anti-pot commercial....

inmytree · February 2007

Has anyone seen the cartoon one where the guy offers his female friend a puff, she says something like, "not again"...and ends up falling in love with alien/martian...

so, if you don't some pot, you'll fall in love with an alien/martian....at least that's what I get from it....

you can find it here: http://www.mediacampaign.org/mg/television.html

it's the one called "not again"....

thoughts...

Pacomc79 · February 2007

my thoughts are the people that created that campaign were high.

know1 · February 2007

Why do people spend time and energy trying to discourage people from using pot? What is their motivation?

inmytree · February 2007

Pacomc79 wrote:

my thoughts are the people that created that campaign were high.

that's what my girlfriend said...:D honestly, that commercial is one of the worst ones I've seen...

well, the one where the girl is all squished and blob looking is pretty bad, too...

inmytree · February 2007

know1 wrote:

Why do people spend time and energy trying to discourage people from using pot? What is their motivation?

my theory, there are two industies that benefit from pot prohibition...one would be the alcohol industry and the other would be gov't/law enforcement...therefore, I think it would be in their best interest to bo anti-pot...

know1 · February 2007

inmytree wrote:

my theory, there are two industies that benefit from pot prohibition...one would be the alcohol industry and the other would be gov't/law enforcement...therefore, I think it would be in their best interest to bo anti-pot...

I disagree that the government/law enforcement has motivation or benefit in ending pot use, but just for the sake of argument, these commercials are being funded by those entities?

inmytree · February 2007

know1 wrote:

I disagree that the government/law enforcement has motivation or benefit in ending pot use, but just for the sake of argument, these commercials are being funded by those entities?

I'm pretty sure our tax dollars fund the commercials...

but let me expand on why I think law enforcement has a vested interest in keeping pot illegal...

busted, then, fines/jail which = money in the coffers of the gov't

if pot were legal, that money stream would dry up...

know1 · February 2007

inmytree wrote:

but let me expand on why I think law enforcement has a vested interest in keeping pot illegal...

busted, then, fines/jail which = money in the coffers of the gov't

if pot were legal, that money stream would dry up...

Yeah - I can see that. I hadn't considered it that way.

By the same toke(n), if they just made it legal, they wouldn't have to SPEND as much money on enforcement, either. So it kind of goes both ways.

And isn't government supposedly non-profit? The fact that they are bringing more money in just means they don't have to tax as much to run their operations, but in the end it's the same for them.

inmytree · February 2007

know1 wrote:

Yeah - I can see that. I hadn't considered it that way.

By the same toke(n), if they just made it legal, they wouldn't have to SPEND as much money on enforcement, either. So it kind of goes both ways.

he he, toke(n), nicely done...!!!

I see your point, however, I'd be willing to bet the fines, and court costs add up to more than the police spend on busting people...also, I would not be suprised if there were federal funds given to the police to "fight" this crime...a round-about example: I remember years ago, the New York State drinking age was 19, the last state to not move it to 21. The NY did not want to change it, but the feds squeezed the state by telling them if they did not raise the drinking age to 21, they would lose Millions in Highway funds...

know1 · February 2007

inmytree wrote:

he he, toke(n), nicely done...!!!

I see your point, however, I'd be willing to bet the fines, and court costs add up to more than the police spend on busting people...also, I would not be suprised if there were federal funds given to the police to "fight" this crime...a round-about example: I remember years ago, the New York State drinking age was 19, the last state to not move it to 21. The NY did not want to change it, but the feds squeezed the state by telling them if they did not raise the drinking age to 21, they would lose Millions in Highway funds...

I edited my comment and added that since the government is supposedly non-profit, that it really shouldn't matter to them.

NMyTree · February 2007

A large majority of Law Enforcement officers I used to work with, often expressed a desire for pot to be legalized, showed much frustration with pot laws and thought that busting pot smokers was the most useless waste of their time and resources.

The only time they appreciated pot laws was when they had a chance to utilize the pot laws (and when nothing else could be proven because of a lack of evidence) to arrest or raid known criminals who they knew were guitly of true crimes (in only rare cases and circumstances). But more often than not, they had something else to hit those criminals with, rather than resorting to pot laws.

humanlight · February 2007

I just asumed that some kid won a contest and got their commerical on the TV. Did not know that it was done by adults...if it was, then it IS the worst commerical EVER!

Outshyned · February 2007

My thinking is that if they legalized weed, then they could empty the system of so many non-violent/non-dangerous pot heads.. Then they could quit letting pedophiles/dangerous/violent people etc go too easily..... To my understanding many of the prisons are over-crowded.
Criminalization of marijane while tobacco and alcohol are legal makes no sense. Alcohol is much worse,, marijane is somewhere b/w cigs and booze imo.

Also.... If they legalized it, it would break factions of the black market and give organized crime one less thing to profit from...
Think about it.. The mofia was in their hayday and most powerful when alcohol was illegal.
The mofia has done nothing but shrink since alcohol was made legal.

The only criminal thing about pot smoking is the fact that "they" made it so.
I'm sick of some of these stupid rules. Let me live my own life/make my own mistakes if they be......

Meanwhile in this people farm of a society the 'psych profession' passes all kinds of these brand new drugs (some of them horribly debilitating) out like m&ms.... Pfft,, whatever.
....And i think the jury is still out on many of those psych meds.. Long term affects etc....
I've seen some lifelong pot heads who are aok and doing just fine.
I've seen some people strung out on psych meds who never get any better... Only worse.. Although i think drugless cognitive therapies are super good.....And i do acknowledge that 'some' psych meds do help 'some' people.

I hate it when people with suits, guns and authority make and enforce rules that defy logic and ignore obvious hypocracy.

whatever
sick of this shit
i want to smoke a joint without feeling like a criminal
Goddamned piss test society.. pfft.

FUCK YOU to DUMB authority for trying to control my destiny where pot is concerned..
It's my life!

-Outs

Uncle Leo · February 2007

know1 wrote:

By the same toke(n), if they just made it legal, they wouldn't have to SPEND as much money on enforcement, either. So it kind of goes both ways.

I second the thumbs up for "toke(n)".

Not only would they not have to spend on the law enforcement (hopefully helping a bit with, oh, I don't know, real criminals), but sales tax baby. They could put a big ol' sin tax--much more than a toke(n)* tax--on that shit. Free revenue.

* just wanted to steal your "toke(n)" creation.

hippiemom · February 2007

know1 wrote:

I edited my comment and added that since the government is supposedly non-profit, that it really shouldn't matter to them.

If pot were legal, we'd need fewer cops, fewer prision guards, etc. It's a jobs issue.

know1 · February 2007

Uncle Leo wrote:

I second the thumbs up for "toke(n)".

Not only would they not have to spend on the law enforcement (hopefully helping a bit with, oh, I don't know, real criminals), but sales tax baby. They could put a big ol' sin tax--much more than a toke(n)* tax--on that shit. Free revenue.

* just wanted to steal your "toke(n)" creation.

But is there motivation there to fund the anti-pot ads since government technically can't profit from tax?

know1 · February 2007

hippiemom wrote:

If pot were legal, we'd need fewer cops, fewer prision guards, etc. It's a jobs issue.

Now that I can see. So the motivation for creating these ads is to keep cops and prison guards employed? If so, wouldn't it make sense for the ads to be funded by cops and prison guards?

soulsinging · February 2007

know1 wrote:

Why do people spend time and energy trying to discourage people from using pot? What is their motivation?

becos there is a significant percentage of americans who feel it is their moral duty to ensure that everyone else lives by their morals.

UKDave · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

becos there is a significant percentage of americans who feel it is their moral duty to ensure that everyone else lives by their morals.

That's the one for me... it's about shaping society to how those in power want it, simple as...

soulsinging · February 2007

know1 wrote:

I edited my comment and added that since the government is supposedly non-profit, that it really shouldn't matter to them.

the trouble is politics. pot was outlawed in california first (surprised? i was). it was a combination of 2 things: racist fear of mexicans who used it and the potential for competition from a hemp paper industry that the logging industry did not want (i think it was hearst who helped inflate their cause). since then, it simply became part of the way things are done. the puritans who lost on alcohol prohibition were very careful to draw a big line so that such liberties did not extend and hurt the temperance movement. then it became part of the culture wars. the conservatives pointed to it as a huge part of that commie hippy movement in the 60s that was destroying their children. then reagan came and the war on drugs really kicked into high gear. any sign of softening on pot was portrayed as being soft on drugs and essentially wanting to hand heroin to pre-schoolers. that's where we stand now. it's a political football.

i think the tide is turning though and people are realizing this war on drugs isn't working, esp not with pot. im reasonably sure it will become decriminalized before long cos it's not as taboo to talk about it as it once was.

know1 · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

becos there is a significant percentage of americans who feel it is their moral duty to ensure that everyone else lives by their morals.

That's the reason that I would expect, as well.

But, by legalizing it, wouldn't we be forcing those people who oppose legalization to live by other morals then? I'm not saying they would be forced to use, but forced to live in a society where it was legal - which is apparently against their morals.

Every single law on the books is about forcing people to live at a certain standard of morality.

anti-pot commercial....

Comments

Categories