Think it's harmless? Now nine in ten teens at drug clinics are being treated for marijuana use

The Daily Mail (United Kingdom) ^ | April 22, 2018 | STEPHEN ADAMS and MARTIN BECKFORD

[familyop]

Cannabis is responsible for 91 per cent of cases where teenagers end up being treated for drug addiction, shocking new figures reveal...The findings also back up academic research, revealed in The Mail on Sunday over the past three years, that skunk is having a serious detrimental impact on the mental health of the young. At least two studies have shown repeated use triples the risk of psychosis, with sufferers repeatedly experiencing delusional thoughts. Some victims end up taking their own lives.

[familyop]

"If you legalize pot, you will find more people will be arrested for it than before."

That's been happening on and around the Rockies in CO, mostly with car stops. Most of them are probably DUIs. Many of them are domestic disturbances, and there have been quite a few busts involving those growing it without licenses, deviating from laws related to growing, etc. (a tax issue but maybe not officially documented as such).

"They will be arrested for untaxed pot, because once the government legalizes it, they will tax the hell out of it. Folks will still obtain it illegally to avoid the tax. I’m willing to bet you will find more folks arrested on tax charges in the future than on possession charges today where it is technically illegal in most places."

Eventually, yes, or for possessing illegal, non-regulated pot (same thing.). The judicial folks are just getting started and slow about making plans, but it will happen with or without mentions of taxes in records.

[dfwgator]

You think there’s a “War on Drugs” now, just wait until the government starts getting a cut of the action.

[familyop]

"You think there’s a 'War on Drugs' now, just wait until the government starts getting a cut of the action."

Yes. The government will get them all stabilized, safe and easier to take care of.

[Ken H]

Fedgov has been less heavy-handed with alcohol since Prohibition was repealed, so why would it be any different with mj? Prohibition is the most onerous and intrusive regulatory scheme there is.

Also, I don’t get the point about searches for untaxed pot. People can grow their own in most legalized states. You don’t have to pay a tax on what you grow or carry around with you, provided you’re within the legal amount.

[RFEngineer]

Time for you to learn how to Google the obvious.

You are particularly unskilled at finding the obvious

[RFEngineer]

Ah. You want a semantic argument.

[NobleFree]

"The study included any substance that can impair driving, including illegal drugs, prescription medications, legal non-medicinal drugs and over-the-counter medicines."

Should we ban them all?

Ban the users from driving and carrying weapons? That's already illegal. Ban the substances from use while driving and carrying weapons? That's already done.

No, just ban them - yes or no? (Or squirm?)

[NobleFree]

I don't believe your claim that people are "stopped and searched looking for untaxed [goods] at the whims of law enforcement" - and you've offered no evidence for it. I call BS.

Ah. You want a semantic argument.

Holding you to your words is not "semantics," fool.

[NobleFree]

A Google search for tobacco OR alcohol tax "search" shows no evidence for your claim that people are "stopped and searched looking for untaxed [goods] at the whims of law enforcement".

Time for you to put up or shut up.

Time for you to learn how to Google the obvious.

A feeble and moronic dodge from the coward.

[familyop]

You just talked all around part of the final solution without understanding it. ;-D

[RFEngineer]

Lol. You have issues. Perhaps cannabis-induced paranoia.

You may notice that states have laws on tobacco and alcohol, mostly for taxation enforcement. They have (often armed) folks with law enforcement powers.

Only you, it seems, are denying that they actually use these people and others to enforce laws. The exact same thing will be so with pot. I’ll help you. Look up cross-border alcohol cases in the Northeast. Or continue to posture.

stick to the topic instead of trying to comically portray debating machismo. You are not a formidable opponent, and it’s absurd on it’s face anyway.

[NobleFree]

[Making recreational pot legal] reduces a profit opportunity for criminals, and respects the liberties of adults.

Either criminals get the money or tyrants do.

Think that you won’t be stopped and searched looking for untaxed pot at the whims of law enforcement?

I've never been stopped and searched looking for untaxed alcohol or tobacco at the whims of law enforcement, nor do I know anyone who has. Do you?

Google it.

A Google search for tobacco OR alcohol tax "search" shows no evidence for your claim that people are "stopped and searched looking for untaxed [goods] at the whims of law enforcement".

You may notice that states have laws on tobacco and alcohol, mostly for taxation enforcement. They have (often armed) folks with law enforcement powers.

Only you, it seems, are denying that they actually use these people and others to enforce laws.

No, I never denied that - you're backpedalling from your claim that people are "stopped and searched looking for untaxed [goods] at the whims of law enforcement". Your new statement - that tax laws are enforced - has the virtue of being realistic; but sadly for you, it gives no support to your claim that "Either criminals get the money [from recreational pot] or tyrants do." Enforcement of tax laws is not intrinsically tyrannical (unless you think the Founding Fathers were tyrannical for granting the federal government taxing powers).

[RFEngineer]

Are you done yet positing your semantic argument?

[NobleFree]

"The study included any substance that can impair driving, including illegal drugs, prescription medications, legal non-medicinal drugs and over-the-counter medicines."

Should we ban them all?

Ban the users from driving and carrying weapons? That's already illegal. Ban the substances from use while driving and carrying weapons? That's already done.

No, just ban them - yes or no? (Or squirm?)

You just talked all around part of the final solution without understanding it. ;-D

Are you trying in your coy way to say merely that laws against driving while impaired by any substance should be meaningfully enforced - and not that potentially impairing substances should be banned even for nondriving use? If so, then we agree.

[NobleFree]

I see you can't support your claim that "Either criminals get the money [from recreational pot] or tyrants do" and are reduced to sniveling about being held to your words. Very sad. Get help.

[RFEngineer]

Thank you for your advice.

[familyop]

You don’t have to squirm. But if you want to,... You already forgot, no firearms for potheads. That’s already illegal, too.