Posted on 01/15/2009 8:32:09 AM PST by Ericka81
so any 17 year old with an older brother or a fake ID should get as much weed as he can afford. ok, got it.
if there were pack-of-weed-a-day smokers i’d show you a lot. come on. we’re talking about degree here. how many people smoke 20 marijuana cigs a day for 20 years like smokers do?
Right now they don’t even need a fake ID. They know where to get it. They find it now.
I’d like you to show me a single death by illness or overdose caused by ‘weed’.
Lots of deaths and life injuries are caused by weed.......well, the murderers that grow, transport, distribute and protect the weed.
Those deaths occur because it’s illegal. Just as deaths occurred because of prohibition. These deaths would end with legalization just as they did when prohibition was repealed.
People who just do a little weed, or cocaine, or etc recreationally will not be counted as criminals unless they cause harm while under the influence.
Meanwhile, the corrupt WoDs is shut down, bad LEOs, judges, politicians, border patrol, etc no longer are able to be bribed because of drugs
Illegal drug cartels are put out of business.
The only downside I see to this, and I'm not so sure that it IS a downside, is that some people will become addicted, ignore everything else, jobs, food, drink, family, etc till they starve to death and die, meaning that the gene pool gets cleansed a little of addictive types.
And the problem is............?
There is no need to chain smoke MJ like cigs so it hurts your lungs less. It is a far superior and safer drug. In fact, if MJ was cheap more people would eat it instead of smoking. Eating MJ and it’s extracts causes no harm.
I know plenty that smoke more than a pack-a-day equivalent(~1/8oz per day). Rolled and unfiltered. Most for about 10-20 but some for over 20 years. They have no lung health issues but I know plenty that smoke cigs with major problems. MJ tar is not as sticky and THC actually acts as an expectorant to clean the lungs.
I also suspect many of the pesticides, fillers and additives used in tobacco contributes to problems. All natural is the way to go.
Drug laws were invented by liberals into order to create government power and government workers.
All about police control.
Lots of death and life injuries are caused by anything of value. People are always trying to protect it and others try to steal it.
By making a common weed that has been smoked and enjoyed for thousands of years illegal, it has become more valuable than gold.
Now imagine something more valuable than gold and then imagine denying producers/wholesalers/retailers protection from police or the law if robbed. The idiots have turned a grass into a criminal magnet!
I honestly don't think that is true. If you put it to a national vote, and limited it to pot, I think most people would vote to legalize it. We're not talking crack or acid here--just pot. As a lot of posters pointed out, its no worse than alcohol (and in some ways better). Regulate it and let our tobacco companies grow it and sell it.
Even if that's true, these laws should not be made by one-size-fits-all Federal government. If the people of Utah don't want pot legal in their state, so be it. However, if the people of California vote to legalize it, they should have that right.
Yet the DEA and DOJ come down hard—very hard—on any state that relaxes any drug law. I don’t understand who the constituency is for going against the will of the people of a particular state on this issue is.
Maybe that's true on the low-end of the business. However, much of the high-end call girl business, even in places where prostitution is illegal, consists of independent prostitutes working hotel bars and such.
I suppose if someone is looking for a $50 hooker, they don't care if she's got bruises from her pimp. But, there is a whole segment of the prostitution industry where the only potential violence is from customers (though that risk is pretty low in the $500+/hour segment of the prostitution world).
If you legalize it, it won't be supplied by street dealer or the Feds. It'll be sold by Philip Morris in regulated, legal stores. Look at what happened after Prohibition ended- the violence associated with moonshining went away pretty much overnight because Coors could undercut any gangster, and people would rather go into a legal liquor store to buy gin, rather than a dodgy speakeasy.
and if it is legalized and the cost goes down, the drug-wars will escalate.
That makes no sense, from an economic point of view. The reason there are drug wars is because the illegal drug trade is so lucrative. But small-time hoods will never be able to undercut Philip-Morris wheb it comes to the price of pot.
When I was growing up, it was often easier to get weed than to get beer. Why? Because drug dealers don't check ID's. Today, a 16 year-old doesn't need an older brother to get him weed.
Older brothers will always buy booze, cigarettes or any other legal (but controlled) substance for their younger siblings.
The constituency are State politicians who are addicted to the cash flow from the Federal government. They're not about to endanger their Federal money by changing drug laws, regardless of what the people in their States might think on the subject.
Yep. Tens of thousands of Government employees who work in completely un-Constitutional Agencies depend on it.
And yet another noobie wanders through without even a perfunctory glance at the FR Homepage...
L
Surveys on marijuana legalization come out every year or two. They've been pretty consistent. Now about 40% will respond on these surveys that marijuana should be legal and regulated similar to alcohol. The percentage is creeping up as the years go on. When they break down the demographics of respondents, men are more likely to support legalization than women, people in the East and West are more likely to support it than people in the South. Younger people are more likely to support it than older people. Maybe you just happen to hang around with people more likely to support legalization. The majority in this country, a shrinking majority but a majority nonetheless, would be against it today. I suspect the percentage who voted for it would be lower than the percentage who say they are for it on surveys because those most likely to be against it are older people who are statistically more likely to actually exercise their right to vote than younger people, especially the 18 to 25 crowd who are mostly for legalization but who generally have low turn out numbers at the voting polls.
Why don’t the gangs run the booze trade?
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.