Seize marijuana market from criminal class

The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, VA) ^ | 2/9/2003 | Kevin B. Zeese

[MrLeRoy]

WASHINGTON--A friend recently remarked to me, "Alcohol is the original date-rape drug." That's very sadly true. And it's why I found it hypocritical that the national drug czar's new ad equating marijuana use with teen pregnancy should debut during the Super Bowl, in which beer and sex were the dominant advertising themes.

Teen drinking is the bigger problem, both in sheer numbers as well as health risks, yet the federal agency overseeing drug-control policy ignores it. An antiteen drinking commercial would have been a powerful counterpoint during that game; the antipot ad came off as a clumsy attempt to maintain beer's market share.

These ads are emblematic of the government's overall war on marijuana. Since marijuana was first federally outlawed in 1937, prohibition has had the perverse effect of making marijuana more popular, particularly among youth and the counterculture. Our government insists on staying the course even though there is no evidence that criminalizing marijuana has ever reduced its use, let alone its trafficking. Meanwhile, the focus on marijuana diverts attention away from more serious problems.

Historian Barbara Tuchman once defined folly in government as the perverse persistence in bad policy in spite of evidence of its failure and the existence of a reasonable alternative.

Marijuana prohibition is a clear example of this. Reports by governmental commissions in several countries point out its failure and call for drastic changes, from decriminalization (for example, the Shafer Commission in 1972) to legalization (a Canadian Senate committee report in 2002). So many of our political leaders have tried marijuana that it becomes news if a politician ever denies any "youthful indiscretions." And yet, still prohibition persists. Why?

Some argue that marijuana is a dangerous drug so it must be banned. Yet we've decided that the dangers of alcohol and tobacco present an acceptable risk, so let's compare:

Alcohol overdoses kill more than 15,000 people each year in the United States, and alcohol-related deaths push the toll up to more than 100,000 annually; marijuana, according to the scientific evidence, has not racked up a single overdose death in centuries of use.

Alcohol use is involved in 40 percent of the violent crimes committed in the United States annually; marijuana is associated with meditative, peaceful behavior, while violence in the marijuana trade is the result of prohibition, not the drug.

Tobacco use is credited with more than 400,000 deaths annually, according to the Surgeon General; in spite of decades of trying, the federal government has still not found anyone dying from marijuana use.

Clearly, marijuana prohibition is not justified by health concerns.

Prohibitionists say we don't need to legalize yet another drug because the ones we have do too much damage. That argument misses the point in many ways.

First, marijuana is widely used, legal or not. At least 21 million people used it last year, according to the federal Household Survey. (The real number is much higher, possibly 40 million; government surveys of illegal behavior are not noted for their accuracy and are widely believed to underreport the true totals.)

More important, marijuana is not simply another substance, it's a less dangerous--not safe, but less dangerous--alternative to drugs we already make available. And, if regulated as we do with alcohol, there would be guarantees of marijuana purity as well as regulation of potency, something the illegal market does not provide.

Prohibitionists counter: Ending marijuana prohibition "sends the wrong message" that legalizing drugs supposedly connotes societal approval of drug abuse. Oh, really? Then we need to bring back alcohol prohibition because, by that logic, legal alcohol sends the message that alcoholism and alcohol abuse are OK. Obviously, that's not true. And we're not going back to alcohol prohibition. We need to turn in a different direction.

It makes no sense to continue threatening people with arrest over their simple use of marijuana. A regulated system takes control of the marijuana market away from the criminals. This means age limits, just as we have for alcohol--drug dealers never ask for ID.

As for the "gateway" theory? Research shows that alcohol and tobacco are more likely suspects than marijuana. A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that early alcohol and tobacco use were strong indicators of later drug use. That study's authors contended that the link between marijuana and other illegal drugs may be due solely to marijuana's illegality, nothing more.

A regulated marijuana market--similar to alcohol but a little more restricted (no Super Bowl marijuana promotions, for example)--is workable. And selling U.S.-grown marijuana through state-run outlets similar to Virginia's ABC stores could bring in millions in tax revenue to states and the federal government.

So why does prohibition persist? As Tuchman put it in her book "The March of Folly": "Wooden-headedness, the source of self-deception, is a factor that plays a remarkably large role in government. It consists in assessing a situation in terms of preconceived fixed notions while ignoring or rejecting any contrary signs. It is acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts."

Seventy years ago, we ended the tragic mistake that was alcohol prohibition. The time has now come to end the folly of marijuana prohibition.

[jmc813]

WOD Ping

[Hemingway's Ghost]

My, the little vermin are particularly active today. Two threads gone so far.

Two threads gone? How so?

[f.Christian]

What the heck does this mean? Happy-happy tip? Have you been getting writing tips from f. Christian (if you're not familiar, check out any creation/evolution thread).

tip (( tote ))

Evolution (( pot // drugs )) is -- full on -- brainwashing (( redacting // deleting -- HATING conservatism )) and . . .

indoctrinating // programming LIBERALISM -- LOVING lies // bias (( anarchy )) all through America // society ! ! !

All unashamedly on the FR too ==== "fraud // corruption" ==== UNADULTERED tyranny // blasphemy !

[Saturnalia]

I like pie made from the blood of Christian babies!
This has been a random off-topic post.

[MrLeRoy]

What language is that? The punctuation rules out English.

[f.Christian]

mlr...

Which part of "free" did you not understand?


9 posted on 02/11/2003 7:00 AM PST by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")


fC...

what language is that . . . liberalism // anarchy ==== police state !

[MrLeRoy]

Is it Martian?

[f.Christian]

That government is best which governs least

Brazillian - - - jungle ?

[f.Christian]

Maybe you can revive . . . reality free zones - - - isn't that the homeless // brainless ==== g-libertariansm-dopia !

[MrLeRoy]

Are you using paint thinner in an unventilated area again?

[f.Christian]

paint thinner . . . weak for you - - - yeah - - - too strong for me !

[-YYZ-]

I think it may be an obscure dialect of Schizophrenese. The punctuation rules out any language that I know anything about.

[MrLeRoy]

I think it may be an obscure dialect of Schizophrenese.

By George, I think you've got it!

[philman_36]

It is amusing to observe how they don't allow minor annoyances such as war distract them from their petty crusade.
It is amusing to observe that you're not allowing minor annoyances, such as war, to distract you from your own "righteous" crusade while you castigate others for doing the very thing you're doing.
Echo...echo...echo...echo...

[CWOJackson]

Yawn.

[f.Christian]

Is that what you experience when you go into withdrawl ==== Schizophreneeze ?

[MrLeRoy]

Is that what you experience when you go into withdrawl

"Withdrawl" is what you get if you spend a lot of time in the South.

[philman_36]

Marijuana is the drug for the radical left counterculture, but before the radical leftist counterculture sprang up in the 60's, marijuana wasn't popular.
Yeah, other drugs like amphetamines were far more popular.

First synthesized in 1887, the stimulant amphetamine became popular in 1920s in the medical community, where it was used for raising blood pressure, enlarging the nasal passages, and stimulating the central nervous system.
Snip...Between 1850 and 1937 marijuana was widely used throughout United States as a medicinal drug and could easily be purchased in pharmacies and general stores. Recreational use was limited in the US until after the Mexican Revolution of 1910, when an influx of Mexican immigrants introduced the habit.

By the mid-sixties, seemingly overnight, marijuana and LSD use was common across the country, especially among the young.
Are you saying that Mexican immigrants or the youth of America were the radical left counterculture? Seems to me I recall adults leading the charge of the radical left counterculture, and they weren't adult Mexicans.

Do you have anything besides this one pony show you keep throwing up? ...radical left counterculture of the 60's, this...radical left counterculture of the 60's, that.
And you say I want to return to that time? Ha! You're the one who keeps going back to that time frame, not me. I'm the one who keeps telling you to step into the current time frame.

[tacticalogic]

Two threads gone? How so?

No Replies

Imagine that.

[Dane]

Do you have anything besides this one pony show you keep throwing up? ...radical left counterculture of the 60's, this...radical left counterculture of the 60's, that.

Uh dude that "one pony show" you call the "leftist(Libertarian) counterculture of the 60's" produced Bill and Hillary Clinton, Jane Fonda, Barney Frank, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, the SDS, the Weather Underground, etc.etc., shall I go on, and ruin your infatuation with the counterculture of the 60's?