And I was making the point that the laws you seem to support also don't exist in a vacuum. They too cost money and impact society in a negative way.

I already wrote a couple of posts ago that I'm currently on the fence on this thing. I just think the argument that "it's not the government's business what I put in my body" stinks, whether dealing with cannabis, heroin or sugar.

I have perhaps a bad habit of replying against arguments that I don't think make sense, even if I'm not necessarily against the larger picture they promote. The legalization arguments so far in this thread have often been based on egocentric wants, personal observations, health myths and the idea that the legality of something which is bad for us (like alcohol) should automatically justify the inclusion of something else which is bad for us.

The argument that the war on cannabis costs money is the only intelligent pro-legalization argument I can remember anyone make in this thread at the moment.

I think then that you and I are coming at this from two fundamentally and irreconcilably different perspectives. In my view one should be free to do whatever one wants unless in infringes on the freedoms of others. Any law that takes away personal freedoms better have one hell of a good justification for doing so and "it's unhealthy" just doesn't cut the mustard for me.

Then I think you're right in that we think fundamentally different. I believe the way to improve the lives of people in a society is to improve the society they live in. Although it's impossible to know beforehand, if giving up a personal freedom will make the overall quality of life go up in a society, then I think giving up that freedom may be justified.

I accept that in society, I won't be completely free to do whatever and I'm fine with that. I'd take happiness and less personal freedoms over freedom and misery any day. Freedoms we give up are usually freedoms we can do without, not things that are crucial to our quality of life.

On the bolded part we agree. And I feel that having prisons filled to the rafters with people convicted of victimless drug offenses has a negative impact on society not a positive one.

Speaking from the law enforcement side, most cops don't really care about low end drug users like pretty much all of us. Some cops might act like busting some teens smoking pot is the crime of the century, but that is mostly for show. What cops dislike about drugs is the violence that inevitably follows it. Where there is drugs you will find drug violence and or property crime. While violence and property crime mostly manifests to higher tiers of drugs, but when even with pot the violence exists. I also don't really believe that legalizing drugs will lower the violence at all because the dealers will be hanging onto whatever they can hang onto. It would be like if Wal-Mart was coming to town and the town's small business owners took it upon themselves to kill the Wal-Mart store manager and employees. I know I'm extrapolating a little bit, but I know for a fact that a lot of pot dealers here in Nevada are shitting themselves today waiting for the ballots to be counted up in California. If drugs and drug dealers had a better reputation in the public's trust then I think the idea of legalizing drugs would be more favorable.



A slightly naive look, but it does contain some truth.

I agree with that. I just think it's (for me) so hard to grasp the full scope of consequences legalization would have in the US. Is it a given that it would reduce crime? If nothing changes except it's turned legal, then crime should go down. If private companies are going to grow it and the government is going to tax it in an effort to control it, then the crime today could simply turn into black market crime instead. Under such a system, if the amount of cannabis consumers increases, then so could black market crime. That's not a prediction, just one of many possibilities for the future.

The reason I'm currently on the fence is that I don't really know what legalization would entail. The effect it will have on crime is one of the things I don't know, but there are plenty of others. F.ex is it going to be grown in the US or are companies gonna get their product from other countries? In my opinion, it's details like that which could turn a good idea into a bad one and vice versa. There could be a way to do it which I could support and another I'd be against, but I'm not sure what the general agenda of the pro-legalization people is.

California's Prop 19 has failed, there will be no American legalization measures this year. Exit polls show 46% for, 50% against, a record number of supporters but still not enough to pass it. Trends show that if it were to be put on the ballot next election, it would pass. Many people say that the poor writing of the prop is to blame for the loss, I have to say it was very poorly written, which persuaded many swing votes to go to the opposition.

Pounds and pounds of marijuana come out of Humboldt County California every day.

No one is stopping it.

Demand is the reason.

The governemnt wants a piece, and that is the whole story. The original letter that started this movement from the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors to the Governor of California explicitly states this outright. ~~~"There is a multi-billion dollar industry going on all around us. The governement is broke. We need to legalize and tax it."

So lets not get greedy and jump on the first weed law that comes our way.

No, you can't absolutely control the growth and flow, and licensure of weed. If its OK to legalize it, lets do it in a way thats good for the people, not some jack ass and his cronies.

I'll wait for a bill that doesn't give someone 5 years in prison for smoking a joint on their own back patio in an apartment complex where someone under 21 years old lives in another apartment.

The taxation opportunity for the government is undeniable. Ok, let them have theirs. But lets not **** the people in the ass to do it.

You seem to completely detach the government from the people, but you live in a democracy. Doesn't money to the government mean more money to the people, possibly in the shape of better public schools and roads? That's how we'd see it over here at least.

I think that's one of the ways in which the experience of living in a big country differs from living in a small country, the effects of one's tax dollars aren't as readily apparent. Keep in mind that MAStudent's state alone has many times more people in it than your entire country. It makes for a very different living situation.

^

I agree. Plus, if we were a true democracy I feel everyone should have a say in where they think their tax dollars should go. For example, during tax season have a big list of stuff the government might want to use it for, and check off the ones you want to contribute towards. As it stands, my tax dollars could very well be going towards a war and not schools, which is something I don't agree with.

I am not sure why population size (if you could isolate the effect of just "size") should matter so much. If you tax 1 million people 10 dollar, you get 10 million dollars f.ex to fund public schools. If you tax 10 million people, you get 100 million dollars. In both cases, the return from the government to the people is generally the same. That's a very simplified example, but you know. Rather, I think other things turn the government into a "they" rather than an "us". Class differences, cultural differences, money spent on war/debt (little or no return to the people), the fact the minority who don't get their wish in a country of hundreds millions population often equals a huge amount of people, etc.

I could write a lot about how I think all that affects the US, but I'd be getting too far off topic. To get back on track, if you don't see the possibility of cannabis taxation as a return to the people, then I'd think that would sway most people towards a no. I'm not that sceptical to taxation, though, I think it can be good. Here in Norway, they just raised taxes on "unhealthy" foods, something I'm fine with. Not only does it generate money to the government (us), but it should help give people a little extra motivation to eat healthy which will be good for all of us. I just wish they'd reduce taxes on healthy food like fruit or vegetables, but I think that's right around the corner. ;)

Anyways, cannabis taxation could be a return to the people, although I agree with Duga that I'd be a bit pissed if my tax money funded a war. I know how expensive some of the cannon ammunition on our navy vessels are and the thought of a year of wages worth of tax money disappearing in a single cannon blast is in itself frustrating .. And then of course you get the associated suffering.

Does prohibition work? I dont think so. Drugs are more widely used now that ever before, more drugs are imported and sold on than ever before. All the current drug laws are doing is permitting and causing the drug trade to remain a lucrative source of economic opportunity for street dealers, drug kingpins and all those willing to engage in the often violent, illicit, black market trade. Where's the sense in that?

Maybe the way forward is to legalize drugs and educate people on the pros and cons of every drug, the hard line anti drug people would probably need the most education. The people who kill themselves through OD's or ruin their lives through a drug addiction are doing that anyway, if they became legal i really dont think it would become fashionable to become a heroin addict. The governments of this world have made a rod for their own back on the legalization of drugs issue through their own propaganda, there are billions of people in this world that hate drugs and would never vote to legalize them. If those billions were educated on the subject properly how many of them would change their minds, safe in the knowledge that they thought they knew alot on this issue but after learning realised they knew nothing.

I havent even touched freedom of choice.

I'm not sure if this problem has been touched upon in this thread, but what about driving while stoned? From what I've been told, you can be tested positive for Marijuana use for pretty much a week after having used it, even if you haven't used it since. So what if you get in an accident and have additional charges/expenses filed against you because you tested positive for driving under the influence but weren't actually under the influence?

Furthermore, without a reliable way to determine just how high someone is while driving, I think legalized Marijuana will cause a lot more people to rationalize driving while high. Which, as studies apparently show, reduces reaction time and could lead to an increased number in vehicular accidents.

^

I'm sure there will be a transition time where things get hectic, but I feel once everyone has eased into the idea of it being legal the driving issue will be no different than drinking and driving.

As it stands, though, weed and driving is a lot different than drinking and driving. It reduces reaction time, yes, but also encourages "paranoid" driving...meaning people generally drive slower. I have not once gotten in the car with someone who has smoked and they start speeding...they are always under the limit. If I know someone smokes a lot and they want to drive, I generally don't stop them. It's no more dangerous than someone who just took their daily meds and drove to work. A new smoker, though, I will tell not to drive. Usually if they are that baked, though, they don't really want to drive in the first place.

Slow drivers can be just as dangerous as speeding drivers, I cannot count the number of times I've nearly been hit by someone while trying to merge onto the freeway at 45 mph because the ******* in front of me was too busy fingering their pussy to enter on at 65 mph. Driving while being impaired on ANYTHING is dangerous and should not be done.

Children know that alcohol is legal, they see you and others drink it, do the majority of children at school get drunk at break time or on the way to school.

Why would they do it with cannabis. If they were going to do it they'd do it anyway whether its legal or not, one thing that is a fact is cannabis being illegal hasnt stopped people using it, in fact more people use it now than ever.

The only we'll see what can happen if a class full of school kids eats cannabis laced chocolate brownies is if it actually happened, the only thing you'd hear about it on the news is the teacher saying what a pleasant lesson it was.

I don't think I would ever want cannabis to ever be without a certain element of subversiveness. Even though smoking herb is marginally accepted within our culture, It being illegal just makes it that much more appealing to me.

I think here's the big issue... America is based off the premise of being the 'land of the free.' Millions and millions of people migrated here for different freedoms that their homelands didn't provide.

So to me, it doesn't make sense that the 'land of the free' doesn't allow an individual to do something that is not harmful to others. Or even really harmful to themselves depending on how the marijuana is smoked/eaten.

Right now, a lot of the older politicans came from the era where marijuana was associated with communism and other negative things... As the years roll on, it's inevitable that marijuana will eventually be legalized, but it's going to take the older generations dying off or losing power for it to happen. But just the voting on Prop 19 is a big step towards it. It's just a matter of time, hopefully sooner than later.

None of the arguments against weed really make sense. Know why it's a 'gateway drug'? It's because people who smoke weed eventually get harder drugs pushed on them or offered to them by their weed dealers. In Amsterdam, the percentage of people into heavy drugs is less than it is here, and they have marijuana legal. Because they've seperated marijuana from harder drugs. You don't have dealers pushing weed AND coke or heroin.

Pretty much everyone thinks it should be legalized on every message board I've posted on. I've always been interested in the prison systems and such, and after taking a few courses I realize how negative of an impact the illegalization of weed has on society as a whole. Prisons are already over-crowded, mixing dangerous criminals with drug offenders. This leads to criminals getting released early due to good behavior and stuff, cause they need all the prison space they can get. There's thousands and thousands of people filling our jails for nothing other than marijuana offenses.

Even if it weren't legalized, and just decriminalized, the government wouldn't have to waste tax dollars on the 'war on drugs.' A 'war' which has failed. Billions of dollars go towards destroying marijuana fields and catching those who grow it in mass. Of course, it doesn't help that the government spends millions every year creating false propoganda like Above the Influence campaigns.

/corny intro

That point is very much subject to debate and evidence.

It's a historical trend that younger people tend to be more liberal and older people tend to be more conservative, regardless of whatever generation we currently happen to live in. Your "dying off" theory may not have any substance as you provide no additional reason to support the assertion that our generation is somehow more liberal than past generations.

Yes, and they've also got an entire subculture devoted to marijuana use. Hardly the most productive thing for society, isn't it? Though I suppose that isn't a very fair argument since leisure time isn't meant to be necessarily "productive". But are you forgetting the physical damage that smoking causes?

So?

This argument irritates me. You're essentially shifting the blame for the problem of overcrowded prisons from the actual drug offenders who willingly broke the law onto the "state" or the "government", whatever that means. We live in a democracy and we have a great judicial system. If you disagree with one of our laws, you have plenty means of challenging it, as Proposition 19 in California has demonstrated. Choosing to break these laws, however, seems like the poorest course of action.

*Source? Such statements are, until further notice, unfounded and accomplish nothing.

For example: "Every year, millions of teenagers across the nation cite the 'Above the Influence' campaign as a primary source of motivation for keeping their lives free of illegal drug use."

Such sweeping generalized statistics are already difficult to interpret and apply; ones without evidence are completely useless.

Is there any kind of point to this post?

Not a world of that made sense Vocal Bass.

Sure it did! I understand where VocalsBass is coming from. I choose not to smoke marijuana, and I never want to try it. Frankly, I don't see the benefit.

Of course you don't see the benefit if you've never tried it.

Do you see the benefit of seasonings on your food?

Yes, I read your previous post. The post I quoted still doesn't make much sense.

You say corny intro... I just call it factual info.

If I am sitting in my house smoking bud from a vaporizer, how am I harming anyone else? Or even myself? And even if I were harming myself, does that even play into the debate on whether it should be legal? Everyone knows how deadly alcohol and tobacco products are, yet they are illegal. Anything in excess is harmful. Too much sugar, caffeine, etc. All legal substances. The government has already set a precedent that the public's health is not their main concern - or else things like tobacco would be illegal.
Try to remember what I say and then what you say. I don't need to support the assertion that our generation is more liberal because that isn't what I am saying. That is what you are saying... See, the older generations grew up in a time when anti-marijuana movies were being created to falsely represent the affects of marijuana. Many people believed those 20-30 movies at the time (See Reefer Madness for an example). Now we know it was all propaganda and lies. The older generations also grew up in a time when marijuana was associated to communism by politicans. My generation wasn't exposed to these lies.

Eh, we have a good judicial system compared to many other countries, but it could be improved a lot. The prison system is a joke to me. A lot of ex-convicts just wind up back in jail. Most go to prison and meet more criminals, create networks, and hone their crime skills... Not sure really why that argument irritates you, it's a fact that prisons are over-crowded. Sometimes you have deadly criminals housed in a gymnasium with bunk beds. Imprisoning non-violent drug users just makes the over-crowding worse. Yes, they commited a crime, but we are discussing legalizing marijuana. Illegalizing obviously just leads to more criminals. I guess it comes down to... Why NOT legalize it?

Like you said, it's leisure activity...and whats wrong with a subculture of marijuana use? They can use it responsibly and Amsterdam has lower rates of drug use among teens and lower rats of hard drug use. Because like I said, they seperate the weed from the cocaine, heroin, etc. Smoking anything is bad for your health. Used from a vaporizer or eaten and there's not much health risk. Not that health risk really even matters, the government makes a ton of money annually by selling things that are bad for peoples health. If somebody chooses to damage their lungs, why is that a problem to anyone else anyways? Like I said, this is the 'land of the free' and yet you aren't able to do what you want to your own body.

As for Above the Influence, the government will tell you that it doesn't work. What a waste of money, not to mention their false respresentation of weed. The government has lied for years to the public and continue to do so. I do not know why. Assuming you don't read the entire article, let me quote on page 10:

"Westat’s evaluation found no significant favorable effects of campaign exposure on marijuana initiation among non-drug-using youth or cessation and declining use among prior marijuana users."

After admitting the campaign has not worked whatsoever, George Bush still increased the funding by 130 MILLION dollars. I've found numbers at around 1.5 billion dollars spent on the campaign. Regardless of the exact number, I think it's safe to say that it is a HUGE waste of money to accomplish nothing.

The war on drugs has failed because marijuana use is still very prevalent, especially to teens and college students. What have we really accomplished with this 'war on drugs.' It's a campaign that appeals to soccer moms and old white conservative white guys. And it's pretty obvious the government has to spend tons of money destroying fields and arresting and imprisoning people who are only arrested for marijuana offenses.

The government has been the ultimate fail with how they've handled marijuana for decades.

Sorry for the novel.

In short, you are wrong.

This is your brain on drugs.

I've heard that first argument over and over again! Marijuana being more potent today. I don't know what you had, but I've never smoked any Marijuana that gets me paralyzed.

The second thing I just though was funny. If you don't know that most high schools, at least where I live, more than 40% of the students have tried drugs, at least the ones who admit it. It is ironic that alcohol is legal and pot is not, one has the potential to kill, and one doesn't. Which one is legal?

In my opinion, it isn't legal due to the history behind it, and how it has never been seen as anything but bad. They say the word Marijuana, and people think that it is a deadly drug, that you get addicted in one hit, you go insane, and all that nonsense. But when people talk about alcohol, people just see it as a drink, a recreational thing, a relaxing thing, it sucks.

I'd like to know where you can find this highly potent - paralyzing weed on the streets.


I need to know for...ummm... research.

Yes. Assuming I've never tried seasoning my food, I must consider the pros and cons of doing so. Essentially, it will either enhance the flavor or detract from it. There is a possible benefit in using food seasoning.

However, I don't see a possible benefit in smoking marijuana that wouldn't be obtained from similar, less dangerous/illegal activities. Call me boring.

Ah, didn't realize you'd never tried it. That explains a little.

Part of the problem is the 'mystique' around weed... I remember in highschool it was like... Everyone knew who had smoked and who didn't and it was like this mini big deal of sorts. Like Ooooo he smokes weed!!! When I was like 16 I was the same way. I was like, i dont need drugs or booze to have fun! Then I pulled my head out of my ass and realized that though I don't NEED it, it's still something very fun.

Why not try it though? Ok, if you try it a few times and dislike it, then don't smoke it if there is no benefit. If it's an anti-smoking in general thing, then I understand that. But you know you can't get addicted or die from it, so why not give it a toke and see what it's all about instead of living with this weird mystique about it

Because trying things for the sake of trying things is terrible logic, in my opinion. Until I'm presented with a convincing and worthwhile reason to try pot, I will abstain from doing so.

It enhances everything you do. I look at weed just as the ultimate enhancer.

Go smoke a blunt then raid the fridge. Or listen to some music and really feel it. Or light up and then have sex and you'll see why millions of people smoke the herb.

There's nothing wrong with that. If you have no interest in it, there's no reason you should feel compelled to do it.

On the other hand, three friends of mine (one being very close) all tried weed for the first time last year. They all hated it. Anecdotal evidence for how awesome weed is doesn't cut it for me.

Well at least you narrowed it down.

I'd recommend to nobody to try weed just once. You don't really know what to expect when you toke at first. The first like handful of times I was kinda confused as to what I was feeling. A lot of people don't really know what they are doing the first time or two either so I don't think they really get the full experience of a bud high.

Some people just don't want to smoke it (like you). That's cool, nothin wrong with that. But you have to ask yourself as to why millions of people smoke it if there is no benefit. I can't think of many things I would rather do sober than do stoned.

It's nothing personal against you or other people that smoke weed. There are two things that I've pretty much resolved to never try. One is weed, the other is slot-machine gambling. :p: