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
JMO, but a big part of it was the arrival of the counterculture, when traditional values were disregarded and the "do it if it feels good" mantra took over and the "actions have consequences" value got thrown out the window.
I would also submit that Gen Xers are intellectually better equipped to deal with drug issues than are our parents.
It's still all about me, me, me, me for them.
Because like it or not they are politicians and that advocating "drug legalisation" would be political suicide.
I have no doubt if Kennedy or Kerry could promote that as a tenet they would. That still doesn't stop their cohort in Massuchusetts, Barney Frank(who is about as left as you can get), from promoting drug legalisation.
Like I said the vast majority of drug legaisers come from the left(Green Party, enviro whackos such as ELF, George Soros, the Socialist Party, etc. etc.)
Not in a leftist-dominated state like Massachusetts. There's hardly a viable Republican party in Massachusetts, nor are there any conservatives in numbers great enough to make a difference. If drug legalization was such a winning lefty cause, a leftist state senator from a tawny suburb like Weston could introduce the legislation, a lefty-dominated Mass. General Court could pass it, and a lefty-dominated Mass. Supreme Judicial court would protect it from legal challenges.
That still doesn't stop their cohort in Massuchusetts, Barney Frank(who is about as left as you can get), from promoting drug legalisation.
On his website, Frank advocates medical marijuana and sentencing reform. I couldn't find his stance on "legalization."
Like I said the vast majority of drug legaisers come from the left(Green Party, enviro whackos such as ELF, George Soros, the Socialist Party, etc. etc.)
And you won't answer the question I've asked like 3 times already:Does smoking pot turn one into a lefty, or do certain lefties smoke pot?
All Barney Frank wants is medical pot and a review of mandatrory sentencing. That's far from relegalizing. In fact, (except for Jocelyn Elders) there are no nationally-known D*m*cr*t relegalizers.
What has the ACLU done in this area?
No, it's more accurate to say that drug prohibition is a Progressive/New Deal phenomenon, and that opposition to it is mainly paleoconservative/libertarian.
IMO, this was one area where Reagan never grew beyound the New Deal.
But there is no one from the American left on this website. This is FR. Is everyone here an "exception" to you??
A CA Guy used the words "sociopath and sociopathic" so many times yesterday it caused me to step away from the debate. I think we were getting a glimpse into his own mental stability, maybe he learned the word in therapy which makes him dangerous in my book. I will not respond to him again.
My cheapo dictionary defines bigot as "one obstinately and unreasonably wedded to a particular belief or creed; dogmatist".
The key word being "unreasonably". When others present fact and logic, the WOsD crowd answers with ad hominems, distortions, outright lies and evasions. The WOsD's argument boils down to "It's bad because I say so."
He has agreed on several occasions that the Tenth Amendment should be respected and that drug policies should be decided by State governments.
He agrees that Federal involvement in the domestic WOD is unconstitutional.
Bottom line: Government for the most part represents the wishes - some stupid some not so stupid- of the people who vote for it. There is no groundswell of favorable public opinion supporting legalization. If anything, the trend semms to shifting the other way. So there!
What an ignorant rebuttal. Murder hurts someone, smoking pot does not. What don't you get here., it seems simple enough even for you.
Don't blame me, I voted for Bill and Opus (and I have the t-shirt to prove it!)
So you believe that checks and balances aren't necessary in our form of government, the first 10 Amendments were completely unnecessary, and there's no such concept as "the tyranny of the majority"?Do you believe the federal government would be justified in criminalizing tobacco smoking?
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.