That doesn’t mean that such a period can’t last for centuries; that’s why I used the term “foreseeable future”. It doesn’t affect anyone now alive if the pendulum doesn’t swing back until 500 years from now.
You’re entirely right. I tend to see things more from the broad vista of human history rather than in terms of my generation. I take comfort in the idea that even if the world around me during my lifespan is entirely fucked, people of the future will be able to look back and shake their heads at how ridiculous all of this is.
That said, I don’t think that even a period of intense conservatism will last more than twenty years or so, barring some sort of horrible economic collapse or massive world war. But this is just my opinion.
In 1976, if you’d have asked me this question, I’d have said “ten years, maybe. Certainly, by the year 2006, marijuana will be legal, and will fund government projects by way of taxation.”
Of course, in 1976, I figured that by 2006, people would have quit bothering with clothes in public, there’d be regular shuttle service to the Moon, and Congress would have five houses, instead of two – lead guitar, bass guitar, drums, keyboards, and lead vocals. In fact, the only predictions I made then that came true by now were the ubiquity of computers and the collapse of the Soviet Union. And even then, I was wrong – I never dreamed we’d use computers for porn, and the USSR collapsed without the use of a single nuke.
Based on current trends, I do not see MJ being legalized anytime soon. Our society has become MORE restrictive, not less, and the same demographic that protested against the Vietnam War way back when is the same demographic that now derides my views of the President and wants to tell me how George W. is the greatest American ever, and how we’d be knee-deep in terrorists if he wasn’t flying around from his Fortress of Solitude, biting their guns in half or something.
Our prison industry has been largely privatised. There is financial incentive to jail and keep them in. If 52 percent of people have tried it another 25 % dont care about it. Prohibition has a poor record.
You are making the assumption that the 20-30 year olds will continue to hold the same opinions (and express them by voting) when they are 30-40. My observation suggests that age mellows and makes people more conservative. Or else the liberals die off quicker, or conservatives become more vocal, or …?
Or maybe the potheads are busier searching for muchies than influencing legislation.
Just to make things clear, this is one point on which I hope you’re right and I’m wrong.
Are you sure the old “people get more conservative” adage is still true. I am not so sure, without polls or studies, it seems like people my age (nearly 40) are mellowing and getting more of a “live and let live” attitude. I know I am less conservative than I was in my early 20’s on many issues. If you smoked pot in your twenties and know there is nothing wrong with it, why would you change your mind in your 50’s or 60’s?
Jim
You’re making the assumption that pot has remained illegal so far (contrary to your idealistic past assumptions) because old potheads don’t bother or have turned against it. The data shows that a huge contingent of voters still exists which hasn’t tried marijuana. The seniors(65) who make up 20% of the voters have virtually no firsthand exposure to marijuana. In fact if I assume that 90% of those who have tried marijuana will vote for its legalization, then as per current voting demographics, legalization would have 37% support. Add in 10% of never-used voters, and that’s still 43%. Which is close to the typical results seen in prior state ballot measures. The reason this won’t hold 15 years from now, is because the 65+ segment then will have a sizable proportion of pot “triers” (~35%), as opposed to the 6% now. The demographics won’t repeat. Contrary to figurative colloquailisms, not “everyone” has tried pot. In fact, less than half. But that will change.
Constant bombardment with contrary opinions?
My observation is not the least bit scientific. And I don’t know how it could be. But my contemporaries who I thought, years ago, would legalize it if given half the chance, have passed thru positions of power and are moving into retirement with not much (or not enough) development on the political front. It just makes one wonder.
No, not really. There is only one private prison in my state that I know of, and there are about a dozen or so state-run facilities.
I know there are several companies who run for-profit prisons, but I don’t think you could characterise the prison industry as a whole as “largely privatized.” The majority are still state-run and likely to remain that way.
Not really. It’s not like the school system where funding is determined by how many kids attend a district. The prison poplulation has increased by a hefty percentage in my state the last few years while budgets have been repeatedly cut.
Lastly, the population in my local prison wouldn’t change if marijuana was legalized tomorrow. There is not a single person in there who was incarcerated just for posession of personal-use amounts of marijuana,
While I was a frequent pot smoker in the 60’s and 70’s, and was a member of NORML and subscribed to “High Times” (well, I didn’t subscribe myself, but read someone else’s subscription), and grew marijuana, and would legalize it if given half a chance, the issue is just not that important to me.
I’m not out there pushing legislation to decriminalize marijuana. If it appears on the ballot, I’ll vote that way, and I like to think I’m voting for candidates who are against criminalizing marijuana use, but it’s not high on my priority list.
I suspect marijuana legalization will occur more “de facto” than “de jure”. The laws will not change so much as become unenforced and unused, like those oddball laws we laugh at on those lists we see on the internet.
How about selling, trafficking, growing, etc.? Presumably those would also be legalized.
There is one guy who would be released under that scenario. He was incarcerated for trafficking (had huge amounts.)
Hey, I’m on your side. Personally, I think that the drug war is one of our country’s stupidest and most harmful endeavors but I think we should be honest and not toss out heartstring-tugging misconceptions about the kid with a joint in his pocket winding up in the Big House.* We shouldn’t do what the “other side” does and make emotional appeals based on half-truths. If we do, it just gives the “other side” more ammo.
Very, very few people go to prison for having personal-use amounts of marijuana. In many areas, it’s a misdemeanor, not a felony. There are a lot of statistics floating around out there which would make you believe otherwise but sometimes they’re not exactly telling the whole story. (For example, some count people who got prison sentences for drug offenses but they were lesser charges included more extensive docket.)
*Yeah, it happens sometimes. There are occasional miscarriages of justice in this regard, but it’s not frequent.
The seniors are results of the 60s when everything was legal. LSD ,mescaline pot. hash. They were everywhere. It was celebrated. Pot smoking in concerts. Everything available.Not much emphasis in coke though.
Hmmm - easily grown almost anywhere making it difficult to tax, versus tobacco giants of Virginia well taxed and powerful … I’d say never in the US - although excellent quality in Arkansas!
Legal? I don’t think so… in the 70s there was a strong movement to decriminalize pot, but it hasn’t been legal in the US since the 30s. (And of course, everything is still available; the laws haven’t done much to actually prevent people from getting recreational drugs.)
We have had this discussion before.
Yes we have.
Which means that around 1,400 people are incarcerated for “use only.” It doesn’t tell us how much they were found posessing. It could be a larger amount than could reasonably be termed “personal use” but the authorites didn’t find enough evidence for trafficking charges.
Even though one is too many, in my opinion, I would still stand by my statement that very few people go to prison for posessing personal-use amounts of pot, especially when compared to the prison population as a whole.
…in Federal facilities in 1997. Most arrests are under state law.
And another 26% i.e. 2,000 for non-use/dealing/manufacturing/importing offenses, which you guessed to be paraphenalia.
Right, but even then, they don’t represent a large number of people. As I pointed out, only one person out of over 2,900 at my local prison has been incarcerated for marijunana posession alone. I fully agree that* one* is way too many but even at the state level there aren’t very many compared with the population as a whole.