Marijuana - Legalize It?

As someone else said, you’re flat out wrong about this.

Not in California. Here, you recieve a citation for possession of marijuana if it’s under a certain amount. A ticket that costs less than many speeding tickets, actually. Even the law here recognizes that marijuana is not the evil entity you’re trying to paint it as.

I’m afraid due to your unwavering repeat of the “drugs are bad, mmkay” mantra you’re missing the point of this thread, anyway. This thread isn’t about what can happen if you get arrested for drugs. It’s about legalizing marijuana. These are two completely distinct topics. If you can’t contribute thoughtfully and rationally to the topic at hand, then please, go regurgitate your D.A.R.E pamphlet in another thread.

Unless you’re running for office, arguing in soundbytes is never a good tactic. This too, is a sign of a weak and simplistic mind.

What continues to amaze me is that the Gubmint refuses to recognize one simple fact: Dope is easier to get than booze, because it’s not regulated as a legal drug. When I was in high school, it was a royal pain in the ass to get beer. Nothing fosters teen ingenuity like the challenge of trying to get a twelve-pack from the local Mom 'n Pop’s without getting carded/busted. We made fake I.D.'s, bribed street people, pestered older siblings, snuck stuff from our parents, etc. Yeah, it was hard. But not so hard that we felt the need to make or deal our own. But make no mistake, if booze became that hard to get, we’d be building distilleries that would make Jack Daniels proud. We were reasonably smart kids. We learned how to ferment grape juice in bio class; learned how to perform distillations in chem. class. The glassware was easy to get. The raw materials available at any grocery store. But the availability through “legal” channels, though difficult to circumvent, left us little motivation to go that far. It’s probably just as well; if we’d learned to distill on our own out of necessity, bootlegging would have been mighty attractive.

Pot? 'Shrooms? Acid? Where I went to school, all you had to do was ask the right kid. Next week, boom, there’s a nickel-bag in your locker. Absolutely painless. Sure, it was tough to get crack and heroin in Southern Maine, but none of us were interested in that, anyway. I tried them all before I even got to college. Why not? It was easy. See, thing is, some kids figured out that if they had the balls to hook up with some shady characters who were local dealers, they could make a tidy profit for themselves as middlemen to highschoolers. Those of us (like myself) who were too chickenshit to go to dealers directly, were willing to pay what our student connections were asking, which, really, wasn’t all that much. So, there you go, you idiot bureaucrats, instead of kids making fake IDs and buying beer at a market, you’ve got them growing and/or distributing and dealing the stuff as part of what is literally an international contraband economy. Anti-drug enforcement does NOTHING. It had ZERO impact on our lives in high school. Sure, if you were an idiot, you might get caught for sparking up a doobie in the boys bathroom; but any kid who used a modicum of discretion was essentially in the clear, unless he/she got incredibly unlucky. The local keystone cops couldn’t find their asses with both hands. The local lobstermen were only too happy to haul up traps full of whatever some other guy up the coast dropped in the bay, and sell it to us kids at 5x markup.

The Feds. need to get real. The war on drugs was lost before it started. All it has done is created a thriving contraband economy and jailed a bunch of hapless non-violents. It has absolutely no impact on use, or distribution, and essentially just drives up costs, whilst generating negative revenue via lost taxable commerce coupled with billions squandered on trying to catch rain with a butterfly net. Legalization of ALL narcotics is the only sane thing to do in the face of the spectacularly wasteful failure that is the “War on Drugs”. The Feds. need to accept it’s a lost cause from the supply side, let non-violent small-time users and dealers out of the prisons they don’t belong in, educate to minimize demand, and tax the newly legal narcotic market as much as it can bear before generating the same black markets that already exist. The revenue would more than pay for treatment of addicts, who, after legalizaiton, would proably not number much more than already exist.

I think we’re all being taken for a ride with the practically one disagreement in this thread.

Indeed, that was an observation I made back when I was an undergraduate 1968-72. Nothing has changed, I see.

I love those AARP ads for affordable drugs that end with the tag line “This is a war on drugs we can win”, thus playing off the obvious understanding that we all have that that “other” war on drugs is one we can’t win.

I’ve noticed that marijuana legalization threads are as close as we ever come to unanimity on these boards.

You act as if everyone else is wrong, and you are right.

Most of what you say I believe is false.

Drugs will not be legalized anytime soon.

I know you don’t understand the outcome of doing drugs, or just think “it won’t happen to me.”

Well, good luck. For they rest of you don’t do drugs in the first place.

Love

Be thankful there is one desenting vote here.

What ever happened to morality, honesty, and integrity.
I bet that sounds stupid to most of you now, but it won’t in the future.

Love

When it comes to the Drug War, there never was any.

Are you saying that drug use is immoral? Why?

Nor do I see how drug use comprimises anyone’s honesty or integrity.

It doesn’t sound stupid at all. Some of the most honest, decent, “moral” people I know have been drug users. They work hard, treat people with respect and courtesy, pay their taxes, mow their lawns, contribute to charity, and are respectful of the environment. What more could you ask?

People, you can’t really argue with lekatt. As you can see, he / she avoids answering questions and replaces arguments with homilies and pearls o’ wisdom.

To make this thread more of a GD, I will play devil’s advocate (hope this is acceptable - while these aren’t my real views, my intention is not to troll).

The arguments against marijuana use, as I have heard them:

  • Marijuana is a ‘gateway drug’ that leads to the use of other, more harmful drugs later on.
  • Using marijuana means you’re supplying money to organised crime.
  • Marijuana has negative health effects.
  • Loss of inhibitions from marijuana use can lead to potentially harmful behaviour.

Refutations, people?

The only correct statement in this post is that drugs will not be legal anytime soon. It’s too hot for the pols to handle, even though they know it’s the right thing to do.

Who is this “everybody else” you’re talking about? I’d say roughly half the people I know think at least some drugs that are currently illegal (esp. cannabis) should be legalized. Probably 2/3 to 3/4 of the people I know well have tried an illicit drug at least once; most of those have used them far more than once. I know one person who is struggling with addiction: She’s the soon to be ex-wife of one of my best friends, and she’s killing herself with alcohol. Uncle Sam hasn’t turned down a dime of her money, I’ve noticed, or used what they’ve taken from her to fund adequate treatment for alcohol addicts who aren’t as lucky as her to have a lawyer for a spouse. It seems the “tough-on-crime” pols would rather put drunks and petty users behind bars. Oh, a far better use of the tax revenue they extract from human vices :rolleyes:.

Two of the most addictive drugs that can be found, nicotine and ethanol, are available to practically everybody, and these drugs kill hundreds of thousands of people per year in this country alone. How on Earth can anyone justify the position that it’s OK to sell people some drugs that kill, tax the hell out them, and then incarcerate the rest for the other drugs they use? Is there even an iota of sane logic in this policy?

Hey, I’ve smoked dope, dropped acid, eaten shrooms, drank myself into a vomitous stupor; not the smartest behavior, and not done during my proudest moments, but I survived my formative years without any noticible sequelae. Nobody’s advocating rampant drug abuse here, nor even recommending people use any of them. But really, for the vast majority of people, the numbers clearly show that occasional recreational drug use is probably not the biggest health risk most folks subject themselves to. For those who succumb to addiction, the science is telling us many, perhaps most, have an inherent vulnerability to codependancy, and these people need treatment, not imprisonment or fines. Putting non-violent addicts in jail is about the stupidest approach to publich health policy the US Govt. has ever conceived, and that is saying much.

Thanks for restarting the debate. I have a shameful confession - I’ve never touched the stuff, though I went to college in the 60s-70s. No moral qualms - I don’t like my head messed up. I’ve been around plenty of it, and despite what our friend lekatt said, no stoned person ever did anything threatening to me - except maybe beat me in poker. Oh, and I work for a Fortune 500 company that does not test.

You transmit some good points, which I think are good arguments for legalization.

I’m not sure the first is really true, but if it is, could it because some people who smoke must buy from dealers who deal in other drugs, and might want to expand their market? Buying from legal channels would reduce this problem, I think. The second point gets eliminated also.

But less so than many legal things, like fast food.

Ditto with alcohol. DWS is already illegal. We need to ban the action causing harm, not the substance involved. That’s like saying we should ban sex to eliminate rape.

‘gateway drug’ - cite? I don’t have a refutation handy, but I am pretty sure you can find data supporting pro and con for this.

‘organised crime’ - this is an argument for legalization, in my opinion

‘negative health effects’ - this is, as far as I know, the prevailing medical opinion, which is related to inhaling burning marijuana fumes. I believe, however, that a ‘safer’ way to take marijuana is currently available.

‘potentially harmful behaviour’ - this is worded in such a way as to make refutation nearly impossible.

this link is tangentially related, in that it is a sort of progress report on the ‘war on drugs’. It is the CIA’s current publication regarding the countries of the world and the roles each one plays in the worldwide illicit drug trade. An eye-opener, to say the least:

CIA WORLD FACTBOOK

Yea, the CIA sure would know ALL about the international drug market, given that they set up half of it :-p

I always liked to suggest a bumper sticker:

Be Patriotic: Buy Homegrown

Everything I ever smoked in Berkeley was grown in people’s closets :-p

This is actually another point - legalization would cripple the international drug market (at least, as it relates to America).

Simply not true:

Just as buying alcohol during Prohibition meant supplying money to criminals, buying illegal drugs today means supplying money to criminals, because the people who sell illegal drugs are criminals by definition. One could argue that marijuana is commonly produced by individuals, so organized crime isn’t involved nearly as much as with other drugs.

However, the main flaw with this argument is that it’s really an argument for legalization. Allowing legitimate companies to sell pot would cut criminals out of the picture.

Both true to an extent, AFAIK, but far less of an extent than alcohol.

The negative effects of smoking marijuana are essentially the same as inhaling any other kind of smoke. But unlike cigarettes, there are ways to consume marijuana that don’t involve inhaling smoke - either by using a vaporizer or by cooking and eating it.

And as for lekatt’s assertion that all but a few companies drug test… I have a friend who works as a driver for one of the big three shipping companies, and he wasn’t tested. Before that, he worked for about 5 years delivering food for a restaurant, where (1) he wasn’t tested, (2) the management knew he smoked weed, and (3) he never got in an accident, despite being high all the time.

I think we can all agree addressing any more of lekatt’s “points” is pretty much an act of futility.

It’s like debating with a bumper sticker.

Thanks for getting us back on track lambchops. I’d address your post, but anything I would say has already been said, multiple times.

There really is no justification for the continued criminalization of marijuana. The only remotely legitimate argument is the slippery slope: if we legalize marijuana, we’ll have to legalize all drugs.

I don’t feel as if it’s a very compelling argument myself, but I’ve heard it a few times. Anyone here care to rebut?

Doesn’t mean a thing. I knew a guy, actually he was my boss for awhile, that drank like a fish. He drove while he was drunk and somehow avoided the police for over ten years, until the night he crashed into a car head-on because he was too drunk to stay in his lane. Three people died.

It will get you when you least expect it.

Blowing dope is for losers.

Love

You hep cat! “Blowing dope”? Sounds like mock slang from the 50s, dig?

I never can keep track of who is conservative or liberal around here, but I would like to know if any of our resident conservatives (Sam Stone, maybe??) have offered their thoughts on this issue. For liberals this is almost a no-brainer issue and there’s no real debate.

I know we have some very rational and articulate right leaning members on these boards, and I would like to hear an argument against the legalization of marijuana that is worthy of the Straight Dope.

Does anybody else see the irony in this statement? :wally

lekatt, maybe you were a dealer and you wound up in a jail cell. Perhaps you are or were the mother or father of an addict. Perhaps you were a user and Jesus (or somebody claiming to represent him) told you what you were doing was wrong.

If any of the above are true, I sympathise. It doesn’t change the fact that your argument is essentially circular:
Why is it wrong? Because it’s illegal!
Why don’t we legalize it? Because it’s wrong!

Nor does it change the fact that you’ve avoiding answering any one of the dozens of substantive questions other posters have asked you. Understand that in the absence of any evidence beyond your increasingly condescending appeals to our morality, integrity, and honesty (qualities I suspect you don’t have much understanding of) we’re going to ignore you and wait for someone with well-researched or at least rational arguments to appear.

With that said, I’m going to play a little Devil’s advocate too. Mr2001 presented an interesting rebuttal to the “gateway drug” manta. However, the fact that most marijuana users never try “harder” substances doesn’t change the fact that some do. I strongly suspect (but can’t find evidence to support) that the number of people who go directly to opiates, for example, without first trying cannabis, is extremely low as a percentage of total usage. On the other hand, I know from first hand experience that any number of people begin using “club drugs”- MDMA, GHB, Ketamine, crystal meth, and so forth- without having first tried anything more illicit than vodka or a Marlboro.