Legalize Marijuana?
 

I say "Yes", and tax it silly.

Re: Legalize Marijuana?
 

Agree.

I was going to post a new thread asking: Are drugs the big problem? Or are the laws against drugs the big problem?

Look at the big mess in prohibition . . .

However I agree, legalize pot and tax it like cigarettes . . .

Maybe we can take a lot of people off more harmful anti anxieties and antidepressants.

I agree with the legalizing part, but I question the ability to tax it. Taxation would go hand in hand with regulation, which involves more government and they already screw up most of what they do. How will you tax it? Will those who grow their own be expected to report production for taxation? Will pot be grown on large, regulated farms? Will those who fail to report become criminals? Legalize it yes, but don’t let government run wild.

Legalize it and the big corporations will run all the little guys out of business.

It's easier to tax a few big guys than a bunch of little ones.

You're probably right. Is that really what we need? I'd say no to the tax idea. But I'm a libertarian at heart. Let the little guy grow his own without government involvement.

i agree

Re: Legalize Marijuana?
 

The only good argument I've ever heard to keep it illegal is what it would do economically to those in the law enforcement community. Think of how many folks make their livings keeping this illegal. Prison guards, DEA, cops..

On the other hand, it's costing ridiculous sums of money to keep it illegal. I don't know of a single person who couldn't get it if they really wanted it.

For the records, I've never touched the stuff in my life. I also don't see the harm in it.

Re: Re: Legalize Marijuana?
 

Think about how much safer our streets would be if those resources were used against violent criminals? Locking such people up carries an economic benefit as well.

Not sure whether I'd be for it or against it, I simply don't bother trying to figure it out because it isn't going to happen, except maybe for medicinal purposes. The reasons I say this are:

1) It's almost illegal to smoke cigarettes anywhere but in your home or car.. as they crack down more and more on this, I don't see them adding a new legal substance. Heck, they are trying to figure out how to tax foods that are high in fat and simple sugars!

2) Too difficult to measure "intoxication" if someone is driving under the influence of marijuana. There's no breathalyzer equivalent. Results of a urine test take too long to get someone off the road right away and don't prove that the person was intoxicated while driving since it stays in your system for 30 days (longer if you're overweight since it's stored in fat cells).

3) New studies show more harmful effects all the time. Smoking one joint is equivalent to smoking 20 cigarettes as far as damage to the lungs

4) As noted by ktsnake, drug busts are funding an awful lot of local police departments in everything they get to impound and then sell in auction.

5) I don't see a big corporation taking this on as a business given the huge lawsuits holding companies liable for health related problems caused by the products they sell.

I just don't see it happening, except possibly for medicinal purposes in which case it is usually in the form of a pill.

Dee

Re: Re: Re: Legalize Marijuana?
 

Amen. Or even concentrating on other drugs...

Obviously make it legal. I think it's ridiculous that the government tries to restrict our personal liberties to such a large extent. Honestly, if someone wants to get high, whose business is it but their own? Unless they're harming someone when they're high, I have no problem whatsoever with it. I think that the goverment spends way too much time messing with people's lives when they should be worrying about bigger problems...

Up here they do what are known as R.I.D.E. (Reduce Impared Driving Everywhere) checks, basically just spot checks for drunk drivers. This year the Ontario Provincial POlice who perform the majority of RIDE checks have a new system to check for people who are driving stoned, and then eqivicate it to the Blood Alcohol Content scale. I am not sure exactly how it works, but i have seen some press coverage of it lately. Pot smoking is a relativly legal thing here (for a while during the summer it actually was legal), it is in the process of being "decriminalized" and eventually will result in getting a ticket as opposed to jail time etc. I support the legalization, i really don't think a kid wo is 17 and smokes dope should have a record for the rest of his life.

Ah... you've hit on a problem though. As far as I know roadside spot checks are not legal in the USA, so enforcement is a little more difficult and complecated.

On a side note Montreal's first Pot Cafe opened yesterday.... with two arrests for possession. Basically the Cafe didn't sell it, but it supported the smoking by people who borught their own (and as long as it is under 30g it's falls into a legal grey area).

I live near Detroit, about 2 miles from Lake Erie and they've been doing spot checks for illegal immigrants being smuggled in from Canada near a couple marinas. I was stopped like 3 times when they first started but they may have abandoned the program because I haven't been stopped in several months now. They were doing that under the Patriot Act.

Occasionally you hear about a drunk driving road block, but they are rare and usually meet a lot of protest. (They have lowered the blood alcohol that marks "intoxication" in Michigan too).

Someone brought up a point about a 17 year old caught with marijuana not having a record.. I'd bet that the "smoking marijuana age" would be the same as the drinking age.

Dee

As noted above, I think they are.

Even if not, cops can be very creative in discovering "probable cause" to stop you.

Like a broken tail light, or driving one mile per hour over the speed limit.

True probable cause has become something of a joke unless you have some serious money . . .

NOt like ciggarettes. Like alcohol. You can buy it at specially lisenced stores, or a bar. You can drink at a bar, resturant with a lisence, or in the privacy of your own home. I think that is how Cannibis Sativa should be treated.

Also, certian strands of Canibis Satvia, known as hemp, can be used to make a lot of durable products. Like plastic, only cheaper to make and better for the enviornment.

I hate quoting big posts, but you're wrong about everything. Post one study that shows one joint=20 ciggarettes, if you can find one, and I'll post 20 that will prove its wrong.

EDITED: You were right about the urine test thing. But driving stoned isn't as bad as driving drunk. Its okay to do it.

I think Dee made some great points regarding the logistics of legalization, especially the one about all of the legislation regarding smoking cigarettes in public. I think decriminalization of the personal and private use of marijuana would be the only way we'd ever see any reform of marijuana laws. I don't think we'll see any reform in our lifetime, however.

And regarding your request for articles - looking online it was hard to find anything that wasn't biased. I found these 2, you can determine their credibility:

4 May 2000
"...The researchers believe that the way in which marijuana and tobacco are smoked is the key. A pull on a marijuana joint compared with a cigarette usually involves a volume two-thirds larger, a depth of inspiration one third greater and a holding of the breath four times longer, write the investigators. Inhalation of three to four marijuana cigarettes a day produces histological changes comparable to inhalation of 20 cigarettes a day..."(http://www.ms-network.com/newsflash/show.asp?ID=47)

and

"Scientists believe that marijuana can be especially harmful to the lungs because users often inhale the unfiltered smoke deeply and hold it in their lungs as long as possible. Therefore, the smoke is in contact with lung tissues for long periods of time, which irritates the lungs and damages the way they work. Marijuana smoke contains some of the same ingredients in tobacco smoke that can cause emphysema and cancer. In addition, many marijuana users also smoke cigarettes; the combined effects of smoking these two substances creates an increased health risk." (http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm)

I meant roadside spotchecks were every car goes thorugh a checkpoint set-up by the cops, and everyone is checked..... not a cop pulling you over.

They set these RIDE checks up around the weekend, or major sporting events on some common route to the highway or just a main road. There will be about twenty cops processing the cars as they come through.... they will ask "have you been drinking", if they smell booze, you say yes, or they think you have - "please drive over to that officer over there for a breathalizer test"; along with ID and insurance.

From what cops (on my hockey team) have told me if they smell pot they'll ask you to pull over to the side and will administer a roadside sobriety test (reflexes, reaction time, hand-eye coordination). They have mentioned that they have been catching alot more people messed up on pot lately, who all insist that they can't be charged with drinking and driving (it's not that up here, it's Driving Under the Influence).

I personally think that idiots that drive stoned should have they book thrown at them just like idiots who drive drunk.

They have been doing roadside checks like these in California for years. The checks have been challenged in court a few times.

RIDE checks have been challeneged here as well, we just happend to have a loophole written into our charter of rights and freedoms.

I don't have time to hunt for articles and get into a big debate about the harms of marijuana to the body, but some of it is just common sense. Inhaling anything into the lungs that isn't clean air is harmful to your lungs if you do it often enough. Whether it is pollution, inhalants, cigarettes or marijuana. Our bodies have to process those toxins and it's tough on all the organs involved. If it goes from the lungs to the urine and you know a little about physiology you can figure out how many organs have to work harder to rid yourself of them. Someone will, I'm sure, come up with an arguement to this next statement but.. In my experience, I've yet to see anything that alters the way the brain works be something "healthy" for people.

As for articles that will counteract this, sure, they are out there. There are also studies that alcohol (a glass of wine a day) can be helpful in preventing heart disease too, but alcohol also has toxic effects to the body. I've also seen articles about how doctors treated cigarettes years ago and I've even seen articles from the early 20's where doctors were recommending smoking to reduce stress! We know more now.

I happen to be a smoker and think that if we choose to abuse our bodies, it's our choice but there are factions out there who think if you suffer health problems related to smoking that government funded health insurance shouldn't cover it because you chose to do that to yourself. The amount of money in health care spent on smoking related health issues is astronomical.

I don't think the government or big corporations are going to take on the risks of legalizing marijuana.

I can see some advantage in having it regulated because marijuana bought on the street is often laced with other things and regulating it would ensure that a user would know what they are getting.

Dee

Almost anything out there can cause cancer. For years, people were saying nutra sweet is a great substitute for sugar. People are now realizing that it is a carcinogen. I'm not saying that it's ok to smoke cigarettes or do any other unhealthy things. I just don't think it's the governments place to tell people what they should do to their bodies. If they want to smoke something that could possibly cause cancer, that's their own choice. Let people know the risks of certain things and leave it at that. If we tried to get the government to ban all that is harmful for people, there would be very few things out there that we could consume.

In recent years, I have become more and more convinced that marijuana should be legal. More so for economic reasons. It will reduce the amount of arrests and people thrown in jail. I know people who now have a record for carrying an 1/8 on them. I'd say the majority people who are caught with marijuana are thrown into a detention center rather than a hard core prison. Still, let's save tax payers money and put real criminals into the detention centers.

While it's probably best to drive sober :) , Billy is somewhat right in his opinion that it is better to drive stoned than drunk. For many people, marijuana opens their senses so that they can concentrate more. I think I remember someone posting on GC a few years back about how they like to take exams stoned just because they're able to process the information better. You just can't get an effect like that from alcohol.

ETA:
On my way to lunch this afternoon, I was stopped behind a car at a traffic light. There were about 3 people in a Civic. The driver blew out a whole puff of smoke that filled the whole car. I was thinking to myself that the puff of smoke was too big to be from a cigarette. That's when I saw the driver pass back a bong to the person in the back seat. I couldn't believe it. Now, they could've been smoking some legal herbal stuff but I highly doubt it. Meanwhile, there was a cop sitting at the other side of the intersection. Either these people have some big cajones or they're just stupid.

While I totally agree with you on this the main argument behind banning smoking in public places is that second hand smoke can cause cancer as well. Smoking in enclosed public areas is banned in the entire state of Delaware and I think California, and is also banned in New York City and I'm sure many counties across the nation (I know mine is one :mad: ). Anyway, the same would go for marijuana smoke. Second hand mj smoke effects others, not just those smoking. Which is why I agree with Dee that the government wouldn't make it legal to smoke in hashish bars like it is in other countries. Marijuana could however be legalized for private use.

Smoking is banned in enclosed places in Florida as well. A new law went into affect back in July that said smoking was prohibited anywhere that served food. So, smoking is still allowed in bars and clubs.
It's still weird to me to go into a restaurant and not have them ask, "Smoking or non?" I habitually will say, "There's of 2 us for non-smoking" forgetting that there's no longer a smoking section.
I'm really enjoying this new law. I no longer worry that there's going to be someone only a few feet away puffing on a cig while I'm trying to eat.

Where I am there's no smoking at all. Not in bars, not in clubs, anywhere. So you can only imagine the uprising against marijuana smoke in public. The county argued that it was for the benefit of employees, but many bar employees are complaining that they've lost business, tips, etc.

For the record I don't smoke, that includes cigarettes, marijuana or anything else, nor do I do any other illegal drugs.

However I do believe it should be legalized for many of the aforementioned reasons. The positives vastly outweight the negatives.
1] The taxes that could be raised for the sale of marijuana through sales tax.
2] The reduction of expenses that are incurred when a person is incarcerated. It costs taxpayers $30,000 to incarcerate a person for 1 year, think about all the people who are locked up for drug related offenses and think how much money could be saved.
3] The taxes raised could be used to offset any ill health effects of smoking.
4] It would keep the product pure, i.e. people only buy weed not weed laced with drug XYZ.
5] Hemp would thus be legalized since it is banned under the same law marijuana is banned under. Hemp is much cheaper to grow and has no known natural predators [insects that eat it]
6] Less use and thus less run off of insecticides.

The reasons legalization won't happen are:
1] Cotton industry would not let it happen as they would lsoe money [this includes the companies that make the insecticides]
2] The junk science with the research that says that it is more harmful than smoking cigarettes without any prove, that it is a gateway drug etc.
3] The tobacco industry would see it as competition instead of embracing it and starting to grow it so they too would fight it.
4] Society has to change and people have to accept responsibility for their actions so that the fear of being sued for people using a product in excess is reduced.

just my $.02

-Mark

well, the law's the law. if it's illegal to have possession of pot and you are caught with it, face up to it and face the consequences.

this second paragraph really got to me. why do people think that they have free reign to do whatever they want? if you want to smoke pot at home and stay there, fine. but when you smoke pot and then get into a car, MY life can be in danger. that's where the line needs to be drawn. just because you want to have fun doesn't mean you can drive a 3000 pound car with impaired vision and reflexes.

smoke it if you want. hell, kill yourself with it for all i care. but once you get into that car, your ass belongs in jail.

Just wanted to explain myself. The paragraph I wrote wasn't from personal experience. I have never driven drunk nor stoned. I don't smoke...it's just not for me. If others want to, that's fine. I hope that everyone is smart of enough to not get into a car if they're not sober. But, if I had to choose the lesser of two evils, people who have smoked usually are more in control than someone who is drunk. (usually being the keyword as it's not the same for everyone)

It's true that the law is the law but there are people out there that don't want to face up to the consequences because they don't feel the laws are just.

I personally don't feel the laws surrounding pot are jreasonable and I think people should keep fighting to have them changed. Many popular ideas begin as an unpopular opinion.

If alcohol and cigarettes are legal I feel pot should be legal as well.

Feeling or even knowing that a law is unjust is no reason not to live up to the consequences of breaking it. Civil disobedience is at its best when those who break the law are willing to pay with their time or money or even their lives. Possibly the best modern American example of this would be Dr. King who did not try to avoid the consequences of his actions, nor, did he whine while he was in jail.


Legalize pot but don't allow the government to grow through its regulation.

I understand what you are saying but it's still true that some people do not want to or feel like living up to the consequences of being caught with "the pot." ;)

I'm just speaking from experience because I have several friends that smoke pot on a regular basis and a few of them have been busted before. One of them received a $350 ticket for having 1 1/2 grams on him (that's not even enough to get some people blazed).

Now if you get caught totin' a pound around you should probably own up to that because you know you are up to no good.

I agree with you. The fines suck! I know I wouldn't want one. I still think old fashion civil disobedience on a large scale might get the message across. Maybe I'm wrong. Add civil disobedience to ballot initiatives, along with getting our elected officials in line and we may have something. I know, getting elected officials in line is a bit of a dream at times.

I am 100%, unequivocably, in favor of the decriminalization of marijuana. A lot of time and money in this drug war (which is a big effing joke) is spent prosecuting users of a relatively harmless drug, when that time and energy could be used in preventing recidivism and treating hard drug addicts (like crack or heroin).

If it's going to be legal, the government should definitely be involved in it. If they're not, then it can't be taxed and there are no real benefits to legalization.

Decriminalization for personal and private is a more realistic option and IMO the only way we'll see the reform of marijuana laws.

My points were actually not meant to be my personal argument for or against, but to point out that societal trends and political culture right now don't seem to be even close to legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana. There has been at least one state that legalized it for medicinal purposes, after a ballot proposal and the Supreme Court struck it down saying a state can't override federal drug laws.

Dee

AGDee
 

But where does the Constitution give the Federal Government the right to regulate drugs? It doesn't that's why it is a states right's issue due to the 10th admendment:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved
to the states respectively, or to the people."

So if any State wanted to fight the Supreme Court they can....b/c the power of our government lies with the States not the bureaucracy they call the "Federal Government"

Just my $.02
-Mark