The Legalization of Marijuana

[Mathusula2]

* actually I believe tobacco does have some medical benefit. The stress-relieving / calming effect it has on both the mind and body makes for good mental health. I also believe marijuana has even more and better medical uses, yet I'm sure if both were illegal they would be in the same category as heroine and cocaine (which also have medical uses).

Just the fact that every other drug in existance (legal or not) is more dangerous than marijuana is enough to make any argument about drugs being illegal for medical reasons completely stupid.

I performed a search on a medical journal database called medline from 1966 to present and to the best of my knowledge (according to my results of the search) there is no medical benefit to nicotine/tobacco. The stress relieving effect you are refering to is actually relief of nicotine withdrawl symptoms.

People, marijuana is not a benign substance. Psycholigical dependence does occur with it. As far as medicinal benefits are concerned, I do believe that in a certain population it's use as a "painkiller" may be warranted but it should be limited to only those few (who generally are terminal) and would probably be made a class 2 controlled substance. In addition, casual use as one would abuse a cigarette would only cause a greater incidences of heart disease (10x the carbon monoxide than that of a cigarette) and mouth/tongue/throat/lung/just about any other cancer and an increase of chronic bronchitis and/or emphysema (2x the tar than that of a cigarette). Second hand smoke, even in a smoke-filled room such as a bar (not anymore in NY, thank goodness) does not cause psychological effects on a second-hand smoker, while second-hand marijuana smoke is more likely to affect those around you.

Delta-9-THC is an approved medical substance in just about any pharmacy. The brand name is Marinol, and is used primarily for... drum roll please... giving people the munchies!!! Yes, it is an appetite stimulant (this just in...).
It also is used for controlling nausea and vomiting.

Another interesting tidbit... Have any of you seen the news reports (CNN, MSNBC, Fox have all had some report on this about 3 weeks or so ago) about this "miracle drug" that lowers cholesterol, causes weight loss, saves the world from tyranny, etc.? It actually works by blocking cannabiniod recepters... in other words it's an anti-marijuana! This does also imply that chronic marijuana use would raise cholesterol levels, make us even fatter, creating even more heart disease......................

Just some thoughts on the drug itself -- people often make the case "I don't want the government telling me what I can/cannot smoke, it doesn't effect anyone but me!!" But all of the increased heath risks associated with marijuana effects the whole healthcare system (or what's left of it), as well as our pocketbooks -- yes, less will be spent prosecuting criminals but more will be spent in terms of healthcare dollars. Whew. Sorry for the longwindedness.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

That it's a milder drug than the rest is just down-playing the long term effects, look at Ozzy for example or Keith Moon.

I think its safe to say they stacked some other drugs as well, don't you?

It's a drug, it's a psychotrophic drug and it has it's dangers like every other drug out there, either long or short term.

Compare them with nicotine and alcohol. Then look at the numbers of people incarcerated and whose lives are ruined for using pot. Its hypocritical. We're burning the village in order to save it.

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/marijuana/news.jsp;jsessionid=DCOFAHKDHMKK

37 percent of Americans 12 and older have tried the drug. That's 83 million Americans. Where are the hordes of addicts? When I was a Drug and Alcohol Abuse Control Officer in the Marine Corps in the early eighties, a survey showed 88% of the young men of recruitable age had tried the stuff. Where are all the addicts?

Well...got news for you. EVERY Marine we had pop positive on a urinalysis was an addict. How do I know this? Because the Department of the Navy said they were, and we were ordered to give them a course and counsel them to seek VA treatment if they were "short" and on the way out. The battalion medical officer automatically listed all alcohol and drug violaters as alcoholics or addicts. Those were his orders.

So a kid gets drunk on his birthday and gets nailed by the Officer of the Day...bingo. He's an alcoholic. That's a wonderful system, don't you think?

Judges give offenders a choice between jail time and treatment...guess which they take? Each one suddenly becomes someone "in treatment," ergo an "addict" when we start looking at statistics.

Here's a quote from addiction epidemiologist Denise Kandel published in New Scientist:

"This leads to what is perhaps the most telling statistic about the addictive powers of cannabis: more than 90 per cent of people who have ever used the drug have long since quit. While most people continue drinking and cigarette smoking long after the first flush of youth, people drop the weed in droves after the age of 30."

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/marijuana/clinic.jsp

Like Ping said... it just opens Pandora's box if this "Ok drug" gets legal.

No. It doesn't. You have no way of knowing that it will open a "Pandora's box." Let me counter with some fact, versus speculation.

The studies on methampetamine clearly show its extreme deleterious effects on human physiology. Four uses of it hooks a person, and the withdrawal is eighteen months (minimum) of suicidal dysphoria. I find it unlikely any state would legalize such a ridiculously addictive substance.

Not so with marijuana.

In the Netherlands when dope was legalized...more people tried dope. That's about it. The data shows that legalizing dope may make a person more likely to try it, but it does not make it more likely that they will continue to use it. One third of one percent of Dutch dope users (0.3%) ever become addicted to it. That's about 2,000 people in the whole country.

Further, the Netherlands has lower per capita addiction rates for other harder drugs than France, Great Britain, Spain, Italy, and Switzerland...and far fewer than the U.S. In 1994 0.3 percent (that tiny number again) of Dutch teenagers tried cocaine, whereas 1.7 percent of American kids had snorted.

So much for "Pandora's Box."

As a recovering addict of 15 years, I speak from experience that legalizing Marijuana .... is... not... a... good... idea!

And, as a recovering alcoholic who lost his father to booze, I'm all for keeping alcohol legal. I know very well how that particular drug can ruin lives, yet I'm not for banning it even though its addiction rates are heart-breakingly high. The issue boils down to one of personal responsibility.

Regards,


Steve

 

[MA-Caver]

You guys are fighting awfully hard for the legalization of this DRUG. Alcohol is a drug (base components are ether and water) and it's dangerous. Marijuana is dangerous in it's own right. The stats showing a lower accident, crime, bad effects aren't going to change the nature of the beast. It still damages the body and affect brain cells the way that other drugs and alcohol damages and affects brain cells. Countering it with arguments that it doesn't is just simply (IMO mind you) denial.
Seems to me that you want to have it legalized so you can at least feel okay about using it. That you won't be breaking the law. But that's the point of the whole drug legalization arguments, legalizing one drug will eventually lead to the legalization of other more dangerous drugs (read: faster killing/damaging).
Having methadone clinics for Heroin addicts only enables not helps the problem user. Also treatment is not only a medical issue it IS a legal/courts issue as well. The two have to work in tandem for it to be effective. Jail is a mighty good deterent to using. Going through a medically sponsored and other theraputical treatments helps as well.
Just because a person uses a drug doesn't automatically make them an addict or their one beer a week makes them an alcoholic. It doesn't work that way.
I said before that there are people (and I know of some personally) that can use a drug and use it in a long term moderation. But they are woefully few and far between. Over time the potential of increased usage grows depending upon the user.
However! The treatments are only going to work 100% effectively IF the user/abuser wants to quit.
Marijuana is well known as a gateway drug. It's that simple. I'd avoided trying all those other ones had I not started with smoking the stuff. I'm pretty sure I would have.

So let me ask you this... if the drug (and that's all I'll ever refer to the topic at hand wil ever be)... does become legal... presumably there's an age limit like with cigarettes and alcohol? Presumably there'll be fines akin to intoxication and driving? Basically treat it like it was alcohol. Have 7-11's start selling baggies of it? K-mart Blue light specials? Since the drug is more readily available don't you think the addiction level will rise? No of course you don't.
It's called... denial.
From what I've seen and personally experienced and am experiencing now... there's nothing good about it...at all.

Your opinion, my opinion... may they never prevent us from being friends. But allow us to have a good understanding of each other. :asian:

 

[psi_radar]

MACaver,

You've got a lot of self-rightous indignation going on, but I don't see you presenting a lot of facts or even logical arguments. I'll also thank you not to put words in my mouth or make public assumptions about my motivations in arguing a point. That's up to me to present, if I care to.

You guys are fighting awfully hard for the legalization of this DRUG. Alcohol is a drug (base components are ether and water) and it's dangerous. Marijuana is dangerous in it's own right.

Ok, name one instance of documented marijuana overdose in America. Two college students in Colorado died of alcohol poisoning this year.

"Drugs are bad, ok."
The good social critics over at South Park use this statement as a catchall for the political, social, and judicial castigation of drugs in America. We're all just supposed to have some sort of blanket hatred of all things mind-altering. Except liquor and cigarrettes. They're ok. Do you see the hypocrisy there?

The stats showing a lower accident, crime, bad effects aren't going to change the nature of the beast. It still damages the body and affect brain cells the way that other drugs and alcohol damages and affects brain cells. Countering it with arguments that it doesn't is just simply (IMO mind you) denial.

Yeah, so does living, holding your breath, living in a smoggy area, Headshots you take in sparring, etc. How adults want to treat their bodies is up to them. The point still is, how can cigarrettes and liquor, which are much more deleterious than pot, be legal when it is not?

Seems to me that you want to have it legalized so you can at least feel okay about using it. That you won't be breaking the law. But that's the point of the whole drug legalization arguments, legalizing one drug will eventually lead to the legalization of other more dangerous drugs (read: faster killing/damaging).

There you go with the assumptions. Remember what happens when you assume? I am not a current user--

"No no no, I don't smoke it no more
I'm tired of waking up on the floor

No thank you please it only makes me sneeze
Then it makes it hard to find the door."--

though I know a lot of people who are. Engineers, programmers, actuaries, lawyers, M.D.s, professors, bankers, and other professionals among them. They're not exactly drains on society. I support legalization because I believe it's the right thing to do, for society and for individual freedom. I support legalization because I think it's ridiculous to have people thrown in jail for possessing or selling a substance I view as less harmful than alcohol or cigarrettes.

Having methadone clinics for Heroin addicts only enables not helps the problem user. Also treatment is not only a medical issue it IS a legal/courts issue as well. The two have to work in tandem for it to be effective. Jail is a mighty good deterent to using. Going through a medically sponsored and other theraputical treatments helps as well.

Being an addict isn't necessarily a societal problem. Addiction is a personal problem, which is up to the person to resolve. Society, in its compassion, could provide treatment centers to help when addicts are ready to stop living like junkies. When an addict turns to crime, society is impelled to act. And in that case, the crimes should be punished as deserved.

Marijuana is well known as a gateway drug. It's that simple. I'd avoided trying all those other ones had I not started with smoking the stuff. I'm pretty sure I would have.

Plenty of people only try a little pot and never try the hard stuff, which I'll name as meth, cocaine, heroin, LSD, psylocybin (sp?), and ecstacy. One of the reasons some people do go on to harder drugs is that they have psychologically stepped past the bounds of criminality and figure, hey, why not? Another reason is that they now have a link to the black market which they can exploit as deemed necessary.

Remember also, smuggling and illicit status tend to modify drugs to their most powerful and least bulky form--easier to hide, more bang for the buck.

Which is one of the reasons dope growers and dealers are caught more frequently than others (besides not being as wealthy to pay bribes and such). Their product is bulky and smelly.

In the Andes, the Indians chew legal coca leaves marinated in lime juice to give them an extra boost of energy in their high-altitude environment. Yet they rarely use cocaine. I wonder why that is...

So let me ask you this... if the drug (and that's all I'll ever refer to the topic at hand wil ever be)... does become legal... presumably there's an age limit like with cigarettes and alcohol? Presumably there'll be fines akin to intoxication and driving? Basically treat it like it was alcohol.

Yes.

Have 7-11's start selling baggies of it?

Actually it'll probably be little filtered cigarrettes made by Philip Morris and our other friends in the tobacco industry. It's said they already have prototypes and brands created in the event of legalization.

K-mart Blue light specials? Since the drug is more readily available don't you think the addiction level will rise? No of course you don't.
It's called... denial.

It's called logic and research. Look into the European and Canadian experiments in the decriminalization of soft drugs. There's a brief spike, then levels drop.

From what I've seen and personally experienced and am experiencing now... there's nothing good about it...at all.

Your opinion, my opinion... may they never prevent us from being friends. But allow us to have a good understanding of each other. :asian:

I think you're reading a little too much of your personal experience into this. You're blaming the gun for pulling the trigger--or in this case, the bong for pulling the stem.

Take it easy,
:asian:

 

[Rynocerous]

Plenty of people only try a little pot and never try the hard stuff, which I'll name as meth, cocaine, heroin, LSD, psylocybin (sp?), and ecstacy. One of the reasons some people do go on to harder drugs is that they have psychologically stepped past the bounds of criminality and figure, hey, why not? Another reason is that they now have a link to the black market which they can exploit as deemed necessary.
:asian:

Very good point here... The only reason I personally got into the harder stuff was because after smoking weed, and being paranoid, they offered my a free toke of crack, or a line of coke, or lets drop some acid, etc. Me not wanting to feel like a chump cause they were doing it, did it with them. Now I realize I was mentally weak back then but if I could had bought weed legally, I wouldn't have had access to all that other crap. I wouldn't had felt if I didn't do it I would lose my contact, and not be able to get a bag here and there, due to appearing like I'm a chump.

Cheers,

Ryan

 

[Xequat]

I think it should be legal to be consistent with what is currently allowed. I don't smoke it now, and I won't start if it becomes legal. But if it becomes legally accepted, then there might be ways to make it filtered to take out some of the tar and unhealthy stuff. I feel that it's simply less dangerous than alcohol, but I certainly don't feel it's healthy. It should be up to us to determine what we eat, drink, and smoke, not the government. I don't want the democratic population to tell me what I can do with myself. But I won't argue that it's healthy. I've heard that a lot of what is sold in the US is grown on mercury-rich soil (maybe someone can back me up on this, I think I heard it on the radio and I'm at work, so I'm not going to research marijuana here to find a link to prove it). There is a lot of tar and bad stuff that enters the body when you smoke a joint. I don't support it for medical reasons; I support it for the reasons that it's not as bad as what's currently out there (so let's get consistent) and that we should be able to decide what we do with ourselves.

 

[Ping898]

Just because something is not as bad as what is currently allowed doesn't mean it should therefore become legal.

 

[Mathusula2]

psy_radar:
Maybe one should cut Mac a bit of slack -- this drug has done some pretty awful things to him and he doesn't want to see anyone else go through it, too. I give him a lot of credit and respect for being so forthright about his experiences.

If there were a way to filter out tar and other harmful substances, they would have forced the tobacco industry to do it by now, IMO.

Lastly, if this country was crazy enough to make it legal, there should be smoking only in the privacy of their own home... as stated before second-hand marijuana smoke is not only detrimental to the surrounding folk's health, but can be thick enough to effect their mental status, as well. It's kinda like if you were to get drunk by standing too close to a drunkard. Oh yeah, and it has been studied... marijuana does effect motor coordination as much as or more than alcohol, so driving while high produces the same effects as driving drunk. Isn't there enough DWI going on without having to worry about DWH (driving while high)???

Oh yeah, and rock on, Ping!! That's exactly right!! Just b/c it's not as bad (which I would argue against) doesn't mean it should be legal. Using that arguement is easily countered with "if little Johnny were to jump off a bridge... would you too?" I really don't care what's available to smoke or drink legally right now... and I don't care what the Netherlands are doing... the fact is that it is not acceptable to be in such an altered state (for both what it can do to you, but moreso what the consequences are for those around you) -- drunkeness is frowned upon but most can drink a few without getting drunk, whereas NO ONE can smoke a joint without getting high.

Marijuana is like the worst of nicotine and alcohol... psychological dependence with an altered mental state.

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

Xequat: "...there might be ways to make it filtered to take out some of the tar and unhealthy stuff."

Yeah, it's called a bong.

"I've heard that a lot of what is sold in the US is grown on mercury-rich soil ..."

I've never heard of that, and it sounds like conspiracy-theory scare tactics to me. Why would someone choose to grow anything on mercury-rich soil? If they didn't choose, and it's accidental, then that means all plants/crops have the same probability of being grown on mercury-rich soil.

Actually, there would be a reason to grow certain plants in soil with high toxic metals content - it's called phytoremediation, and uses plants ability to draw substances out of soil and into its body to clean up contaminated areas.

In my environmental engineering classes, we learn that poplar trees are commonly used for this.

The only places where one would find mercury-rich soils would be near mining operations, metal smelting facilities, and coal-burning power plants.

After a little research, it turns out that this in fact has happened:

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/toxic.html

What I gathered from the article is that the cannabis was grown near an abandoned mine that has been contaminated with heavy metals - the cannabis was grown by the Canadian government for use by legal users for medicinal reasons.

"CSA believes that Health Canada could have saved millions of dollars and years of unnecessary work and suffering had they shown the common sense to listen to the concerns of experienced users, cultivators and distributors, who have expressed worries over possible heavy metal contamination and have stressed the importance of organic cultivation since it was first announced that this product would be grown in an abandoned Copper and Zinc mine.
"Canada's compassion clubs and societies have the experience and expertise that is so obviously missing from the Office of Cannabis Medical Access", says Lucas, "they are currently the only safe source of cannabis for Canadians suffering from critical or chronic conditions, and they are contributing more research than any other organization, including Health Canada; all at no cost to the taxpayer.

"Canadians for Safe Access advises Health Canada to cease the distribution of Prairie Plant Systems' cannabis to legal users and researchers until the extent and results of their safety testing is revealed, and accommodations are made for an independent analysis of this product."


Now, whether or not we are to believe "...that a lot of what is sold in the US is grown on mercury-rich soil..." will depend on how many users in the U.S. are getting their supply from the Canadian government.




MACaver: "You guys are fighting awfully hard for the legalization of this DRUG."

Putting the word "drug" in all capital letters does nothing but reinforce the connotation that "drugs are bad, mmkuay."

Aspirin is a drug; dandruff shampoo is a drug; antihystimines are drugs. They are all dangerous too - I guess we have to make them all illegal.

"Alcohol is a drug (base components are ether and water) and it's dangerous."

Actually, it's ethanol, not ether, but you're right it is dangerous, yet legal.


"Marijuana is dangerous in it's own right. The stats showing a lower accident, crime, bad effects aren't going to change the nature of the beast."

No, but it does show that the beast is pretty warm and cuddly, and not so much of a demon.

"It still damages the body and affect brain cells the way that other drugs and alcohol damages and affects brain cells."

Bad lapse of logic here. It would reasonably follow that different drugs have different effects on the body and mind, and not that everything effects everyone in the same way. Unless you just meant to say that it does have an effect and not necessarily the same effect as other drugs.

"Countering it with arguments that it doesn't is just simply (IMO mind you) denial."

Yes, that would be silly. However, using the argument that it does to the same degree as other drugs is at the opposite end of the spectrum - exaggeration.

"But that's the point of the whole drug legalization arguments, legalizing one drug will eventually lead to the legalization of other more dangerous drugs (read: faster killing/damaging). "

There are two different arguments. One is for the legalization of marijuana/hemp/cannabis - either for personal recreational use, industrial use, or medical use. The other argument is for the legalization (or at least decriminalization) of all drugs. They are similar, but saying that the point of marijuana legalization is to lead to legalization of more dangerous drugs is ridiculous.

The similarities lie in that prohibition of marijuana and certain other drugs is a limit to personal freedom, is based more on politics than health concerns, and doesn't really do any good to stop the use of such things. The failure of the War on Drugs, and all the obvious hypocricy of having some drugs (alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, etc.) be legal while others are not just shows that prohibition is a waste of effort.

"Your opinion, my opinion... may they never prevent us from being friends. But allow us to have a good understanding of each other."

Well, said. Now if people could set aside their opinions, gather the facts and weigh the pros and cons, then maybe we could come to a sensible decision. Maybe that decision will be to keep it illegal. That won't stop people from using it. It will not change the fact that it is safer to use than other drugs (many of which are legal). It will help continue the failed War on Drugs. It will continue to overcrowd prisons with non-violent offenders. It will hinder research into medicinal uses. It will continue to put a limit on personal freedom. It will continue to limit industrial uses of the plant. And It won't change the fact that hemp is probably America's #1 cash crop, that unfortunately is only profitting law-breakers.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

First, for the record, I want to state that I respect MACaver for having gone through rehab successfully and getting the "monkey off his back" to borrow a phrase from playwright John Monks (a morphine addict who served with my father in WWII). I don't want to minimize your achievement here.

Seems to me that you want to have it legalized so you can at least feel okay about using it. That you won't be breaking the law.

I don't use it. My present addiction is to caffeine via coffee, which I drink daily. Maybe three cups, four tops. I smoke cigars perhaps twice a year. I quit drinking on November 23, 1987...almost thirteen months following my Dad's death from alcoholism. I took the pledge at the Marine Corps Ball in San Bruno, California. My last drink was a Budweiser. I hate Bud, so it was probably a good way to end it.

I counsel the children in my school to avoid drugs, alcohol, and overeating. I'm 47 and haven't used marijuana in about twenty years. I don't have plans to use it again.

I have three friends whose children are currently struggling with marijuana addiction. Two of those three parents I know for sure smoked marijuana in the seventies and stopped using it before their thirties. The third parent I'm not sure about. I'm aware that cannabis triggers schizophrenia in those genetically pre-disposed to it. One of those was my best friend in high school. My alcoholic sister's niece is a drug addict who relapsed upon he death of her husband from Lou Gehrig's disease. She met him in rehab.

I'm not unaware of pot's dangers.

But the majority of people who use it, as I've presented, are able to walk away from it. The articles I've presented indicate that. Every member of my nuclear family has tried it, including both my parents (my father-born in 1916-a former Republican mayor of South Bend Indiana in the fifties, of all people). None used it regularly. All walked away from it to find their drug of choice, which was usually alcohol.

Jail is a mighty good deterent to using.

Obviously not. Roughly one third of all Americans have used it. A marijuana user is arrested once about every 54 seconds. About a half a million people a year are busted for it.

Just because a person uses a drug doesn't automatically make them an addict or their one beer a week makes them an alcoholic. It doesn't work that way.

No kidding. You didn't get my sense of frustration with the Chief of Naval Operations? So much for irony. Most of those kids were not addicts. I knew that then, as did the battalion surgeon. They were "addicts" by an Admiral's decree.

I said before that there are people (and I know of some personally) that can use a drug and use it in a long term moderation. But they are woefully few and far between. Over time the potential of increased usage grows depending upon the user.

Check the stats I've posted.

For each drug it is different. Methampetamine and Crack are incredibly addictive. One in ten people in our country struggle with alcohol. As I've said, with dope most people don't use it long term or chronically...with exceptions, obviously. The majority walk away from it. Look at the Netherlands studies and the article from the addictions epidemiologist.

As you point out, biological diversity will often affect how an individual will respond to a drug. It is a bit of a crap shoot. If you're Native American or Irish, there is a chance you have less ability to produce alcohol dehydrogenase in your liver. Addiction among those populations can be severe. The stereotypes are, sadly, rooted in truth...but it isn't an issue of morality as it was in the 19th century where Indians and the Irish were portrayed as intellectually bankrupt and corrupt. People with genetic schizophrenic tendencies can find their disease triggered early (case in point, Mark Vonnegut, son of the famous author Kurt).

But for most of us...it isn't a problem when it comes to marijuana.

However! The treatments are only going to work 100% effectively IF the user/abuser wants to quit.

I wouldn't be too quick to say that. But that's another topic. Let me tell you about my niece sometime.

Marijuana is well known as a gateway drug. It's that simple.

No. It is not that simple. Again, check the review of the studies from the Netherlands I posted earlier. There was an increase in people who tried the drug subsequent to its legalization, but no increase in the number of addicts. In spite of it being legal and more people trying it, the number of hard drug users in the Netherlands is one of the lowest in Europe.

So let me ask you this... if the drug (and that's all I'll ever refer to the topic at hand wil ever be)... does become legal... presumably there's an age limit like with cigarettes and alcohol? Presumably there'll be fines akin to intoxication and driving? Basically treat it like it was alcohol. Have 7-11's start selling baggies of it? K-mart Blue light specials? Since the drug is more readily available don't you think the addiction level will rise? No of course you don't.

You didn't read my post, or the links, did you?

It's called... denial.

Its called thinking rationally, not emotionally. I have no issues with marijuana. Please don't use 12 Step jargon on me. I'm clean and have been for years.


From what I've seen and personally experienced and am experiencing now... there's nothing good about it...at all.

Of course not. You're a recovering marijuana addict. Had you been one of the majority that walked away from it, you might feel very differently. You have the great misfortune of being one of those few people who is neurologically wired in such a way that dope--for you--is a very bad thing. For most, it isn't.

Let me put this another way: Criminalizing it makes it an issue of morality, and not one of addiction. Putting users of pot in prison does nothing to rehabilitate them. We're punishing users, some of whom are addicts, but most are not. We're punishing them for--what? By your definition-- hurting themselves? Let's layer it on, punishment upon self abuse. We're taking a classic tragedy and turning it into a morality play.

Here in Indiana a 36 year old man, Mark Young, introduced two people who wanted to sell marijuana to three men who wanted to buy it. He merely introduced them. He didn't broker the deal, he had no drugs in his possession. He had no guns or any physical evidence presented against him. He was merely a go-between who never saw the marijuana in question.

For this Young was arrested and was convicted solely on the testimony of co-conspiraters who had agreed to testify for the government. Note Young had never been charged with a violent crime in his life.

In Indiana an armed robber serves typically six years for his crime. A rapist will serve about eight years. A convicted murderer 25 years. On February 8, 1992 Judge Sarah Evans Barker sentenced Mark Young to life imprisonment without parole.


This is insane.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Steve

That IS insane. And that is one of the saddest aspects of marijuana use and attitudes in this country - treating it like a terrifying spector, rather than the frequently-used recreational and medicinal drug that it is.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

And yet another: Will Foster, sentenced to 93 years in prison for growing medical marijuana in his basement. Amount? Ten plants. The disease? Rheumatoid arthritis.

Was he breaking the law? Sure. Was he dealing? No. It was all for private consumption. The cops raided the home on a fraudulent tip that he was selling meth. He wasn't. His five year old daughter watched as the cops tore her stuffed bear apart looking for drugs.

93 years.

One of my students came up to me some years ago and confided to me she'd been raped at knife point five years earlier. I felt honored by her confidence in me and asked her why she felt the need to divulge such personal information.

"I'm a little freaked out. He's getting out of prison today."

Five years.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Feisty Mouse]

And yet another: Will Foster, sentenced to 93 years in prison for growing medical marijuana in his basement. Amount? Ten plants. The disease? Rheumatoid arthritis.

Was he breaking the law? Sure. Was he dealing? No. It was all for private consumption. The cops raided the home on a fraudulent tip that he was selling meth. He wasn't. His five year old daughter watched as the cops tore her stuffed bear apart looking for drugs.

93 years.

One of my students came up to me some years ago and confided to me she'd been raped at knife point five years earlier. I felt honored by her confidence in me and asked her why she felt the need to divulge such personal information.

"I'm a little freaked out. He's getting out of prison today."

Five years.


Regards,


Steve

It's injustices like that that make me feel violent and enraged with the way our laws are set up now.

Violent crime against another person means less than growing a couple of pot plants for your own use when you're in constant pain?

I hate people sometimes. Just in general. IT MAKES NO SENSE.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

People here should visit the NORML site.

http://www.norml.org/

It isn't what you think...a bunch of rants by stoners. Its actually a well designed site with a wealth of information. I just found it tonight while researching for this thread.

And of course, for those of you that liked "Fast Food Nation," Eric Schlosser's newest book is "Reefer Madness." The first essay concerns the history of marijuana in the U.S. and the current legal issues. The book itself deals with the blackmarket economy in the U.S. It is classic Schlosser. Excellent writing with first rate research.




Regards,


Steve

 

[MA-Caver]

Hopefully this shows that I can lighten up on the subject...

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Marijuana airlines? Thier motto: "We fly higher than the others." They don't serve inflight meals...only snacks. Lots of snacks. No inflight movie. Just a picture of a black velvet Jimmie Hendrix poster lit with a black light.

Back to the issue.

----------

A quote from Lynn Zimmer, co-author of "Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts."

"Levels of cannabis use in the Netherlands, with full scale decriminalization, are about the same as in the rest of Europe. In the U.S., rates are the same across most states, regardless of penalites. So, although decriminalization might increase use some, I don't think too much."

This refutes the notion that going to jail is a deterrent.

A transcript of a forum discussion with her is here:

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/marijuana/chat.jsp

Of 15 million illicit drug users in the United States, 12 million are cannabis users. About a half a million or more of them are arrested every year. If cannabis were legalized, resources could be diverted to cracking down on harder drugs like crack, methapmetamine, heroin, or...and here is an interesting thought...terrorism.

The U.S. federal government spent $19.179 billion dollars in 2003 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $600 per second. In 2000, 646,042 people were arrested for possession of cannabis alone.

http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

Only one out of eighty marijuana users ever try heroin. One out of nine try cocaine. There goes that "gateway" theory again...right out the window.

http://www.drugwardistortions.org/distortion7.htm

Regards,


Steve

 

[Rynocerous]

Well I'm finally back from D.C. I must say HHJH, very good posts, there isn't much you can add to this. Well written.


Cheers,

Ryan

 

[TonyM.]

This is a huge non issue for me. It seems like every time our country gets really messed up democracy wise, someone has to pull the public focus away from the real problems with such a mind boggling who cares issue such as the legalization of cannibus. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Well I'm finally back from D.C. I must say HHJH, very good posts, there isn't much you can add to this. Well written.


Cheers,

Ryan

Thanks. It was fun researching that. I learned a lot.


Regards,


Steve

 

[MA-Caver]

Well I'm finally back from D.C. I must say HHJH, very good posts, there isn't much you can add to this. Well written.
Cheers,
Ryan

Sure there is... try this link... http://www.health.org/features/interact/calc/
It's private enough to get your own answers but basically what the quiz does is calculate how much you spend on drugs right now... including cigarettes and alcohol and shows you the total at the end of the year.
Something to think about I guess.


:asian: