I still don't understand marijuana legalization people.

[Destiny]

I'm sure most of you have heard the phrase that the only people who support marijuana legalization are people who smoke it. While that is in fact true, atleast for the most part, I still don't understand the potheads. Sure, they want it to be legal so they can get their fix, and continue using harmful and illegal substances (which wouldn't be illegal if they had their way). Most people are opposed to legalization of illegal drugs, but I just don't get why some people think it's a good idea to make it legal? People who say "it puts innocent people behind bars" are idiots. Innocent people don't use illegal substances. There is no reason for marijuana, or any other illegal drug, to be legalized. You don't want to go to jail? Don't use illegal substances.

 

The only legitimate use for illegal drugs is for medical purposes, but if you just want to go get stoned and/or feed your addiction, then it's not okay. And people who say that marijuana is not addictive at all are full of shit. People get addicted to marijuana all the time and they suffer from it, just because you got lucky with a joint once or twice, doesn't mean that everyone is immune to become addicted and/or dependent. I really don't understand marijuana legalization people. No intelligent individual supports and/or endorses an illegal activity, yet a select few uneducated persons seem to support the use of marijuana, which is an illegal activity.

[Sisyphus]

First off, you need to stop the ad hominems, right now. "Only potheads support legalization." "No intelligent people support legalization." These are logical fallacies, and are against our rules.

 

Second, your hypothesis is incorrect: I don't smoke marijuana at all, and I fully support legalization. Is it only people with alcoholism who support the 21st Amendment?

 

What you're doing is making a circular argument. You basically seem to be saying that it is illegal because it is wrong, and it is wrong because it is illegal.

 

And I'm not saying that marijuana isn't harmful. It isn't nearly as harmful as many things which are legal, like alcohol, but that isn't the point. Eating cheeseburgers is bad for you, too. You say there is no reason for marijuana to be legalized. Ok, what is the reason for cheeseburgers to be legalized? How about in a free country, you don't need a good reason for something to be legal?

 

Beyond that, the prohibition of marijuana is extremely expensive and laughably ineffective. Everyone who wants it can already get it. All prohibition accomplishes is making the product less safe, funding organized crime, and putting a whole lot of otherwise law abiding and productive members of society behind bars for something about as harmful to society as drinking a glass of wine. All of the same reasons the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s was a bad idea also apply to marijuana.

[A Tripolation]

I support legalization. I have never even seen pot. I just know it would bring in a lot of revenue via taxes, and hurt a lot of the minor drug dealers. And physiologically speaking, it's much less harmful than alcohol.

 

And plus, they would support the local restaurants.

[timo]

From the viewpoint of efficient gathering of data, I don't think it is a very smart strategy to insult people in whose opinions you are [allegedly] interested in before a discussion has even started.

 

EDIT: guess I'm being proven wrong by this thread.

Edited December 17, 2010 by timo

[ydoaPs]

First off, you need to stop the ad hominems, right now. "Only potheads support legalization." "No intelligent people support legalization." These are logical fallacies, and are against our rules.

 

Second, your hypothesis is incorrect: I don't smoke marijuana at all, and I fully support legalization. Is it only people with alcoholism who support the 21st Amendment?

 

What you're doing is making a circular argument. You basically seem to be saying that it is illegal because it is wrong, and it is wrong because it is illegal.

 

And I'm not saying that marijuana isn't harmful. It isn't nearly as harmful as many things which are legal, like alcohol, but that isn't the point. Eating cheeseburgers is bad for you, too. You say there is no reason for marijuana to be legalized. Ok, what is the reason for cheeseburgers to be legalized? How about in a free country, you don't need a good reason for something to be legal?

 

Beyond that, the prohibition of marijuana is extremely expensive and laughably ineffective. Everyone who wants it can already get it. All prohibition accomplishes is making the product less safe, funding organized crime, and putting a whole lot of otherwise law abiding and productive members of society behind bars for something about as harmful to society as drinking a glass of wine. All of the same reasons the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s was a bad idea also apply to marijuana.

Combining the post I quoted above with the fact that legalization leads to mass production and taxation(thus boosting the economy and chipping away at the deficit) and the fact that legalization removes the black market aspect(thus lowering crime), it's not hard to see that it is in fact reasonable for intelligent people to support legalization.

 

By the way, pot is illegal, not because it is particularly harmful-it isn't(it's even been shown to inhibit growth of cancerous cells), but rather because of a smear campaign against hemp as a cheap high quality manufacturing resource.

[Marat]

John Stuart Mill, the famous 19th century British legal theorist and father of modern liberalism, said that the only legitimate reason for making anything illegal for anyone in a free country is that it harms someone else. If something is only harmful to the person doing it, then that is no justification for the state to treat that person paternalistically and punish him with prison for not acting in what the state believes is his own best interest. So since marijuana use, if it is significantly harmful at all, only really directly produces harm for those who use it, then a liberal state such as ours, which even makes suicide legal, cannot sensibly forbid marijuana use.

 

It is also profoundly inconsistent to make alcohol, which demonstrably kills thousands of people every year from traffic accidents, liver disease, etc., perfectly legal, while making marijuana, which kills no one, illegal. Since alcohol also makes people more likely to commit violent crimes against others, while marijuana does not, it makes no sense for the former to be legal while the latter is illegal.

[Mr Skeptic]

I don't smoke anything, and I support marijuana legalization, much like I support alcohol legalization despite not drinking. This is an issue of freedom, of practicality, of economics. Do you have even the slightest idea how much it is costing us to try to tell people what not to smoke? Not just in economics terms either, check out how much of our prison population is there for marijuana for example, and compare our prison population to pretty much any other country. "Land of the free" my arse.

[Twinbird24]

Alcohol also has benefits if you drink it in moderation. People who smoke marijuana can experience the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers do - mainly because you are inhaling particles. If I were to smoke marijuana (I don't smoke, personally I hate the smell of marijuana and I'm not even interested in getting "high", also, I tried it once, and I just felt no high and it burned my throat) I would probably "vaporize" it first, so I don't inhale so many particles (and just get pure THC instead). Also, smoking tobacco, I think, is worse than smoking marijuana, and yet marijuana is still illegal.

[Moontanman]

I tried it but I didn't inhale....

[skyhook]

The stance destiny took is right in my opinion. This is a mind altering drug. Now if you say you can make revenue via tax, the government will be indirectly making immoral money off people, and I would not approve of this if I were you. Two wrongs don't make a right. I've seen alcohol addiction in my family. I've not encounter marijuana use as it is illegal, so it is rare. We also know from history how opium affected people and society, but I suppose opium is alot more addictive compare to marijuana.

There are differing opinions regarding its benefits and dangers,While some say it inhibits some disease, there are also articles saying that there are indications that it has cacinogens and other stuff. Many governments have ban this drug. but my idol, Kareem seems to have a legal prescription for the drug. It probably have medicinal use, same as morphine in terminal stage cancer patients. so I suppose I'll support its use in medicine but not in recreational use.

[ydoaPs]

This is a mind altering drug.

So are caffiene, vitamin B, oxygen, and alcohol; all of which are legal. Alcohol is also more dangerous than THC. Also, studies have not only shown that pot does not cause lung cancer as cigarettes do, but it inhibits cancer growth!

 

 

Now if you say you can make revenue via tax, the government will be indirectly making immoral money off people, and I would not approve of this if I were you.

So, you disapprove of the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes as well?

 

Let's break this down(feel free to add to the lists):

 

Legalization pros:

1)Economic stimulus

2)Deficit reduction via taxation

3)Reduction in crime(no cartels; similar effect as the repeal of prohibition of alcohol)

4)Lowering of judicial system costs as so fewer people will be incarcerated

5)Increased safety of product via mass production and regulation

 

Legalization cons:

1)It's illegal

2)It is a mind altering drug(which is less dangerous than other LEGAL mind altering drugs)

Edited December 18, 2010 by ydoaPs

[Mr Skeptic]

so I suppose I'll support its use in medicine but not in recreational use.

 

I support marijuana legalization but oppose its use as recreation. Just because I think something should be legal (or rather, not be specifically outlawed) doesn't mean I think it is a good idea. For example, falling down the stairs is legal but not recommended, and throwing people in jail because they fell down the steps would be profoundly stupid. Similarly, procrastination is a bad thing and also a choice, but throwing people in jail just because we don't like procrastination just seems like it would make things worse. Trying to make all bad things illegal is impractical and expensive. I don't want people smoking marijuana but I dislike even more the idea of spending my tax dollars to throw them in jail on my behalf for smoking it. As ydoaps noted, there's many reasons why legalization would be a good idea, which in my opinion would have far greater positive effects than the slight increase in usage that would result from legalization (for example, you wouldn't smoke it even if it were legal, right?).

 

Oh, and if you think smoking pot is bad for your health, compare that to jailtime and see which is worse for the person in question.

[Twinbird24]

I found this article, it's pretty interesting.

 

From the article:

 

"Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.

 

The actual story shows a much different picture. Those who voted on the legal fate of this plant never had the facts, but were dependent on information supplied by those who had a specific agenda to deceive lawmakers. You’ll see below that the very first federal vote to prohibit marijuana was based entirely on a documented lie on the floor of the Senate.

 

You’ll also see that the history of marijuana’s criminalization is filled with:

 

Racism

Fear

Protection of Corporate Profits

Yellow Journalism

Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators

Personal Career Advancement and Greed

These are the actual reasons marijuana is illegal."

 

Also, I wouldn't smoke marijuana even if it was legal.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Twinbird24

[Marat]

There is a general theory that mind-altering drugs associated with disliked races are the ones which have been made illegal, while those which are not associated with disliked races, such as alcohol, are not. Thus marijuana caused a moral panic in America in the early 1940s because it was used by despised Mexican immigrants but not by Wasps, just as opium use caused a moral panic in San Francisco in 1900 because it was a Chinese but not an Anglo drug. Races and ethnic groups are very much identified by the foods they eat (e.g., English as beefeaters, French as frogs), so if the group is disliked, so is its favorite drug.

 

Society generally can be understood as itself a massive mind-altering drug, since it seeks to induce conformity with certain basic values in the minds of the whole population, and this is part of the reason why it seeks to suppress alternative mind-altering drugs which may liberate people from the mass indoctrination society seeks to impose. But in a modern, tolerant, multicultural society there is tolerance for a number of profoundly mind-altering doctrines which take people far outside the conventional indoctrination system (e.g., belief in strange religions), it makes little sense to object to mind-altering drugs which change people's thinking much less than their alien ideologies do.

[random]

Well where I come from we have a prescription narcotic abuse crisis. Many after being prescribed and then becoming addicted and then having to overcome the horrible physical withdrawal switch to pot. As too many pot smokers won't touch em. People smoke dope for many reasons recreational use of any mind altering substance is always going to be with us. Alcohol is responsibly consumed by many as it is also abused and in my honest opinion alcohol is much more harmful. I also know many with medical problems who would not be functional without it such diseases as lupus and HIV. So my thing is that since it isn't that bad legalize it. Narcotics like cocaine and heroin that cause addiction with first time use are the ones we need to look out for not the ones that more or less make you feel a little drunk.

[mississippichem]

I've never really felt strongly either way on this one. On the one hand THC is definitely a mind altering substance and can be habit forming but isn't chemically addictive as far as we know. However, when compared to the chemically addictive nature of ethanol, THC looks quite benign.

 

One facet of this argument that I do feel strongly about is the fact that here in the states we lock people up for years for a victimless crime. I advocate a "confiscate only" policy for personal use drug infractions. We should go after the dealers instead, and not the petty street peddlers either; the major tax evading, customs dodging, cartel friendly, mass-scale distributors. Locking up some college kid in a prison with hardened killers just for having about a cigarette's worth of a non-addictive drug seems pretty heavy handed to me. Here in my state Mississippi, marijuana laws are surprisingly lax for a red [majority Republican] state. First and second offense small weight possession is a misdemeanor, which I think is a step in the right direction.

 

Well where I come from we have a prescription narcotic abuse crisis. Many after being prescribed and then becoming addicted and then having to overcome the horrible physical withdrawal switch to pot. As too many pot smokers won't touch em. People smoke dope for many reasons recreational use of any mind altering substance is always going to be with us. Alcohol is responsibly consumed by many as it is also abused and in my honest opinion alcohol is much more harmful. I also know many with medical problems who would not be functional without it such diseases as lupus and HIV. So my thing is that since it isn't that bad legalize it. Narcotics like cocaine and heroin that cause addiction with first time use are the ones we need to look out for not the ones that more or less make you feel a little drunk.

 

I've known people that started playing with hydrocodone, oxycodone and other weaker opiates; just taking the pills. Now they shoot heroin and or morphine on a daily basis. This is just what I've witnessed so I'm not saying this is a common occurrence, but opiates are opiates. Heroin serves just fine as a fix for a morphine addiction.

[pioneer]

One of the practical reasons for legalization, is it would cripple the black market for that product. The prohibition keeps the price high. This means it is very profitable for young entrepreneurs to get into that tax free business. There is plenty of money for all types of things, such as buying guns, etc. If I was in the black market (I am not), I would like having the government keep the price up. If they stopped the black market protectionism, which costs the tax payers billions, the price would fall, profits would be gone, there would be wide spread unemployment in the black market MJ industry, there would be no money for guns and no longer worth fighting and killing for. It would worth the black market's effort to put money into anti-legal-campaigns, since this will assure that their industry is here for the indefinite future.

 

The system in placed not only provides the black market a lucrative tax free industry, but it also supports many other businesses. The prohibition creates a lot of jobs and revenue as reflected by the billions given to the support industries. For example, lawyers, judges, police, jails, etc., make billions. This trickles into the economy to buy cars, guns, computers, paper (plenty of paper), etc, There is also the entire rehab industry; hospitals, half way houses, therapy, legal drugs, who also benefit. If I was in those industries,( which I am not) I would lobby to make sure nothing changes this wonderful cash cow. Advertising would be useful to keep the case cow funding going.

 

Maybe as way to see the effect is to go back into history to a similar prohibition; alcohol. This too created a lucrative black market industry. With the money coming in hand and foot, some was shared with local politicians and some bought guns and goons. The support industries also had many bumper years. When it was repealed what happened to the black market for alcohol? What about alcohol related violence? Did the country go crazy and all become alcoholics?

Edited December 19, 2010 by pioneer

[Marat]

Why not extend that argument and legalize all drugs? Until the restrictions created in the U.S. circa 1906, you could buy almost anything you wanted at a drug store, including laudanum and opium, and yet the country still functioned with reasonable social cohesion and efficiency.

 

Since it is perfectly legal in the U.S. today to commit suicide, it makes no sense that something infinitely less harmful like taking dangerous recreational drugs like cocaine, heroin, lsd, etc. should be prohibited by such severe legal penalties.

[Dak]

Narcotics like cocaine and heroin that cause addiction with first time use are the ones we need to look out for not the ones that more or less make you feel a little drunk.

 

I don't think you can actually get addicted first time (possibly barring if you have some underlying psychiatric condition that the drug 'fixes'...).

[random]

I don't think you can actually get addicted first time (possibly barring if you have some underlying psychiatric condition that the drug 'fixes'...).

 

 

Well then we need to get into definition of addiction and reach an agreement as to what defines addiction. Many medical journals and user testimonials state addiction happened (happens) with first time use. So is addiction an intense desire to use the substance again for the pleasure inducing experience or is addiction only defined as a negative physical reaction if the drug is not present in the body? I personally define it as the intense desire to use the substance again which will with constant use eventually induce the physical aspects of addiction.

[zapatos]

A commonly accepted definition:

 

Addiction is a primary, chronic, neurobiological disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

 

Physical dependence is a state of adaptation that is manifested by a drug-class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist

 

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/163/11/2014-a

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

!

Moderator Note

Moved this to Politics, where it belongs. Destiny, seeing as this same text has been posted on numerous other forums, I'm inclined to consider it PR spam, so you'll have to earn the right to post in Politics like everyone else.

[Butters]

I'm sure most of you have heard the phrase that the only people who support marijuana legalization are people who smoke it.

 

No intelligent individual supports and/or endorses an illegal activity, yet a select few uneducated persons seem to support the use of marijuana, which is an illegal activity.

 

Hmm. Well I will add my vote to somebody who supports marijuana legalisation but doesn't smoke it. I have smoked it in the past, never heavily, with few ill effects. I smoked/ate/drank it at Government-run "Bhang Stores" in Rhajistan in India. I smoked it during a week in Amsterdam, but it certainly didn't make me addicted. In fact, in both of those countries, there seemed to be very few negative social effects because of this. In Rhajistan, alcohol was FAR more of a social problem.

 

In the interests of full disclosure I will admit that I tried opium at those same Indian shops. We were also able to buy amphetamines, valium and ketamine at the pharmacy in various parts of the sub-continent and south-east asia. I had magic mushroom milkshakes in laos and thailand as well, with the only negative being an inability to stop giggling for an hour so my cheek muscles hurt.

 

As a teenager, I tried a lot of other things as well as those mentioned above.

 

My point is, I am now in my 30's, and have never robbed anyone for drug money or been so stoned I microwaved my baby. Had I been sent to prison at any point (although in a lot of circumstances what I was doing was legal where I was) then I can only assume that I would be a far more maladjusted person than I am now.

 

Something being ILLEGAL does not necessarily respond to what is moral (an abstract concept that is very open to debate) or what is in the best interests of a society. The law is a patchwork of revisions and special interests and whilst I agree that it would be a bad trend if people were to only obey the laws they agreed with, I think it is very healthy for a society to debate those laws which are not in our best interests so they can be changed.

[Pangloss]

I think it's interesting that some folks are okay with requiring people to purchase health insurance, but want drugs legalized. Are we all connected, with our actions impacting one another, or not?

 

Put another way, being okay with legalization would seem to undermine support for that aspect of Obamacare.

[CaptainPanic]

I'm sure most of you have heard the phrase that the only people who support marijuana legalization are people who smoke it. While that is in fact true, atleast for the most part, I still don't understand the potheads. Sure, they want it to be legal so they can get their fix, and continue using harmful and illegal substances (which wouldn't be illegal if they had their way). Most people are opposed to legalization of illegal drugs, but I just don't get why some people think it's a good idea to make it legal? People who say "it puts innocent people behind bars" are idiots. Innocent people don't use illegal substances. There is no reason for marijuana, or any other illegal drug, to be legalized. You don't want to go to jail? Don't use illegal substances.

 

The only legitimate use for illegal drugs is for medical purposes, but if you just want to go get stoned and/or feed your addiction, then it's not okay. And people who say that marijuana is not addictive at all are full of shit. People get addicted to marijuana all the time and they suffer from it, just because you got lucky with a joint once or twice, doesn't mean that everyone is immune to become addicted and/or dependent. I really don't understand marijuana legalization people. No intelligent individual supports and/or endorses an illegal activity, yet a select few uneducated persons seem to support the use of marijuana, which is an illegal activity.

It has been a long time since I saw such a poor argument in favor of banning weed. Your argument goes something like this:

1. Marihuana is illegal, so you should not use it.

2. Because you shouldn't use it anyway, it should be illegal.

That is a circular argument... and therefore flawed.

 

I live in the Netherlands. Marijuana is tolerated here (de-criminalized). We have shops (like bars) where you can simply buy it if you're over 18. It is a topic which can be openly discussed in our free society. I know plenty of people (students and working people) who smoke pot. These can be accomplished scientists and engineers.

In our country, despite the fact that it's freely available, the amount of habitual smokers is less than in the countries around us - there are multiple sources (summarized in this article) which support that.

 

It's a pity that people like you abuse your freedom of speech to write such complete nonsense.