Legalizing Marijuana

[4C1D]

I have nothing against maryjane but,

i think legalizing it would not bring less crime, especially drug dealers, because they would just sell another forbidden drug more, like cocain, to have their "normal" effort.

[krAzy :)]

legalizing marijuana also means many tourists ! ! !! ! +1

 

in amsterdam it works well =)

[Duckie]

california is always the first to step up on issues like this... props to them.

 

so should it be illegal to eat chipoltle?

 

oh god fred... oh no... no, no no. THAT is when i will leave this country

[brightside]

Let me ask you guys a question.

Do any of you drink alcohol? Do any of you smoke cigarettes? Does anyone of you have obesity? Is there anyone that doesnt exercise on a regular basis?

 

Well, those guys will probably die before the average life expectancy.

Alcohol makes for worse drivers, drunken rage and results in death and beat-up women and children.

It is not forbidden.

 

Cigarettes cause damage to the lungs. results in death and lifelasting deseases.

It is not forbidden.

 

obesity cause tighter vains, less mobility, heave breathing. In America 1 on 4 is obesed. It kills people daily.

Not forbidden to eat high calory goods.

 

Forbidding marihuana is just the same as forbidding one of these.

 

Nowadays everything is taxed. Cigarettes, alcohol and healthier products are benefitted by the government over unhealty food.

 

I believe, as a lot of fellowbelievers, that the legalization of marihuana, if controlled the same way as alcohol(i.e. alcoholtests, ...), will not lead to degeneration, But will improve creativity (think of all the great songs that have been written while high) and will cast a new light on diverse matters. Being high is not the same as being drunk. Ability of speech may drop, but if not used in excess it is no more dangerous than alcohol

[NoGooD]

I hope it becomes legalized. Imagine how many prisons would be closed and how much state/federal/local money would be saved if marijuana was legalized. Not to mention I am extremely interested to get my hands on some to study its anti-psychotic and anti-depressant effects at very low dosages (no not enough to get someone high although I may have to try that once or twice ). Imagine how much money would be saved if there was no "war" on marijuana.... Law Enforcement could finally start working on real crimes.

 

Anti, look around sites like lexisnexis and google scholar, and if you have any friends in the medical field or access to it, a system called "Uptodate" as well as others . There have been many studies done on marijuana and it's affects on psychosis. Most of what I've found tended to state something along the lines of MJ leading to an increase in psychotic episodes in people already diagnosed with psychosis. This was generally studied with moderate to high doses.

 

I agree that a boatload of state/federal money could be saved. I've spoken with people that have served what I would consider ridiculous sentences for just a few ounces of pot. Generally there were other charges trumped in with the illegal possession, such as "intent to distribute" because the amount the person had was over a set limit. Legalizing it would free up alot of money in the prison system over time, but bring in ALOT of money for the state if it became taxable.

 

 

 

Legalize the marijuana isn't solve the problem.

 

+1. I think it will solve some problems, but new ones will arise. Only time will tell if the new ones will be worse. One of the problems I foresee with it's legalization is it's abuse by people. Let's face it. Americans don't do moderation very well. Shit...put a plate of chocolate chip cookies in front of me and watch me prove that point. I'll jack someone up if they get to close to my cookies, lol.

 

Besides, I'm not sure I'd want a bus driver hauling passengers around while high, or a doctor operating on me while high. Can you imagine going on a flight with a pilot that's stoned. You'd hit some turbulence and they would come across the loudspeaker "Duuuuuuuuuude, we're hitting some turbulence...AHAHAHA. Just chill...we'll take auto-pilot off once we're done rolling this phatty. Could a stewardess please bring some Cheetos to the cockpit? AHAHA, get it....cock-pit"

 

 

I used to blog about this alot.

Indeed, statistics show thousands of deaths related to alcoholism, tobacco, obesity just to name a few. However nobody can find a single death directly attributed to marijuana.

Secondly, if marijuana has no medicinal properties....then why does the US gov't have patents on two essential cannabinoids found in marijuana?

Third, legalization may not do-away with all of our problems. However it takes this drug out of the shady backalleys and into safer pharmacies and dispensaries.

Fourth, once it's available to the public legally, the less likely we will be reading stories in the news about drug cartels growing in our national forests and wreaking havoc at the border with Mexico. You're basically cutting out this dangerous middle-man and putting the cartels out of business.

 

I fully agree with legalization, save the fact that it may be even easier to fall into the hands of minors.

 

If it is legalized, there is going to be s shitload of red tape that will need to be figured out. Like whether or not applicants can be discriminated against for enjoying a joint in their non-working hours, or where it is legal to smoke or not...

 

1. I'll play devils advocate on this. Simply put, there are very few studies related to deaths by marijuana. You can't throw a broad stroke brush over an issue like this. It's like being back in the 50's and saying cigarettes never killed anyone because there is no medical proof. Just because the CDC doesn't have the research right now doesn't mean it's fact. Instead ask yourself how many deaths from traffic accidents while driving impaired, or from COPD due to long term use of marijuana, psychological reactions that related in death due to long term use of marijuana. Still...I'd put money on the fact it's probably alot safer than a majority of prescription drugs designed to produce the same effects.

 

2. Marijuana does have medicinal properties if used properly. It's been fairly well established in it's use for cancer patients. Some of the most straight edge doctors I know can make very strong cases for it's use in patients with certain diseases. The pain blocking properties are quite good, which is why as you stated, there are patents and drug development for synthetic cannabinoid development. Also another well known problem with most opioids are they really aren't designed for long term use. They tend to cause constipation, lower appetite among a host of other unwanted side effects and long term use generally leads to withdrawals so often times people have to be tapered off of them.

 

In a disease process like cancer, marijuana not only relieves much of the pain, but increases appetite. Something that to my knowledge, which is pretty low on pharmacology admittedly, no other drug can do. Certainly at least no single drug I've heard of.

 

3. IMO, this just isn't going to be the case. Drug cartels won't go out of business. They'll just switch product focus like any good company would.

[Nugget]

If you are not allowed to put anything into your body that you desire, you do not live in a free country. Period.

[KevinBacon]

 

3. IMO, this just isn't going to be the case. Drug cartels won't go out of business. They'll just switch product focus like any good company would.

 

Sure, they can push meth, or coke or whatever....doesn't mean people are going to go out and buy it. At least not in the same numbers that marijuana produces.

And since we're on taxes as well, think of how much police expenditure would be saved if the DEA and local law enforcement would stop spending millions trying to eradicate a plant FFS?

Couple that with the taxability of the product and the state will be making money hand-over-fist. Hell, it might even put a big dent in the joke that is California's own deficit.

As it is, I'm just waiting for them to start telling schoolchildren that they're going to have to bring their own toilet paper to schools....

[PHANTASM]

California's main intent is to put a tax of $50 an ounce on weed. If people don't pay it then they can be charged with tax evasion, a worse crime than mere marijuana possession.

 

Al Capone was put in prison for tax evasion, not selling illegal alcohol.

 

The US state of Illinois already has a "tax" on weed, at $100 a gram, even though it is illegal. No one pays it, of course, but the state uses it to apply tax evasion charges on anyone who gets caught with weed.

 

California wants to make money on both ends - whether people buy it legally or illegally. California is $20 billion in the hole, and unlike the federal govt, they can't print their own money.

 

And yes, most serious drug dealers will switch to some other drug if weed is made legal. The same thing happened when alcohol prohibition ended.

[NoGooD]

As it is, I'm just waiting for them to start telling schoolchildren that they're going to have to bring their own toilet paper to schools....

 

@Kevin You mean your kids don't have to bring their own?

 

I agree way to many resources are spent trying to stop pot farms, but what Im' curious about is whether it will slow down illegal pot farms or make them spring of faster since there would be an increased number of places to sell to.

 

Granted I haven't followed this law that closely, but who is going to supply the depots and will the depots be required to have proof that they bought from a state approved licensed grower? Seems to me that more illegal farms will spring up in state. Or worse even those ran by the drug cartels operating on US soil. Also I"m not entirely sure that the sale of meth or coke will go down. Only time would tell on that though.

 

If the police want to eradicate a weed...I wish they'd wipe out Jimson weed. Im tired of seeing dumbass kids getting jacked up on that crap and having to see how much kidney/liver damage they end up with.

 

 

@Phan Seriously though. I agree, but knowing the California legislature they will write the law so it's completely screwed up and makes it easier to simply buy it illegally rather than pay a tax on it. If someone's going to buy weed with a $50/oz tax, why the hell would you buy it. Unless health insurance is going to cover that cost there's no way in hell people would pay that. It would be smarter to drop it down to $5-10/oz which is still expensive but at least people could justify buying it.

 

You may be onto something there Phan.

[Thoracic]

FYI....a link to the ballot measure:

 

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/19/

 

I agree with the above statement regarding the economics of purchasing 'legal' vs. 'illegal' sources if there is a discrepancy in price there would still be a market for the non legal sources. One item the proponents bring up is a loophole which would invalidate government 'drug free' standards and cost many to lose their jobs. I would think the government would determine this before the law is passed so I don't have all the info but it would complicate the measure.

Also, the current revenue estimate for legalization is $1.4B USD which would be a small dent in our fiscal shortfall but I think there would still need to be an enforcement agency which would use some of the revenue so I am somewhat skeptical that all the $1.4B would flow to citizens.

In the end I do think it is a good discussion and glad to see it on the ballot, I'm just not sure the benefits are as clear cut as proposed.