Roflcore said:
I know that it does that, and I do have a problem with that, but I do not see much of a different solution. Your ideas are nice on paper, but don't really work. The border is already heavily guarded/patroled/searched, I lived in Moenchengladbach for 20 years and every now and then did drive to Holland to get some nice fries, flowers or cheap gas - so I do know about that stuff.
You also need to understand that your laws affect us as much as our laws affect you. Most of our laws are almost the same, but some aren't and that causes problems with such open boarders. I think the idea of open boarders is great and I love Schenge, but the weed is a problem. I know it is really drastic but how would you react if small arms were legal in germany? Like really easy to buy? Of course you would close your boarders immediatly. Weed is not that dangerous, but still illegal in germany, so we and you have to do something.
Ehm, first of all, no we wouldn't close our borders. Mostly because that would be disastrous financially. It also doesn't need to be a problem.
Second, again: Germany has no jurisdiction and no say in this. There's a lot of things you can do that don't amount to simply closing shops, as I've already stated, including refusing sale to Germans. But most of this doesn't actually solve any problems: people will still get weed illegally, since it is a big part of society and not that hard to get your hands on.
Roflcore said:
But before we continue we need some facts we can all agree upon. Personally I say weed has some longterm effects like the difficulty to concentrate or remember if you use it regulary. Shortterm effects appear to happen when you are a real junky who smokes every day (maybe even several times). Do you agree on that? Because if not and you say weed is barely harmful than their is no real need for further discussion. I have read data that stats it is harmful and I have also read it is not harmful, from my personal experience I say it is, if you disagree its rather pointless to discuss the whole weed/boardertrade discussion, because if it wasn't harmful I would not have any problems with it.
Define harmful.
Weed is barely harmful in the long term and most studies conflict eachother and are problematic in their approaches.
The only solid study that has been done shows a very small congruence in incidence of schizophrenia and smoking lots and lots of weed over a very prolonged time.
Also, I know many people who smoke at least once a day and for whom it has no effect in their daily lives.
Roflcore said:
And I'd like to ask: Why do you say something like "alcohol is far more dangerous then weed" when nobody said otherwise? Stating the obvious might be useful at the beginning of a discussion, but at this point I'd rather think this was meant for me, because I don't see a reason why you would write it otherwise.
If you'd read my posts, you'd know that I was pointing out the hypocrisy in wanting to ban weed, while alcohol is getting no flack.
Roflcore said:
Because alcohol was legal for way to long to just quickly ban it. didn't work in the us. I agree that you have to allow or ban both, but that is not so easy to do. personally I say ban both, but thats not possible in a short time. so why create another problem when you don't need to? ban weed for the moment, ban alcohol when it is possible.
All banning weed does is drive it into illegality and cause even more problems, similarly to what happened in the US during the Prohibition. It means the link between weed and crime becomes more solidified, and hard drugs become more accessible for those who smoke weed as well.
Weed is already omnipresent throughout the media, and simply people's daily lives. Look at a show like Entourage, weed is treated as simply an established fact, even though it is set in the US.
