuGoode who actually gives a shit and wants to fill out paperwork on your behalf. I'd rather just crush your precious weed into the pavement and send you on your way, unfortunately I won't be able to do that when we roll out the body cams, but we'll see.

What if they just kill all the blacks?

Not cheap either.

They are allowed to by the laws of leftism since they are not white

Quick question officer. Isn't everything you said also apply to alcohol? I mean people get drunk and get behind the wheel of a car and it causes accidents. Alcohol also impairs people's judgement and makes them do stupid shit. Also during prohibition it was controlled by the Mob. Do you think we should ban wine and beer also?

Got off on too many tangents and forgot to answer OPs question.

Yes we look forward other crimes when we know someone needs to take a trip to jail. For example we get a theft call, we find a guy matching the description but hes already ditched the items, you think we're not going to process him for the weed in him? The only times I make an arrest for a small amount is either if you're under the influence or I know damn well you did something else. If you want to call that "finding an excuse" then yeah sure. If you want it the other way around then don't bitch when I don't have enough evidence to arrest your vehicle burglary suspect and just let him go despite the fact that he has weed on him.

Arresting someone is putting in effort. There's a lot of paperwork and legal liability, having to appear in court, etc. We don't just do it just to do it. The people we actually put a away are people you would want away, from you and your loved ones.

I can't, however, speak on behalf of certain states that don't respect the Constitution. We've all heard bad stories about CA and NY cops...

Well it's cheaper for the Mexicans than allowing a bunch of dindus to fuck up their country even more. Mexico is on the edge already. A push like this might make it turn into Africa.

Not him but while it certainly applies to alcohol, it directly refuses that stoner bullshit propaganda that weed is harmless and nobody ever died because of weed.

Mexico is actually much worse than Africa if you look at the murder rates.

Sadly, so are the history threads.

Have you ever seen one that actually meets the intention of the original sticky?

>When discussing history, please reference credible source material, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.

They're just full of /int/ and /pol/ posters making things up in their heads.

>Legal, regulated weed ended up being a hell of a lot more expensive than some guy selling it that doesn't have to pay for taxes, rent for a storefront, security details, and employee salaries.

No?

I think they mean it's harmless just like alcohol is. They and alot of people think alcohol is harmless. But you do have to admit that there is a bit of a double standard between weed, and alcohol. I mean either both should be illegal, or both should be legal. They are both just as bad and damaging.
Well Mexico doesen't have bands of roving cannibal rapists, and the people are smarter, also it has not reached a civil war JUST YET. It's close, but if the Cartells and government come to full scale fighting then it would be a civil war. Now it's on the same level as south east asia.

Alcohol is just as bad, especially given the prevalence of underage kids using it. The reason it's not banned is because it's ingrained in our culture. If you try banning it people will make moonshine and find illegal sources (this also applies to weed). Now let's say you ban it in Saudi Arabia (it already is), you don't have as much of an issue because culturally, alcohol use is not as prevalent. But if you try to ban hookah over there, something they use often socially, you're going to have an issue, like we did with alcohol prohibition.

To put it bluntly, the laws exist as a deterrent to keep cannabis use from becoming a cultural norm. If I could change the cultural norms of alcohol I would. I enjoy a drink every now and then but there are people who are really affected negatively by it. They abuse it, and perhaps if it wasn't as culturally accepted they would have never developed an issue with it. Same applies to weed.

I won't get into the science stuff, but I don't belief habitual, or even moderate use of marijuana is the same as moderate use of alcohol. I feel it does have an affect on the person's overall cognitive health, more so than alcohol. That's just me if you're curious, I know that's subjective since there's "evidence" on both sides about it being harmless?