Marijuana law reform?

[b0ardski]

Let's make this simple to understand;

prohibition is the opposite of liberty:mad:

drugs will never be eradicated, it's human nature:smashfrea

profits from them should be used to support public education & care rather than supporting violent gangs & cartels:AR15firin:)

In modern times any war is only won when the situation is controlled, argue that:argue:

[KingCrimson]

A huge and frightening percentage the American public qualify as obese.A habit of eating french fries contributes to that alarming rate and also the diseases that cause death earlier than without obesity.

Now that's stupid.

Prokopiw, not sure why you made this post. I was not arguing that fats aren't bad, but french fries don't get you high. Ecstacy, pot, and booze do a helluva lot more.

Dea- You're right, I haven't spent a large amount of time reading about MDMA, BUT there are kids at my school that have since dropped pot and do E almost exclusively and I know since last year they are SIGNIFICANTLY worse, they have quite literally, become e-tards.

I really don't have a problem with pot or alcohol. Boardski can smoke his joint while grilling on 420 and he's not hurting anyone. My english teacher can go home and have his shot of Jack and play guitar. He's not hurting anyone either.

The problem I have is the guy that comes home, drinks his brains out and becomes riproaring mad and then does whatever the hell he wants. We are a nation of excess, and until we can get our consumption of what we already have within reason, I don't see any reason to introduce potentially troublesome substances into the legal market.

[Gecko]

you do realize that about half the crime in San Diego is linked in one way or another to the illegal drug trade right? Think about how much safer your word would be without that....

[b0ardski]

"The problem I have is the guy that comes home, drinks his brains out and becomes riproaring mad and then does whatever the hell he wants. We are a nation of excess, and until we can get our consumption of what we already have within reason, I don't see any reason to introduce potentially troublesome substances into the legal market."

I agree that abuse is and should be illegal, the persuit of happiness should not.

drugs will never be eradicated, it's human nature:smashfrea

profits from them should be used to support public education & care rather than supporting violent gangs & cartels:AR15firin:)

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Arclite]

I knew Theo would resprond, but 3 times?

D- Ecstacy, pot, alcohol, all those narcotics and stimulants @#$% you up. End of story.

When there are freshman girls asking teachers for advice because they missed their period and they don't know why except for those parties they don't remember because of E and booze, I think I see a problem. These are kids, and it's not as if ecstacy or booze should be made legal for us BUT it brings on the following point.

Let's say my mom comes home and pops some E or snorts some coke BOTH of which are undeniably detrimental to your health. What kind of example is she setting for me? To further this example, what if you were the product of some ecstacy charged sex? Or you were a crack baby?

In the same sense that you state that drugs should be legalized, I'm going to take the same hard stance and say they destroy society.

French fries don't make you stupid. However, I'm sure you've heard the term "E-tard" in reference to ecstacy users.

Furthermore, in my opinion, debating this is rather pointless, as proponents of the legalization won't be swung by the opposition and vice versa.

Prokopiw, not sure why you made this post. I was not arguing that fats aren't bad, but french fries don't get you high. Ecstacy, pot, and booze do a helluva lot more.

Dea- You're right, I haven't spent a large amount of time reading about MDMA, BUT there are kids at my school that have since dropped pot and do E almost exclusively and I know since last year they are SIGNIFICANTLY worse, they have quite literally, become e-tards.

I really don't have a problem with pot or alcohol. Boardski can smoke his joint while grilling on 420 and he's not hurting anyone. My english teacher can go home and have his shot of Jack and play guitar. He's not hurting anyone either.

The problem I have is the guy that comes home, drinks his brains out and becomes riproaring mad and then does whatever the hell he wants. We are a nation of excess, and until we can get our consumption of what we already have within reason, I don't see any reason to introduce potentially troublesome substances into the legal market.

I like the last comment. And technically from that chart that Terry posted, isn't mary jane an illegal drug too?

[bobdea]

Dea- You're right, I haven't spent a large amount of time reading about MDMA, BUT there are kids at my school that have since dropped pot and do E almost exclusively and I know since last year they are SIGNIFICANTLY worse, they have quite literally, become e-tards.

what else are they doing?

Is it not possible they are just idiots and are either useing drugs as crutches to be idiots or as they progress into their late teens they are becoming worse and the drugs are just a side note to that?

Most of the people in highschool that I knew that were considered heavy users were hardly that at all. Those of us that were actually heavy users often tended to be less obvious. a good example of that is this kid Dan, those of us that knew him knew he was the biggest boozer in the school. He won track meets wasted and so forth but no one other than his close friends really knew. He's a legend, the kid set school records totally in the bag.

now take this other dip****, Adam, was known as the biggest druggie in town. The kid did some drugs but really not all that many but since that was all he could talk about, did tons of stupid **** and wore tiedye was known for it.

[Terryw]

I really don't have a problem with pot or alcohol. Boardski can smoke his joint while grilling on 420 and he's not hurting anyone. My english teacher can go home and have his shot of Jack and play guitar. He's not hurting anyone either.

The problem I have is the guy that comes home, drinks his brains out and becomes riproaring mad and then does whatever the hell he wants. We are a nation of excess, and until we can get our consumption of what we already have within reason, I don't see any reason to introduce potentially troublesome substances into the legal market.

Theo, Theo, Theo, you have been brain washed and you are displaying your prejudice. When was the last time you heard of or knew of any one getting high on mj and then subsequently beating anyone? You are arguing that because alcohol can make some people violent, any other drug will have similar effect. And because we as an American society are obviously abusers of any easily available substance we are unable to control our animal urges and will commit atrocious crimes while consuming those substances. You are arguing emotionally not factually. There is no scientific basis for your belief. There is however substantial evidence to the contrary position. Why do you refuse to consider it? You stated that no mater what is said, most committed people won't change their minds anyway, so what is the point of discussion. I submit that any reasoning logical being has the ability to change their opinion when new facts previously unknown are learned. Sadly many people have closed minds and refuse to be swayed by the facts simply because they don't agree with their world view. How can you ague that pot and other drugs make you withdraw and become unresponsive ie an e-tard, and them come back and stipulate that drugs will make you violent? Do yo not see the contradiction in your own arguments?

The facts are that prohibition does more harm than good. I am not talking about weather the drug of choice is harmful to the individual or not. I am simply taking the position that the human toll in real lost lives and ruined lives due to application of our current laws causes more damage then could or wold ever happen with the actual use of said drugs. When not one person has died of over dosing on mj (not counting the idiots who become impaired and then operate vehicles, duh!), and we lose literally thousands every year because of the effect of creating a lucrative trade in illegal drugs, does it not make some sense to try to preserve the most lives and eliminate this law? Isn't that the purpose of our government to preserve the well being of its population?

We can look at two examples where countries have liberalized their drug laws in the recent modern world. The Netherlands, and Portugal as recently as 2000 have done just that. What do you think happened in those countries? Did their population suddenly become drug crazed addicts? No. As a matte of fact drug use has dropped in those countries across the board. So in a round about way, by keeping drugs illegal, we actually increase usage and violence. That is the largest reason why we should change the law. Its unintended consequences, however well meaning the original intent, have destroyed countless lives.

[bobdea]

funny you should say that about the netherlands, their biggest problem since making the herb and a few others legal is idiot tourists that go there for a party and can't hang.

at least this is what I've read in a few places, I guess they are considering making so only citizens can buy.

[Transistor Rhythm]

funny you should say that about the netherlands, their biggest problem since making the herb and a few others legal is idiot tourists that go there for a party and can't hang.

at least this is what I've read in a few places, I guess they are considering making so only citizens can buy.

The biggest problem is the fact it's not legal to grow or sell in big quantities. Netherlands was never allowed by America to totally liberate cannabis (afraid it might worked probably), so they went a bit in between. Coffeeshops only can stock ridiculously low amounts of pot officially and they're not even allowed to buy this low amount at once. So any coffeeshop that is checked most of the time violates the law, making it easy for the government to close shops at will.

It used to be grown by people that were unemployed or other hobby growers, but since the government is getting more succesful at cracking down on growers, it's now steady in the hands of organized crime.

Also there's problems with drug tourists buying drugs in the Netherlands, all types of drugs are cheaper and better quality than anywhere else in Europe (except for the places where those tourists come), at least it used to be so, also for drugs like heroin or cocaine, not produced in our country. The illegal drugs are not sold in coffeeshops so those people are served by drugs runners, mostly also not from The Netherlands.

Still all those drugs, low prices, good quality and no jail time for users didn't lead to more people doing drugs: http://www.rivm.nl/vtv/object_document/o1507n19087.html

The government was succesful in cracking down on XTC production labs and cut their resources off. So a lot of people got into cocaine and others got pills that were containing dangerous alternatives to MDMA. This was the start of a wave of powder cocaine use. The people stopped smiling.

[Transistor Rhythm]

We can look at two examples where countries have liberalized their drug laws in the recent modern world. The Netherlands, and Portugal as recently as 2000 have done just that. What do you think happened in those countries? Did their population suddenly become drug crazed addicts? No. As a matte of fact drug use has dropped in those countries across the board. By the way thier numbers were very close to ours in % of use by population.

- Our numbers are not close, drug use is about half in The Netherlands compared to the US in about any substance

- The Netherlands were always about as liberal about drugs since the sixties

[Terryw]

Thank you for correcting me Transistor! I took my info from a recent Time article which spoke more specifically about Portugal. I generalized a little too much. But, the important fact to pull from all of this is that use of drugs generally decreases with decriminalization.

[Terryw]

Just to be a little clearer, from the synopsis of the Time article:

Contrary to what one might hear in the news, in The Netherlands marijuana is also a crime. The difference in The Netherlands is the Dutch have decided not to enforce those laws because it’s in contrast what the people desire. However, when the Dutch decide to go after a particular grow operation or cannabis shop, they have full charge of the law behind them to do as they please.

The Portugal model is the only one of it’s kind in Europe because they were the first European country to remove all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs including marijuana. And they have been completely legal since 2001!

Portugal

Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal’s drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%.

The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%.

According to the Time article, a CATO study concludes that Portugal’s legalization program is a resounding success having reduced overall drug use, HIV cases, and cutting addiction rates by half across the board with all hard (addictive) drugs.

This is an extremely unique report because Portugal, unlike other countries, didn’t just “dabble” in decriminalization for a select group or demographic, they simply LEGALIZED EVERYTHING.

[KingCrimson]

It's obvious everyone wants to teach me a thing or two about people I know. I felt that since I am in the middle of such a mess, my opinion had some ground, so I posted it. Nothing more.

Litle afterthought- nobody has mentioned the whole gateway aspect of marijuana. I was hoping that would be inferred from my logic, but I guess not.

I'm out.

[b0ardski]

beer & cigarettes are the gateway, but they're legal for adults.

If mj were legal it would be less of a gateway to cocaine addiction than caffeine.

back on topic; the criminality causes more harm to both individuals and society than responsible use of marijuana does; mj is as incomparable in affect to X, meth, coke or heroin as coffee is.

the point here is control over conflict, revenue over expenditure, peace over war:biggthump

[Terryw]

It's obvious everyone wants to teach me a thing or two about people I know. I felt that since I am in the middle of such a mess, my opinion had some ground, so I posted it. Nothing more.

Litle afterthought- nobody has mentioned the whole gateway aspect of marijuana. I was hoping that would be inferred from my logic, but I guess not.

I'm out.

Hey Theo, not trying to pick on you, just attempting to show you the other side of the story. What mess are you in the middle of? No one is saying that your experiences are not valid, just that they are anecdotal. In other words, you are extrapolating from too small of a sample. I have always been a fan of the idea of big claims need big evidence. I have spent some time studying this issue and I feel very strongly about it. I have seen friends lives ruined because of enforcement of this law. Those same people used mj for years with no apparent ill affects. Now that is also anecdotal evidence and not a good basis for an argument. But that was what set me to trying to understand this issue to begin with. What I found when I researched was that my experience was common and happened in large numbers around the country. I am basing my belief on scientific studies and large statistical samples.

So, as far as the gateway theory, there is no apparent causal relationship between use of mj and the subsequent use of harder drugs.

" Statistically, for every 104 Americans who have tried marijuana, there is only one regular user of cocaine, and less than one user of heroin. Marijuana is clearly a "terminus" rather than a gateway for the overwhelming majority of marijuana smokers. "

Now most people who use a hard drug have also used other drugs. But that does not mean that use of a "soft" drug automatically leads to the use of other harder drugs. The numbers just don't bear out that idea.

If you examine the evidence re mj and its uses, you will find that most of the common beliefs held by people who object to it are not based on logic and scientific reasoning. They are usually just paroting what they have been told all of their lives. That is part of what makes this such an emotionally charged issue.

[D-Sub]

D- Ecstacy, pot, alcohol, all those narcotics and stimulants @#$% you up. End of story.

no, not end of story, and i can tell already that you didn't, and won't answer my question.

When there are freshman girls asking teachers for advice because they missed their period and they don't know why except for those parties they don't remember because of E and booze, I think I see a problem. These are kids, and it's not as if ecstacy or booze should be made legal for us BUT it brings on the following point.

again I say...something being illegal does not keep it from happening. period. end of story, AND in the meantime, people who don't goof up get punished. severely sometimes.

Let's say my mom comes home and pops some E or snorts some coke BOTH of which are undeniably detrimental to your health. What kind of example is she setting for me? To further this example, what if you were the product of some ecstacy charged sex? Or you were a crack baby?

I'm sorry but you're not making any sense here bud! I've had this argument more times than you've been snowboarding. Seriously. You're not thinking it through and, well...I can't convince you of anything and don't feel like trying.

In the same sense that you state that drugs should be legalized, I'm going to take the same hard stance and say they destroy society.

I didn't say legalize. I said decriminalize. Different, and, well...sorry but you're wrong. Irresponsibility is the issue, not drugs. Would you rather have ALL vices made illegal? If so, you have deep-seated beliefs about authority that I, again, can not argue with you about because it would be a complete waste of my time.

[Terryw]

I like the last comment. And technically from that chart that Terry posted, isn't mary jane an illegal drug too?

It is true, it would fall into that category. However, the point of that chart is that marijuana has no deaths associated with it.

[Transistor Rhythm]

I didn't say legalize. I said decriminalize.

What is decriminalization gonna get you? Ofcourse keeping users out of jails is already a big step forward, but where do they buy their drugs? From who? Still the same gangs.

Legalize the whole production chain. If it's not illegal to do it's not illegal to grow. Tax it. Use the money you get from the taxing and not locking up people or trying to lock up people to address the gang problems, because they will try to shift to other sources of income after the drugs money dries up.

[Gecko]

California is looking at approx $14billion if they legalize...that would certainly help the economy

[D-Sub]

What is decriminalization gonna get you? Ofcourse keeping users out of jails is already a big step forward, but where do they buy their drugs? From who? Still the same gangs.

a darn fine point that didn't occur to me. thanks.

Legalize the whole production chain. If it's not illegal to do it's not illegal to grow. Tax it. Use the money you get from the taxing and not locking up people or trying to lock up people to address the gang problems, because they will try to shift to other sources of income after the drugs money dries up.

I guess we could tax retail sales, but...cigarettes are already taxed SO heavily, and I am philosophically opposed to taxes in general so it makes it hard for me to agree, BUT I sure as hell would rather see a price increase on legal weed (and all other drugs. keep em clean and safe) than more and more people in jail.

Yes, people still go to jail for pot use.

[D-Sub]

California is looking at approx $14billion if they legalize...that would certainly help the economy

question

do you think the price would go up or down in the marijuana market?

$60+ an eighth, and even more at dispensaries...

[bobdea]

probably would go down if growing were legal, could do a lot of things like making so small crops less that 20 plants can go untaxed

also, that's premium weed, being sold in baby bags. I could go pick up a pound of not nearly as good but smokeable weed locally for about $1800 or so if I had the desire. that's grown in the northeast by rednecks when pop plants in other people's land, usually public land of some sort. if you ever seen a dude riding a fourwheeler through the woods with trash bags ties to it in the fall you just a lot of weed freshly harvested.

if they could do this on their own property openly, production would skyrocket.

[tex1230]

to answer D-Sub's question, the price would drop dramatically. we ran a study on legalization of Cocaine and Heroin in college, and determined that the criminal enterprise hed over 1000% markup after factoring in cost of transport, bribes, cut, employees, etc. (and we ASSUMED the workers in the fields and processing labe were paid US minimum wage - which I seriously doubt) - Being that there is a hell of a lot less processing required for weed, if it were sold by the government and taxed at a similar level to tobacco, you'd probably be looking at a 75% drop in price.

Granted this was 17 years ag so I don't know what stuff costs, but I'd assume the markups are pretty steady.

[D-Sub]

my question was kinda dumb since the simplest law of economics almost always applies.

Supply goes up, prices drop. Simple.

Oh man..the money we'd save on prosecuting and incarcerating people!

[D-Sub]

And the money I'd save!

you oughta just grow your own anyway. 3 or 4 plants every spring/summer and you'd have a year's supply if you don't burn a lot.

funny part is...I don't even smoke. the only drug I do anymore is alcohol, and the occasional toke, but I can't stand legislation of morality, and the costs of all this nonsense are astronomical. I hate the DEA almost as much as the CIA, IRS and ATF.