So the big danger is people switching from alcohol to pot? Stoned instead of drunk. That’s an improvement? Following your logic the laws against pot have not and do not stop anyone from smoking it,right? So we may as well make it legal and profit from the addictions/damage? What about coke,meth,heroin? All of those are used despite laws and a FORTUNE is spent on them. Better the government profit from all drugs? Meanwhile- tobacco-which only harms the users body and does not DOPE people up, is demonized. Users are shunned, no advertising, no cigarette machines. We must do what is BEST for people’s health(despite their choice to use it) re. tobacco, but not marijuana??
Will it be ok for businesses to forbid pot smoking? Can people sue for second-hand smoke damages?
All I know is ANYTHING that hampers brain activity is worse than what doesn’t, and the more the brain is affected the worse it is. Kids get turned into zombies with drugs for ‘hyperactivity’ and now we’ll give permission to the adults to be stoned and zoned out too.
Imagine society with stoned adults, drunk adults, zombified kids( because stoned adults will think anyone not stoned is ‘hyperactive’, and those not self-medicating will suffer the consequences.
So if profit is your best defense I expect you will encourage profiting from ALL currently illegal drugs to deprive dealers and druglords of the fortune? By that logic we should open euthanasia/suicide centers and charge those who want to REALLY self-destruct. If they want to die-might as well make’em happy AND make some money from it,eh?
Yes, I sat in a courtroom for 2 years and assure you that is an improvement for most people. I'd rather they be sober but stoned IS less impairing and violent than drunk. I've never seen a raging violent stoner but encountered raging violent alcoholics every day in court. Most didn't even remember their crimes.
"What about coke,meth,heroin? All of those are used despite laws and a FORTUNE is spent on them. Better the government profit from all drugs?
Those drugs are 100% proven to be chemically addictive and toxic. Pot is the exact opposite. These drugs also require far more infrastructure to deliver so prohibition does cause a dent in their use. My point is that pot can be grown by any idiot in a yard, forest or closet so prohibition is useless. You can find it any city within 1 hour.
"We must do what is BEST for people’s health(despite their choice to use it) re. tobacco, but not marijuana??"
Many of the same restrictions for tobacco are found on legalized pot. Some even more so like age 21 instead of 18. They know restrictions can't be too harsh because people will turn back to illegal dealers. Pot can be grown easily anywhere. Tobacco can't.
"Kids get turned into zombies with drugs for ‘hyperactivity’ and now we’ll give permission to the adults to be stoned and zoned out too."
The difference with kids is the drugs are often requested by the school and MANDATORY. These are designer drugs with serious side effects and kids become chemically addicted for life. Pot has no proven long-term side effects and is not physically addictive in 99.9% of people.
Permission for adults is irrelevant for a plant so easy to get. Those who want pot already have it. The ONLY thing legalizing will do is change who makes the profit.
"By that logic we should open euthanasia/suicide centers and charge those who want to REALLY self-destruct. If they want to die-might as well make’em happy AND make some money from it,eh?"
Euthanasia is guaranteed self-destruction so it does not fit that logic. With pot, most people do not destroy themselves. I don't advocate destruction. I advocate the freedom to responsibly use something even though a few other people are not responsible with it.