Posted on 02/20/2002 6:08:45 AM PST by Magician
My first reaction is WHY NOT?
It’s a question of common sense.
Our marijuana laws do not work. They never have, and they never will.
Their stated goal being to rid society of the so-called affliction of marijuana use, the harsh reality is that since prohibition, usage rates have increased drastically.
Either we legalize it, and fast, or we get busy locking up millions of Canadians. With one out of three Canadians admitting to having tried marijuana, we may very well be locking up our best and brightest, not ruined by drugs, but ruined by the criminal sanctions that go with getting caught for what amounts to a common social practice. I can’t even begin to count how many elected officials admitted to having used it, yet everyday hundreds of average citizens are arrested for marijuana offences.
So, why are there so many users, and why is marijuana so easy to acquire?
In a strange twist, prohibition is to blame.
When a product is illegal, the profit margin skyrockets. Prohibition turns an agricultural product (a plant that’s very easy to grow) into a drug worth its weight in gold. Without prohibition, marijuana would cost pennies to produce. No wonder some adventurous modern day prospectors are setting up in their own back yards and basements to try and get in on the gold rush. Who could blame them? They aren’t hurting anyone, they’re making good money, and most of all customers are willing, grateful participants in the process.
We must come to grips with the fact that the demand for marijuana is never going away and find a better way of dealing with it. Imagine the billions of dollars spent on marijuana and enforcement going to more noble causes like health care and other social programs.
The general public understands this. Support for legalizing marijuana recently reached the much sought after 50%+1 majority. Recent polls show that 51% of Canadians support legalizing marijuana, a slim, but very real majority.
And with more and more advocates, the trend is just taking off. Several European countries like Belgium, Switzerland, Holland and Germany are successfully leading the way towards tolerance with legislation aimed at helping drugs users, not by treating them as criminals, but as human beings deserving of respect. There is no reason why Canada should lag behind. We should be on the cutting edge of this new international movement.
Now it is time to step onto the world stage and assert our sovereignty by legalizing marijuana once and for all. I would venture a friendly wager that the international community would stand by Canada on this issue. Our inevitable success would then make us a world leader in marijuana reform—an example for others to follow.
(I can hear it already): But marijuana is dangerous!
For the record, marijuana is NOT dangerous. It is no worse than coffee and much safer than alcohol. Marijuana is also much less addictive then cigarettes. Chronic use is rare as the majority do not smoke it everyday. Try that with tobacco!
What little risks that may be present with marijuana are no worse then any other risks deemed "morally acceptable". Should we ban music because, if played too loud it might hurt your hearing?
French fries and gravy are far more dangerous for our health then marijuana. Should we ban fast food and send overeaters to mandatory fitness camps?
Who are we, as a society to judge? What exactly are marijuana users guilty of? Who are they hurting? What have they done wrong?
To deny marijuana users the right to choose what they want to consume is nothing more than an arbitrary decision based on moral values, not public interest......
Legalization does not mean promoting use. It means providing medical care, support, education, quality standards and proper labeling. We then trust that responsible adults will make their own choices. This is what makes legalization healthy for our society. At least legalization would force retailers to be accountable for what they sell.
Under prohibition, the government has waived its responsibility for the well being of marijuana users, and is only responsible for their arrest and persecution.
This total disregard for their rights drives a wedge between them and the rest of society and breeds contempt for our legal institutions. If society does not tolerate pot smokers, how are pot smokers supposed to tolerate society? This does not make for a healthy social climate and even less a basis for sound policy.
If a policy so deeply flawed as prohibition not only fails to reach its goals, but actually makes the situation worse, it should be radically changed.
Prohibition is the problem, and legalization the solution.
In places where marijuana is tolerated use actually decreases.
Of course, don’t count on the politicians to have the courage to change the law—it’s not in their nature. Look instead to the Supreme Court. That is where most significant legal change comes from anyway. Gay rights and abortion issues were resolved there, and, some time this year our land’s highest court will also rule on the constitutionality of marijuana prohibition. I strongly urge government to make a wise decision and end this madness now. Millions of bright, productive, patriotic pot-smoking Canadians are counting on it.
Most sincerely, Marc-Boris St-Maurice Le Parti Marijuana
Uh no it wasn't. The rates of the late 70's were among the highest of the century.
LOL!! You are correct! We are getting close to being able to compile a pretty good "Top Ten List". Neither your nor I will ever let CJ forget he said that(along with about a dozen others). I'd have to give CJ a slight edge over Dane for first place honors, though.
Dane is a particular species of individual called the Typicus Baby Boomerus Hypocriticus Major-- When he and his fellow Golden Children of the Baby Boomer era were making, taking and selling all sorts of mind altering goodies it was somehow ok for them because they were, as Tom Wolfe once wrote, the "Superkids," arrogant spoiled brats who considered themselves superior, specially evolved beings who could do no wrong and deserved special treatment.
This fits in with the process of the Boomer evolution from loud '60s peaceniks to tailored 21st century fascists--all along simple, self-serving hypocrites who have become far, far more authoritarian, greedy and power-hungry than the elders they claimed were the exactly that would have ever dared to be.
Nothing's really changed with that self-absorbed crew of now graying Aquarians--an observation confirmed by the now-former editor of Slate, Boomer Michael Kinsley, when once he said of his age group in a puzzlingly regretful manner that "we'd never thought that anyone would be younger than us."
No way?! How come?! Wherefore?!
I'm a medical student who toked my way through undergrad - d@amn I wonder how I ever got in?! Aren't I supposed to be a lazy deadbeat somewhere?
'Work' isn't the problem, it's 'consent of the governed'. At least 1/3 of the population wants relegalization, over 2/3 consistently vote for relegalization for medical purposes. How the H*ll are you going to get convictions if at least four jurors believe the law is wrong ?!
Gets my vote.
Any statistical analysis of pot use vs. cocaine/heroin/etc. use would tell you your statement is false, if you can understand basic algebra.
Besides, that argument is no longer true. It might have been true 20 years ago, but now pot is much stronger.
Stronger pot might be more prevelant in the market, but it isn't much stronger than the good strains that were available in the 70's.
It is grown to produce new generations of plants with a higher THC content. Pot is now psychologically addictive, whereas it wasn't 20 years ago.
You sound like a DARE manual...
The drug culture? Just another absurd result of the gov't (and its spokescritters) blurring the distinctions between drugs. I mean, get real: about the only thing that speedfreaks and heroin addicts (for example) have in common is the illegality of their favorite poison.
Why should heroin be illegal when a person can readily purchase paint thinner or battery acid? Both of those substances would cause more harm to anyone who injected them. Where does it end if we allow government the ability to dictate these matters?
God saw that it was good
God gave it to man
Genesis 1:11
And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. (Whole Chapter: Genesis 1 In context: Genesis 1:10-12)
Genesis 1:12
And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Whole Chapter: Genesis 1 In context: Genesis 1:11-13)
Genesis 1:29
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. (Whole Chapter: Genesis 1 In context: Genesis 1:28-30)
Please cite where I said I "counsel" kids. Also please cite where I said that I agree or disagree with the article you refer to. You make up lots of things.
Now to the other two questions, how do you justify not going to jail while others do? And what did you charge when you were selling drugs? You didn't answer the question of whether or not you ever gave drugs in exchange for money so I have to assume you did. Please correct me if you are prepared to deny it.
This is just plain wrong for a variety of reasons. First, one certainly can decide to have just one puff of marijuana and get a nice light "buzz" (beer drinking terminology), or to get completely intoxicated with the stuff. Just like booze, dosage counts.
Second, it is easier to control dosage with smoke than it is with liquid. Smoke goes straight in. One can judge how much effect smoke has almost instantaneously. This is not so with liquor. You can drink a belly full and not feel the full efects for an hour. If you are an "experienced" drinker, you moderate accordingly. If not, you might end up dead from alcohol poisoning.
Third, marijuana "intoxication" typically relaxes and intellectually stimulates the user while the effect lasts. Alcohol intoxication revs them up and decreases their ability to reason. Alcohol users decide to go driving. Or fighting. Or just beating up their spouses and children.
Fourth, Alcohol is addictive where marijuana is not.
Finally, unlike alcohol, marijuana intoxication produces no sickness or hangover once the effect begins to wear off.
OOooo, I forgot about that one. Maybe we should just compile a list, and archive it, and when any of the drug warriors post anything, just reply with the list.
And do drugs to alter my state of mind? No! (Don't tell anybody but lets all pretend it's the same thing... pretty sneaky of us, huh!)
Like the prohibition on alcohol, the criminalization of drugs has failed. Those with money "legally" use/abuse drugs, such as ritalin, codeine, demerol etc, while those without ability to get prescriptions must stick with the non-script pot, crack heroin etc. Some people will use chemical means, legal or illegal to feed their pursuit of happiness and the government has shown it can't stop it. Imagine Elvis Presley taking pills like M & M's and you can get a better picture...what is the difference between that and a casual pot smoker?
Prohibition increased crime and decreased revenues for the government, hence it was doomed from inception. People drank but it cost more and since risk was involved, alcohol of choice changed from beer and wine to harder more concentrated alcohol. (the same as MJ today!)The repeal of the Volstead Act and the taxing of alcohol was inevitable and marijuana will probably one day follow in its footsteps.
It is estimated 1/2 or organized crime involves illegal drug supply. Why not regulate and reasonably tax the supply and eliminate the crime. Who benefits from making SOME drugs illegal and others available by prescription?(doctors/pharmaceutical companies/LE seizures!!!) Is drug use/abuse/addiction a crime or an illness?
Before you guys jump on me as a drug defender, I am not. I have seen the dregs of society resort to sniffing glue, paint or whatever to get a 'high" I have seen heroin users that have tracks all over their bodies. I found these people and their habits disgusting, but no law could stop them. 20 years ago I thought the govt. could, but reality has now set in. I don't believe it is the government's job to protect us from ourselves but from others. If illegal drugs are so wrong, why is their no constitutional amendment banning them? Apparently not enough voters feel that way.
LOL, reminds me of a politician who 'never inhaled' but wound up imprisoning more people for pot offences that anyone else in history. Have any of our Woddies claimed that they'd still have a job after relegalization?
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.