Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.18
It should definitely be legalized.
Econ. L/R -3.75; Soc. Lib/Auth. -6.46
Legalize and regulate.
Interestingly this is not really much of a liberal position: Milton Freidman has advocated for this as well.
There is no evidence that marijauna is anywhere near as dangerous as tobacco or alcohol. Nor any evidence that it is anywhere near as addictive. The biggest harm that comes from it is its association with other, more harmful, illegal drugs of abuse, and thus its function as an introduction into a social group that has a higher incidence of use of such substances. This is a result of its illegality; not of its nature.
I am no anarchist/Libertarian despite my Political compass markings. The State has an obligation to protect its citizens from their own stupidity. But it must, in each case:
-demonstrate that the harm is great enough to warrant the limitation of individual freedoms;
-demonstrate that the end is achievable;
-and if achievable, demonstrate that the cost is worth it.
In the case of marijauna there is:
-No convincing evidence of such harm.
-No reason to believe that making it a target of the “Drug War” is an effective approach at any cost. In fact it has had an opposite effect. The battle on pot has driven it from a backyard crop of low potency into the hands of professional horticultualists who have made it roughly 20 times as potent as it was two decades ago. This now superpotent marijauna is more available in Middle and High Schools than is tobacco (I am a pediatrician and this is a consistent report from kids of all stripes.) Regulated tobacco has its potency controlled and its access relatively limitted. A small investment in enforcing those extant regulations further would have a very cost effective benefit. The Drug War has even been correlated with increasing crime and murder rates, especially of crime associated with gun use (while Airman and others may remember my position in favor of moderate gun control, the rate of gun violence correlates better with the illegal drug trade than with any regulation or disregulation of gun ownership.)
-There is thus no evidence that the cost is worth it.
I’ve never met an irresponsible LSD user. They don’t get violent. They don’t tend to do it in public or in situations where they need to drive. It’s not addictive. And it’s [usually*] just hard enough to find that you can’t do it every day.
[sub]I know sometimes a large amount will come into a city or region and it will be everywhere for awhile but due to certain factors (stiff criminal penalties, low demand because it isn’t addictive and a lot of people are scared of it…etc.) it is moderately hard to find for the most part.[/sub]
BTW, if anyone wants to read Milton Freidman’s take on The Drug War just click away.
Even the recent American Academy of Pediatrics’ policy statement against legalization/decriminalization of marijauna couldn’t muster much against the substance. They admitted that it is definitely less harmful than tobacco or alcohol and that the harmful effects are memory loss and, well, getting high, with the short term cognitive dysfunction associated with such a state. They just are concerned that legalization and decriminalization might lead to more underage use and bad driving with more traffic fatalities. They’d like to see the other two controlled much more strictly too. Obviously I disagree with the analysis. Legal pot could have strict laws on underage access, on potency, and be taxed at such a rate as to keep it too expensive for most kids.
There are certainly powerful interests that would want to keep it illegal: Tobacco companies, Liquor companies, Minivan driving moms who would remake society so little Jennifer or Joshua never suffered so much as a scraped knee, and of course the illegal drug dealers themselves. Ironicalistically*, it’s the last group that has the most to lose if pot were made legal.
*I know it’s not a word, but ever since Gary Trudeau had Bush use it in his commic strip, I can’t help but repeat it. 
And oh BobLibDem, there are no effective treatment programs for marijauna addiction. Because there is no evidence that marijauna addiction exists.
Potheads really can quit without withdrawl symptoms. The best studies show that their cognitive function returns to their baseline in short order (of course the best and brightest are not generally choosing to be long term heavy users so their baseline might not be all that impressive).
Quick drive by from Japan…my internet connection here sucks. As web pages take like 5 min. to load I’m not going to search for my own score on the compass, but I was just right of center and liberatarian.
No surprise here, I agree it should be. Don’t really have much to add that hasn’t been added already except to say I expect it too be legal in the US in my lifetime…and that people will feel the same way about this period of US history that they felt about prohibition…namely that it was a stupid waste.
-XT
As John said, uncertainty of dose is solely due to its illegality. THC tablets or Nicorette-style inhalers could even provide a specific dose while eliminating any harmful byproducts from burning the stuff.
It seems the only argument left is driving. Does that not imply that driving is the problem, not alcohol, sleeping pills or whatever else one might get legally shitfaced on?
Of course one simple solution is to not use taxpayer money to subsidize hospitals.
But your reasoning should be much more applicable to alcohol than pot. So many people already use that pot that making it legal probably wouldn’t increase people’s consumption that much. So, if one compared the medical costs to society of driving while drunk vs driving while stoned, one would have to conclude that alcohol should be illegal. You can’t (logically) have it both ways.
But this is also true for the people who over eat, jump from airplanes, or use a skateboard. The list is endless. Practically everything we do involves some kind of risk, its just a matter of what activity you enjoy most. Can you really show me statistics that show someone who smokes pot is a greater health risk than someone who enjoys playing contact sports?
No; I detest the problems of alcohol abuse and would like them all to go away, but I grudgingly admit that the most effective method of doing that (stop all people drinking alcohol) simply isn’t going to happen (and would cause a whole bunch of problems and upsets, and would remove the possibility of relatively innocent enjoyment for a great many people). We’re stuck with alcohol; it’s been socially acceptable for most of human history (in some places, anyway); it is totally ingrained and it isn’t going away, so we have to deal with it, whcih isn’t always nice but we cannot unboil that particular egg.
However, I see no particular reason why this fact should compel me to boil an additional one; I don’t see why I ‘must’ do the same with marijuana, if by adding it to the picture, we are causing a net increase in the general level of inconvenience to third parties (including myself); to say "but you let them drink alcohol; you have to let me smoke pot’ sounds like something my children would say.
If it can be introduced in such a way as not to cause any additional problems (or maybe even result in a reduction of them (why am I not seeing people arguing that point?), then I’m quite content to see it happen. I fear, though, that relaxing the law in one place (the control of substances) will demand a tightening of the law in others (public order).
No, I can’t, which is why I said “I realise that ‘problems of their own making’ is a continuum here” and said that I was only the slightest bit concerned.
I am of zero opinion on this matter (well, pehaps that isn’t strictly true. I wouldn’t mind if it was legalized, but I don’t care enough about that to make it a ‘votable’ issue), but I thought it would worth mentioning that the latest issue of National Review comes out in favor of legalization. (Payed subscription is required to view the current issue online.)
-3.25, -4.31. I plot on the chart with Ghandi :eek: Yes, I think that legalization and regulation are needed.
One instance comes to my mind; I know a high school student who quit smoking pot and started drinking instead. He did this because he made the football team, and the players must be drug tested. He told me he “can’t wait for summer” so he can go back to pot, because it is much gentler on his system. I submit this as evidence that some alcohol consumption would be replaced by marijuana use - instead of “adding to” the problem of substance abuse.
About [-7,-5]
I strongly agree. People should at least have the right to posession and casual use in privacy. Pot is so prevalent in the U.S. (and basically everywhere) that it makes sense to me that the government should just legalize it and take over the industry.
I just find it interesting that so many of the people who are in favor of universal health care are also in favor of legalizing drugs. I am in favor of decriminalizing both things. It seems that many people are in favor of the government heavily regulating how and with what doctors treat illnesses. But when they try to regulate other types of drugs it is somehow a civil rights issue.
I guess I’m getting more radical as I read here.
Marijuana should be legalised. Yes, absolutely, as soon as possible.
Mangetout, you asked why we should add marijuana to the mix. Meaning, I think, that we have enough problems with alcohol, why add another substance for people to get into trouble with?
But we’re not talking about taking adding marijuana to a currently pot-free (or even nearly pot-free) country. Marijuana is already on the scene; already part of the mix. We don’t have the option of deciding if Americans should or should not have access to marijuana. They’ve got access.
IMHO, the problems caused by the war on marijuana are far worse than any problems caused by the substance itself.
IMHO, whatever increase in consumption legalization would produce would be at the expense of alcohol. This would be a good thing, both for individual users and for society, as marijuana is less harmful.
Re kids, marijuana (due to its illegality) is easier for them to obtain than is (regulated) alcohol.
About (-3, -5)
Strongly agree
I favor both universal health care and drug legalization, but I don’t think universal health care means regulating how doctors can treat illnesses. It just means everyone can see a doctor, no matter where they work or how much money they make. That might involve regulating which procedures the government will pay for, but it shouldn’t mean regulating which drugs can be prescribed, sold, or used.
I once was totally opposed to drug legalization but have reconsidered over the years.
I see that making drugs illegal has caused people to try more risky, but more legal drugs (look up pot alternatives, not to mention inhaleing arasols). and the current illegal status makes people try to come up with other drugs which work, and will technically not be illegal. Pot is almost a refined product comming directly from the plants, and far different that the pot of the 60’s as I understand it - waht a shame what a loss, but no doubt to increase potancy. Also chewing on the coca leaf is suppose to be a mild stilumant, which might be OK, but refined into a powder, it can ruin lifes.
The illegalization of drugs has caused more potent and dangerious drugs, if Pot was legalized I would like to see older version only.
This is a myth. There’s very little evidence that marijuana is any stronger today than it was 40 years ago. Even if it were, though, that would be a good thing - people wouldn’t have to inhale as much smoke to get the same amount of THC, making it easier on their lungs.