View Full Version : Lawmakers to introduce bill to legalize marijuana
Lawmakers to introduce bill to legalize marijuana
I would say 'Bout Time!
Lets see how the Lefty Lib Left and Personal Responsibility Right line up on this one.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/lawmakers-introduce-bill-legalize-marijuana-225335489.html
"A group of US representatives plan to introduce legislation that will legalize marijuana and allow states to legislate its use, pro-marijuana groups said Wednesday........................"
Treat marijuana just like cigarettes. You want to smoke dope then make sure you don't work for a company that drug tests it's employees.
The bill, which is expected to be introduced on Thursday by Republican Representative Ron Paul and Democratic Representative Barney Frank, would be the first ever legislation designed to end the federal ban on marijuana.
It will be interesting to see the roll-out on this. If I read it correctly, after the federal "laws" are altered, then each state MAY want to change.
This could take 10 years or more..
:munchin
It will be interesting to see the roll-out on this. If I read it correctly, after the federal "laws" are altered, then each state MAY want to change.
This could take 10 years or more..
:munchin
If I correctly understand, there are already a few states who have done the reverse of this. Im pretty sure California is one of them.
PedOncoDoc
06-23-2011, 07:09
If I correctly understand, there are already a few states who have done the reverse of this. Im pretty sure California is one of them.
Michigan recently changed their marijuana laws as well - Ann Arbor is particularly notorious for lax marijuana rules and has hosted the annual "Hash Bash" for almost 40 years.
A good friend who is a local LEO has stated that they are seeing an increase in the use of hard drugs by teens who seem to get just as much of a thrill out of knowingly breaking the law as they do from exploring recreational drug use. :mad:
A good friend who is a local LEO has stated that they are seeing an increase in the use of hard drugs by teens who seem to get just as much of a thrill out of knowingly breaking the law as they do from exploring recreational drug use. :mad:
I think this is a key element in the lure of drugs.
If you make them all legal,, someone will start snorting Portland Cement... :mad:
You know, having been in the CN field for a time, I would say that if anyone thinks that there will be a significant reduction in trafficking or any other drug related crime, they are kidding themselves. However, I actually agree. They should legalize it. As a libertarian, I think the government needs to get out of our lives. Negative actions should be criminalized and the act of purchasing a narcotic isn't automatically a negative act. Theft is. We would also need to require, as a prerequisite for receiving ANY type of public assistance, mandatory drug testing. Not a civil liberties issue as receiving public assistance is a privilege and not a right. One can still choose not to accept it and do all the drugs they want.
You know, having been in the CN field for a time, I would say that if anyone thinks that there will be a significant reduction in trafficking or any other drug related crime, they are kidding themselves.
Why would there still be a "need" for trafficking if the drug is legal and anyone can buy it at 7-11 or grow it themselves?
A good friend who is a local LEO has stated that they are seeing an increase in the use of hard drugs by teens who seem to get just as much of a thrill out of knowingly breaking the law as they do from exploring recreational drug use. :mad:
I'm not sure whether pot is such a gateway drug or, as in this case whether association with like-minded people leads to further destructive behavior. I suspect more the latter. Behavior’s, both good or bad loves company regardless of the actions or the crime.
I would disagree with legalization regardless. ..jd
dollarbill
06-23-2011, 07:51
I agree uplink5. Thus the saying, birds of a feather.
Why would there still be a "need" for trafficking if the drug is legal and anyone can buy it at 7-11 or grow it themselves?
Organized crime takes advantage of any weaknesses in the legal system. When a particular drug is legalized, as other nations who have tinkered with this have discovered, organized crime shifts from illicit trafficiking into protection, taxation, forgery (licenses), blackmail and extortion (law makers, police, judges, etc) in order to manipulate the judicial system in their favor.
In other words, legalization (as well as any other government effort of any kind) takes away one opportunity but creates another. with different, but often equally, damaging second and third order effects. It is the core reason for having less government intrusion while punishing only core misbehavior (theft, murder, rape, cheating, negligence, etc)
IMHO
R3V3LATIONS
06-23-2011, 08:45
I am against the passage of this new law. What would the REAL reason be for legalizing marjiuana? becuase we are tired of filling up jails with its users, seeking to eliminate trans-national drug traffic, seeking to undercut criminal enterprises out of one drug market? To me, the call to legalization of marijuana seems like the adoption of a defeatist attitude.
Case example, Red light district in amsterdam, prostitution is legalized, but the criminal elements of organized crime have a foothold in the area and now have one less thing for law enforcement to run them out with.
Also, although certain states allow for the usage of medicinal marijuana, it is stll illegal to use federally. And if caught transporting or misusing "medicinal" marijuana...it becomes a federal offense in which the DEA then becomes involved. I arrested someone for it about 4 months ago.
Look at my posts. If the intent is to "solve a problem", only new ones will be created. However, what problem has our government ever solved by tinkering with it? I am for it from a libertarian perspective. I think the government needs to leave people to their own devices. I have no illusions that crime will drop or some social issue resolved.
Been listenin' to the arguments all my life.
Don't Bogart That Joint! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvGJvzwKqg0
Smoke Two Joints - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7mg5j038lU&feature=related
I`ll Never Smoke Weed With Willie Again - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm34ZLlIvQg&feature=related
Seeds and Stems Again Blues - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEg9FbuaSCk&feature=related
Legalize it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOEgjkfuMOg&feature=related
Panama Red - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyPYM5uUViI&feature=related
The Pot Smoker's Song - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tm8EJaoFO8&feature=fvwrel
Reefer Man - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D44pyeEvhcQ&feature=related
Smoking Reefers - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GtZ_DVBQ78&feature=related
Weed Smoker's Dream - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyjW8FTGxbI&feature=related
I like some of the music.
Richard :munchin
I used to be all for its leglaization. It is far less harmful than alcohol and from what I gather its very similar to tobacco. The thing that changed my mind was a tobacco statistic. Don't quote my numbers but cigarette related illnesses cost the country something in the range of 50 billion annually. Even though there would be gains in tax revenue it would be a huuge drain because of medical costs.
Plus I think most people need to be protected from themselves. Tobacco kills millions of people but others still don't care enough to not do it. There's no sense in providing another opportunity
Texas_Shooter
06-23-2011, 09:25
Marijuana will not be legalized. Period. End of discussion.
Kyobanim
06-23-2011, 09:25
Treat it like alcohol. Age limits and taxes. Quit pissing away billions of dollars a year on enforcement. Didn't work in prohibition and it's not working now.
Texas_Shooter
06-23-2011, 09:36
Alcohol, cigarette, and "legal" drug companies will tell all there friends in congress to vote against it. They are the ones that stand to lose the most if cannabis was to be legalized.
This bill sounds like it is not even out of committee where it will die.
I used to be all for its leglaization. It is far less harmful than alcohol and from what I gather its very similar to tobacco. The thing that changed my mind was a tobacco statistic. Don't quote my numbers but cigarette related illnesses cost the country something in the range of 50 billion annually. Even though there would be gains in tax revenue it would be a huuge drain because of medical costs.
Plus I think most people need to be protected from themselves. Tobacco kills millions of people but others still don't care enough to not do it. There's no sense in providing another opportunity
If one even has the remotest understanding of the limits placed on government by the constitution and why they were placed, you wouldn't say that. If you are okay with this one, someone else will be okay with something you don't like. The powers that our government have are enumerated specifically to avoid subjective interpretation and personal likes and dislikes.
Personally, I have been totally against legalizing it. I do understand Sinjefe's point though. If we legalized it, then tied all social welfare and benefit programs to drug tests (pop hot, no benny's); most companies make drug testing a provision of working for them; etc; that may take care of part of it. OTOH, we might create a new class of citizen.
Treat it like alcohol. Age limits and taxes. Quit pissing away billions of dollars a year on enforcement. Didn't work in prohibition and it's not working now.
I can trust an alcoholic, I can not trust a pot-head.
I can see into the eyes of the drinker and say, "You're not driving", or "you're not climbing this radio tower with my life in your hands". "Go sleep it off, you're working the night shift".
With pot, I can not clearing see your judgement making skills. Is pot enjoyable, can one partake within the confines of their house? I'm not the one to speculate, but I beleive that long term use, does change the mental health of the user.
Take in point, aprox. 100 years ago, rural Wyoming. One could buy pot, coke, opium, whores, booze, any number of "social taboos", can legally purchase or have perscribed such items. The total using population was probably smaller then the total number of users today, but more available then, then now.
I will not use, be it leagal or not, I enjoy my health.
It would boost the economy.
Legalize it.
Tax the bloody shit out of it.
Develop a breathalyzer test for it.
Moderation in all things.
Legalize it.
Tax the bloody shit out of it.
Develop a breathalyzer test for it.
Moderation in all things.
There are already tests in place. In NC you have to go to the Drug Recognition Expert School, be certified as a DRE and you can administer the tests. Just a little trivia for you, did you know that after you smoke marijunana your tongue is flourescent under a black light? That is part of the test.
Just a little trivia for you, did you know that after you smoke marijunana your tongue is flourescent under a black light? That is part of the test.
Like, wow, min-I gotta try that. You need, like a mirror, though-right? :D
It would boost the economy.
Shovel-ready projects??? :munchin
Shovel-ready projects??? :munchin
Think about it, though-what a legacy! I mean, if nothing else got done during the whole administrative term but legalizing ganja...:rolleyes:
Shovel-ready projects??? :munchin:D
Yup..dig and plant, water liberaly (no pun intended):munchin
1stindoor
06-23-2011, 12:18
Why would there still be a "need" for trafficking if the drug is legal and anyone can buy it at 7-11 or grow it themselves?
For the same reason you can't grow your own tobacco or produce your own liquor.
If it's made legal...it'll be regulated, taxed, and overwatched by the Federal Government...and Uncle Sam hates when you dip into his profits.
1stindoor
06-23-2011, 12:24
It would boost the economy.
I disagree. The "boost" would be short lived as the Beaucracy would grow to new levels to regulate, tax, etc. Eventually, like cigarettes...congress will kill that goose as well.
greenberetTFS
06-23-2011, 12:26
I have a friend in Austin,Texas who is a degreed drug councilor of 30+ years and he told me that marijuana is how most drug addicts start,how does he know,he was one himself..... As a former Navy corpsman in Vietnam serving with the Marines....... They started with marijuana,then more heavier stuff and that's why he's a strong advocate of NOT making it any easier to get people started on drugs..........:(
Big Teddy :munchin
greenberetTFS
06-23-2011, 12:31
Editted
Originally posted by Pete:
Treat marijuana just like cigarettes. You want to smoke dope then make sure you don't work for a company that drug tests it's employees.
But, who wants to make a bet against the possibility that within a short period of time of legalizing marijuana there will be a push to prevent employer drug testing for marijuana since the smoking of it will, at that time, be a legal act.
There will be the inevitable comparisons to alcohol being consumed by employees on their own time and the fact that there is very little, if any, testing for alcohol at the workplace, so why should there testing for marijuana.
Marijuana users will cry that they are being discriminated against and we all know how Liberals feel about discrimination. The Libs will then take the dopers under their wing and pacify these poor, discriminated against, pot smokers.
Whose to say that it will not eventually become a civil rights issue. I think that twenty-five years ago most of us would have declared that gays and such would never be allowed to act openly within the ranks. Then came DADT and now the new policy is being hailed as a civil rights victory.
If this sounds a little far-fetched, maybe it is. But let's compare it to this philosophy: If we allow the Liberals to pass their gun control laws that make extended magazines and assault rifles illegal, they will then be full of themselves and try to take away pistols and concealed weapons permits throughout the country. After doing away with those they will then go after the hunter's everyday hunting rifle, shotgun and hunting bow (animals have rights too).
I do not thinking that I am going too far out on a limb in saying that most on this forum would agree that this could or would be the Liberals' idea of the natural progression of gun laws.
I know that I am mixing a few apples and oranges but there is a definite parallel between the two ideas. Obviously, the outcome will be determined by the present administration and legislature, but I trust neither and actually I have now scared the shit out myself thinking what things could be like if Obama gets re-elected. I hope that I am not being paranoid.
Just my $00.02.
Tress
I can think of no circumstance where I would encourage ANY new law or regulation and only would welcome the rescinding of laws.
Paragrouper
06-23-2011, 14:17
"The bill, which is expected to be introduced on Thursday by Republican Representative Ron Paul and Democratic Representative Barney Frank"
WOW! politics really does make strange bedfellows :eek:
WOW! politics really does make strange bedfellows
Not if you consider that Ron has been Barney's 'closet' gynecologist for years. :rolleyes:
Richard :munchin
I have a friend in Austin,Texas who is a degreed drug councilor of 30+ years and he told me that marijuana is how most drug addicts start,how does he know,he was one himself..... As a former Navy corpsman in Vietnam serving with the Marines....... They started with marijuana,then more heavier stuff and that's why he's a strong advocate of NOT making it any easier to get people started on drugs..........:(
Big Teddy :munchin
Did marijuana get him started on all those other drugs or was it just that he made the conscience decision to do drugs? We always hear that marijuana is a gateway drug, but if it didn't exist would there really be that much less coke, heroin, and crack usage? My guess is that people would just "start" using with another drug.
I should mention that I have never used an illicit drug, so I'm not a proponent of marijuana use.
GratefulCitizen
06-23-2011, 15:54
Even supposing that federal drug laws are beneficial, and their repeal would be detrimental, I am still in favor of their repeal.
The federal government cannot, nor shoud, be the answer to everything.
If they want to block the importation, fine.
Within the nation, let the states figure it out.
Police power at the federal level cannot to be trusted with excess jurisdiction.
The Constitution is there to protect us from our own best intentions.
"If the provisions of the constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned."
-George Sutherland
But, who wants to make a bet against the possibility that within a short period of time of legalizing marijuana there will be a push to prevent employer drug testing for marijuana since the smoking of it will, at that time, be a legal act. .........
You forget. Tobacco is a legal product but yet there are private companys that have banned it's use by their employees. That is "to reduce" health care costs and it has been found to be legal.
Originally posted by Pete:
You forget. Tobacco is a legal product but yet there are private companys that have banned it's use by their employees. That is "to reduce" health care costs and it has been found to be legal.
True, but I still think that someone will try to prevent an employer from testing them.
Tress
People are going to smoke Pot whether it is legal or not. Legalization and FDA approved varieties won't contain additives like PCP.
But legalization it will have some short term gains, in no time Monsanto will own the seeds, Federal, State and Local governments will suck as many nickels and dimes out of it through taxes & fines as they can.....it's another casino or lotto scheme in the making. Some folks will want something with a little extra zing, or more organic (like fresh milk) that isn't on the FDA approved list.....and the cycle will continue.
Not if you consider that Ron has been Barney's 'closet' gynecologist for years. :rolleyes:
Richard :munchin
Or colorectal surgeon????
:eek::eek:
Gateway this.
Gateway that.
People make decisions and those decisions have consequences.
Yea you can get hooked on drugs but you can also quit doing drugs. People just need to be responsible for their own actions.
Alcohol vs Marijuana: Between the two marijuana is by far less responsible for violent crimes.
Personally I say legalize it and control it as it's far less harmful than alcohol in my opinion.
This from a guy that has NEVER done any type of drugs.
mojaveman
06-23-2011, 20:40
I just witnessed a large drug bust today at the Border Patrol checkpoint near Rainbow, CA. I knew it was a "find" because of the number of DEA agents that were present. They had a medium sized commercial vehicle pulled over and the driver surrounded at gunpoint. I don't use nor support the use of Marajuana but sometimes question the billions of dollars that we spend on trying to intercept it from coming across our borders. If I'm not mistaken the success rate of that operation is something like 5%.
Texas_Shooter
06-23-2011, 23:35
Gateway this.
Alcohol vs Marijuana: Between the two marijuana is by far less responsible for violent crimes.
I have never heard of someone that killed a family high on marijuana, it is always ALCOHOL!
The worst you would probably hear about marijuana is local stoners raid corner store for munches. :munchin
My drug of choice is: Jameson, Red Breast, Bushmills, John Powers, Johnny Walker / Red, Black, Gold and Green, (Blue is not worth cost), and a few rare blends that friends pour from time to time. Beer comes in two categories; Good and Better.
I've also enjoy good cigars, but have limited myself to not over do it, and never like cigarettes.
Of course, my real weakness is chocolate and keylime pie.
PedOncoDoc
06-24-2011, 04:37
My drug of choice is: Jameson, Red Breast, Bushmills, John Powers, Johnny Walker / Red, Black, Gold and Green, (Blue is not worth cost), and a few rare blends that friends pour from time to time. Beer comes in two categories; Good and Better.
I've also enjoy good cigars, but have limited myself to not over do it, and never like cigarettes.
Of course, my real weakness is chocolate and keylime pie.
I'm with you, WD. But I also must not forget coffee. I like my coffee strong, black and in large quantities. On occasion I'll splurge for a cup of the fancy stuff (but not the stuff made from monkey crap.)
I do cut out all caffeine, booze and make serious dietary modifications for 2 months out of the year to keep myself in check.
BrowningFan
06-24-2011, 12:40
I am for legalization as well, as I am an advocate of personal responsibility and don't believe people need the government to constantly protect them from themselves.
That being said I think the taxation/revenue argument is moot. It works for liquor and tobacco for the following reasons. For liquor, it is difficult to make something palatable and if you want to get drunk on something nasty, buy a 40oz, its cheaper and legal. Also, without regulation it can be dangerous. (In the town where my sister lives 7% of cases at the local hospital deal with moonshine poisoning.)
Smokable tobacco is difficult and time consuming to produce, making it unfeasible for the average citizen.
Marijuana, on the other hand is called weed for a reason. It will grow almost anywhere things grow and naturally grows to be several feet tall with little attention. One can get a usable product from a pot in their windowsill, which is not the case for these other legal but regulated products.
On a side note, as far as I am aware it is legal to brew ones own beer for personal use...
If legalization were a clear-cut moneymaker, you can bet it would have been done by now. Economics always has and always will drive the train. I may be wrong, but the only way I see to make any income off of this is to legalize and tax it as an import with stateside growth being illegal like the hybrid textile hemp we import from Canada.
In any case there are far more heinous crimes and criminals I would like to see my tax dollars investigating, prosecuting and penalizing.
I want it legalized so I can smoke it and not get busted.
greenberetTFS
06-24-2011, 13:30
My drug of choice is: Jameson, Red Breast, Bushmills, John Powers, Johnny Walker / Red, Black, Gold and Green, (Blue is not worth cost), and a few rare blends that friends pour from time to time. Beer comes in two categories; Good and Better...../quote/WD
I'm with you WD on all of the above.........;)
Big Teddy :munchin
My drug of choice is: Jameson, Red Breast, Bushmills, John Powers, Johnny Walker / Red, Black, Gold and Green, (Blue is not worth cost), and a few rare blends that friends pour from time to time. Beer comes in two categories; Good and Better...../quote/WD
I'm with you WD on all of the above.........;)
Big Teddy :munchin
lol C'mon, Big Teddy-you an me could toke up and spin some 50-Cent!
GratefulCitizen
06-24-2011, 17:09
Legalizing and controlling drugs doesn't make them safer.
What percentage of deaths from drug overdose come from prescription drugs?
You can't protect people from stupid, self-destructive behavior.
They can increase their recklessness faster than protective measures can be implemented.
You can only educate people about the consequences of certain behaviors.
If they choose the behavior, they are choosing the consequence.
Look for Pepsi Co stock to go through the roof if this bill passes.<<LINK (http://www.fritolay.com/our-snacks/doritos-nacho-cheese-chips.html)>>:eek:
You all have a lot of confidence in people's ability to make the right choices and then take responsibility for the choices they made. I don't think government should step in and try to control everything people do. We live in a free country for a reason, but there are situations where some freedoms should be restricted. I think this is one of them. The costs far outweigh the gains in this situation.
I have no scientific studies showing that marijuana is a gateway drug, but I have seen many of my friends go from smoking pot to using pills and then to using heroin. There is certain a progression. Its like anything else. People test the waters a bit. Then they step in further and eventually they jump off the depend. Some people have more control than others, but these drugs alter the chemical makeups of peoples mind and interfere with their decision making processes. On top of that I think legalizing marijuana would make it more readily available for younger people who certainly don't have the maturity to make the right choices in situations like this.
Then they step in further and eventually they jump off the depend. Some people have more control than others, but these drugs alter the chemical makeups of peoples mind and interfere with their decision making processes.
Hmmm, Sounds like the same effects you get from drinking too much alcohol.
I can hear it now "Watch this", or "I'm the biggest, baddest MF in this place". Many times the outcome of these two statements weren't good ones.
How many people do we know that turn into ASS HOLES when they drink? I've never been around people who do drugs but in the case of Marijuana in my mind I'm pretty sure it pretty much mellows them out. Someone correct me if I' wrong.
If one even has the remotest understanding of the limits placed on government by the constitution and why they were placed, you wouldn't say that. If you are okay with this one, someone else will be okay with something you don't like. The powers that our government have are enumerated specifically to avoid subjective interpretation and personal likes and dislikes.
EXACTLY. I would like to see the 10th ammendment make a comeback in a big way. Representative government works best at the local level, and the Federal Government has exceeded its constitutional authority for decades now. The core issues is behind legalize it/don't legalize it is faulty to begin with; the Federal government doesnt have the authority to legislate on that issue, the states do. The commerce clause was never meant to give the Fed. govt the authority that it has assumed. I'll get off the soapbox now.
You all have a lot of confidence in people's ability to make the right choices and then take responsibility for the choices they made. I don't think government should step in and try to control everything people do. We live in a free country for a reason, but there are situations where some freedoms should be restricted. I think this is one of them. The costs far outweigh the gains in this situation.
I have no scientific studies showing that marijuana is a gateway drug, but I have seen many of my friends go from smoking pot to using pills and then to using heroin. There is certain a progression. Its like anything else. People test the waters a bit. Then they step in further and eventually they jump off the depend. Some people have more control than others, but these drugs alter the chemical makeups of peoples mind and interfere with their decision making processes. On top of that I think legalizing marijuana would make it more readily available for younger people who certainly don't have the maturity to make the right choices in situations like this.FWIW, there is growing evidence that marijuana is not in and of itself a 'gateway' drug <<LINK (http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-09/uonh-rom083110.php)>>.
PedOncoDoc
06-25-2011, 04:33
I've never been around people who do drugs but in the case of Marijuana in my mind I'm pretty sure it pretty much mellows them out. Someone correct me if I' wrong.
This is often the case, but not always.
That is, if you are assuming the person has smoked maijuana that has not been laced with anything (PCP, for example.) One will never know until purity/quality is controlled if the effects from smoking marijuana are solely from the marijuana or if something else has been added into the mix. I've also heard stories of people dipping their marijuana in formaldehyde, having opium mixed in, etc....
1. Pot is a gateway drug. When it becomes legal, what is the new gateway drug. I am sure it will be something "harder".
2. If pot becomes legal, people will say the price will go down. It can be regulated. The cost is of no real importance, if I have no money. No matter the price, I still have to steal to get it. Nearly one third of all convicted burglars committed their crimes in order to purchase drugs.
3. Pot users are three times more likely to not show up to work as a non-user and are five times as likely to file a health insurance claim.
4. Roughy ten percent of the population is currently exposed to drugs. Expose the other ninety percent and watch the problems grow. Ninety percent more people calling into work, ninety percent more people filing insurance claims, ninety percent more crime.
To those who thing that making pot legal will bring us back to Woodstock....it won't. Wake up and look at the bigger picture. America is going to hell in a hand basket because we entertain such stupid policies and take our eyes off what is really important. The budget, muslims, corrupt politicians.......
Okay, my rant is done.
In short, pot bad.
Alcohol bad too. The point is, I think, less what is bad and more when is it the governments job to intervene in its control. Though I am a libertarian, unlike many, I do believe that society has the right to determine parameters of behavior (notice I didn't say government). Government is supposed to serve society, not the other way around. Our society, at some point, may say pot is okay (just as it did for alcohol). Life will go on. However, if any one has ever been around someone high on crack or meth, one understands the risks. It is no longer a liberty issue as those that consume "hard" drugs, generally, lose their ambition and drive for anything other than consumption. They stop cleaning up, they don't take care of their property (if they have any),. They lose their jobs and have to steal to buy the drug. It becomes an unending circle. I would say that, at the very least, trumps the core idea of libertarianism (I should be able to do whatever I want as long as I don't have any effect on any one else). Hard drug consumers DO have an impact on every one else they come in contact with.
I don't mean to sound contradictory. I still believe that we should allow people to do as they wish. But I do believe that we have a right to draw a line (somewhere). That is the essence of the debate.
Many of the arguments used to demonize pot were used against alcohol leading up to prohibition. I don't think drugs are good for anyone, but alcohol isn't inherenty healthy either. If someone is smoking pot in their house, or snorting coke off of their girlfriend in their trailer, I dont think its the federal governments buisness. If that same guy gets behind the wheel or knocks over the 7-11 to feed his habit, that IS the public's buisness. Then you bust them for DUI or armed robbery, not drug use.
When the feds first started looking at banning drugs in the early 20th century as a public health issue, banning caffeine was discussed as well. If some of those legislators had had their way, someone on this forum would no doubt bemoan the legalization of coffee in Oregon as the first step towards social armeggedon.
On a side note many substances that are controlled in the west, such as opiate based medications like codeine, are readily availble overseas at pharmacies over the counter without leading to widespread social breakdown.
greenberetTFS
06-25-2011, 13:49
Source: AFP(Top of the Web)
Greenhouses lined with genetically modified marijuana sit on a mountainside just an hour ride from Cali,Colombia where farmers say the significantly enhanced plants are more powerful and profitable............A police commander in Cauca region where Cali is located ,Carlos Rodfiguez said one of the modified varieties goes by the name of "Creepy".....:rolleyes::eek::p
Big Teddy :munchin
craigepo
06-25-2011, 15:13
I run Drug Courts in two counties, so I spend quite a bit of time around addicts. FWIW, here are a couple of observations:
1) I would prefer to call marijuana a "slippery-slope drug" as opposed to "gateway" drug. The addicts I see generally start out as somewhat lazy, poor work-ethic, with too much time on their hands. Oftentimes their parent(s) didn't do a very good job of raising them. Lack of supervision leads to teenage drinking, which leads to marijuana use, which then leads to something much harder and more addictive.
2) By the time the person gets to the hard stuff, the rest of their life is in a nosedive. Jobs, education, family, everything gets tossed aside. Life turns into ongoing episodes of sitting on a couch and getting and staying high.
3) Methamphetamine is the most addictive substance we have ever faced as a society. EVERY meth addict I have seen used marijuana before. Same with crackheads, paint huffers, and every other person addicted to narcotics.
4) Smoking marijuana is very detrimental to one's health. Smoking one joint is like smoking an entire carton of Camel non-filters.
5) I never see alcoholics who grew up in a European-style household, wherein kids learned to moderate alcohol consumption by emulating parents.
6) The reason our prisons are full and court dockets are exceedingly long is because of drug crimes.
7) Humans have become addicts since the beginning of time. The Pharisees called Jesus a "winebibber"(and no, he wasn't an addict---this was an ad hominem attack against him to denigrate his message). I would suggest that we will always have addicts. The issue is what exactly our society is willing to tolerate them being addicted to.
8) I would be more than a little surprised if American society ever totally cuts away addicts. Today's progressives attempt to turn government into God (Why show personal responsibility when there's government money to be spent? By the way, if I spend this money for you, will you vote for me?) . I really don't expect to see these same politicians watch addicts lie in a ditch without throwing money at the problem.
BigJimCalhoun
06-25-2011, 20:16
I am not sure I buy the "tax it" argument.
Aside from not liking another tax for the government to spend, I think many people might grow the plant themselves or grow and share. I don't think it is like coffee, maple syrup or tobacco that can be grown only in certain areas. Am I wrong on this?