| Author | Message | ||
     newjerz Citizen Username: Newjerz Post Number: 60 Registered: 5-2003  |
I was thinking about this the other day and I thought it might be good fodder for the soapbox. I think that legalizing marijuana would be a good idea for this country for three reasons. 1. It would strip gangs and particularly urban gangs of a lot of their power, wealth, influence (just as the repeal of prohibition deprived the Italian mafia of lots of revenue and power). 2. It could be taxed like cigarattes and provide huge revenue for state treasuries. Also money would be saved on enforcement. 3. It could be regulated and would provide jobs to legal hard working people. Plus it could become a huge cash crop for certain states with the right climates. As long as people understood that it is not acceptable to come to work high or operate machinery under the influence (just the way it is unacceptable to do be drunk on the job or drink and drive), I don't think it would be a big deal. Plus it is not addictive so there is no slippery slope towards harder more dangerous drugs. Since most conservatives are not teetotalers, I don't see any principled reason why they wouldn't adopt its legalization under such circumstances. | ||
| crazyguggenheim Citizen Username: Crazyguggenheim Post Number: 422 Registered: 2-2002  |
sounds good to me! Call me crazy | ||
| #9Dream Citizen Username: 9dream Post Number: 541 Registered: 12-2002  |
It would also provide a needed boost for the cookie and snack cake industries. And did anyone actually ever call it "mary jane?" :-) | ||
| Charles A. Moody Citizen Username: Chedron Post Number: 12 Registered: 8-2003 |
I'm against legalizing pot because it's a very dangerous drug. It's addicting for children and often leads to harder drugs. Adults who smoke to much of it put their lives and other lives at risk everytime they drive or handle heavy machinery. I've also heard Pot "might" possibly cause Mad Cow Disease. Like I tell my children, only dopes smoke dope. I'll stick to a cigar here and there, but that's about it. | ||
| -af Citizen Username: Java_drinker Post Number: 254 Registered: 8-2002 |
safer than cigs and booze, so, what's the question? | ||
| buzzsaw Citizen Username: Buzzsaw Post Number: 1012 Registered: 5-2001 |
I'm in. Where would the Maplewood head shop be? | ||
| greenetree Supporter Username: Greenetree Post Number: 1681 Registered: 5-2001 |
Newjerz- In 1977, my English class was assigned the topic "should marijuana be legalized?" for a reserach paper. Citing the exact reasons you did, I argued both sides, concluding that legalization was better for the community, but that decriminalization would be better for teens who could not afford taxed products as easily (I said it was 1977)!. Did you steal my paper?  BTW- I rented "Reefer Madness" last night for ha-has. It's such a bad film that it's great! Takes a lot to reach that kind of cult classic stature! | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 320 Registered: 2-2002 |
Here is my fodder on the subject: I recently read *Reefer Madness* -by Eric Schlosser. -An excellent and thoroughly researched book which enumerates how tragically ridiculous the pot laws are in this country. There is absolutely no consistency between state and federal laws, sense of proportion when creating or applying them (particularly when compared to violent offenders). or meaningful usefulness when you consider that the government cannot even keep pot out of armed camps, (our prison system) because of the corruptive power of it's illegality. Guys who get busted for weed spend their time in prison smoking it. Pot is already already far and away the largest cash crop in this country, (forget imports), -well ahead in billions from the number #2 crop-corn , and who benefits from these riches? Congress and the Senate have passed a number of laws allowing random drug tests in the work environment yet curiously exempting themselves from the same scrutiny. One final observation: I was watching a program on the tube the other night which consisted of a live camera in a domestic violence courtroom. Almost every story began with the words: "we where having a few drinks". | ||
| #9Dream Citizen Username: 9dream Post Number: 542 Registered: 12-2002 |
Charles -- Nobody in their right mind would recommend legalizing pot for use by minors, or making "DWH" (driving while high) legal. It's not legal for minors to smoke or drink either, and the "heavy machinery" risks you cited are all true of alcohol as well. I think the "gateway" thing has been pretty well debunked as well. Mad Cow disease? Really? Cows smoking weed, how 'bout that.... | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 1093 Registered: 5-2001 |
society is paying an absolutely ludicrous amount of money keeping people in prison on pot-related crimes. Wanna lower your taxes? Let's stop throwing money at this non-existent problem. | ||
| johnny Citizen Username: Johnny Post Number: 696 Registered: 5-2001 |
How many years would it take for the first pot smoker to file a lawsuit against marijuana manufacturers? Would states also sue to get billion dollar payments for healthcare costs? | ||
| newjerz Citizen Username: Newjerz Post Number: 61 Registered: 5-2003 |
You see I disagree with the argument for merely decriminalizing weed. If we decide as a society that something is so dangerous that it should be illegal then I think the proper steps should be taken to enforce the rules and deter the crime. There can't be a soft middle ground. It is worth the money to defend a principle. (By the way, I think all politicians who support the settlements reached with the tobacco companies are gutless cowards. If they really thought that smoking cigarettes was so bad for the general public they would move to make it illegal and try to prevent people from doing it. But that is politically impossible so instead they publicly vilify the tobacco companies for providing a product which is heavily demanded and which everyone has known for the past 25 years is dangerous and anyone with some common sense could deduce is unhealthy. Then they try to get in on the business by reaching these settlements.) My real motivation for advocating legalization of weed is not because I am a smoker, but rather because I think it is a reality that people are going to use this product and would rather see the benefits of all this economic activity properly integrated in our economy. I'd rather have a teenager behind a counter selling a regulated and heavily taxed product than hustling on the street, risking getting arrested, and involved in gangs that need to protect their turf for selling weed. | ||
| 1-2many Citizen Username: Wbg69 Post Number: 182 Registered: 6-2002 |
why is it ILlegal? the harms are less than other legal things, and the benefits are surely there. is it so-called morals? what is so moral about it, or about prohibiting one mind-altering substance when others are allowed? just wait till some megalith like McDonalds or Coke figures out how best to package the concept of legalization. only then will our corporate-sponsored decision makers finally see that this is the right solution (though by that time the solution will likely be completely pastuerized, processed, and artificially flavored and colored beyond all utility). | ||
| bella Citizen Username: Bella Post Number: 327 Registered: 7-2001 |
Charles, I was always told (in drug education classes) that marijuana is not physically addictive, that any addiction to it is purely mental. And no, I do not partake. Best of luck kicking the nicotine addiction, tobacco is a nasty drug itself. The American Cancer Society had proof in the sixties/seventies that the tobacco industry knew all about the dangers of smoking, but the tobacco companies denied everything. I admire you for taking a stance on this as far as your children are concerned, but you should consider the example you set by smoking cigars. | ||
| -af Citizen Username: Java_drinker Post Number: 255 Registered: 8-2002 |
The Discovery channel did an excellent show on just these questions and the history Marijuana in the US. It turns out that the reason it was first outlawed in the US had less to do with the plant itself and more to do with who was using it: Mexicans. During the mid 1800’s there was an anti-Mexican sentiment rampant in southern sates and Congress followed in suit making weed an illegal substance to posses. Then, for over 50 years we had the Marijuana Stamp Act that did not make it illegal, but instead required a person to purchase a “stamp” in order to grow, purchase, possess, or sell it. The catch was that no stamps were available by design. After a trip to the Supreme Court and finding the law unconstitutional Congress scheduled it as a Class I drug and has been in that status ever since without basis. Some other interesting facts: there has never been a government-sanctioned study on the effects of MJ that found it harmful or addictive. As a matter of fact the Nixon administration study found it almost without any detrimental effects beyond those found in smoking any material. I would think that since this is the administration that ran on the platform of State’s and individual’s rights we would make progress on decriminalization. But instead, Hier Ashcroft stated last year that the individual States have no rights to decriminalize MJ and that the Feds would step in if they tried. He has even gone on the record threatening the sovereign country of Canada with economic sanctions if they acted on their own to address this issue (BTW, he has no authority to make such a claim). This, coming from the administration of a President that used his body as a chemical dumping ground in his younger years. Oh, I forgot, nothing he did before he was 40 counts, right. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3267 Registered: 5-2001 |
First off, I believe that there is a difference between decriminalization and legalization. If pot was legal you could buy a pack of Maui Wowee, heavily taxed, down at Maplewood Stationers. Decriminalization means that possession of small quantities and use would not be a criminal offense under the law, but a violation, much like a traffic ticket. In other words, no criminal record to have to explain on your job ap. Currently under California law doctors can prescribe marijuana for certain medical conditions such as glaucoma and for pain relieve, usually to terminal cancer patients. The Feds under the direction of AG Ashcroft are doing their best to put a stop to this. Back in the 1960s a similar, although less powerful substance, called belladonna was available over the counter at drug stores in some states. When the kids started using it for recreational use it didn’t take the state legislatures very long to put a stop to that little loop hole. And Big Bill and I have one thing in common; we never inhaled.  | ||
| hello Citizen Username: Hello Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2003 |
---deleted | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 1685 Registered: 9-2001 |
A few other issues, comparisons, and questions... ... so tonight my wife and I meet some friends at a local pub, have a burger, a beer, and a butt. No problem right? ... next week we meet some friends at a local pub, have a burger, a beer, and a joint. Still no problem? Question. What are the affects of mixing drugs and alcohol? ... have one bottle of beer and drive home. No problem, right? ... have one joint and drive home. Still no problem? Question. How do we measure and control the different influences of the two? Cigarettes are up to $7.00 per pack, but who grows tobacco at home to save money? Lets say joints were only $7.00 per pack, so tell me who wouldn't grow marijuana at home to save money? Question. Where is all that tax revenue now? | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 1095 Registered: 5-2001 |
1) you stay up all night having discussions about philosophical issues 2) we'll need a measure of thc in the blood and set standards. 3) in the underground economy | ||
| melidere Citizen Username: Melidere Post Number: 609 Registered: 5-2001 |
you might add to number 3, tom, that it is financing terror and thugs. and i'd like to add to the questions the effects of combining anti-depressants with alcohol. but no biggee...they are prescription drugs so they're ok, right? |
