Legalizing Marijuana... are we ready?

Nobody actually gives a shit about what politicians did in college, just as long as they own up to it. Look at our last three presidents:

Clinton: "didn't inhale."
Bush: smoked pot, drank tons, general fuckup until he turned 40.
Obama: smoked pot all the time in college, did cocaine too.

I'd say that if anything, we're headed toward marijuana use being more acceptable than ever, just because it's become detached from the counterculture/rampant drug abuse culture of the 60s/70s/early 80s, and all of the people who grew up with that culture are now voting regularly.

 

I disagree slightly. Sure we may have a drop off like you said, but you also have to factor in that once marijuana is legal, no more money would be wasted convicting, incarcerating or investigating any marijuana related crimes (for the most part). Because Bobby Blowhard has an ounce on him and he gets sent to jail, who do you think is paying for him to stay there? We are, the tax payers. Once we get rid of all the space these guys are taking up, maybe prisons wont be so damn overcrowded.

 

The driving thing will be the hardest thing to figure out, but unlike kuhjager, I don't think it's really that dangerous to drive while stoned, and I give that argument all the time. You will never black out because of weed and you will always have your common sense, even if you are thinking a little slower people can tell when they are too high to drive. Because they can't find their keys. But either way, people can consciously say they are too stoned to drive, if it comes down to it. Drunk people will 'step up to the challenge at hand' to make sure people know they are 'fo real'.

I broke my ankle pretty bad last year, and was on a constant stream of percocet, then vicodin, and I would much rather have someone stoned drive me around than someone that has taken a couple pain pills in the last 20 minutes. I tried to avoid driving when I was hopped up on pain pills even though the pill bottle only said "use caution when driving", although I have never really thought twice about driving after a session.

Over the last 3 years I've lived with 5 different people, and they have all said the only time they can tell that I am stoned is when I am driving carefully. Maybe I just am a little biased toward my side of the argument, but driving while stoned isn't really as big of an issue to me as most people. But most often with stoned people you'll see someone wait a couple turns to go through a stop sign because they don't think it's their turn than see someone blow through it because they didn't see it. In my experience, stoned people are more careful than anyone else when they are driving.

 

But because these people are not being convicted, where is the tax dollars going to come from when hundreds of jobs are lost due to the fact those working in the criminal justice system are no longer employed? Keep in mind one of the biggest employers in the USA is the Federal Prison System. And several of these prisons are run by large corporations, who in turn fork out HUGE tax payouts to the government. Without little Sammy Slick in jail for peddling a few ounces of weed, there goes the need for the prisons, the guards and every other facet that comes with operating a jail. This would NOT be good for the economy, no matter how much extra money marijuana brought in.

 

I agree with Mr. Harrelson. Maybe things will be different if some kind of health care reform is passed, but until then I don't believe much will change. I think it's ludicrous that it hasn't been legalized as many/all have mentioned. Currently, those in law enforcement are risking their lives everyday in the hopes of confiscating a plant that can be grown anywhere. Talk about futility.

The only tangent I haven't seen covered here is how mind-altering drugs such as pot can excacerbate any trace of mental illness/instability in a person into full-blown schizophrenia, paranoia and psycopathy. My sister worked with the mentally ill and many were victims of drug psychosis from the 60s as a result of LSD and pot. This happened to a close friend of mine and it was pretty scary.

I, though, believe it should be legal. Now.

 

So we should keep jailing people who sell weed because it will not be good for the economy if we don't? This is the worst argument against decriminalization I have heard.

 

I wasn't arguing against decriminalization, I was just stating a fact. The prison system in the states is run like a business, and because of the stake the federal government has in it, it will not pass any legislation into effect that could have a negative impact on the return they get from it. The entire CJS in the USA is set up to make money. A lot comes from fines associated with drug use, therefore, there will be even less of a chance being legalized until they can find the RIGHT way to a) control who gets to grow it and b) tax it to maximize revenue generated

 

This makes no sense. The big moneymakers for Big Pharma are all in the likes of cholesterol management and other shit that old fat people need to take. There is no great risk of marijuana usurping the place of anti-depressants and anti-psychotics*. Palliative cancer care products have a low patient population and there aren't many patented drugs that can still make money for the big industry players. As for the question of distribution, pharmaceutical companies have gotten into the business of making either synthetic or isolated cannabinoids in legitimate pill form. Pharmaceutical companies have gotten very good at selling new products to physicians, and could even stand to make some money on marijuana delivery systems (nebulizers and so forth). The pharmaceutical industry has far better things to spend its lobbying dollars on than keeping marijuana illegal. I may be off, but I see moralizers like MADD and conservative Christians as far more vocal (not to mention over-represented) opponents of the issue.

I mean, I don't doubt that select economic interests conspired to make marijuana illegal, helped out by irrational paranoia, racism, and the brand of morality that brought about Prohibition. It just doesn't make any sense that it would be the pharmaceutical industry, or at least, not in the modern day.

*Daily Double: an experimental anti-cannabinoid drug was fairly recently discontinued in the trial phase. It was meant to reduce appetite in obese people, but the frequency of causing depression as a side effect was so great they cancelled the project.

 

You see, I'm not so sure I wouldn't. Or rather, a younger version of me wouldn't. These days, I'm completely drug-free (besides alcohol and very rarely tobacco, which are generally not refered to as drugs, though they should be). I wasn't always like that, though. At around ages 16 to 18, I was hyper-curious about drugs. Not because I was going through a tough phase in life or I came from a bad neighborhood or anything like that, but simply because the effects they had on the human mind fascinated me. The first illegal drug I tried out at the time was, unsurprisingly, weed. I followed up with laughing gas, Salvia (which I could never get to work), Mushrooms, E, Speed, and Codein. Mind you, I was being extremely cautious with whatever I took, reading up every bit of information available on a substance for dozens of hours before trying it out. And to my credit, I did have the self-control not to become addicted to any of those substances, and (besides weed) I did not consume any of the above more than maybe 4 to 5 times in total, some even less than that. It was really primarily a matter of being curious and wanting to know how that stuff feels, not wanting to develop an addiction which I knew would have devastating long-term effects. Weed was the only substance which I allowed myself to become somewhat addicted to (and ended up consuming for several years), because I figured that its detrimental effects, while certainly real, would be astronomically lower than those of any of the other drugs, and it was still a lot of fun to do. I never tried Heroin, but that was really just because I didn't have a source for it. Otherwhise, I would probably at least have tried snorting it a couple of times. And you know what, maybe I would've been fine with dropping that drug, too, after checking another box in my book of things I want to try out before I die. Or maybe I wouldn't have. From what I'm hearing, H is considerably more addictive than any other drug I've tried.

So, what am I trying to say with all this? Well, I'm saying that even though I am actually an example of someone who DID manage to handle dangerous drugs in a reasonable manner at an early age, and while I absolutely agree most of the positive effects you listed would, indeed, ensue from an all-encompassing drug-legalization, I am still wildly opposed to the idea because:
1. More people would try drugs without a doubt. Not everyone, or nearly everyone, but don't think for one moment that there isn't a lot of people on this planet who thought to themselves at some point in their lifes "damn, I'd really like to try [whatever drug]", but never did because they lacked the connections / criminal energy to get it. Now if those people could've just gone to the next Wal-Mart...
2. Most people wouldn't be able to handle the more dangerous / addictive drugs in a reasonable manner. They aren't able to now, so why would that change if their legal status was changed? If anything, and despite any state-driven information campaigns to the contrary, people would assume that drugs "can't be so bad after all", if they're legalized. An idiotic line of thought? Yes, but that doesn't mean a lot of people won't pursue it.
3. The negative commercial consequences of more people becoming addicts, and thus being less functional in their work lives, or eventually being admitted to medical treatment, might well outweigh any financial gains from lowered crime numbers / drug taxes.
4. Access for minors would be made a lot easier. Bribing your older brother to go get you a fix of some drug is a lot easier than finding a dealer at a young age.
5. The number of drug-related accidents and drug-related crimes (i.e. crimes where the assailant is under the influence of a drug, not where he is trying to get a hold of drugs in the first place) will rise, just as the overall number of consumers rises; this also goes to the economical detriments adressed in point 3.
6. And this is more of a general point: While I am a very liberal thinker and strongly tend to favour individual choice over state-dictated rules, I think there is some things that a state really should protect its people from. All the talk about being responsible for your own actions and chosing your own fate is true, but at the same time, people inevitably do make bad decisions sometimes in their lives, and drugs are an area where one bad decision can just get you into an astronomical shitstorm.

As a closing note (and probably the only line of this post that is truly on-topic, so delete if necessary): With all the above said, I absolutely do agree that marihuanna needs to be legalized (though put under strict scrutiny as far as stoned driving goes). It's really always a matter of weighing of the benefits to the detriments, and while there are some detriments to marihuanna use, we know today that they don't really account for all that much, and the overall risk of the drug isn't really any higher than, say, that of alcohol, which is universally accepted.

 

Aren't we releasing people early because the prisons are so packed we can't keep inmates locked up? Get rid of the nonviolent marijuana users, lock up the pedophiles and rapists and murderers.

 

The funny thing is that the crackheads more likely started with alcohol but that's big business and there's a tax on it so they can't make that a part of their propaganda.

 

I'd be willing to bet EVERYONE started with alcohol. I know I did and I was one of the most straight laced kids around when I was a teen. By 16 I had already been drunk numerous times, but I didn't start smoking pot until I was 20, and my brother was a HUGE pothead and even grew some right in our back yard when I was in high school. (He was 13 years older than me) They were beautiful, by the way, he had about 8 plants that were at least 6 feet high. Once I started smoking pot, I found that I enjoyed it far more than alcohol. It's such a better head and it doesn't make me shit funny or profusely, and it takes a lot less to get you "high". I also find that it's not nearly as physically harmful.

I'm a medical transcriber and I work for a large hospital. I can tell you for certain that alcohol is far far worse for you than pot. The amount of people who go through that place with alcohol related problems is mind boggling. I have never once typed a report for someone who came in because of a pot related illness, and in the past 11 years I have typed up a LOT of reports.

The fact that pot is illegal is a complete joke as is the "war on drugs" The whole thing is really backwards. From the amount of money spent on enforcement to the amount of people locked up for possession and "small time" offenses.

I really would like to hear from someone who is totally against the legalization of marijuana. As far as I am concerned, it's a no-brainer. All drugs should be legalized and regulated. It's the only sane option.

 

Don't confuse correlation and causality. I don't support the legalisation of weed because I consumed it for a couple of years. I support it because I believe that (unlike many other drugs), the detrimental effects of weed are mostly pretty harmless, and not worse than those of alcohol or tobacco. This belief is also why I consumed it for an extended period of time.

Well, I did. But I could name you a number of people from my circle of friends who were also quite curious about some of the drugs I did, but didn't have the connections to get them and / or the drive to follow through. I'm certain that at least some of them would've tried out more drugs, had they been more easily available.

Well, I don't know under what conditions antibiotics are sold in the U.S., but I presume you need a prescription from your doctor. So, what exactly are you proposing? That drugs be made legal, but medically prescribed? On what diagnosis? "Doctor, I really, badly have to get high this weekend, and I was thinking an eightball might be the way to go..."?

 

You advocate the legalization of marijuana for personal use, but maintain that if police pull you over for running a stop sign and see a bowl and a dime bag sitting in your cupholder, they have the right to arrest you for a potential DUI? They can presuppose that, because you possess marijuana 1) you're under the influence and 2) the paraphernalia belongs to you, and, on the strength of those presuppositions, detain you and force you take a drug test?

Someone can abstain from smoking for 90 days or more and still have trace amounts of THC present in their system. That means they could be charged with DUI after testing positive for a substance they haven't imbibed in months. How is this not a massive booby trap? You tell the public they are permitted to possess, use and distribute this substance, but that if they are caught with it in a motor vehicle (not caught using it, caught WITH it), there are decent odds they will be arrested and charged with a misdemeanor whose repercussions for a first offense include the suspension of their driver's license, mandated counseling sessions and thousands of dollars in attorney's fees?

Have you ever transported closed bottles of liquor on the front seat of your car? I have. If what you're suggesting was applied to alcohol laws, police would have the right to cuff me as soon as they saw that bottle sitting there. Not because my breath reeked, or because I was swerving while driving, but solely because I am in possession of a completely legal substance, and happened to make an illegal right turn at a red light.

Pot is either legal or it isn't. Your idea creates a grey area that is just begging for abuse.

 

I'm against the legalization of it for one reason- Every habitual marijuana user I know is a complete waste of space. The same thing is true about every alcoholic I know (and every other drug addict I know). We simply don't need another drug out there. I know it is hypocritical. I just don't think that making it easier for people to destroy their lives is something the government needs to be involved in.

Oddly enough, I used to be against it for totally different reasons. That reason being every job that I have had since high school required a drug test. I was simply jealous, and wanted to bring everyone down. I made up other reasons to be against it because I didn't want to admit my true feelings.

And to anyone who argues that driving while high is safer than driving while drunk, please, politely, die in a fire. This shouldn't be up for debate as anyone that is driving while under the influence of anything should be shot on site. You are endangering others willingly. Fuck, I don't even like driving while I'm tired. Sure you may not black out, but short of that it is pretty much the same damn thing.

 

Some of the most successful people I know are habitual (every damn day!) smokers. Lots of people destroy their lives because they don't want to try, learn or grow. They may use marijuana, but it's not because of it. Food is an addiction for many, check out Walmart. Should we blame the food or that persons inability to control themselves?

I do absolutely agree that driving while high is likely safer but not right.

 

If that's the case, they should re-criminalize alcohol. It's distribution something the government condones and profits from, and they've made it fairly easy to obtain. Thousands and thousands die each year from alcohol-related illnesses and injuries. Many thousands more fail to contribute to society. It creates perversion, dissension, malaise and laziness. One might even say that alcohol is damaging the moral fabric of the United States of America. I think you're right. We don't need one more drug. We need one less drug. Just one less drug, and our problems will be solved.

I know what we should do. We'll start a movement against alcohol use. We'll convince people that they are killing themselves, and that the government is allowing them to do it, and that we have to control ourselves. For the good of the people. For the good of AMERICA. And we'll do it all in the name of Jesus Christ.

Maybe we can amend the Constitution. We'll make it a federal crime to produce or possess alcohol. We can spend millions of dollars creating armed federal agencies to combat the enormous black market that will inevitably create itself as a result of increased demand and decreased supply. We'll have to start a half-dozen monitoring agencies, too, to combat the massive rise in political and municipal corruption. It doesn't matter if we have to keep jailing mayors, city councilmen, and local sheriffs for taking monthly payments from crime syndicates. The scourge of alcohol is wiped from the face of our nation. Except, of course, for the thousands of speakeasies, gin mills, and substandard bootlegging operations that produce dangerous knockoff spirits that have the potential to seriously harm or even kill its users.

You know, it's crazy. I could have sworn I heard this idea somewhere else. Must be deja vu.

The government doesn't and shouldn't give a shit what we put in our bodies. They're worried about money. You're drawing arbitrary lines in the sand because you admittedly have little to no experience with this particular substance, and you choose to associate with people who have no self-control, and who would have found a way to fuck their lives up with or without the help of marijuana. At least now they're doing it behind closed doors and out of sight of the rest of us, which is all I'll ever ask of anyone. I could give a fuck if they meet someone's personal standards of productivity. Do what you want, and leave me the fuck out of it.