The Legalization of Marijuana

[Rynocerous]

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:

Really cool link, really enjoyed it but not much of a suprise. Booze was killing my pocket book, but I have recently decided to quit, now that I'm going back to school.

Cheers,

Ryan

 

[shane23ss]

Wow, this is a touchy subject for a lot of people. As some of you know, and all of you if you read my profile, I am a Drug Task Force Agent. The legalization of Marihuana (I know I spelled it with an "h", that is how we write reports here, just habit), has been talked about more than you can imagine around my office. My personal belief is that it will be legalized in the near future. Already the consequences for manufacture, possession, introduction, and distribution is less in most places than other drugs. Although Marihuana is a Schedule I drug (Schedule I being worse than Schedule 5) on the CSA (Controlled Substance Act), it is looked at as being less harmful than other drugs such as cocaine, ex, meth, etc. The "ranking" of Marihuana on the CSA has to do with how drugs are "ranked". They are scheduled according to 1) medical use, 2) chance for abuse, 3) history of use. Marihuana has such a high history of use, it bumps it up to Schedule I. There are over 400 chemicals in Marihuana. Of all these chemicals, Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the only "active" chemical. This is the chemical that causes the "high" effect. THC reacts differently depending on the person using it (body mass, history of use, tolerance, etc) and can even react differently from use to use in the same person. This "unknown" is probably the biggest factor keeping Marihuana from being legalized. It is not money, because the government could make a lot more money taxing marihuana if it were legal than they do just from court costs now. I think when the right people pich a good enough explanation of how Marihuana affects the body, and it sounds "not so bad", then the powers that be probably wont hesitate to make some more money. That's just my opinion.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Makes me absent minded for days after use. Might as well keep it illegal...I have no regular use for it. (yes, the world does revolve around I/ME/MINE, thank you.)

D.

 

[MA-Caver]

Wow, this is a touchy subject for a lot of people. As some of you know, and all of you if you read my profile, I am a Drug Task Force Agent. The legalization of Marihuana (I know I spelled it with an "h", that is how we write reports here, just habit), has been talked about more than you can imagine around my office. My personal belief is that it will be legalized in the near future. Already the consequences for manufacture, possession, introduction, and distribution is less in most places than other drugs. Although Marihuana is a Schedule I drug (Schedule I being worse than Schedule 5) on the CSA (Controlled Substance Act), it is looked at as being less harmful than other drugs such as cocaine, ex, meth, etc. The "ranking" of Marihuana on the CSA has to do with how drugs are "ranked". They are scheduled according to 1) medical use, 2) chance for abuse, 3) history of use. Marihuana has such a high history of use, it bumps it up to Schedule I. There are over 400 chemicals in Marihuana. Of all these chemicals, Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the only "active" chemical. This is the chemical that causes the "high" effect. THC reacts differently depending on the person using it (body mass, history of use, tolerance, etc) and can even react differently from use to use in the same person. This "unknown" is probably the biggest factor keeping Marihuana from being legalized. It is not money, because the government could make a lot more money taxing marihuana if it were legal than they do just from court costs now. I think when the right people pich a good enough explanation of how Marihuana affects the body, and it sounds "not so bad", then the powers that be probably wont hesitate to make some more money. That's just my opinion.

All due respect I had to laugh when you ID'd yourself as a DTFA. I had this mental image of cockroaches scattering when the light comes on in this thread... (no, I'm not comparing the pro-legalization guys to a bunch of cockroaches, geez fellas :lol: ).
The powers that be will probably have to change hands for another generation or two before it happens. I cannot imagine the Bush Administration and the current House/Senate/Congress members actually passing the legalization bill. Money does talk but not loud enough in this case. But I agree, pretty soon. I'm guessing by the time present day middle-schoolers are in college or at voting age.

 

[shane23ss]

All due respect I had to laugh when you ID'd yourself as a DTFA. I had this mental image of cockroaches scattering when the light comes on in this thread... (no, I'm not comparing the pro-legalization guys to a bunch of cockroaches, geez fellas :lol: ).
The powers that be will probably have to change hands for another generation or two before it happens. I cannot imagine the Bush Administration and the current House/Senate/Congress members actually passing the legalization bill. Money does talk but not loud enough in this case. But I agree, pretty soon. I'm guessing by the time present day middle-schoolers are in college or at voting age.

Yeah, I take a lot of ribbing from time to time. I don't mind.

 

[Tgace]

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/564/

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

I was gonna say something profound, but I forget what it was. *bong water bubbling in background*

 

[Darksoul]

-I know people who smoke pot responsibly, if you can call it that. They keep it to themselves, don't smoke out in the open, all on the down low. Then there are the people who will bust it out, regardless of where they are. The first group is one I can deal with. The latter group? I can't stand them. For example, I go to a goth club here in Rochester. A couple of weeks ago, I walked down to the bathrooms. I could smell the smoke even before I took two steps down. Turning the corner, I came upon the ladies room, door open, about 10 people standing in there, in a cloud of smoke. One look of disgust, into the men's room. Ahh, fresh air, relatively speaking. Finish my business, and the guy in the stall next to me light's up. WTF! Upstairs I go, find security and send him down. They all scattered like roaches.

-My point is that the club is like a second home to me. Been going for almost 7 years, and have many friends there. I don't smoke, drink, whatever, unless you count the occasional cup of coffee, tea, or energy drink. I don't have a problem with responsible users. Its not the drug that really matters, but the people. And some of them really dont' know when to stop. What bothers me about the club is some undercover cop walking in, seeing this crap going down in the bathroom, and shutting the club down. Vertex (name of venue) is the only decent goth club in western NY. Not to many places play this type of music. And these smokers know there is an outside world. If they want to smoke, fine, just do it off the property, where they'll get busted, and the club won't. Its placing other people in danger that riles me. And some people are affected by weed in different ways than the norm, and people need to be careful around them.

-I just don't think this nation is mature or responsible enough to handle the legalization of pot. I certainly agree about the whole prison, drug law b.s. That crap needs to be repealed. Murder someone? Here's a few years in prison. Get caught with weed? Here's 15 years. ??? Somebody is making money by having all these prisoners. Scare people into thinking crime is out of control, something must be done, gov't says give us more money, ie raise taxes, we'll build more prisoners and put those violent pot smokers away. Whatever. I think the gov't is giving control of some prisons over to private contractors. Capitalism...


A---)

 

[Lisa]

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/564/

LOL! Sponge Bob Hemp Pants! No wonder people are outraged at the video going out to schools!

 

[Ray]

It isn't good for me, so I don't use it. Make it legal and it still isn't good for me. Are there things worse than it that are legal? Yes...but I don't use those either.

If it comes to a vote, I vote no. Will others claim that I am unfairly preventing them from enjoying a semi-harmless high? They may, but that's okay.

 

[Gray Phoenix]

I have never, will never use drugs. I dont even like the pain meds prescribed after dental surgery. That being said, ALL DRUGS SHOULD BE LEGAL. If I want to sniff crazy glue out of my gym socks, then thats my problem. The fact that it effects those around me would further prove that I'm a horrible person. The acid junky who robs me for drug money is no different than the guy who kills me while drunk driving.

Its a basic law of ECONOMICS: Just because you make something illegal, does not mean it goes away, it just raises the price.
I would have thought Prohibition proved that. If there is Demand, then there will be Supply. Just think of it: No drug cartels, no billions of tax dollars spent to fight drug cartels.

Of course we would still ahve to contend with the guy who turns his brain to pudding in the whirlpool. I had friend of mine find someone like that. 1 week later. The cops called him "soup".:rofl:

 

[psi_radar]

<snip>
Of course we would still ahve to contend with the guy who turns his brain to pudding in the whirlpool. I had friend of mine find someone like that. 1 week later. The cops called him "soup".:rofl:

Ah, that's not very funny. Junkies, as pitiful are they are, are just the core result of people brought down to specific level of depravity that is both genetic and a condition of the drug. "Never trust a junkie." That's true. However, having done lots of drugs in the past, don't worry about an "acid junky" doing anything more than dominating time in front of your big screen tv or candle collection.

 

[Ray]

I have never, will never use drugs. I dont even like the pain meds prescribed after dental surgery. That being said, ALL DRUGS SHOULD BE LEGAL. If I want to sniff crazy glue out of my gym socks, then thats my problem. ....

Of course we would still ahve to contend with the guy who turns his brain to pudding in the whirlpool. I had friend of mine find someone like that. 1 week later. The cops called him "soup".:rofl:

Well then, if you're willing to personally support all of those who become soup without using dollars from other Americans....

Don't you think it's worth it to try to discourage just one person from becoming soup...

 

[Schtankybampo]

Banning things just makes it more lucrative for those who have them to sell them. That's referred to as: Economics.

Spend some time in Amsterdam.

Nancy Regans "War on Drugs" did more to profit the drug lords than anything has since. Legalize EVERYTHING, regulate it, tax it. Register the junkies. I'm sorry, but it was their choice to light up/shoot up/pop pills in the first place.

I have never used. I've never even smoked MJ. I don't like tylenol, fer gossakes. But you can't legislate morality, and you can't regulate behaviour. If people wanna go through life with thier head stuffed full of rags, I'm sorry, it's thier choice. Do me a favor, though, don't smoke it RIGHT in front of the door.

Honestly, I'd rather smell marijuana smoke than stinky marlboros anyway.

 

[Ray]

...But you can't legislate morality, and you can't regulate behaviour....

You may be right on your stance on the legalization of dope, but this particular arguement isn't legit. Penalties for murder, for example, do not stop people from murdering but that doesn't mean it should be legalized.

 

[Schtankybampo]

I agree, it shouldn't be legalized. But those penalties don't stop someone who is determined to murder another human being. Nor do the penalties stop someone who is determined to take drugs. I will amend my statement; You can't legislate morality or regulate behaviour for EVERYONE.

If there were no penalties, if there were no consequence, would you kill someone? Would you take drugs? Is it the penalties that are stopping you? Or something deeper within yourself?


M

 

[Ray]

I agree, it shouldn't be legalized. But those penalties don't stop someone who is determined to murder another human being. Nor do the penalties stop someone who is determined to take drugs. I will amend my statement; You can't legislate morality or regulate behaviour for EVERYONE.

If there were no penalties, if there were no consequence, would you kill someone? Would you take drugs? Is it the penalties that are stopping you? Or something deeper within yourself?

Those are awesome questions.

Let me ask specifically about:"If there were no penalties, if there were no consequences" and Is it the penalties that are stopping you?"

Do you mean legal penalties and legal consequences or are their also natural consequences to our actions? If I decide not to smoke dope because it's illegal, then is that a bad reason? If I decide not to smoke dope because it's bad for me, then is that a bad reason? If I decide not to smoke dope, based on religious teachings, is that a bad reason?

If I can't regulate/legislate behavior/morality for EVERYONE does that mean I should just tolerate the state of my home, neighborhood or country rather than try to improve it? If my 16-year old wants to shoot heroin, should I just stand idley by? If he wants to smoke dope in his bedroom? If my neighbor wants to run a crack-house next door?

 

[Schtankybampo]

If your 16 year old wants to do heroin, no, you shouldn't stand idly by. You should do everything you can do as a parent to raise your child to think about these things for themselves, which I am sure you do. (Assuming it's not a hypothetical 16-year-old) Should we tolerate these things? No, but this thread is about legalization. When crack is available at the pharmacy, will that crackhouse still exist? When the funds brought in from legal drugs can pay for the policing of the illegal sources? If they are regulated, registered, and sold, I think this will be less of a problem. I don't say it won't be a problem at all...but the illegal nature of drugs in general adds to the mystique, the "taboo" of it. Again, I cite Amsterdam. Maybe I wasn't touring the gritty reality of it, but I do keep my eyes open. There were places that people went, things were clean, and if you wanted a joint, you strolled up to the bar and ordered one. With a beer chaser. How much of the drug problem in America would dissappear with legalization?

Go ahead, call me heartless, but if someone uses the legalization of drugs to OD, well...were they adding so much to humanity by thier presence? If someone wants to be a junkie, they will. All we can do for our kids is actually *raise* them, and do the best we can to help them see that this is not a happy road.

M

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Ray in bold:

Penalties for murder, for example, do not stop people from murdering but that doesn't mean it should be legalized.


Substitute "drinking" for "murder" and you quickly get a sense of the simplistic failure of that argument. Marijuana use and murder penalties are two separate issues, each with different social impacts.

Murder, for instance, does not relieve chronic pain. Murder is a crime against the person. Smoking dope at best harms the user and perhaps someone exposed to second-hand smoke or the toxins of the marijuana. I suspect a fetus would be harmed just as it is with tobacco and alcohol.

The issue of legalization is one of cost/benefit. There is no benefit to legalizing murder, and clearly harm. Legalization/decriminalization of marijuana has not been shown to cause harm.

In the Netherlands the GDP grew 2.4% per year from 1990-1997. That's an average. In 1998 it grew 4% and the country had one of the best economies in the world according to macroeconomic indicators. I consider that an amazing output for a bunch of stoners, don't you?

Here's a fact sheet on usage rates among the Dutch and other countries:

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/thenethe.htm

Their overdose rates are the lowest in Europe. Our usage rate is double theirs.

So...we dump a bunch of money into the drug war, much of it specifically targeting marijuana. We arrest dealers. We arrest users. We use D.A.R.E. Now we have more people using it than a country in which it's legal.

This echoes the passing of the Eighteenth Amendment. When Prohibition went into effect on Jan. 16 of 1919 it damaged wine businesses, brewers, distillieries. Restaurants around the country closed down because of a loss of liquor sales. Delmonico's, one of the most famous restaurants in U.S. history, closed its doors just short of its 100th birthday.

In very little time the nation's drinking rates per capita went through the roof. Demonize something, and you make it fun. Bathtub gin and speakeasies abounded. Organized crime got into the game and small time thugs like Al Capone suddenly became wealthy and famous. The Italian and Irish mobs made huge fortunes.

That drug war didn't work either, in spite of Eliot Ness and his Untouchables.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Tgace]

Sweden has been doing a good job and drugs are illegal there.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/global/drugpolicyby/westerneurop/sweden/

And the Dutch model isnt exactly "anything goes"...

http://www.drugpolicy.org/global/drugpolicyby/westerneurop/thenetherlan/