Cannabis should be decriminalized for the same reasons that alcohol is

The Prometheus Institute ^ | 8/28/2006 | Editorial

[tang0r]

It turns out that alcohol is legal for the simplest, most nostalgic, and most American reason of all. Despite its risks and harmful side-effects, adults are reserved right to drink because they are independent adults in a free country. For all of the empty rhetoric about economics and black markets, the end of Prohibition was due to a single principle: even if drinking may be bad for society, government has no right to keep the people from doing it. The ability to get drunk is an inalienable right that we have forever confirmed with the 18th Amendment.

[bandleader]

William F.Buckley Jr.AGREES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ConservativeMind]

I wouldn't mind decriminalizing drugs if we could simply hold those who did something to another while under the influence as though it were premeditated.

That, coupled with a strong torture penalty, would let me go with legalizing drugs.

And you can put me first in line as a guest torturer.

[xhrist]

"Equating the two is pointless

no,
discussing legalization of THIS drug is pointless...
with you and so many "so called" conservatives..

phhff

[nativist]

What the advocates of legalizing pot fail to understand is that once the gov't gets its regulations on pot the user will barely be able to get high. Once that is done then the lawyers will sue the manufacturers for the ill effects of pot and bankrupt the industry.

I don't have a problem with decriminalizing pot as far as users go, maybe ticketing them or doing something akin to what people with DWI's go through. If they want to arrest the dealers that would make more sense.

[longtermmemmory]

I wish we would form a seperate back room topic area for this pot stuff.

[frogjerk]

Anyone have numbers from the pot smokers accident numbers? I have been told they are not even close.

I remember someone stating on FR that pot smokers drive better than drivers stone cold sober. Honestly. With a straight face.

[Moonman62]

For all of the empty rhetoric about economics and black markets, the end of Prohibition was due to a single principle:

Prohibition failed because it wasn't a prohibition. Possession was legal, doctors gave out millions of prescriptions for whiskey, low alcohol beer was legal, and law enforcement was banned from establishments that served alcohol.

[BenLurkin]

No, let's discuss it.

But first, respectfully, will you concede that conservative and libertarian are not the same thing.

[Moonman62]

The pot crowd has been particularly active the past few days. I think it maybe because of the Colorado referendum.

[frogjerk]

But first, respectfully, will you concede that conservative and libertarian are not the same thing.

Amen to that. Totally different animals.

[frogjerk]

The pot crowd has been particularly active the past few days.

Sounds like a contradiction.

[RayStacy]

Does anybody not agree that FEDERAL drug laws are unconstitutional? I thought we all worshipped the enumeration around here (I know I do). In the good old days when the Con. was respected, and the FED wanted to do something about a drug, they had the decency to do it right -- moving against alcohol through a legal Constitutional amendment process. My view is this -- NO fed. drug laws. If the state of TX wants to put you in jail for 10,000,000,000,000,000 years for merely thinking about pot, that's up to the people of the state of TX. If MASS wants to reward you with praise for smoking 10,000,000,000,000,000 pounds of pot, that's up to the people of the state of MASS.

[Protagoras]

Alcohol is a bad thing. Drink enough and you can be impaired for a day or even two.

Drink enough and it will impair your ability to live.

Marijuana, however, impairs a user for weeks.

Nonsense. Even though the two substances take different amounts of time to be eliminated from the system, taking that to mean that any level "impairs" the user is baloney.

It's use is also tied to the development of schizophrenia and clinical depression.

Like alcohol? So they are the same, kinda?

Equating the two is pointless.

If you are trying to avoid being on the wring side of an argument, yes it is pointless for you to concede.

They are different substances, yes. So they do different things. But they are similar in enough other aspects to make the comparisons on those levels valid.

And no, I have never used it.

[Bigh4u2]

"Anyone have numbers from the pot smokers accident numbers?
I have been told they are not even close."

And they wouldn't be.

Since Alchohol is legal and more people drink then do smoke pot, then the numbers wouldn't even be close.

If the numbers of consumers was even, or near even, to begin with, then you would probably find that the number of accidents were nearly equal.

[theDentist]

So let me get this straight - there's a push to ban smoking cigarettes, but allow smoking pot???? Makes a whole lot of sense doesn't it?

And they want to ban high-sugar sweets, but allow it to be cooked into brownies? :-)

[Frank_Discussion]

"It's use is also tied to the development of schizophrenia and clinical depression."

You got that right. I have a family member who's clinical depression diagnosis points to such a causation. Pot is a very different kind of intoxicant than alchohol. And it stinks like hell.

[dljordan]

"Now watch the single-minded, blue-nosed "conservatives" here, flame broil you for lunch. "

People that advocate the state aggressively and violently interfering in people's lives to enforce their particular world-view aren't conservative they're socialists.

[DungeonMaster]

Should it also be legal for soldiers to get stoned when off duty?

[frogjerk]

No one can - nor should try to - challenge the fact that alcoholism is a social disease, that youth drinking creates a net loss to society, that nearly all alcohol consumption is physically unhealthy, and that there is little medicinal or health benefit to the substance itself.