Cannabis should be decriminalized for the same reasons that alcohol is

The Prometheus Institute ^ | 8/28/2006 | Editorial

[tang0r]

It turns out that alcohol is legal for the simplest, most nostalgic, and most American reason of all. Despite its risks and harmful side-effects, adults are reserved right to drink because they are independent adults in a free country. For all of the empty rhetoric about economics and black markets, the end of Prohibition was due to a single principle: even if drinking may be bad for society, government has no right to keep the people from doing it. The ability to get drunk is an inalienable right that we have forever confirmed with the 18th Amendment.

[SupplySider]

Does that mean that since prostitution is legal in Las Vegas, you'll be more inclined to have sex with a prostitute if you visit there? Is legality your moral code?

It's a good point. What worries me about legalization is not so much adult behavior but the effect it might have on the attitudes of young people. I can easily imagine an explosion of marijuana use among minors, along the lines of the explosion in oral sex we got after Bill Clinton and other media messages to the youth that that was "cool". Points of law and freedom aside for a moment, I hope we might all agree that this would be tragic if it happened.

[Sir Gawain]

I have read extensively on the subject.

But your post was still logically flawed. One hit doesn't always get you high just as a shot of weak alcohol won't get you buzzed but a shot of Everclear or whatever will do it. Everyone has different levels of tolerance to drugs but it is possible to manage an MJ buzz the same way people manage alcohol consumption. Also you have to take into account the fact that every single plant will have varying degrees of THC and I don't think even legalization or regulation could change mother nature in that regard.

[mugs99]

Should it also be legal for soldiers to get stoned when off duty?

Until 1937 it was legal for military personel to smoke marijuana. The US Army conducted a study in June of 1933 of soldiers in the Panama Canal Zone, who were heavy marijuana smokers, to determine if marijuana use was detrimental to military operations. The result...safer than booze!
.

[Dogrobber]

We can't be expected to make our own free choices and live with the consequences.

Ah,. . . no offense, but in this day and age isn't this statement just a little too much to actually expect to happen? Live with the consequences - nobody does that anymore.

[JimRed]

Only a matter of time before some attorney makes a drug test part of his civil suit litigation in accidents.

An employment contract could have a mandated drug test associated with any on-the-job mishap that causes bodily injury. The company covers itself that way, and non-abusers have nothing to worry about.

[7thOF7th]

Your assertion is not based on any fact. Impairment for weeks! That must be some great weed! What a load of BS.

[Sir Gawain]

It's a good point. What worries me about legalization is not so much adult behavior but the effect it might have on the attitudes of young people. I can easily imagine an explosion of marijuana use among minors, along the lines of the explosion in oral sex we got after Bill Clinton and other media messages to the youth that that was "cool". Points of law and freedom aside for a moment, I hope we might all agree that this would be tragic if it happened.

Of course no one wants that but I think if anything, normalization will take all the coolness out of it, rather than causing a stampede. It would still be illegal for minors and under correct interpretation of the Constitution it would be up to each state to regulate the drug. If you look at the Netherlands, MJ use hasn't exploded. You can't even buy MJ from the drug dealers there. There's no profit involved for them anymore.

Of course realizing this you begin to realize why the War on Some Drugs will never end because it's the gravy train that keeps the DEA relevant and "necessary". They'll never win a war that would put them out of business. They're happy just getting their cut like the rest of the dealers.

[hellbender]

"What worries me about legalization is not so much adult behavior but the effect it might have on the attitudes of young people. I can easily imagine an explosion of marijuana use among minors, along the lines of the explosion in oral sex we got after Bill Clinton and other media messages to the youth that that was "cool". "

I wonder if legalization advocates have ever really thought through the consequences of what they advocate. For example, most of us here believe in market economics. If drugs are legalized, prices should come down, and consumption would then rise. Pot might reach the mass consumption levels of alcohol, which is a major health and public safety problem. For another thing, if the drug syndicates lose their "monopoly," just who do you think is going to produce and sell the stuff? Maybe big corporations like the ones which now push alcohol. Certainly the govt. would tax sales, which would give them a vested interest in drugs, just as they now have in gambling. Then the decision to legalize could never be reversed, no matter how foolish it might seem by then.

[JimRed]

Very different from deeply inhaling and holding the smoke in your lungs until you're "stoned", as nearly all users do.

Except for Slick Willie, who "didn't inhale"!

[mugs99]

It would be interesting if one of the major parties became an advocate for personal liberty and limited government, but unfortunately both tend toward statist policies to keep their awkward coalitions voting for them

Democrats want to be your mommy and Republicans want to be your daddy.
.

[longtermmemmory]

I think the POT crowd are just trolls sent to FR to push people away from FR because FR is part of the Get Out the Vote factors that defeat democrats.

In 2004 the democrats has the most successful most efficient GOTV machine they ever had. They hit the polls with their best paid volunteer machine to maximize their people at the polls. They still lost. So now they resort to pot-heads to scare conservatives away.

[7thOF7th]

A voice of reason and fact, I'm with you on this.

[2ndClassCitizen]

You got my logic. If the cannabis is weak, one hit will not get you high. You are correct on that point.

Have you ever heard of someone who wanted one hit of weak pot? There are people who want only one hit of strong pot.

[Sir Gawain]

I think the POT crowd are just trolls sent to FR to push people away from FR because FR is part of the Get Out the Vote factors that defeat democrats. In 2004 the democrats has the most successful most efficient GOTV machine they ever had. They hit the polls with their best paid volunteer machine to maximize their people at the polls. They still lost. So now they resort to pot-heads to scare conservatives away.

Some strains do have a paranoia inducing effect...

[mugs99]

weed has always been illegal

Weed was legal until 1937. Republicans opposed big government Democrat sponsored cannabis prohibition in 1937.
.

[Sir Gawain]

Have you ever heard of someone who wanted one hit of weak pot? There are people who want only one hit of strong pot.

Ok, and the end result is what? Less consumption, which means less lung damage from inhaling smoke, and then what? This person is less of a risk to anyone compared to the same person that just consumed a massive amount of alcohol. MJ and alcohol behave differently in the brain. MJ makes you more risk averse (drive slower, think slower, don't take chances) while alcohol makes you risk-prone (give me my keys I'm not too drunk to drive!).

[7thOF7th]

Your statement that weed has always been illegal is not accurate. Weed has been used for millennia in many different cultures including American culture. The plant was used extensively for treating epileptics and other ailments for thousands of years.

[DungeonMaster]

Until 1937 it was legal for military personel to smoke marijuana. The US Army conducted a study in June of 1933 of soldiers in the Panama Canal Zone, who were heavy marijuana smokers, to determine if marijuana use was detrimental to military operations. The result...safer than booze!

A "study" conducted before Thalidomide? How very reliable that.

[Ouderkirk]

So, we end the so-called war on drugs and legalize drugs of every sort. You say we can then tax them. Who then pays the price for the all of the social ills that befalls us? The tax revenue? What about the cost in lives (those around them not the users)?

There's more to it than just legaizing drugs. You need to think further downstream than just the immediate.

[7thOF7th]

The one fact that must be made clear here is that a naturally growing plant is a gift from our Creator and I am of the opinion that a child of God is entitled by God to use it responsibly. The State has NO jurisdiction either presumed or implied. Processed or manufactured narcotics fall under an entirely different category and the State has every right to regulate it.