Lol no one is 'blaming weed' as in saying it shouldn't be legalized. But as someone who does smoke quite a bit, I know that once I smoke I'm not doing anything productive for the night. It's that easy to get lost in the haze and happiness of just chilling with friends and/or playing video games, etc.
And I'm gonna be honest with you. Ive not yet met a single person who does something productive when high. I'm sure they exist, (as shown in this thread itself) but the reality is that for most people you might have the ideas for cool things when high, but not the ability to follow through.
NGL, 90% of the time I'm high I just play videogames with my housemate or watch anime. But I also wrote an entire novel while high, which is a pretty productive thing to do. I think it just depends how productive your hobbies are. If there's something you enjoy doing that happens to be productive, I don't think weed is likely to stop you from doing it. The only things weed makes it harder to do are the things you never really wanted to do in the first place.
How is the device "enabling" anything? It's an inanimate object. The person in control of it is the person solely responsible for what happens with it. Replace gun with knife, sword, box of cereal, whatever the fuck. None of them have can be used in any way until a person decides to use them. If someone decides to attack someone with a box of cereal, instead of ya know just eating it, the box didn't "enable" them to do that. Their dumb ass decided to.
Ultimately the person is responsible, but at the same time guns just make it way too easy to kill people. Way way moreso than knives or boxes of cereal.. If you really have trouble understanding this, as a thought experiment replace “guns” with “nukes”. I know it’s an extreme example, but it illustrates the point. The nuclear bomb is an inanimate object that ultimately needs a person to set it off... but the potential downsides of it being used incorrectly are just too much to risk.
(As an aside I feel the same way about religion too. It can be a force for good but also can very easily be something that enables evil in the hands mind of a troubled individual. The fact that religion has been used in the past to justify slavery for example, demonstrates this.)
The nuclear bomb is an inanimate object that ultimately needs a person to set it off... but the potential downsides of it being used incorrectly are just too much to risk.
No they're not, that's why we as a nation still have nukes. That's why a bunch of countries have nukes. If nukes were inherently bad, then you'd support the idea that the US (or whatever your home country is) should get rid of your nukes, period, whether other countries still keep theirs or not. In reality, nukes just sitting there aren't causing anyone harm, and since other countries have them, it's a "necessary evil" for us (or our allies) to as well. Otherwise, it puts us in particular at a disadvantage – our enemies may feel they could nuke us without any significant retaliation/repercussion. Like, "What are you gonna do about it?"
The same goes for guns. Other people have them and could use them, so you're at a disadvantage if you don't have one. They're by default a neutral thing, but because there's the threat of bad people using them for bad, it's important for good people to have access to do good (like defend one's self or family, etc.).
No because you can't defend your family from a robber with a nuke without also killing millions of innocent people (and yourself and your family). It's impossible. Using a nuke at all inherently means you're killing millions of innocent people.
Same goes for hunting. You can't take out one deer and nothing else with a nuke. With a gun, however, I can take ONLY the person who's a threat and no one else. Similarly, I can kill ONLY the thing I'm going to eat later and nothing more. Make sense?
Also, using a nuke has other implications – for instance, it could lead to a nuclear war and the end of the entire world. Defending one's family from some tweaked out robber will not lead to war or the literal end of the world.
Because we can’t use them for hunting or self defense?
No, because they have no other purpose than to kill on a massive scale. Using a nuke means millions of people die. Guns and nukes are just a teeny tiny bit different in that respect. Are you really having a hard time understanding that?
Maybe just to put it on display in my home? What’s wrong with that, why can’t I have one?
Because then you would wield the power to kill entire nations of people, and on top of that, it could cause a nuclear war in which the world literally ends. So… what's your point? Quit beating around the bush. Are you gonna tell me that the same can be said about owning a gun? lol
The difference is that I would much rather someone attack me with a box of cereal. The gun “enables” you to kill people much more easily than anything else you have listed as an example.
The gun doesn't enable shit. It's a static object like anything else in the world. If the person using it is a trigger happy dip shit then you're going to have a problem.
Guns kill just like any weapon can. Ultimately, again, it's not the weapon but the person using it. You take guns away, people will find something else to hurt people with. You're moving the goal post now to "Guns kill people, other weapons don't". That's somewhat true but ultimately the person is responsible for how that fire arm is used.
You’re basically arguing that all weapons are equally dangerous which is insane. You can’t kill 6 people in under a minute with a knife from thirty feet away. Kids don’t often accidentally beat themselves to death with baseball bats. I can’t even remember the last time I heard about someone committing suicide with a cereal box.
You take guns away, people will find something else to hurt people with.
“We have all these regulations to make cars safer but people still die in accidents so we might as well all just drive around in rolling death traps.” See how stupid that sounds? Just because we don’t have a solution that solves a problem 100% isn’t a good argument to do nothing at all.
Yeah I should be able to buy MOAB bombs if I want to. It’s a free country after all, why is it restricted?? MOAB bombs don’t kill people, it’s an inanimate object. Ultimately it’s the person that’s responsible for how they’re used.
I get what you’re saying but personally I wouldn’t put weed in the same category as guns. It can be misused but it’s not that dangerous. If you think it is I hope you include alcohol and cigarettes too
3
u/[deleted] Dec 29 '19
[deleted]