I'm interested to see how many of you shared my reaction to something that happened to me today. I got home from the grocery store at about 3 o'clock. As I was carrying my bags up the stairs to my apartment, I noticed two kids, maybe 14 years old at the most, sitting on the steps. I also noticed an extremely strong mar1juana smell, and when I looked more closely at the kids, they both had classic dog-who-****-on-the-rug guilty looks on their faces. So, pretty clearly, I'd stumbled across two kids toking up. What would you have done about it? I thought about calling the cops, or the apartment rent-a-cop-- not out of any grouchy old man type reaction, but because I don't think 14-year old kids should be smoking pot. It is illegal. Maybe calling the cops and getting them in trouble would have convinced them that, for the time being, mar1juana is more trouble than it's worth. Then again, it was none of my business. They politely moved out of my way on the stairs, perhaps glad I didn't stop and say, "Something smells like pot!" It's a victimless crime and generally a pretty harmless one, too. Then again, 14 is awfully young to be messing around with drugs. I don't think a 14-year old makes the same kind of informed decisions about what to put in his body that an adult would be capable of. I don't really know. Both of the options made sense. What would you have done?
Would have, not would of. Have! BK -- I would have just kept walking. I share your sentiment that 14 is too young for that type of thing, but I would feel that it really wasn't any of my business. If, however, I was friendly with the parents of these kids, I might feel inclined to mention something about it to them. But with strange kids that I don't know, no.
hmmmmmmmmm. drugs are bad. i think those two are dumb as hell for sittin around smokin pot where lots of people can walk by and smell it... all the SMART 14 yr olds i know hang out at the bayou where they wont get caught. if they're dumb enough to make it obvious, then go tell on like an old man... GO TELL ON THEM NOW!!! take pictures of them and hang up posters.
Smoking mar1juana is not a victimless crime. AT ALL. At the point of consumption it may appear that way, but consider the people who profit from it -- two groups I can immediately think of are South American guerrillas and TERRORISTS. Now don't get me wrong, the link is indirect, certainly, but it does help fund illegal operations. Heroin and cocaine are similar stories. Opium fueled the former Taliban economy. A more direct link would be the enormous amount of dollars spent in the US fighting mar1juana and other-drug use. There are victims. It's hard to say that people shouldn't smoke weed, though. Really what is the difference between getting high (drunk) off alcohol, getting high on tobbacco products, and getting high off weed? really not much.
I wouldn't. I mean your not doing any favor's to them. You become untrustworthy. Also it wasn't like they were snorting Coke. And when you buy oil money can goto terrorist groups. How many terrorists have attacked America because of Mary J? I am SUUURRREEE it's a lot.
I of a lot of pot at my house, but I don't of a bong, so I can't of my daily smoke, without ofing something to smoke it with. I don't of papers either.
Azadre -- 1) Buying oil is a necessity for the economy to function, mary jane is not 2) Buying oil is legal, mary jane is not nice try
must be something about apartment complexes and young teens... a couple of months ago, i was getting home from a social gathering with friends on a saturday night... it was only 2am, but there were 2 boys (couldn't be more than 15) wandering around the parking lot of the apt. complex... as i walked to my staircase, one of them comes up to me and says "duuuuude, you got any weed?" i tersely replied "no son, go home and go to bed"... i was in disbelief! not only at the fact that they were only 15, but me (a 24 year old) was acting like an old man! ahhh! anyways, i wouldn't have done anything about the kids you saw. let them learn their lessons the hard way. plus, i wouldn't want any trouble with neighbors... who knows what wacky schemes they could hatch to "plot revenge"
South American guerillas are not making their payroll with money from mar1juana. Most pot consumed in the US is grown in the US. Most of the rest if from Canada and Mexico. Heroin and cocaine are completely different stories. Didn't the Taliban ban (hah) opium? How can dollars spent be victims? Are you saying we are victims because we decide to spend money fighting the war on drugs as it pertains to mar1juana? Couldn't we just decide not to spend that money? Can you be a victim if you have a choice? BK, That is a tough one. I would probably not call the cops. As far as them being underage I don't know what you could say that might change that. Like others have said maybe if you thought they were or their parents were approachable then say something.
Hey fadeaway I wasn't trying to make fun of you, rather the other way around...bad grammar gets on my nerves, too.
Hayes Street-- I realize that South America doesn't import mar1juana, but they do import other drugs. You get my point. don't argue for the sake of arguing. thanks You asked if the Taliban banned opium? answer: no. When you spend $$ fighting the drug war, the "victims" are the taxpayers. I for one would rather spend money on myself rather than some hooligans doing drugs.
Good answers. I didn't want to bias the answers one way or another by saying, "This is what I did" before asking. Now that everyone's had their say... I didn't do anything. Didn't think the kids looked particularly receptive to advice from a complete stranger, figured they were less apt to get into vandalism if they were otherwise occupied, and doubted even getting busted would teach them anything other than, "Don't smoke on the steps of building 20, or you get narc'd on". It is a victimless crime. The overarching consequences of trafficking illegal mar1juana may have a great number of consequences, but the crime itself-- possession-- has no direct victims. That's all that's meant by that term. If a kid is smoking a joint, the crime is possession. There is no direct victim of the crime. If I murder the kid, there is a direct victim-- the kid. And me, once I get to prison and the inmates notice what a good-looking young man I am.
I don't think Hayes was arguing for the sake of arguing. He was making a completely valid point. And a good one at that. I believe you meant to say South America does or doesn't export. You might not like the oil example, Trader Jorge, but we do support illegal operations and corrupt people with many of the dollars we spend. I agree with you that when you spend $ fighting the drug war the taxpayers are "victims." We know oil directly controls our economy and has made people a lot of $, but there are "victims" of the oil industry too, and a lot of them pay with their lives and health instead of their pocketbooks. Azadre does have a point. Your sign and quote that you're a member of a right wing conspiracy is stupid. I tend to fall to the right politically sometimes, too, but to say you support a conspiracy is not a good thing. conspiracy- An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act. An agreement to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
Hmmm. You said mar1juana had victims because South American terrorists get their funding that way. I pointed out you are wrong. Whether SA terrorists get funding from coke and heroin is irrelevant to the discussion about mar1juana. And when I post for sport you'll know it, trust me. "The Taliban rule that ended last fall cut Afghans off from world markets, information and social norms. In that course, it also effectively halted opium production in the provinces. According to the UN’s Global Illicit Drug Trends 2002 report, the Taliban won "a high degree of compliance" with their July 2000 ban on opium production." (http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/business/articles/eav70202.shtml) Oops. And as I pointed out, we do not have to spend money stopping mar1juana, so to claim taxpayers are a 'victim' of their own decisions is a misuse of the word 'victim.'
