Posted on 02/03/2012 10:57:07 AM PST by gabriellah
In 2011, Gallup reported that 62% of 18-29 year olds and 50% of the general public supports the legalization of marijuana; 69% of liberals and even 34% of conservatives also support such measures. Obviously the pro-pot movement has taken root in the American populace and especially in the minds of Millennials (even managing to infiltrate the minds of the most conservative among us).
Myth #1: Legalization Would bring in Enormous Tax Revenues
The Heritage Foundation’s Charles Stimson published an extensive legal memorandum urging for the failure of the RCTC Act of 2010, which would have legalized pot in California. This memorandum debunks the myth that legalization would eliminate the black market for marijuana and would bring in enormous revenue, therefore stimulating the economy.
Dr. Rosalie Pacula, a drug policy expert at the RAND Corporation for over 15 years, testified that under the California law: “There would be tremendous profit motive for the existing black market providers to stay in the market. The only way California could effectively eliminate the black market for marijuana is to take away the substantial profits in the market and allow the price of marijuana to fall to an amount close to the cost of production. Doing so, however, will mean substantially smaller tax revenue”(Stimson 9).
In other words, simple economics expose the assumption that drug dealers would voluntarily enter the legal market, when the cost of production is virtually zero. In fact, it was calculated that “an individual will be able to produce 24,000 to 240,000 joints legally each year” (Stimson 9). This is more than any individual could possibly consume, and it is encouraging individuals to sell pot on the side, subverting taxation. Why would anyone buy marijuana legally when they would have to pay a higher price for it? It would be a much higher price considering California proposed a $50/ounce tax on top of the list price. Why would drug dealers leave the black market when they don’t have to?
Fiscal conservatives should not be lured into such intellectual inconsistency. We are not going to solve the budget crises and pay off our $15 trillion debt with whatever change is left from a feeble government attempt to tax the un-taxable.
Myth #2: Marijuana is a Victimless Drug
Marijuana has a history of being linked to crime in the United States and throughout the world. “60% of arrestees test positive for marijuana use in the United States, England, and Australia” (Stimson 6). And while many pro-legalization advocates argue that most of these marijuana users are people arrested for non-violent crimes, they fail to note that marijuana usage is strongly correlated with cocaine and other more serious drugs, as well as murder, assault, money laundering, and smuggling (Stimson 5-6). Surely, legalization advocates do not believe that all marijuana users are little angels?
In fact, in Amsterdam, one of Europe’s most violent cities, pot is legal and a prevalent aspect of society (Stimson 6). Heritage reports that “Officials are in the process of closing marijuana dispensaries, or ‘coffee shops,’ because of the crime associated with their operation” (Stimson 6).
California’s partial legalization via usage of “medical marijuana” is beginning to show the same effects. LAPD reports that areas surrounding cannabis clubs have seen a 200% increase in robberies and a 130.8% increase in aggravated assault (Stimson 6). A drug that increases crime doesn’t exactly qualify as “victimless.”
In addition to this, local communities where neighborhoods and residential housing are dominant will be adversely affected. Residents who live in areas with extensive marijuana usage have repeatedly complained about the incredible smell put off by the plants. Even worse than the smell though, is the growing crime rate in residential areas which is induced by theft of marijuana from yards where it is grown (Stimson 6).
It may be ideologically convenient for some to oversimplify the issue as a violation against individual liberty, but when all the facts are presented, it is obvious that the only liberty being violated is the blatant disregard for property rights, law, and order.
Myth #3: Marijuana = Alcohol
Legalization advocates link marijuana and alcohol as equally mild intoxicants, suggesting that they deserve equal treatment under the law. However, as the above research suggests, marijuana is more dangerous to the health and safety of society.
For better or for worse, alcohol as been part of human history for millennia. Typically, individuals responsibly self-monitor their consumption thereof. Alcohol has also been regulated by cultural norms rather than by government. Society, culture, and religion have proven to be the best regulators of alcoholic consumption. The same cannot be said of marijuana – as seen in the information presented earlier.
In addition to its lack of historical precedent in America’s historical experience, marijuana also has much more severe health effects than alcohol. 1) marijuana is far more likely than alcohol to be cause addiction, 2) it is usually consumed to the point of intoxication, 3) it has no known intrinsically healthful properties (it can only relieve pain –and artificially at that), 4) it has toxins that can result in birth defects, pain, respiratory damage, brain damage, and stroke, 5) it increases heart rate by 20% to 100% elevating the risk of heart attack (Stimson 4).
In relation to history, economics, and health, marijuana is nothing like alcohol.
Conclusion: Conservatives should not be afraid to combat the growing sentiment that supports the legalization of marijuana. Economics, historical precedent, and conservative principles are all on our side. It is up to unashamed, unapologetic young conservatives to articulate that message and continue to stand for ordered liberty.
Check out Norquist’s ties with Islam.
My point is just that it’s questionable to list Norquist as a conservative now. I know that there are conservatives who support legalization, such as William F. Buckley, who was accused of not being conservative earlier on in this thread.
Yeah, they drive so slow, people run in to them.
No, I didn’t have my child run over by a stoned driver, but someone has had that happen to them. Somebody has gotten stoned out of their mind and driven their motorcycle into a tree. I am sure somebody has gotten stoned and beat their wife, or their wife has gotten stoned and beaten them. I see this as a hellbound train heading into hell.
Yes, and all of these things have occurred absent any intoxicant.
The research on the subject does not support your premise. The substance does not affect motor skills in the same way or to the extent that alcohol does.
Being on two wheels, you tend to pay more attention to other vehicles and what they are/might be doing as the odds are against you in any accident regardless of fault.
Not sure how many of the dangerous drivers I have encountered were high, but I can tell you that folks on the phone, texting, eating, or putting on makeup while driving are a serious threat to those around them on the road, and often times appear as if driving drunk.
I’ll keep an eye out for those driving under the posted speed limit and with Cheetos stains on their fingers in the future as well.
At least you are on topic, MJ myths.
Why?
If it was legal, anybody can grow it. You don't need lights. Heck, just plant it. It will grow any where and anytime, except when it is too cold. I grew lots of it. I tried it once but I prefer beer. So I gave my plants away. I would grow more for friends when they would bring their seeds to me.
It got irritating though, so I planted the stuff in ditches and on the side of roads.
After the plants got a few inches high, the same size as I would grow them. Some got 8" tall, just growing with no one seeing them. They really freaked when they found the big ones. :)
Leads to lower consumption of alcohol
DENVER (Nov. 29, 2011) – A groundbreaking new study shows that laws legalizing medical marijuana have resulted in a nearly nine percent drop in traffic deaths and a five percent reduction in beer sales.
"Our research suggests that the legalization of medical marijuana reduces traffic fatalities through reducing alcohol consumption by young adults," said Daniel Rees, professor of economics at the University of Colorado Denver who co-authored the study with D. Mark Anderson, assistant professor of economics at Montana State University.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-11/uocd-ssm112911.php
We must be better behaved in New England. ;-)
Don’t worry... in the coming dystopia, you’ll have all the soma your heart desires.
Marijuana makes pure, white young girls have sex with black jazz musicians!
Well I guess it did but even some “Conservatives” are anything goes now.
No wonder we are doomed.
Light ‘em up!
When alcohol was OK again, ATF had to have something to do.
We import hemp products from Canada instead of allowing our farmers to grow it.We have gangs fighting along our borders and murders going on, everyday because of the War on Drugs.
Why didn't they have to ammend the Constitution to make drugs illegal?
Yes,and Dupont made nylon. We made rope for ships, cowboys and evrything else from hemp. Dupont wanted it banned so we had to buy their rope and cloth made from nylon.
I have read that you can't get high from hemp. I don't know but it is supposed to be different.
I have made both beer and wine. no one bothered me. It is legal to make for your own and guests use. It is illegal to sell what you make.
You would smoke it to effect. That is the control. When you take a pill you don't know you didn't take enough for half an hour or so. Same thing, if you take to high dosage a pill. If you are smoking it, you know real fast when enough is enough.
No arguement, but Oregon's medical marijuana laws are a maze of rules and regulations that have set up dual systems, one legal, the other illegal, and a black market to boot. It's barely controlled chaos.
One puff...2 puffs...? To effect?
When you take one pill it may be too much or not enough.
re: “On the contrary, teens report that they can get pot more easily than they can get cigarettes or beer. It seems the best way to restrict access for teens is to make the producct legal for adults, so sellers have an incentive to restrict their sales to adults - that incentive being the potential loss of their legal adult market (through loss of license) if they sell to teens.”
All I’m saying is that alcohol and legal perscription drugs are far more of a problem than illegal drugs. Alcohol is involved in more traffic fatalities, domestic violence, than illegal drugs.
As to Prohibition, yes there were more speakeasys than legal bars after it was enacted. That’s why I said it depends on which group is quoting “facts” about Prohibition. There are other statistics that say that alcohol consumption reduced during Prohibition overall - others say no it stayed the same, others said it went up. I don’t know. The statistics are vague from state to state during that time.
I’m only surmising that accessibility is the reason alcohol is the problem it is today. Adding illegal drugs by legalizing them only worsens the problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.