# Political Compass #29: Marijuana should be legalised. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 25, 2004, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163 "2004-06-25T10:06:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/81 "2004-06-29T07:46:18Z")
> [@II Gyan II](#): > > [A counterpoint](http://www.ccguide.org.uk/driving.html). Interesting, but it looks like they have been a little selective with their data (which is unserstandable, given the site’s specific agenda. I didn’t scrutinise every article there in detail, but some of them seem worthless as science, for example: > [@](#): > > RESEARCH for a computer game company has found a small amount of cannabis could help players’ performance, making them drive faster and safer. > > The experiment was carried out for Acclaim Entertainment to see how cannabis would affect people playing its new game, Burnout. A group of 20 experienced games enthusiasts and drivers between 21 and 40 took part in the test to study reaction times, speed, concentration levels and road safety. > > Ten of them then smoked about 0.15 milligrams of cannabis, or about half a “joint”, while the other ten had had no stimulant for at least 72 hours prior to the test. They were then given a demonstration of Burnout and asked to take the controls. > > The researchers say 80 per cent of those who had smoked cannabis demonstrated superior reaction times to those who had not. About 60 per cent finished a lap faster, while 70 per cent experienced a lower number of collisions, and more than half reached a higher level in the game. > > When playing in competition with each other, the drivers who had smoked cannabis won eight out of the ten matches. The company claims drivers under the influence of cannabis appeared to have more confidence in their ability and be much calmer. > > Simon Smith-Wright, Burnout’s communications director, admitted the findings do not translate into real life, but insisted small amounts of the drug helped driving. > > He said: "The results of our tests clearly indicate that a small or moderate amount of cannabis is actually quite beneficial to someone’s driving performance. A group of TEN? against a control group of TEN? Sheesh. It may be that there is something to the claim, but trying to demonstrate it with such a tiny sample is just plain stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/82 "2004-06-29T11:35:42Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > A group of TEN? against a control group of TEN? Sheesh. It may be that there is something to the claim, but trying to demonstrate it with such a tiny sample is just plain stupid. Or maybe the other 200 tests didn’t provide the results wanted, so they were discarded. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/83 "2004-06-29T11:56:27Z")
**Why** is this driving business so important? There are all _kinds_ of ways of impairing your ability to drive. Do we prevent new kinds of sleeping pills or cough mixture coming onto the market because they would _add to_ an already present danger? This is a red herring. The probability of being killed or maimed by an impaired driver would be massively reduced by **banning alcohol**. All this talk of such a ban being “unfeasible” is irrelevant: we are _debating_ here! Once marijuana had been legalised for w while, _it_ would be unfeasible to ban, surely? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/84 "2004-06-29T12:35:25Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > **Why** is this driving business so important? I don’t honestly know why we seem to have latched onto it, perhaps it is just the easiest example of something that could be adversely affected. > [@](#): > > There are all _kinds_ of ways of impairing your ability to drive. Do we prevent new kinds of sleeping pills or cough mixture coming onto the market because they would _add to_ an already present danger? To be fair, sleeping pills and cough mixtures aren’t _generally_ used in the same kind of recreational context as dope; people don’t drive to parties where cough syrup is passed around, well, not much in my part of the world. > [@](#): > > This is a red herring. The probability of being killed or maimed by an impaired driver would be massively reduced by **banning alcohol**. Yes, it would, but this also is a red herring; we would find it difficult to ban alcohol completely (there is, however, already a ban on driving under the influence). We pretty much have to live with the unpleasant side effects of having alcohol deeply integrated in our cultures. We’re stuck with the problems that alcohol can cause, and these may well be more significant and serious than any that could be caused by marijuana (or they may not), but that isn’t sufficient justification to permit or tolerate whatever additional problems marijuana may bring. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/85 "2004-06-29T12:51:17Z")
> [@](#): > > We’re stuck with the problems that alcohol can cause And yet we can be intellectually honest by _advocating_ the legalisation or banning of a given substance, else we surely fall prey to the fallacy of argument ad populum? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/86 "2004-06-29T13:22:18Z")
I honestly don’t know. Are we saying that the alcohol thing boils down to: A is already permitted/tolerated A is possibly worse than C C is not yet permitted/tolerated Therefore either: - A should be banned - C should be permitted/tolerated in addition to A. ? ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/87 "2004-06-29T13:39:47Z")
Yes, if we are to be intellectually honest. And I would argue that A is not “possibly” but _demonstrably worse_ than C under every relevant and testable criterion. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/88 "2004-06-29T14:01:13Z")
I suppose; I put ‘possibly’ in there because the actual effects (upon any particular society) of legalising marijuana are unknown until it is actually done, but I’m quite happy to omit the term, so: A is already permitted/tolerated A is worse than C C is not yet permitted/tolerated Therefore either: - A should be banned - C should be permitted/tolerated in addition to A. I don’t think this argument _necessarily_ holds water in all possible scenarios; perhaps it would if we were ‘starting fresh’ and deciding which, if any, items to permit/ban in a brand new civilisation, but we aren’t in that position. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/89 "2004-06-29T14:28:06Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > This is a red herring. The probability of being killed or maimed by an impaired driver would be massively reduced by **banning alcohol**. Banning alcohol is unfeasable. All one needs to do is look at the 18th and 21st Amendments to the Constitution for the ultimate proof of that. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/90 "2004-06-29T15:08:56Z")
Continue that quote, **AD**. This is a _debate_. Of all those who say that banning alcohol is _unfeasible_, I ask: _Is it **right**?_ ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/91 "2004-06-29T15:19:34Z")
The very first thing I said in the entire thread addresses the second part of that quote. I think all drugs should be legalized. What else is there to say? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/92 "2004-06-29T15:29:48Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > Continue that quote, **AD**. > > This is a _debate_. Of all those who say that banning alcohol is _unfeasible_, I ask: > > _Is it **right**?_ No, because it is unfeasible. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/93 "2004-06-29T15:33:08Z")
> [@](#): > > No, because it is unfeasible. How is that not simple argument ad populum, that something is right or wrong simply because many people believe it? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/94 "2004-06-29T15:35:41Z")
Stongly agree. Decriminalize it. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/95 "2004-06-29T15:38:43Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > How is that not simple argument ad populum, that something is right or wrong simply because many people believe it? Because the existing integration of alcohol in our society is a much deeper and broader phenomenon than one consisting merely of popular opinion. Removing it, or attempting to remove it, would have effects far more reaching than simply upsetting sensibilities. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/96 "2004-06-29T16:14:09Z")
Well, argue how you will, but I feel that appealing to the status quo just because it is _so_ is rather circular (and, incidentally, used in many sinister or dubious instances - “but we’re _used_ to slavery!”) - far better that we each have the courage of our convictions and advocate our honest opinions on how the status quo _should_ be changed, don’t you think? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/97 "2004-06-29T16:21:30Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > Well, argue how you will, but I feel that appealing to the status quo just because it is _so_ is rather circular (and, incidentally, used in many sinister or dubious instances - “but we’re _used_ to slavery!”) - far better that we each have the courage of our convictions and advocate our honest opinions on how the status quo _should_ be changed, don’t you think? Perhaps, but in this case, preventing the influx of new misery (even though that misery may be entirely imaginary) is easier than dealing effectively with established sources of misery. Alcohol has its ‘foot in the door’ (for better or worse), but that shouldn’t automatically compel us to open it wider and let other things in. I’m quite prepared to be won over on this though. ---
**Author:** ![BoringDad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ad7895/32.png) [@BoringDad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BoringDad)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/98 "2004-06-29T17:35:04Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Perhaps, but in this case, preventing the influx of new misery (even though that misery may be entirely imaginary) is easier than dealing effectively with established sources of misery. Alcohol has its ‘foot in the door’ (for better or worse), but that shouldn’t automatically compel us to open it wider and let other things in. > > I’m quite prepared to be won over on this though. But the fact is, the new misery is already here. All legalizing does is acknowledge the fact and allow regulation. There would certainly be an increase in MJ users if it was legalized, but I do not think that there would be a vast upswing in the number of problem users. Alcohol use post-prohibition seems to support this belief, as the US was NOT swamped by millions of drunks all of a sudden. I think that most people familiar with users will agree that someone who uses pot every day is negatively affected by it, and that an excess of pot will affect your reflexes and driving ability. Legalizing, regulation, and REAL education will help with these abuse cases. Current education of “Drugs are bad, mmm-kay?” helps no-one. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/99 "2004-06-29T18:12:24Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > We’re stuck with the problems that alcohol can cause, and these may well be more significant and serious than any that could be caused by marijuana (or they may not), but that isn’t sufficient justification to permit or tolerate whatever additional problems marijuana may bring. We’re stuck with the problems that marijuana brings, too. We should not be stuck with the problems that prohibition of marijuana brings, though. Marijuana may not be as established as alcohol, but it is very much established in our society and I think it would be wrong to claim that it is not. Regarding the percentage that had ever used marijuana, “[Among young adults aged 18 to 25, the rate increased slightly from 53.0 percent in 2001 to 53.8 percent in 2002.](http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda/2k2nsduh/Overview/2k2Overview.htm#highlights)” ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163/100 "2004-06-29T18:15:41Z")
**Mangetout** , Indeed, what “new misery” is being prevented by keeping pot illegal? Let us look at a few comparisons: First, there are no countries where pot is legal and regulated; only where it is decriminalized. For example in the Netherlands possesion is illegal, although use is not (?). The Netherlands has half the usage rate as the US. But more than other European countries. So hard to interpret. How about a comparison to regulated recreational drugs? Tobacco is harder for kids to get a hold of than is pot. Tobacco has its potency regulated. Getting hold of tobacco does not expose kids to an underworld of other drugs. It seems that having made pot a target of a Drug War has increased the misery (assuming that such is correlated with a drug of greater potency being more widely available to underage users). Legalization with tight controls (including hefty fines for public use) may actually decrease the misery that is already extant. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-29-marijuana-should-be-legalised/252163.md?page=6)