|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:15 am
I read earlier today in "Reefer Madness" that 2/3 of highschool students have tried marijuana. I knew a lot of people participated in recreational drug use, but I had no idea how many people have experimented with it. Now, in retrospect, I see it everywhere. It's all over the media, art & literature. So my question is this: Why is it still illegal? Couldn't it be legalized and good for the economy, as well as the social environment?
I want to hear your opinions!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:06 pm
It could be legalized, but I don't feel it would be good for society. It would be like saying "Here, abuse this."
Naturally, people already abuse illegal substances just as they abuse legal ones, but by taking the stigma off of and allowing something legality you're sort of encouraging more people to try it since there is no longer the risk of arrest or prison.
That means more opportunity for the destruction of lives. I feel the drug laws could use some remodeling, but I don't feel drugs should be entirely legalized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:28 pm
I've heard of countries where drugs are legalized and instead of abusing them, people use them only once in a while. I think that legalizing it allows governments to tax it doesn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:50 pm
I'll support medical marijuana. But not recreational. I mean, we already administer morphine to hospice patients - marijuana could probably ease their suffering.
I say - only with a prescription! I take amphetamine drugs for my ADD, but I'd never even consider taking meth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:05 pm
I can honestly say that I am undecided on this.
As a teen I watched many friends use pot. It seemed to me this was
often following cigarettes and alcohol. From pot, many kids were interested
in trying stronger drugs. LSD was the popular drug.
So from that experience, I think of it as a gateway drug.
I didnt try pot until I was 20, I liked it, and have only used it a handful
of times. I have not tried any other illegal substance.
I have had very close friends who were addicted to pot, but not many.
So I think it can be used responibly and irrisponsibly.
I would like to see pot legalized for medical purposes.
Paired with healthy meditation and habits- could it be a helpful
tool in anger management?
Id like to see real scientific research, what are its benifits and how does
it effect the brain?
I dont think we are ready as a society to release it to the public. I do see its possible economic benifits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:12 pm
Id like to also reply to the first post-
You mentioned the thought that its a common part of much of US culture-
that is its "everywhere".
I think that depends a bit on perspective and personal lifestyles.
Whats "everywhere" and very obvious to one person can be "way out
there" nad quite odd to another.
I dont think that majority rules should always be the favorible responce.
Many sexual preditors use the internet to find targets and exploit thier
particular interest, but because there are so many people doing it doesnt
justify or make it ok to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 6:53 am
You've all made valid points, so let me respond to a few of them. First I'd like to point out the marijuana is only mentally addictive, putting it in the same rank as alcohol, and making it even better in that regard than cigarettes. As an abusive substance, it seems no less damaging to society than alcohol, after all I've never heard of someone on pot running through an intersection and killing a family of 4. Also, economically, you think taxing cigarettes makes the government money? You could tax the marijuana cigarette as much as you wanted, and people would always buy them. The economy in this country would turn around.
One thing I do have to admit, pot can be a gateway drug. I've seen it happen, but in most cases however ( in my experience ) it does nothing of the sort.
I also just found out that Marlboro, the popular cigarette company, has the first rights to the marijuana cigarette. Legalization might be in the not-so-distant future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:27 am
Maeph You've all made valid points, so let me respond to a few of them. First I'd like to point out the marijuana is only mentally addictive, putting it in the same rank as alcohol, and making it even better in that regard than cigarettes. As an abusive substance, it seems no less damaging to society than alcohol, after all I've never heard of someone on pot running through an intersection and killing a family of 4. Also, economically, you think taxing cigarettes makes the government money? You could tax the marijuana cigarette as much as you wanted, and people would always buy them. The economy in this country would turn around. One thing I do have to admit, pot can be a gateway drug. I've seen it happen, but in most cases however ( in my experience ) it does nothing of the sort. I also just found out that Marlboro, the popular cigarette company, has the first rights to the marijuana cigarette. Legalization might be in the not-so-distant future. I did not say people would not buy them, I was simply pointing out that if the government sees anything in this, they may legalize it and be able to tax it. I often heard that this is the same as prostitution - make it legal and tax it. It does not stop the purchase of either, but it makes it taxable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:35 am
HeianWarrior I did not say people would not buy them, I was simply pointing out that if the government sees anything in this, they may legalize it and be able to tax it. I often heard that this is the same as prostitution - make it legal and tax it. It does not stop the purchase of either, but it makes it taxable. Yes, but drugs are already accessible. I could go spend 10 minutes in the city I live in, simply walking around, and find some. If it was legal, it would put cartels out of business, the government could regulate it, AND they could tax it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 3:44 pm
Maeph I read earlier today in "Reefer Madness" that 2/3 of highschool students have tried marijuana. I knew a lot of people participated in recreational drug use, but I had no idea how many people have experimented with it. Now, in retrospect, I see it everywhere. It's all over the media, art & literature. So my question is this: Why is it still illegal? Couldn't it be legalized and good for the economy, as well as the social environment? I want to hear your opinions! Firstly I just wanted to say about it is, 2/3 people have tried Marijuana but, How many people did they interview? If it's less then 1000 then the stats aren't compleatly acurate. I really don't want them to legalize it. Smoking is bad enough but to have drivers on the street stoned , would be horrible! It would be great for the economy but, I'm more conserned about the people who will be affected by the legalization rather then the economy of it. The economy has enough money .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 8:22 pm
the idea of making drugs like pot and LSD illegal is insane. smoking pot is like smoking a cig, and people try to say but you get even more of a smoke intake in pot then in cigarettes, but thats because cigs have filters! And LSD has no proven health side effects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 9:23 pm
I'd rather have people smoking pot than tobacco. There are already laws against driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, so, really I can't see an increase in accidents because of legalization of marijuana. In addition to the tax benefits, the government can also regulate the THC levels of commercially available marijuana. BTW, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MarijuanaQuote: The name marijuana (Mexican Spanish marihuana, mariguana) is associated almost exclusively with the plant's psychoactive use. The term is now well known in English largely due to the efforts of American drug prohibitionists during the 1920s and 1930s, which deliberately used a Mexican name for cannabis in order to turn the populace against the idea that it should be legal, playing upon attitudes towards race. (See 1937 Marihuana Tax Act). Those who demonized the drug by calling it marihuana omitted the fact that the "deadly marihuana" was identical to cannabis indica, which had at the time a reputation for pharmaceutical safety. Prohibition doesn't work. Anyways, I heard that the cotton companies lobbied against hemp citing the psychoactive use of the plant, but their real agenda was to get rid of their competition in the textile market. And this would be why so many of our clothes are made from cotton. (Without evidence, I relegate this to a conspiracy theory, but an interesting one.) See also : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 9:25 pm
The movie, "Refer Madness" was the funniest movie I ever watched! Not ha ha funny, but WTF funny! The government wanted to frighten young people out of using pot, and wrote the script to depict people who look like they're on E or speed!!! Alcohol is way worse than pot. AND in the 30's the tobacco and alcohol companies put a stop to legalizing pot by filling the pockets of our lawmakers with MONEY! Of course Marlboro bought the rights to distribute pot, they knew pot would ruin the ciggie market. And the Alcohol companies know what a blow legalization would be. Thankfully, the time is near, friends!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 9:32 pm
The concentration of THC in marijuana has gone up considerably since the 1970s and is, thus, more toxic than it was in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:25 pm
abarrach Anyways, I heard that the cotton companies lobbied against hemp citing the psychoactive use of the plant, but their real agenda was to get rid of their competition in the textile market. And this would be why so many of our clothes are made from cotton. (Without evidence, I relegate this to a conspiracy theory, but an interesting one.) See also : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp That seems really likely upon reflection. I've seen a number of hemp shops that made everything you could wear on your body. Purses, dresses, wallets, all that. Also if I recall, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his diary about how he grew hemp and occasionally smoked it. I've heard the same about George Washington, but I'm not positive about him. I will go wiki it (:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
