Posted on 03/18/2013 7:39:49 AM PDT by Kaslin
In his column of March 12, 2013, my beloved friend wrote on the issue of legalized marijuana in the state of Colorado. On his radio show, he justifiably bemoaned readers of his column who had written comments questioning his sanity and their relationship over this one issue despite years of being Prager groupies. I will not do any of that. But for only the second time in our long relationship, Mr. Prager, you are dead wrong on a topic … but I still love you.
We Baby Boomers grew up in a generation where marijuana made the jump from the dark corners of jazz clubs to mainstream culture. We were advised to stay away from the dangerous herb by silly movies like Reefer Madness. We were forewarned that marijuana was a gateway drug to things like cocaine and heroin (crystal meth was not topical then). Yet despite all these warnings, the use of marijuana spread and people were not seeing the ugly warnings come true.
Then President Nixon appointed a commission chaired by Raymond P. Shafer to look at the exploding use of illicit drugs in America. The commission came back with a simple conclusion – stop prosecuting the use of marijuana and employ other methods to dissuade people from partaking. This would free up resources to pursue dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine. That was 1972 and President Nixon told his commission to jump in a lake.
Forty years later we are still confronting the same issues. The field has changed due to new designer drugs and the in-vogue use of legal medications in illegal manners. Yet there is the old, standby marijuana exhibiting the same innocuous effects. The only difference is the partial legalization of its use across the country because of its proven medicinal benefits. And in the 40 years since Nixon blew the chance to advance the issue of drug use in our society, we found out marijuana is just as dangerous as The Shafer commission found it – which is not really.
First we must accept the fact that the ingesting of anything in excess can lead one to destroy their lives. And you can certainly find multiple examples of malingerers excessively using marijuana. The question in those cases becomes is the marijuana the cause or effect? This society has endured the widespread use of marijuana for almost 50 years and the instances of problems from use of marijuana are miniscule.
Mr. Prager starts his column by analyzing the effects upon the culture in Colorado in the short three months since legalization. He falls into the same trap as the journalists he cites. How can you possibly analyze the effects of the new law after such a short period of time? Is it really shocking to see some people flocking to the use because of the change in legal status? How different is this than people flocking to the hot new restaurant? How do we know that the entire usage might not become passé? To even discuss what is going on with the change in law reeks of premature evaluation. We wrote a column two months ago endorsing the experimentation of such laws at the state level. Let’s give these laws a chance as that is the purpose of federalization.
Mr. Prager then lurches into comparing the use of tobacco products to marijuana. His righteous indignation against the anti-tobacco forces remains totally justifiable. In fact, their war against tobacco at times staggers the imagination. Except for the statement that some people would endorse the use of marijuana yet deplore the use of tobacco products is fair, but his commentary is of little relevance.
The real comparison has been and is between alcohol and marijuana. There is no doubt to a large part of our society that marijuana use is safer and better for the society than alcohol. You don’t hear of people going into a marijuana rage. You don’t hear of two dudes duking it out after toking up in a barroom brawl. You don’t hear of husbands lighting up and then going home and beating their wives and children. We do hear of happy drunks, but we certainly hear more about the unhappy ones. The worst effect of marijuana use remains dry mouth, excessive giggling and mass consumption of nacho cheese Doritos.
Sure there are irresponsible people who drive after partaking too much, but is that anything different than alcohol or all the other illicit and licit drugs being improperly used? To this Mr. Prager states “Legalizing marijuana is foolish because it leads to far more use of the drug and the availability of ever more potent forms.” Unfortunately, this is wrong on so many levels. We don’t have any idea whether usage will really remain higher in the future or whether the new legalized marijuana will replace the use of alcohol or the misuse of legal medications. If the latter happens that would be a good thing. As for the potency, legalization will standardize the potency and allow customers to know what they are smoking which can only also be a good thing. Apparently, Mr. Prager did not stop in a marijuana store during his world travels to Amsterdam. My friends using medical marijuana in California tell me for the first time in their lives they know what they are buying.
Dennis, my beloved friend, you should sit back, take a puff off one of your pipes and wait for the real results of the experiment in the legalization of marijuana. If three years from now driving in Colorado is like being in bumper cars at the County Fair then we will know we made a mistake and the other 48 states will say no way. I am putting my money on Mr. Shafer and the fact we should have done this 40 years ago.
Show me a single study that proves more than just correlation. There are nearly identical studies that show diagnosed schizophrenics and bipolars are several times more likely to use cigarettes/alcohol than the average population. These studies do NOT prove using hemp, cigarettes or alcohol causes mental illness. It only proves a correlation that mentally ill people are more likely to abuse ALL substances.
On the other hand, alcohol abuse has been 100% PROVEN to cause irreversible physical damage to the brain and liver. Alcohol abuse can easily result in deadly poisoning. Withdrawal from alcohol addiction can result in death. These are 100% proven medical facts and you can observe the damage during an autopsy. You can go to a detox clinic and find guys with inflamed livers sticking out of their side.
I'm talking about alcohol ABUSE, not “a few drinks”. Both alcohol and hemp are safe in moderation(as most things are) but abusing alcohol is far more damaging than abusing hemp. We have countless dead bodies, dead livers and direct physical brain damage with 100% proof of causation. Alcohol actually rots every single organ in the body but liver failure comes first and is usually a death sentence.
“Not to mention severe psychological addiction.”
One can become psychologically addicted to almost anything. Even if it is dangerous and interferes with their lives. Compulsive behavior is a natural part of human nature. Should we ban all inanimate objects that contribute to compulsive behavior?
In America's early days, Thomas Jefferson went on a mission to buy the best Chinese hemp seeds from a smuggler in France. China kept tight controls on their hemp since it was so valuable for military and commerce. The first law regarding hemp in the Colonies MANDATED all farmers to plant some due to its military value.
So what happened? The cotton gin made cotton a cheaper source of light fiber but hemp was still used for heavy shipping applications. As the hemp requirements for ships went down, the hemp industry came up with their own “gin”, the decorticator, in 1936. It was going to revolutionize the textile industry. Then in 1937, “reefer madness” propaganda and the crooked stamp tax conveniently stopped it for the cotton industry.
Then once again in WW2, the government promoted growing hemp due to its many practical uses. Find the video “hemp for victory” from the federal government. Hemp produces the most fiber and renewable oils per acre per year.
Hemp is not marijuana
“Marihuana” was a evil-sounding Mexican slang word picked up by the anti-hemp lobby to outlaw hemp under the radar. Read the text of the 1937 Senate debate on the “marihuana stamp act”. Most of the people that read about the bill had no idea it was hemp. The testimonies on “marihuana” were obvious lies based on what we know today. For example, the government's narcotic expert testified that he “injected” numerous dogs with the “active ingedient in marihuana” and most of them died. We now know there is no deadly dose AND the fat-soluble chemicals cannot be made into an inject-able form. He also testified that one puff made someone psychotic for life. Obvious 100% lies.
Numerous medical and industrial experts testified on the benefits of hemp so a “compromise” was reached to tax rather than outlaw. Due to the rise in hemp production and more advanced chemistry, its medical use was also increasing.
The only problem was the government never issued tax stamps so all hemp became illegal except during WW2. The government shut down a whole industry by simply refusing to accept taxes on something that must be taxed.
Crony capitalism at its finest. It's sad to see so many so called FREEpers falling for it...
You are preaching to the wrong person. Marijuana is the most stupid and insidious drug you can take because so many think it is benign....so party on Garth! I smoked some in my youth but have not touched since I was 21 years old. If you want to be stupid then keep smoking it....
Matter of fact I know a spaced out older fellow who smoked it for years. And he is very liberal too. If you want a permanent Democrap majority then legalize marijuana and have an illegal alien amnesty
Excellent rebuttal to just one of Prager's idiocies - others are found in responses to Prager's screed at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2996034/posts.
Dennis Prager is one of the foremost minds whose honesty, clarity, scholarship, and thoughtfulness is beyond the pale. In no way can be Dennis be described or have his ideas and views attributed to those of an idiot.
Idiotic is as idiotic does, and however stellar his other writings, the one in question included a number of idiotic arguments.
Dennis was instrumental in my conversion from Liberal to Conservative.
And I'm sure he loves his mother, too - but none of that redeems his idiotic arguments in the essay under discussion.
"Universal"?! LMAO! The studies you refer to explicitly show that IQ and schizophrenic correlations are FAR FROM "universal."
There were no laws against pot in 1776.
hehe
There are places that classified marijuana as poison as early as the middle 1800s. The real criminalization didn’t start until the very early 1900s and the final say didn’t happen until the feds got involved in the 1920s. Which just happens to be about the time of Prohibition, brought about by the Progressive Movement.
Dopers can’t face life so they make their own world they can never be trusted with anything.
Pot was not illegal back then because no one was dumb enough to smoke it. The only pot puffers were some marginal people on the fringes such as jazz musicians, some arsty types, a few blacks and a few Hispanics. The white population was at 90% back then and did not touch it
I think all drug use should be legal. However, I also think it should be damned difficult to find a job, obtain custody to children, operate certain types of machinery (cars, boats, etc.), run for public office.
I think it ought to be difficult to buy insurance if you use it. I think lenders should be able to test and either not loan users money, or charge them higher rates (higher risks mean higher rates).
Use it in the military, lose a stripe and some cash. (destruction of government property - just like a hangover before movement or a sunburn that puts you in sickbay). I think colleges ought to be able to test for substance use before giving students admission (again, higher risk means higher drop out rate).
I think it should be taxed. I think those people selling it without paying the tax, or buying it without paying the tax should have a lien put on their personal property.
Let the free market discriminate on the basis of risk, and don’t sue them for it. The science is pretty clear, so let the actuarials reign and let the courts protect the businesses (this is the weak part in the argument).
So your claim, "If pot was legal in 1776 we never would have driven out the British" was nonsense.
Dopers can’t face life so they make their own world they can never be trusted with anything.
At least some of them know how punctuation works.
Disgusting how deep the brainwashing on both sides goes.
>Either we are free, or we are slaves!
NoToNannies
So your claim, "If pot was legal in 1776 we never would have driven out the British" was nonsense.
your logical processes are very deficient
Thanks for the morning laugh!
Legalize pot and get million more Obama voters...Not that you care. You just want it legal so you are not paranoid about the police anymore. Pot makes you paranoid
So your claim is that millions who now vote Republican would if pot were legalized start voting Democrat? Can you give any reason for anyone to believe this surprising claim?
...Not that you care. You just want it legal so you are not paranoid about the police anymore. Pot makes you paranoid
It's not "paranoid" to worry about the police when in violation of a law - unless you think USSR circulaters of dissident literature who worried about the police were "paranoid."
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.