Law Enforcement Against Prohibition: On 40th Anniversary of “War on Drugs,” Cops Release Report Showing its Failure; World Leaders Encourage Drug Legalization

[Springfield]

Very fun thread so far. I'll try and ruin it as best as I can.

First thing that I find very ironic. Republicans regularly accuse democrats of trying to create a "parent state", that the democrats are trying to tell people how to live their lives. However, once the subject of drugs (and more specifically marijuana) is brought up, the republicans then become the ones wanting a parent state. Very ironic and inconsistent if you ask me.

Now as to the last several pages of comments. People against legalization or decriminalization seemingly don't know what they are talking about. Legalization is very different than decriminalization. Decriminalization does not mean that there is no penalty for possession of marijuana, this is what many states have in place now. Often there is no penalty for possessing up to 1/2 ounce of the drug. After that there are fines that increase with the weight of the substance with jail/prison time being a very possible punishment for larger amounts in possession. Legalization means that you can possess as much marijuana as you'd like without fear of punishment. I support full legalization as many times a marijuana user has more than 1/2 once of the substance in his or her possession. They aren't drug dealers, they just don't feel like going to the "marijuana store" to buy more every couple of days. Think of it like after you get back from Costco and all the sudden you have 3 months worth of toilet paper.

There is lots of talk about the stigma of being a "stoner", how "stoners" act and what "stoners" do. You have no idea what you are talking about and are trying to generalize something that can't be put so simply. There are many functional marijuana users just as there are many functional alcohol users. The drug does not make the person. A lazy, messy, dumb stoner is exactly that... he's a lazy, messy, dumb person. The marijuana did not make him this. The fact that the lazy, messy, dumb person smokes marijuana is a correlation, NOT a causation. If you can't tell the difference between the two, you should go back to school and study some more statistics.

Marijuana users will not be walking down the street smoking marijuana. You won't go to the bar and see people smoking marijuana. You won't be able to take a marijuana break during work. None of these things will happen if it is legalized so stop your worrying. Marijuana will be treated much like alcohol and to some extent cigarettes. You won't be able to be "high" at any point during the work day and still hold your job. You won't be able to light up a joint in front of school kids. Republicans are anything but naive and some of these dumb assumptions I've seen in this thread are exactly that. Either that or you are playing dumb to try and prove a point.

There is currently drug testing at work places. Legalizing marijuana will not stop employers from hiring people who don't pass a drug test. Legalization will not stop employers from firing a worker who comes to work high. Can you fire an employee who comes to work drunk? Then of course you can fire an employee who comes to work high. I'm not sure if there are any field tests to determine if somebody is driving under the influence of marijuana, if there isn't there will be. Think about that, you'll be creating a whole sector of jobs by making some sort of field test for marijuana. Not only is the tax opportunity there, but you'll be creating a huge job sector by legalizing marijuana.

As far as the negative effects of marijuana...

Yes, it is addictive. If you try and quit you'll probably have trouble getting to sleep and you might have a lack of appetite for a few days or a week. I can tell you personally that quitting marijuana is 100's of times easier than quitting something that is completely legal... tobacco. So, it is addictive but that's not really a big deal. Caffeine and alcohol are both more addictive than marijuana. An addictive property of a drug is not a reason to make it illegal.

Yes, it does give you a "hangover". I'd describe it more of a haze. Funny thing is that daily users of marijuana won't experience this "hangover". A hangover from alcohol is infinitely worse than one from marijuana. To answer McD's question, I'd rather have my doctor come in and operate one me after smoking 15 bong hits last night than one that took 15 shots of tequila last night. Never mind the fact that smoking 15 bong hits is incredibly difficult in one sitting. Oh, and guess what is a perfect cure for a nasty hangover? Yep... Marijuana.

I guess that's it for now. Probably tl;dr as it is.

---------- Post added June-18th-2011 at 03:55 PM ----------

Oh, forgot something. Hubbs proves how cool he is once again. Hilarious.

[ACW]

#1, control both. Criminalizing both=fail.

SS, unfortunately both parties are to blame

[ixcuincle]

Pros:

Tax revenue

Eliminates underground drug trade saving who knows how many lives

No prison time for folks not deserving (this is an opinion, certainly) so more room in jails for real criminals

Medicinal benefits embraced

True education can be spread about marijuana instead of just "oh drugs are bad, its a drug!" that we teach kids today (vs responsibility, accountability, etc)

Marijuana becomes harder to access for kids (yes HARDER, believe it)

Cons:

Potential for people to get high and perform their jobs, endangering others

Potential for people to drive while high

Gateway drug leading to other harsher drugs (opinion, and not mine, personally)

So tell me - the pros are very much real...as for the cons (which are also real) - how are the cons any different than those related to the legalization of alcohol? Oh wait...alcohol impairs your senses and decision making even WORSE than marijuana. Thats the difference.

That same school bus driver can just have "a few drinks" before he goes to work, isnt that the same thing? And he can do that right now.

This thread has proven all 3 cons are bull****. Therefore there is no incentive to keep marijuana illegal.

This notion of the "irresponsible pothead" driving around and getting into accidents is ridiculous. If such an individual exists, why hasn't it happened in California?

Potheads stay at home and toke up. They don't drive whilst high or work whilst high.

[elkabong82]

This thread has proven all 3 cons are bull****. Therefore there is no incentive to keep marijuana illegal.

This notion of the "irresponsible pothead" driving around and getting into accidents is ridiculous. If such an individual exists, why hasn't it happened in California?

Potheads stay at home and toke up. They don't drive whilst high or work whilst high.

I imagine a field sobriety test to determine how stoned someone is could be employed. Test coordination and memory, if they're too stoned to pass, they're too stoned to drive, bam, DUI. Stoned drivers are fairly easy to spot, they're the ones driving around past midnight heading toward Taco Bell, driving 15 under the speed limit.

[alexey]

Alcohol is indeed a very different substance. Unlike marijuana, alcohol is both physically and psychologically addictive, can incapacitate and even kill people, tends to make many people violent, substantially impairs motor skills, and is linked to thousands upon thousands of rapes, deaths, car wrecks, etc. every year. The problems associated with alcohol consumption far exceed the problems associated with marijuana use.

The principal problems associated with marijuana use stem from the laws that criminalize marijuana, including the enormous cost to prosecute and incarcerate users and dealers of marijuana and turf wars between gangs dealing marijuana. That's not to say I exonerate those who use or deal marijuana from responsibility for their actions. I am simply arguing that, as a practical matter, there are very real costs that flow from the criminalization of marijuana use and distribution. Moreover, other problems associated with marijuana use (e.g., decreased worker productivity) do not justify the cost taxpayers incur in connection with the criminalization of marijuana.

Finally, as a general matter, the reach of the government's arm should extend no further than is necessary to mitigate real threats/costs to society. Here, the government's reach extends far beyond that which is necessary to mitigate the threats/costs to society posed by marijuana use. Reasonable restrictions on use are fine (e.g., no driving under the influence). Flat prohibitions are simply ridiculous.

Great points all around!

Some additional thoughts:

Humans generally like to get messed up. Every culture favors some substances and shuns others. Alcohol is our culture's substance of choice.

Criminalization of drugs, as well as our criminal system in general, seem outdated. I recently ran into this interesting interview:

I've been working on this topic [neurobiology and law] for years and it’s become clear to me that our legal system as it stands now is so broken and outdated. It essentially rests on this myth of equality, which says all brains are created equal. As long as you’re over 18 and you’re over an IQ of 70, then all brains are treated as though they have an equal capacity for decision making, for simulating possible futures for understanding consequences and so on. And it’s simply not true.

Along any axis that we measure brains, they are very different. There’s as much variation neurally as there is with people’s external physical characteristics. So an enlightened legal system, and one that’s also more humane and more cost effective, will instead of treating everybody equally and treating incarceration as a one-size-fits-all solution, will do customized sentencing and customized rehabilitation. It will try to understand people better, in terms of what can be done with them and for them. It can have better risk assessment to understand, “How dangerous is this person?”

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/06/audio-excerpt-incognito/

It's about time we started teaching our children the basics of neurobiology, emotions vs reason, reward circuitry, addiction, etc. The brain is a very important organ and it doesn't come with a manual... In that context, I think, it would be much easier to properly deal with issues of pot, alcohol, sex, etc.

Also a quick point about the role government... mitigating the threats/costs to society is not a clear cut issue. What about profanities on TV? What about being naked in public? We decided not to allow that. Should we? People will try to push boundaries in order to sell crap. Or, what about popular songs with words like "im too sexy for ya" playing on the radio? That is costly to society as well, but we decided that we have to allow that.

[ACW]

I stand firmly on the side of government intervention must have a proven need.

[Prosperity]

Contributions of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton are also cemented as an integral part of our culture... but yes you do have a point. Pot smoking does not automatically disquality you from being able to make meaningful contributions in some areas.

When you smoke pot, you reduce some capacities of your brain. When you smoke pot all the time, your brain adjusts to these reduced capacities. This adjustment changes your personality. This is not an argument from authority. You cannot discredit this by claiming that I didn't smoke enough myself, that I don't know enough smokers, or that I am prejudiced.

Extra Extra, Read All About It, Smoking Too Much Pot Is Bad!

well duh, but hey, no one is saying go out and get high all the time, as for personality changes, well maybe that's not such a bad thing

[NavyDave]

How will the prisons survive if we legalize drugs?

Its not like the scumbags using illegal drugs that steal to support their habit would change their ways. Then you have those who use drugs and their inhibitions are lowered to the point they do destructive things.

And lets not pretend that there have not been DUI related deaths this year in the area using those harmless drugs by people driving on suspended licenses.

Then you have liberals trying to convince people that the idiots who become addicted to illegal drugs have a disease, a sickness which IMO is a load of crap. A Disease or sickness is like Cancer.

When you knowingly shoot into your body or ingest an illegal substance thats primary purpose is to alter the reality you can not deal with its not a sickness its a weakness.

Drug companies that make medication to control chronic pain that is highly addictive should be held accountable.

[ACW]

When you knowingly shoot into your body or ingest an illegal substance thats primary purpose is to alter the reality you can not deal with its not a sickness its a weakness.

Drug companies that make medication to control chronic pain that is highly addictive should be held accountable.

So you've never used prescription drugs? They have the same purpose. And drug companies should be held accountable? Wow :doh:

[NavyDave]

So you've never used prescription drugs? They have the same purpose. And drug companies should be held accountable? Wow :doh:

You really suck at moral relativity.

Recreational use of illegal substances and medication to cure ailments and help others recover after surgery are not the same.

There are drug companies that in the past did market drugs that were highly addictive or had terrible side effects and were quietly removed from the US market but the good news is they are / were available to poor saps in 3rd world nations

---------- Post added June-19th-2011 at 09:21 AM ----------

25 years ago today Len Bias died from a Drug overdose. Cocaine was considered harmless back then.

[ixcuincle]

How many people do you know who have died from a marijuana overdose?

[ACW]

So glad that cocaine being illegal stopped Len from doing it...wait, it didn't? You mean prohibition doesn't work? :yikes:

[doctorshockalu]

When you knowingly shoot into your body or ingest an illegal substance thats primary purpose is to alter the reality you can not deal with its not a sickness its a weakness.

So you consider meditating/fasting/eating/taking advil/drinking water/etc... to be a weakness? Legal or Illegal. Anything you ingest will alter your "reality".

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yeah, 100% seriously. And I don't even have kids. You know how there is always the person at the party in the front yard throwing up? The ones that can't handle their alcohol? I don't want to see that bus driver smoking "just a little" before work, or at a lunch break, then killing 40 kids. You know it would happen.

Nor do I want to see 18 year olds graduate HS, then sit their asses on the couch taking bong hits all day.

How about driving around in a Buick Skylark with a warm keg of Natty Lite in the backseat?

---------- Post added June-20th-2011 at 11:27 AM ----------

People used to say that it was Cornell, other people used to say it was U Chicago, people used to say it was Harvard, people used to say it was MIT, people used to say it was Johns Hopkins, people used to say it was NYU,etc.

I wonder if there is a definitive answer anywhere?

I recall one suicide in the 4 years when I was in college.

I have to think that the highest suicide rate is at a large state school just because those have the largest cross-section of the population.

[Hubbs]

So glad that cocaine being illegal stopped Len from doing it...wait, it didn't? You mean prohibition doesn't work? :yikes:

I know 172 dentists that committed suicide by intentionally overdosing on marijuana.

[Madison Redskin]

Recreational use of illegal substances and medication to cure ailments and help others recover after surgery are not the same.

Have you ever intentionally altered your reality by getting drunk? If so, does that mean you're a wuss? :evilg:

[Busch1724]

BTW, for all I care legalize pot. With that said the most ridiculous argument out there is from the legalization people that inevitably ask the question, "How many people died from smoking pot?" It's the same argument made by anti-religious people that ask, "Who created God?"

[RVAbrendan]

I have a feeling this will come back to "moral relativity".

Which in my case, my morals have almost NOTHING to do with man-made law. I suppose that's where the line is drawn?

[elkabong82]

BTW, for all I care legalize pot. With that said the most ridiculous argument out there is from the legalization people that inevitably ask the question, "How many people died from smoking pot?" It's the same argument made by anti-religious people that ask, "Who created God?"

It's used to make a distinction between it and harmful drugs where one can have a deadly overdose, including alcohol which is legal and prescription drugs which are legal. The argument alone I agree is not enough to validate the legalization of pot, it's part of a larger, collective argument.

[SnyderShrugged]

I know 172 dentists that committed suicide by intentionally overdosing on marijuana.

I hear they are making a giant quilt out of hemp and dental floss in memoriam.

[Hubbs]

I hear they are making a giant quilt out of hemp and dental floss in memoriam.

Great, that's only going to make them think about it more often and cause even more suicides. Already, the cause of death for four out of five dentists is suicide by marijuana overdose. (The cause of death for the other one of out five dentists is being murdered by angry patients whose root canals were botched because they were performed by people who were stoned out of their minds.)