Should Marijuana Be Legalized?

[Ash]

Please vote!

I'm not trying to get into a debate about marijuana and if it should be legalized.
I'm simply curious to see the results of this poll.

Do you think marijuana should be legalized in the United States?

If you have an opinion on this issue, by all means, please share it if you're willing.
(you can still vote but not voice your opinion if you don't wish to)

[ghouck]

It's hard to make a decision without the parameters. Age limits? Legal levels of intoxication while driving? Public exposure? Taxation? Regulated or unregulated sources? Foreign or domestic sources?

That's the problem with this question, and thus the debate that it brings is that the parameters are rarely set.

If there's no mention of age limits and legal/illegal levels of intoxication for people driving on public roads, , then the answer is a big No, as most (sane) people would agree.

[Ash]

For arguments sake, let's say the parameters are the same as they currently are for alcohol in most U.S. states.
21 to buy.  Same penalties as if you were caught driving while intoxicated (as they are now) etc...
No commercials or any other types of advertising marijuana allowed by state law.  (unlike alcohol)  I can't imagine TV commercials or billboard ads for packs of these:


Essentially, the laws governing marijuana purchasing and consumption would be very similar to U.S. liquor laws.

(Sorry, I should've covered this in my original post)

[akiratubo]

I've had friends who started smoking pot and went completely to s**t.  I've also had friends (not to mention myself) who started drinking and went completely to s**t.

I don't know if one is worse than the other.  If the age restrictions and penalties for intoxication were the same, I would say legalize marijuana.  I truly don't think people need to be arrested and spend any time in jail for carrying around a few joints.

In a perfect world, people wouldn't WANT either of them.  It's not a perfect world, though.

[Trevor]

Please vote!

I'm not trying to get into a debate about marijuana and if it should be legalized.
I'm simply curious to see the results of this poll.

Do you think marijuana should be legalized in the United States?

If you have an opinion on this issue, by all means, please share it if you're willing.
(you can still vote but not voice your opinion if you don't wish to)

The powers that be in South Africa are debating whether or not to legalize it here, Ash: I voted yes but only if it is prescribed for medicinal purposes.

[Mr_Vindictive]

Ash, didn't you post this in the past?  Seems like we had a very similar post a couple of years back.

Anyway, I voted yes along with was is apparently the majority.  When it comes to marijuana, I don't believe it should be illegal.  It's not nearly as bad as alcohol, and the government stands to make a killing off of it.  Tax it at a huge amount, and you WILL make a huge amount.  Easy enough.

Not only that, but a huge section of the "War On Drugs" could be shut down.  The amount of money that would save each year is staggering.  We have drug dealers killing each other over marijuana, something I just cannot understand. 

[Jack]

Legalize it, absolutely.  I smoked pot for 10 or 12 years.  In the average year, there would be 3 or 4 times when you had to wait an extra week to buy some, because none was available at that moment.  For all the huge amounts of money and time spent on the war on drugs, all they accomplish is to cause a slight inconvenience for people.

[Derf]

I voted yes, not because I particularly approve of marijuana use, but just because I don't believe the laws in their current state are effective anyway. Much like during Prohibition, when speakeasies were common and people pretty much ignored the law, today we see much the same behavior with marijuana (among other, harder drugs). I've never smoked it myself (I grew up in a small town with a teacher for a mother and a policeman for a father--I couldn't get away with anything anywhere), but I am tired of reading about a prison system overcrowded with minor offenders, most of whom are caught just because they are the easiest to find, while the ones who should be behind bars are free just because they hide better.

[Trevor]

I've never smoked it myself (I grew up in a small town with a teacher for a mother and a policeman for a father--I couldn't get away with anything anywhere

 

[AndyC]

I agree with medicinal use, although I got a report just this week of a guy who got raided because his medicinal crop exceeded his permit by about 40 plants. I can also see some benefits if it is strictly regulated, like alcohol.

However, I voted no, simply because there is no way to regulate it. Liquor can be made at home, but not without considerable difficulty, and the quality is not so great. Marijuana is dead easy to produce in any forest, cornfield or basement. Cops would still be hunting the stuff down, but also have the added burden of distinguishing the legal stuff from the illegal.

Myself, I've smoked the stuff on a couple of occasions, when somebody was passing it around at a party. To be honest, I was too drunk to know what effect, if any, it had on me. 

[ghouck]

I'm extermely mixed on the issue. Unfortunately, , there is SO much BAD info out there, from BOTH sides that it's hard to really know what to believe. Stoners claim it's NOT addictive, that it doesn't lead to further crimes, people DON'T want to fight, blah blah blah, , but I find most of that to be rhetoric. I work in a Maximum security prison, and I know of more people than most would believe that are there because they smoked a bunch of WEED and blasted someone, or killed someone in a car accident, robbed a place for weed money. Stoners don't want to admit it happens, but it happens ALOT. Weed is a factor in the comission of non-drug crimes MUCH more than the stoners want people to believe. Anti-weed people make claims like "there are 647 KNOWN carcinogens in MJ, compared to only 23 in cigarettes", , of course, then the anti-tabacco people say crap like "There are over 2400 carcinogens in tabbaco".

If I were to list all the people I know according to SUCCESS in life, , it would near perfectly mimic their MJ use. I have a friend that is absolutely the MOST talented pipefitter/plate fitter/welder/leadman I've ever met. He is SO talented it's amazing, I've seen him lead work crews of 75 people on HUGE projects that lasted 8-9 months without breaking a sweat, but now that he's back to the weed, he's making about half of what my semi-crappy job pays. He SHOULD be working for BP like another friend of mine is, who as the crew leader of an 8-man crew, made $106,000 a year a few years back, likely MORE now. It is fundamentally unjust that my friend that uses MJ makes less than ME, in all honesty he's twice as talented and twice as knowledgible. In the town I live in, I know at LEAST 10 people that are really, trash, , and they all happen to be stoners. I'm talking people 45 years old, making $10.00 an hour living in a rented trailer, with a piece of junk truck, no insurance, in a town where milk is $3.79 a gallon and gas $4.79. I just don't see it as coincidence that the family that allows their 15-year old son to smoke pot, in the house even, is supported totally by both parents driving taxicabs seasonally, in a town that is two miles by a quarter of a mile. Yes, that sounds like isolated incidents, but I have a fistfull of examples that would bore you. It's quite pathetic.

Now, I'm not saying there isn't any people like that who DON'T do drugs, or the EVERYONE that smokes weed is useless, , it's just from my experience, it shows a distinct overall pattern. I think about MYSELF in high school doing that crap and although I had alot of FUN, I have TONS of regrets. I read once that when polled in public, over 80% of people polled were FOR MJ being LEGALIZED, , but no official ballot has ever realized more than 40%. That to me speaks volumes towards MJs supression of motivation and ambition if it is true. I tend to give it some credit from hearing official ballot resulys that have shown MJ legalization to have around 35% support, yet knowing that the majority of people I know, users and non-users alike, support legalization. 

With that being said, I think the amount of money spent of fighting that crap is a phenominal waste. Add to the the fact that if a person is 65 years old, I really can't see what issue there could be with it's use, which tells me there is SOME age, between 16 and 65 that the line should be drawn, and it doesn't nessisarily have to be 18 or 21. Of course that's what gets automatically brought up, ,'21', , that's the asnwer for everything here in America, , I think this issue requires some thinking outside the box. (for the record, I think the drinking age in the ARMY should be RAISED, , but that's another story altogether). MJ is just like alcohol, , some people should be allowed to use it, , some people shouldn't be allowed, and for various reasons. I am not one that feels we need any more laws than is absolutely nessisary, , but when the actons of people adversely and negatively affects others, something should be done.

But, either way, until we figure out a way to measure INTOXICATION, un-intrusively like a breath-a-lizer does for alcohol, and a standard for level of intoxication, , it shouldn't happen. And NO, being high does NOT make you drive BETTER.

[Rev. Powell]

I voted "yes", although in reality I wouldn't go that far, at least not yet.  I favor decriminalization of simple possession, and de-emphasizing the police resources committed to stomping out the trade.  Perhaps simple possession for personal use could be a small fine, and sale a minor felony.

I don't find Ghouk's explanation of the link between MJ and crime convincing, though, because correlation does not equal causation.  The fact that most criminals smoke weed doesn't mean that pot CASUSED these otherwise upstanding human beings to become criminals.  It seems more likely to me that someone who sees no reason to refrain from breaking and entering or from beating someone's head in with a pool cue will see no reason to refrain from smoking grass. 

[ghouck]

When you talk to many many people, , and being high is THEIR explanation, what else is one supposed to conclude? I'm talking about people that in every other way seem like intelligent, normal people with tons of positive accolades in their past, , and no hint of a criminal history beforehand. Your stance on the issue is typical, but when someone is imprisoned for stabbing someone to death during a drug deal gone wrong, and that drug was MJ, it's hard to feel otherwise. I could just as easily say that all the drunk drivers out there would have caused accidents/injured people even WITHOUT the alcohol, , but we know how false that would be. When a person says "I robbed that guy because I thought he had weed on him, , and when I realized he DIDN'T, I took his wallet and beat the crap out of him", you can see the conclusion is easy. It's easy to put a blanket over it and say "weed didn't cause this, people did", , but when you get down to individual issues, , often times the weed WAS a huge factor. It's a truth that it hard to fathom without working directly with the people involved.

It seems more likely to me that someone who sees no reason to refrain from breaking and entering or from beating someone's head in with a pool cue will see no reason to refrain from smoking grass. 

That's just it, , most of them DO see what is wrong with those crimes, and don't do them when they're NOT on drugs. Your implication that people that commit crimes all feel there was nothing wrong with what they did is largely false.

[Rev. Powell]

When you talk to many many people, , and being high is THEIR explanation, what else is one supposed to conclude?

You could conclude that they're trying to shift blame for their crimes to something other than themselves.  I remember being highly sceptical when Ted Bundy tried to blame his serial-killiing ways on hardcore pornography for precisely that reason.

I'm talking about people that in every other way seem like intelligent, normal people with tons of positive accolades in their past, , and no hint of a criminal history beforehand. Your stance on the issue is typical, but when someone is imprisoned for stabbing someone to death during a drug deal gone wrong, and that drug was MJ, it's hard to feel otherwise.

Can't say as I've run across anyone like the people you describe.  However, I would point out that advocates of legalization argue precisely that it's the huge drug profits made possible by the contraband status of drugs, not the drugs themselves, that is the major cause of drug violence.  Your example of someone stabbing someone else in a drug deal falls into that pattern. 

I could just as easily say that all the drunk drivers out there would have caused accidents/injured people even WITHOUT the alcohol, , but we know how false that would be.

When a person says "I robbed that guy because I thought he had weed on him, , and when I realized he DIDN'T, I took his wallet and beat the crap out of him", you can see the conclusion is easy. It's easy to put a blanket over it and say "weed didn't cause this, people did", , but when you get down to individual issues, , often times the weed WAS a huge factor. It's a truth that it hard to fathom without working directly with the people involved.

It seems more likely to me that someone who sees no reason to refrain from breaking and entering or from beating someone's head in with a pool cue will see no reason to refrain from smoking grass. 

That's just it, , most of them DO see what is wrong with those crimes, and don't do them when they're NOT on drugs. Your implication that people that commit crimes all feel there was nothing wrong with what they did is largely false.

I would never argue that MJ couldn't be a factor in particular crimes; any valuable commodity can motivate a property crime, such as the mugging you mentioned.  Nor would I say that one could never find an instance where someone committed a crime under the influence of pot that they wouldn't have committed if they'd been straight.  But as a general rule or trend, I don't see it.

Certainly the fact that you work in the criminal justice system gives you a different perspective than me.  But dealing with criminals every day actually could bias your view; you're exposed to the problem cases, the exceptions to the rule, day after day.  I wouldn't be surprised to find out that a huge percentage of the prison population indulged in marijuana, just as I wouldn't be surprised to find a huge portion of them were hard drinkers.  I still question the causal connection between marijuana and crime, without more.   

It wasn't my intent to imply that criminals didn't know their acts were wrong; I was being imprecise.  My larger point is that criminals tend to lack impulse control.  I’m not surprised that someone who can’t obey major societal rules, such as “don’t bust a cap in someone cause they dissed your wheels”, also can’t muster the willpower to obey a minor rule, like “don’t smoke weed.”

Part of the reason I likely won’t ever be convinced on this issue is that it contradicts my personal experience.  I toked up as a collegian, and the last thing I would ever want to do under the influence would be to go out and commit a crime.  It would have been a huge buzzkill, taking valuable time away from playing hacky-sack, eating Cheetos, and listening to Floyd.  Plus, there’s that paranoia to deal with, which to me would dampen the enthusiasm for violating the law. 

On the other hand, I once drank too many vodka gimlets and sucker-punched a guy because I didn’t like the look of his face.  But I would never claim that responsible alcohol use should be illegal, despite that fact that alcohol lowers inhibitions and therefore clearly creates more crime. 

Also, note that I only dispute the link between marijuana and crime: I’m fine with your other observations that marijuana isn’t particularly good for your lungs, is psychologically addictive, and encourages the “loser” syndrome you describe.  I just don't think that criminalization has been an effective way to deal with these social problems, or ever could be.

[Ed, Ego and Superego]

Having lived in Holland, I think it would make little difference 5 years down the line.  Society would not fall, we would not become a whole pack of weedheads or anything.  That is, if all the alcohol regulations are as stated earlier in the thread.  It still impairs your ability to drive and such.

I was amazed to see how little marijuana effected life in the Netherlands.  You see the Coffeeshops, some folks use them and many don't.  Once you leave Amserdam and the stoned college kids, you just see the odd place that seels it.  You can go in or not, just like a bar.  I did feel that the decent folks looks down on those who went to those places too often.  Can any Dutch friends comment? Do we have Dutch friends here?


Of course reefer makes you go crazy and kill people, so maybe not the best idea:
http://www.badmovies.org/othermovies/reefermad/

-Ed

P.S. speaking of siezed medical marijuana. I saw this in the paper 30 seconds after hitting "post"  http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_10380112