The War on Pot: Wrong Drug, Wrong War

NRO ^ | 05/10/2005 | Rich Lowry

[PaxMacian]

We are not all railroad engineers and pilots.
For that matter, we don't all drive either.
In fact, few drive in the inner cities.

Possibilities of improper actions by some
does not warrant waging war upon citizens
for their possession, propagation and protection
from eradication of this gift from God.

By the way, their are millions of daily users
of this herb in our country. Our government is
practicing terrorist actions by selectively acquiring
targets to make solely symbolic arrests and convictions.
It is not a war meant to be won but waged in perpetuity.
Dragging people from their homes into the public square
in order to justify their existence is status quo for LEOs.
The black armored and black masked DEAmen knocking
down doors in the dark night of America's herb prohibition
is worse than the taliban and their 'holier than thou' agenda.

Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

Romans 14: 2
For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

[bird4four4]

You'll never convince someone with their mind made up already. Since everyone loves to give 'their experience' as the final proof af any fact I'll give mine, just for fun.

Consider the reaction time for sports, similar to driving, I have had no problem playing tennis, basketball, soccer, vollyball, etc, while high. Quite the opposite with booze. One sport that was effected was golf. Basically because it is not a fast paced, focus and react sport. I would stand over the ball and over anylise every aspect of my stance alignment backswing etc, until I royally screwed it up. If I just walked up and hit it I did fine. But you can't beat the scenery at the links.

[Know your rights]

I have a brother with brain damage because he thought he could smoke pot and drive at the same time.

I'm sorry to hear that. Many people think they can drink and drive, often learning otherwise the hard way, but that's not sufficient reason to ban all alcohol use ... is it?

[Know your rights]

this does NOT imply they have the basis for denying any possible 'gateway' function of marijuana

No, but it does provide a simpler, and therefore scientifically preferred, explanation for the observed correlations.

[bill1952]

Cannabis has no effect on reaction time

LOL! Put down the pipe, bill.

It most certainly does.

[William Terrell]

I supposed that if one is zonked out of his mind reaction time will be slowed, but not from physically inhibiting the firing of the synapses like alcohol.

I personally know many that smoke and drive. They've had no accidents. I've watched a group playing volleyball while having smoked cannabis. They reacted just fine. People play sports while using it. There are several personal testimonies on this thread.

Using a chemical depressant like alcohol, none of the above would be possible.

I have been high on cannabis before and I have been high on alcohol before. The difference is measured in light years.

[pawdoggie]

Many people think they can drink and drive, often learning otherwise the hard way, but that's not sufficient reason to ban all alcohol use ... is it?

Comparing apples to oranges does not an analogy make. You can drink a beer, and afterwards get behind the wheel of your car and legally drive away (i.e. you're within the legal limit). Can you take a couple of tokes and drive legally: no, but if you've followed the point/counter-point I've had with "William Terrell", you'd know that I was responding to his assertion that there is no loss of driving reaction time when you smoke pot. That's dangerous and foolish.

[Know your rights]

Can you take a couple of tokes and drive legally: no

Perhaps not legally, but you *can* drive (unless you were toking the new "superweed" that apparently only John Walters knows where to find).

[William Terrell]

That's dangerous and foolish.

I've tried logic, and even studies (posted earlier on this thread) to get a point across. Cannabis. does. not. cause. interruption. of. the. firing. of. the. synapses in physical the way that alcohol does.

You still believe the fairy tale that it does. Fine. Find me some clear research that shows it.

I think I can state this as a true statement: If you don't already have any studies for that belief, then you have been told it by someone and you bought it without proof, probably because you wanted to. Fitted right in with your conditioning.

[robertpaulsen]

"Take note, drug warriors: this is from a CONSERVATIVE source: the National Review."

Owned and operated by a LIBERTARIAN.

[robertpaulsen]

"There is not a valid, logical, legitimate reason for pot to be illegal."

There has to be one?

If the majority of people tell their representatives that they want it illegal, that's not good enough? Citizens have no right to decide how they will live together?

Pot is currently illegal, valid reason or no. Here's a better question: Can you give me a valid, logical, legitimate reason for pot to be legal? Why should I vote for that and what will we gain by it?

[Ignatius J Reilly]

"If the majority of people tell their representatives that they want it illegal, that's not good enough? "

Good one!! actually yes that is valid. However is that really the case? I'm not sure it is, California voters for instance say it is OK for use by people with certain medical conditions yet the feds don't recognize this.

"Can you give me a valid, logical, legitimate reason for pot to be legal? "

That should not be the way legislation should work, everything should be legal unless specified by law (and for a valid reason.) To go the other way around, everything is illegal unless allowed by law is draconian. Another argument, it's a plant, how can a plant be illegal? Did god mess up?

As to what is to be gained, huge cost savings to the jusicial system (especialy prison), increased tax revenue, decriminaliaztion takes out the profits to organized crime, many people enjoy it and find it adds to their quality of life/happiness. Prohibition didn't work with alcohol and it's not working for pot either.

[Beckwith]

The majority of people did not make marijuana illegal.

The tortured soul of Harry J. Anslinger, Assistant Prohibition Commissioner, made marijuana illegal and his primary motivation was pure racism.

And Robert Paulsen is to marijuana as Carrie Nation was to alcohol.

[pageonetoo]

And Robert Paulsen is to marijuana as Carrie Nation was to alcohol.

No, I disagree. Carrie Nation had principles. RP just likes to sit on the sidelines posting his pro-jackboot junk, and try to make people think he knows something. He cares nothing about truth. He only cares about getting attention...

IMO, the WOD is about control, and money! Thank the Kennedy's and their rum-running, scotch importing, daddy for this prohibition!

Joe Kennedy was a criminal. Joe Kennedy was a prohibition bootlegger. Joe Kennedy was a mobster. Joe Kennedy was a Nazi. Joe Kennedy was an inside trader and stock fraud. Joe Kennedy parlayed his mob connections and ill-gotten fortune into political power, which he used to promote the now despicable Kennedy political clan, which bought us the womanizing John Kennedy (who also managed to get us into the Vietnam War), the vindictive AG Robert Kennedy, and the deplorable Ted Kennedy, along with a myriad of other Kennedy crooks and rapists. Like father, like sons.

Kennedy was tight with Hollywood, and marijuana was in competition with his booze...

He's a guy that raped the stock market by selling short, purportedly helping the crash, then they made him head of the new SEC???

[Beckwith]

The reason that marijuana was made illegal has to do with jazz music working its way up the Mississippi.

The jazz musicians favorite relaxant was then, as now, marahoochee.

The white kids who were listening to jazz were also beginning to accept herb.

This drove the white authorities nuts and Anslinger led the drive to criminalize natures own.

Kennedy had nothing to do with it, although the other issues you raise about the Kennedy's are quite accurate.

Prohibition was repealed in 1933 and pot was criminalized in 1937 with the Marijuana Tax Act so Kennedy was long out of the bootlegging business by the time pot was made illegal.

[robertpaulsen]

"California voters for instance say it is OK for use by people with certain medical conditions yet the feds don't recognize this."

California is but one state out of fifty. This being a federal issue, the other 49 also deserve a say-so.

"As to what is to be gained, huge cost savings to the jusicial system (especialy prison), increased tax revenue, decriminaliaztion takes out the profits to organized crime, many people enjoy it and find it adds to their quality of life/happiness."

You can say this about any drug. Are you saying all recreational drugs should be legal?

I'm looking for a reason why marijuana, specifically, should be legal. What's to be gained? I don't see any.

"Prohibition didn't work with alcohol and it's not working for pot either."

Alcohol Prohibition lasted 13 short years. Marijuana prohibition has gone on now for 70 years with no legalization in sight for the next 30.

Marijuana usage dropped 60% from its high point in 1979, and has remained relatively flat (4% to 6%) for the last 15 years. Hardly what I would call "not working".

[bassmaner]

I'm looking for a reason why marijuana, specifically, should be legal. What's to be gained? I don't see any.

How about freeing up law enforcement resources to go after dangerous criminals instead of harmless potheads? That alone would save billions for the taxpayer, and if coupled with a legalization scheme where excise taxes are collected, would actually bring in revenue.