1) It costs a crapton of money to enforce the law.

2) It costs another crapton of money to warehouse nonviolent (drugs only) offenders.

3) Keeping marijuana illegal allows organized crime to have a major source of revenue which leads to violence and in Mexico's case, government instability which leads to a lot of deaths and bad stuff which wouldn't happen if the drug was being sold legitimately.

4) It's a low cost way for many people with serious ailments to deal with those ailments without the use of expensive drugs which may have undesirable side-effects (as far as I know, and I've never used the stuff, so I don't have much frame of reference, marijuana doesn't have any undesirable side effects, bad interactions or anything which might give rise to concern).

5) Constant marijuana use isn't nearly as bad for you as continuous alcohol use.

ETA: 6) In the Netherlands, where the stuff is quasi-legal, there is just about no problem with meth and other drug use is drastically lower.

7) An extension of #6: Many terrorist groups and other international bad guys make a lot of money producing or transporting other drugs for use in the United States. Legalization of marijuana would be a huge financial blow.

Again, I've never used the stuff and I never plan to. I do, however, find the arguments for legalization to be pretty compelling. Here in Oklahoma, each year, the Tulsa World orders the statistics from the department of agriculture about the size of the state's marijuana crop. Apparently, just like every other plant, marijuana reflects certain light back into the atmosphere which the government can track and get an idea as to how much there is in any given place. The last time I heard about this story, if marijuana was to be legalized in Oklahoma, after realizing cost-savings in law enforcement and just ordinary sales taxes on in-state sales of the stuff, we could fund common education.

Does that mean legalization could be a good thing? Not necessarily. Are there some excellent arguments urging legalization? I think so.

If I remember correctly, that may be another part of the legalization debate. Thiat is, would it be sold commercially OTC or would pharmaceutical companies sell it for the medicinal purposes? Then I think one would have to consider how to tax it if one of those angles were to be selected. That is partially why the gov't won't do weed the same way they did cigarettes and alchohol because of the medicinal properties attributed to it. They realize that there is money to be made in it, but how?

More car accidents.

Fewer homicides.

Kevin, this is all good information, but making it legal means that someone who smokes it would be able to smoke it around other people. I've never used it either and I never will, but I know the second hand smoke can have some of the same effects it has on the actual user. I'm just a casual drinker (beer only at ball games, dinner, etc.) so I don't know the long term effects of alcohol abuse either. We already have a problem with DUI laws, so why even add to it. I like what you posted though, I guess it's kind of like how prohibition was during the 1920s, but just not on that level. I just think that if they legalize it, that it's going to cause major problems for people who don't use it. I mean I can't even stand the smell of alcohol coming through someone's pores when they've had to much to drink. I don't know how I would accept pot smoke around me, or having contact with someone who's been using it. I think it's a bad idea.

Pass better laws.

It wouldn't be difficult to have a regime wherein it'd be illegal to smoke around children, in public places or in a car. I'm sure there will still be problems with idiots who abuse it, but I really don't foresee those problems being more serious than what we have with alcohol, nor do I see the repercussions to our justice system outweighing the benefits of legalization.

The only folks I think who would really have a legitimate beef are the private prison systems, criminal defense attorneys and to some degree the state's attorneys, but there's always work for a prosecutor.

What indication do you have that use will go up with legalization, or that enforcement will go down?

Yeah, I'm sure there will be some designated areas, but what about just walking around outside smoking it like a cigarette. I jog every morning so what if I pass someone smoking it and I smell it. That's unfair to me.

If more people will have access to it, more people will try it and continue to use it.

Not necessarily. Currently in California, you can't smoke tobacco in most public places, including, I believe, the streets/sidewalks. Smoking marijuana would be included in those smoking bans, leaving people to smoke in dedicated smoking areas (I know they still have cigar clubs and the like, maybe those for marijuana) and at their house. Legalizing or decriminalizing in no way forces people who don't want to use to be around it.

But you currently can't stop those people around you from doing something just because it makes you ill. If I want to drink until I'm stewing in it, that is my prerogative. Your rights end where mine begin.

Well, as long as they smoke it in their homes and not on the streets or sidewalks like you've mentioned.

Yes, you're right, that is your perogative, but don't effect someone elses health by doing it. While you're making it your perogative, let it effect your health and only yours, not mine.

:rolleyes:

^^^whatever.

It's just baffling to me how you think your rights are more important than others'.

I never said my rights are more important than others. It's just that I think it's wrong that my health should suffer because others want to get high. Smoke it in your own homes.