Quote:
Originally Posted by jgd85
San Francisco - The Snitch - Marijuana Advocate 'Flabbergasted' at DEA Raid of S.F. Dispensary
o rly? we already know obama says one thing and does another.
not lets think about why pot should be legalized:
prohibition of alcohol didnt curb usage, it just lead to a less safe product with an artificially high price
that artificially high price makes it a place for gangs to profit, hence mexico drug cartels
the violence from those cartels is directly related to our consumption
the war on drugs has cost nearly 1/2 trillion dollars since it started, yet marijuana use has not gone down
innocent otherwise law abiding citizens goto jail and ruin their lives because of an illegal plant
its an attack on civil liberty
its less harmful than both alcohol and cigarettes, not to mention 'pharmacuticals' like ssri's
it fuels the corrupt prison system in america, we have the highest incariration rate in the world
not to mention the huge economic impacts, marijuana legailzation would be a net gain of >$25 billion a year for the economy
addiction to anything is a SOCIAL MEDICAL PROBLEM, not a criminal one
society as a whole? give me a break. if your out to benefit society, it would make more sense to outlaw alcohol and cigarettes and you know it.
|
Your claim that alcohol consumption didn't go down with prohibition is just a claim and I see no reason to believe it so far. It might be true, but remember that I'm not an american, so I don't know how successful prohibitions have been in your country.
You say a lot of "innocents" are incarcerated. Actually, I checked it up, and the punishment for using marijuana is not that hard. If a cop finds you with a joint, you get a fine - you don't go to prison. There are also drug courts in America where people are given treatment rather than jail time. The people who go to jail are often dealers and almost always have criminal records from before.
Source >>
Who’s Really in Prison for Marijuana?
You also make the argument that prohibiting marijuana is costful to society. You have to remember that legalizing marijuana will probably lead to more use and thus also have a cost on society. Some studies expect higher occurrence of schizophrenia, depression, cognitive deficits and also significantly higher risk in people for developing dependency on other more dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine. Those drugs will, of course, also cost society.
If you don't believe marijuana is harmful for people, you should look at this article that predicts a serious increase in schizophrenia with increased marijuana use.
>>
Scientists warn of cannabis ‘timebomb’
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dr. David Murray, chief scientist of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. "On the Legalization — or Not — of Marijuana." New York Times, Freakenomics. October 30, 2007
Marijuana use is currently the leading cause of treatment need for those abusing or dependent on illegal drugs, is the second leading reason for drug-induced emergency room episodes, and has surpassed alcohol for young people in addictive risk and impact on dependency requiring treatment.
|
Some statistics to back up the man's claim can be found here ->
Trends in Marijuana Treatment Admissions, by State: 1992-2002
Furthermore, you say it's less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes. This idea is very popular and maybe it's true, but so what? It's still bad. To illustrate my point, should a country that allows murder also allow rape because it's not as bad? Allowing something harmful to society doesn't mean you should by default accept everything else which is harmful.
You argue that the US government could make money, I guess by marijuana taxation. Okay, so how are you gonna do this? Are you gonna let the american private market buy into drug farms located in other countries and support the industry that goes on there? Or is some company gonna get a marijuana license to grow themselves and have a marijuana monopoly? Should the government sell marijuana? I'm not saying there are no good solutions, I'm just interested in hearing what they are.
For your claim that it's an attack on liberty, well .. You live in a democratic country. Thus, I assume the majority is against legalization, otherwise it would've been legalized. Since it's not, I guess you don't have the majority yet. Does that qualify as an attack on liberty? I don't think so.
edit :
By the way, I did write that my stance is against. I could've been a bit more general in that I don't necessarily think it has to be depending on what society is like, but in Norway today for example, I see no reason to legalize.