The war on Marijuana- is it worth it? (poll)

[Wcross]

WASHINGTON - American taxpayers are now spending more than a billion dollars per year to incarcerate its citizens for pot. That’s according to statistics released last week by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics…………..Of course, several hundred thousand more Americans are arrested each year for violating marijuana laws, costing taxpayers another $8 billion dollars annually in criminal justice costs.
http://www.examiner.com/a-349381~Paul_Armentano__A_billion_dollars_a_year_for_pot_.html

[Wickerman]

1. Hell, just moments ago Rick Steves, the travel guy

was on MPR and said that US pot laws are ridiculous. Not positive what that had to do with hyping his travel books but he made more sense that a lot of the talking head experts on MPR. The war on drugs is a loser and everyone knows it.

[maxsolomon]

15. Npr?

what's MPR? put down the pipe, son!

[alfredo]

22. Minnesota Public Radio

[Wickerman]

26. Pick up the pipe, perhaps?

Minnesota Public Radio is synonymous with Public Radio and was instrumental in establishing Npr.

Minnesota Public Radio first began operating the station KSJR 90.1 FM in January 1967 after being spun off from Saint John's University in Collegeville, Minnesota. That station still operates on the Saint John's campus. That first station was headed by Bill Kling, who still heads the network today.

In 1969 and 1970, MPR assisted in the formation of National Public Radio and was a founding member of the organization. Four years later, in 1974, the network began live broadcasting of Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion, perhaps the best-known program on public radio.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Public_Radio

For the record, I don't smoke but I'd certainly not suggest that it's ok to suppress the rights of those who do.

[maxsolomon]

28. an excellent suggestion

i intend to follow upon arriving home this evening.

having never stepped foot in Minnesota, MPR is not synonymous with NPR in my experience.

[vickitulsa]

76. Interesting history -- thanks for informing us!

Goes to show ya, we sometimes jump too quickly to "correct" others! :D

A young friend of mine learned this lesson years ago, when she "corrected" me about the spelling of a word in one of my songs. She used to sing them with me so I'd give her a copy of my lyrics.

Turned out her "correction" was incorrect! She was embarrassed when she read the dictionary entry and never made that mistake again. Nice to learn such a thing when you're still only 19! ;)


And a big THANK YOU to Mr. Kling and MPR for helping to get NPR off the ground! I don't find their experts to be stuckup or any other negative thing I've heard some say. NPR's interviews and presentations, even their editorial opinions, are far more balanced than most other sources of news, information and opinion I know.

Matter of fact, I just tuned in "Studio Tulsa" which was great today -- about digital images and how they've propelled dramatic changes in the world of photography. Now I'm listening to "Day to Day," which is quite interesting also. Is our government issuing a deadline to Iraqi leaders for controlling "insurgent" violence in Iraq or not? James Baker seemed to confirm it.

"Bush says so much, we never know what to believe!" This was from a subordinate of PM Maliki, in response to a question to him on the subject. Hah!

(Just before I turned off the teevee and tuned in NPR on the radio, the History Channel was airing a couple of programs on Vietnam -- the Saigon airlift, "Operation Frequent Wind" in April 1975, and their "declassified" show on the TET Offensive of 1968. Stunning how much they say about Vietnam, especially toward the end of U.S. involvement there, makes talk about Iraq now sound like ECHOES....)


But about NPR, any station which airs views in one program from such divergent sources as the CFR and the Iraq Study Group, then current officials of Iraq, and then Senator Jack Reed (D) of RI, is pretty damned balanced and unbiased!

And NOW what I'm hearing (still on Day to Day) about a longtime Republican-supporting Kansas newspaper now endorsing eight out of 16 DEMOCRATS in upcoming elections ... man, that's great news! The owner-publisher, last name Rose, just said it ... and also said most R's in Kansas are "fed up" with how the party has been screwing everything up and NOT doing what they should for conservative folk. He mentioned that two candidates running for high offices in KS have changed their party affiliation from R to D! And many more R's are following suit, Rose said.

What a bellweather THAT could turn out to be, eh? :shrug:

And some R senator or congressman, didn't catch which, invited Chimpy to his state to speak, according to Juan Williams, due to the big trouble he's in in his race. Seems a Peruvian woman 35 years younger than he is with whom he had a longterm affair has filed charges against him for abuse. So what does Chimpy talk about that is a "safe" topic for the R's? MILK! Yup, the dimmest one bragged about how his administration LOVES the milk farmers and does all it can to help them!


I couldn't resist throwing all this out there since the subject of NPR came up in this thread, and a couple of days ago someone in another forum had some negative things to say about NPR. Something about them not being "passionate" enough and not engaging in the "heated" arguments and attacks on R's that he thought we needed to be hearing, a la AAR....

NRP may have shortcomings, of course; but the criticisms on DU of NPR that I've heard lately just don't ring true to me. I depend on NPR a lot, and I just keep hoping this administration doesn't succeed in cutting all public funding for NPR!

[Wickerman]

85. I agree

I listen to NPR/MPR on a regular basis and have for years. Can't get Air America in this neck of the woods and can't download the stream at work.

Yes, it has become more "balanced" but it is hardly Right Wing. It is more mainstream than I prefer But I think it balances fairly well with the demographic it serves. I often disagree with what I hear but then, I find it challenges me to better articulate my own views. Some months back a bunch of folks were complaining about MPR's Speaking of Faith program - that NPR/MPR was jamming religion down our throats now, too. Anyone who has ever actually listened to the program would understand that the program is a dialog about commonality of Faith, of the theology behind those faiths - not about the fundamental ideologues that some of our users confuse with any type of organized religion.

Pleasure chatting with you. :hi:

[Dunedain]

184. Krista Tippett

Know her work well. I commute from Mankato to Bloomington everyday and at some point AM (AAR) turns into static. From Jordan to LeSuer, it's 91.1, after that it's 91.5. MPR has informed my day going on thirty years now.

[Gruenemann]

59. Rick Steves has visited countries with more enlightened laws AND

As a result he is active in the fight to decriminalize marijuana. He's on the board of NORML. More info here:

http://ricksteves.com/about/pressroom/activism/marijuana.htm

Steves is involved in other social causes as well:

http://ricksteves.com/about/pressroom/activism/activism_menu.htm

[Wickerman]

86. Cool, I thought he said he was NORML, but couldn't be sure

so didn't say so. Thanks for the info. Nice of him to hang it there. Could be a risky career move and I admire a guy who is willing to stand on his principles no matter what.

[Shakespeare]

185. He's on NORML's Board of Directors.

He's a pretty cool guy. :smoke:

[YOY]

2. Of course once there puritanical dips realize there is money to be made

They'll decriminalize and corporatize it...the little people won't make money on it anymore.

[Ellis Wyatt]

9. Tell that

to the farmers who make their living off barley and tobacco

[YOY]

16. Long time institutions with long time farmers

versus an institution that would be set up rapidly in today's times for maximum profitability. Barley and Tobacco growers have large farms versus the relatively smaller marijuana growers.

Granted this makes an interesting model on Micheal Porter's five forces in a hypothetical creation of an legalized industry. How would such a market look. How could corporate entities influence government legalization in such an endeavor to tip favor in their scales.

1. The bargaining power of customers

2. The bargaining power of suppliers

3. The threat of new entrants

4. The intensity of competitive rivalry

5. The threat of substitute products


I don't see a union of pot growers being able to get a word in with a hypothetical legalization and 'corporitizing' of marijuana.

[bryant69]

3. At least it's a plant and not an abstract concept.

But it's still kind of a waste.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[SteppingRazor]

4. Other: It should be legalized, not decriminalized

Decriminalization simply removes the penalties, but keeps prohibition in place. Marijuana prohibition should be wholly repealed.

[cui bono]

6. I agree. And it should become a legitimate crop for hemp use in products.

What a waste.

[meganmonkey]

12. That's the worst part of all, IMO

The equating of the hemp plant with the smoke-able cannabis plant.

There is virtually no THC in hemp, certainly not enough to give anyone a buzz, and it is an extremely versatile plant that can be used for just about anything. Easy to grow, too.

When I think about what hemp could do for the US farming and manufacturing economies I could just cry.

And on second thought, the hemp thing isn't the worst part. It is tied with the fact that thousands upon thousands of non-violent people are stuck in prison for carrying or selling the good herb. And many people become violent because of prohibition. It's absolutely devastating.

Our drug policy is insane. Prohibition is NOT good for the people :shrug:

[tridim]

20. Not only is it easy to grow,

but it grows in one season with minimal or no chemical fertilizers and doesn't screw up the soil like some crops do.

[wovenpaint]

82. Hemp can pull toxins out of the soil

heavy metals, for one....

http://www.serftosurf.com/hempfacts.htm

The first American flag was made from hemp!

This plant was banned in the US in 1937 because it was competing with the oil, chemical and timber industries.
DuPont came out with nylon fiber/fabrics the same year....William Randolph Hearst had invested in the timber industry-rise of the automobile industry and the petrochemical industry-I think you can see the picture from here....

I believe the time is coming around again to take another look at hemp-AND marijuana(plant renamed that by W.R. Hearst, btw)

[Beelzebud]

36. During WW2 the government produced a film: Hemp for Victory.

Urging farmers in the midwest to grow industrial hemp to use for the war effort. They used it for the huge ropes that large naval vessels use.

Oh how far we fell from a nation of rational thinking...

[cui bono]

65. Seriously. Yep, drug policy needs a complete overhaul.

And think about the forests it would save.

And another thing that really makes me mad is that they allow hardcore pharmaceuticals to be advertised on TV!!! "Ask your doctor what *** can do for you". That's completely backwards. Plus, how many of our kids are on legalized drugs by the time they're 10 because those drugs are made by major corporations? AAAAARGH!!!

[tridim]

13. Yes, decriminalization is an unnecessary step

It should be as legal as planting basil or tomatoes. Growing your own should be encouraged to help dissolve the black market.

[Beelzebud]

38. God that would be like living in a free country!

Wouldn't that be great if we could just grow it in our gardens? The black-market would be gone during the first harvest season.

[Roon]

67. Correct

In Colorado it's already decriminalized, you get caught with it and they give you a ticket. It's a hundred dollar fine, but if you take it to trial, they will drop it.

[Ganja Ninja]

5. Legalize it and tax it just like booze.

It'll put people to work and create revenue so we can lower taxes. Did you hear that Republicans? LOWER TAXES!

[Ellis Wyatt]

11. wow, logic

It infuriates me that this country not only wastes god-knows how many hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars fighting POT, which is not addictive like tobacco, a passive-enducing drug not like the aggressive-enducing alcohol, and doesn't kill your lungs or liver.

So not only are we wasting countless sums of money fighting it, but the reveue for the drug goes to criminals to fund other (actual bad) criminal activities rather than to the government. How the hell can anyone be against legalizing pot?

[Quantess]

75. There is no logic to criminalizing it.

Some people see any drug as a slippery slope to all drugs. That's what they teach you in school. In some people's minds, if you legalize weed then next thing you know, meth will be legalized, too. Maybe they think people will start bringing their bongs to work. I don't know how some peoples' minds work.

Marijuana is not harmless, but it doesn't merit prosecution. It's just a fairly benign substance that some people use to get intoxicated. And some people really need it for the same health related reasons that a doctor would write a prescription. Except, since marijuana is illegal, the prescription would be for a pharmaceutical drug. Uh, oh! Maybe that's the real reason marijuana is still illegal.

[druidity33]

116. well...

as far as the logic towards keeping it criminal...

it sure does keep a lot of DEA agents and other Police-style officers employed... not to mention the burgeoning Prison "Industry" (highest growth job market dontcha know). I'm not sure what the cops in my town would be doing if they weren't harassing the hippies and dreadlocked youngsters... more time for coffee maybe?

:shrug:

[Dogmudgeon]

7. Other: Marijuana should be legal. Period.

And I don't even like the stuff.

There should be no restrictions on any drugs other than those which are necessary to maintain standards of quality and safety, and to keep organized crime out of business.

Making half the drugs entirely illegal, and requiring people to beg a physician-cum-parent for a permission slip for any of the rest, isn't something that "the land of the Free and the home of the Brave" should be doing.

--p!

[0rganism]

8. legalize, regulate, tax

as the rich & powerful become less willing to pay progressive income and property taxes, I expect more and more states will look to increase their revenues through "sin taxes", and marijuana legalization will gradually become more viable as an indirect result.

[misternormal]

45. One can make one's own beer, but...

... One can not make one's own distilled liquor... that is still heavily regulated and taxed, although there are those that have been making "moonshine" for years...

Marijuana will likely be the same if legalized... It will be extremely difficult to regulate, and you can grow pot in a closet with just a couple of lights, and some tending... (Not that I've ever done that of course)...

The government will want to tax the shit out of it if it becomes legalized, and force more people to "grow their own", therefore, giving the revenuers more to do...

It's a vicious circle, but the DEA has to justify the manpower and equipment that they use, because they can't get a handle on the drugs that are REALLY killing people... (But that's for another thread)

[tridim]

66. Distilling alcohol is dangerous, growing pot isn't

I know that wasn't your point, but I thought I should point out one reason why distilling alcohol is legitimately illegal.

[0rganism]

90. beg to differ - growing pot is plenty dangerous *now*

thanks to the ever-vigilant DEA, of course...

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. This won't win liberals any votes.

It's a shame, but it's the truth. I wonder how long it will take before Rove exploits this difference between the parties, like they exploited pro-choice.

[Ellis Wyatt]

14. Soon enough

This is a big cause of the libertarians, and I've even seen some republicans on the right side of the fence (or is it left side?)

[The Backlash Cometh]

46. moderate Republicans, perhaps, but the conservative base, the

base from both parties, will hate it. I, personally, think that better education and rehab is the answer for the new generation of Americans. I realize that for older liberal Americans, this issue is already a moot point.

[Warren DeMontague]

97. The only people who "hate" it are the religious right.

The libertarian wing of the GOP is getting tired with the anti-personal freedom jihad of the fundies.

And the base of the Democratic Party is strongly in favor of, if not full legalization, at the very least decriminalization. Just look at the poll in the OP.

[The Backlash Cometh]

104. I think most people would agree to decriminalize it for the end user

as long as they put that end user in rehab instead of prison. But I don't think it should ever be decriminalized for the drug providers.

Personally, I think we have too many powerful people controlling the drug trade in the U.S.A. I hope with everything that we're learning about the sexual perversions of the Republicans, it won't be long before someone outs the agencies which are responsible for protecting the drug traffickers in this country.

[Warren DeMontague]

135. So you would have stuck, say, Carl Sagan in rehab?

Clearly he needed it, because his life was a disaster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan

I think the majority of people who say they support "decriminalization" instead of full legalization think that it's appropriate to have it handled like a parking ticket, with a fine. I disagree with that approach, but it's saner than what we have now.

Or maybe you think people who let the parking meters expire should be sent to rehab, too.

[Pastiche423]

159. So, you're saying...

end users should be in rehab?

So, you're saying end users that need pot for medical reasons should be in rehab?

[High Plains]

19. Really? Support for legalization is nearing 50% on the West Coast

Not quite so high in other regions of the country.

I guess November 7 will be a test: Nevada and Colorado both have legalization initiatives on the ballot. Pot has never won before, although legalization initiatives garnered more than 40% of the vote in Alaska and Nevada before.

[tridim]

23. The generic support numbers are higher than 50%

The problem with the initiatives is that they're always coupled with loud disapproval from big-alcohol and the feds. I'm sure there is a good chunk of voters who are afraid to vote for something that they perceive could get them in trouble with the feds.

Here in Denver it's already legal to possess up to 1 oz, but it's still illegal to buy it. It's insane.

[The Backlash Cometh]

51. It just dawned on me. You know how many people I know that take

drugs? Zero. And now I'm a bit of a recluse because my days of wonder, when I enjoyed people who were different and off the wall, are over. I think the last person did me in. He was a Libertarian-Republican. Ruined me for life.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. You must not know many people.

Either that, or plenty of the people you know use drugs and just don't tell you.

[The Backlash Cometh]

73. Sorry to disappoint.

I embraced life as a "yute" and really enjoyed being around people who had different experiences than I did. I was the straight in my crowd in high school, but my friends were definitely potheads. Didn't bother me, at the time. Seriously, I went after it so much when I was younger, that I'm satiated.

And, I believe I mentioned that I live a reclusive lifestyle now. Don't have a problem wanting to help to keep America open and tolerant, but, I'm too exhausted to deal with other people's bad habits.

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. That doesn't surprise me at all.

So, four-five states against...how many?

[Warren DeMontague]

96. FYI, there are 33 Million people in California.

That's over 1/10th of the total population of the USA.

[The Backlash Cometh]

105. It certainly didn't help win a presidential election, did it?

All it does is promote the stereotype that California is looney left, BECAUSE it's so different than the rest of the country.

Not exactly a cross-over issue, is it?

[Warren DeMontague]

134. Huh? Are you saying that California's 55 electoral votes don't matter?

(Try doing the math. We sure as shit didn't help LOSE the election.)

I suggest you bring that line of reasoning - "Fuck California" - up with your local Democratic Party leadership, and see what they say.

[Bridget Burke]

55. PLEASE let Bush come down hard on drugs!

I know some people in Houston who knew him back then. (I ran with a better crowd--even though we dressed funny.)

[The Backlash Cometh]

78. Good observation.

Maybe that's why Rove hasn't done it yet?

Funny clothes? I still can't believe that I cut the stiches out of my denim overalls, sewed in a colorful patch in the legs to make a maxi dress, and then added rainbow colored toe socks and platform shoes and walked off the military base and into a foreign country. I thought I was kewl! No wonder we got thrown out.

And no wonder I'm exhausted.

[Warren DeMontague]

87. Bull. There are MILLIONS of socially libertarian voters that neither party

is doing a terribly good job reaching out to. If we came out strong for the right of consenting adults to make their own decisions about their own bodies, made the solid moral and FISCAL case for legalizing, regulating, and taxing pot, stood up for the separation of church & state, reproductive rights, and the right of people to make their own end of life decisions- it WOULD win us votes.

The REAL voters in play in the GOP are the libertarian wing. Shit, the National Review thinks the drug war is a waste of time.

A liberal, progressive, and socially libertarian coalition would wax the ass of the religious right and the GOP.

[The Backlash Cometh]

91. Aren't social libertarians against government in general?

Well, Democrats aren't against government. Democrats are in favor of a benign government.

[Warren DeMontague]

92. You're confusing social libertarianism with the big-L Libertarian party.

Social libertarians believe that consenting adults should be free to make their own choices so long as they're not harming or intefering with anyone else.

A good resource is the Political Compass test.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

I sit firmly on the lower left quadrant, as does most of DU in my experience. That's social or left-libertarianism.

Edit: And if you can explain to me how spending $40 Billion a year to lock up pot smoking cancer grannies is an example of "benign government", I'm all ears.

[The Backlash Cometh]

94. I think most people will agree that marijuana for medicinal purposes

should be allowed. I just don't think it's a good idea to hook kids and young adults on drugs that tend to slow them down. There's too much of life they need to be paying attention to, to tune out. They have their entire adult lives to do that.

And, anyways, why give the pharmaceuticals another product niche?

[Warren DeMontague]

95. $40 Billion dollars a year to tell consenting adults what to do with

THEIR OWN BODIES.

Why give pharmaceuticals another product line? Huh? Are you so reflexively against pharmaceutical companies that you don't want anything that might benefit anyone legal, ever? What about the Morning After Pill? That's being distributed by pharma companies. Are you against that, too?

How about asking: "Why give government another excuse to shit all over the constitution and lock up people who aren't hurting anyone else?" We are the number one per capita incarcerator of non-violent offenders in the industrialized world.

I like how you use language like "hook kids". Arguments around legalizing pot have to do with legalizing and regulating it for adults, just like alcohol is legal- for adults. I realize that people under 21 still drink, but interestingly enough, in many places, illegal drugs are easier for kids to obtain than alcohol is; precisely because the black market doesn't "card".

I think it's a glaring - GLARING - example of the vacuousness of arguments against allowing consenting adults to make up their own minds vis a vis what chemicals they want to put in their own bodies (just like it's a glaring example of the vacuousness of arguments against the legality of, say, consenting adult porn for consenting adults) that people arguing against it are seemingly incapable of formulating an argument without dragging non-consent or non-adults into it.

Lets try again. Arguments here about legalizing pot are universally about legalizing it FOR ADULTS. You are rationalizing a system that turns consenting adults into criminals for nothing more than smoking pot- not endangering others, not robbing banks, just putting THC into their OWN consenting adult bloodstreams.

Now, can you do that without bringing up children or somehow implying that these adults don't "know any better" (i.e. are incapable of consent?)

[The Backlash Cometh]

99. Let me guess. Libertarian?

[Warren DeMontague]

102. You aren't listening to me, are you?

I guess you couldn't be bothered to read what I wrote before about the difference between the big-L Libertarian party and social libertarianism. No, I am not a registered Libertarian. I am a Registered Democrat, thankyouverymuch. I hold socially libertarian views on social issues like the "drug war" as, (news flash!) do most other members of DU and most members of the base of the DEMOCRATIC Party.

You want to wag your finger at me about what "democrats believe" like I'm Howard Jarvis wandering in from the local Club for Growth meeting. I've been a yellow dog democrat all my life, and in many respects - like my support for a SPHC system - I am ahead of my party in terms of supporting benign government, waiting for them to catch up.

But I would guess you can't figure out a coherent argument to respond to mine, so you've fallen back on name calling.

"Libertarian" - ouch! :hide:

[The Backlash Cometh]

103. To me, there is little difference between the big "L"s and the little "l"s

I'm a social pragmatist and though we may begin our reasoning at the same starting line, I would draw the line tighter than you do. I don't really think the live and let live liberal method works where someone does great harm to himself and his family members, and I believe people with addictions fall in that category. I agree with Bill Clinton, that those who have suffered drug addiction would be far worse if it weren't for the drug laws which, at least, force people to seek rehab.

There it is.

[Zhade]

121. Someone smoking pot doesn't do great harm to others.

If it's to themselves - and here's where you'd have to prove that it does, as no one has EVER died from an overdose (it's not really possible to do so) and it's NOT physically addicting - that doesn't matter; you have no right to control others' bodies and choices if they impact only that individual.

Smoking pot is not an addiction. Some - SOME - may become psychologically dependent; that is still not addiction.

You are seriously misinformed as to how this plant operates, and you want to be involved in deciding its legality?

[Warren DeMontague]

132. Bill Clinton's brother was a cocaine addict.

That is hardly a justification for turning some 50-100 million otherwise law-abiding, taxpaying, pot smoking citizens into criminals. That's not "drawing the line tighter", that's pure fucking ludicrousness. We spend $40 Billion a year on the drug war, and the vast majority of it is spent on pot. Not cocaine, not meth, not heroin- POT. Now, I do agree that some people may have problems with marijuana- but I've never known one that would have been "helped" by a 10 year mandatory minimum sentence in prison. Hell, I can't drink- I managed to quit, and alcohol is legal. The stuff is poison for me. In fact, I don't do any mind-altering substances (short of caffeine) anymore. But your argument is akin to saying that someone like me would have been "helped" through alcohol addiction if I had faced a 5 or 10 year prison sentence every time I had a bottle of jack daniels in my possession.

And you know what? I had a problem with alcohol- I can't drink it- but that doesn't mean that everyone who ever takes a drink or drinks recreationally is an alcoholic or "needs" to be forced into rehab by the criminal justice system. Same with pot, except in my experience pot is a far less volatile drug, which causes far less damage -on average- in people's lives, even the people who have a problem with it. Note that I'm not saying no one has a problem with pot, but it is absolutely fucking ludicrous to imagine that everyone who smokes some on occasion is a dangerous drug addict who we need to spend billions putting in jail and/or forcing into treatment. Willie Nelson? The late Carl Sagan? How many names need to be listed of fully functional citizens who happen to enjoy or who have happened to enjoy the occasional hit of weed, to recognize that it is as prima facie absurd to spend $40 Billion a year turning all these people into criminals and waging "war" on their recreational habit as it would be to call everyone who has an occasional weekend cocktail or a beer after work an alcoholic?

Far more sensible, in my mind, to junk the "drug war" and this misguided law enforcement approach to drug abuse, fund real education and treatment on demand instead (remember, that's $40 Billion a YEAR. That's a lot of treatment) adopt a "harm reduction" strategy for hard drugs like the netherlands, and legalize (and tax) pot, because there is no way in hell it is any more dangerous than legal drugs like nicotine and alcohol.

[Zhade]

138. Infuckingdeed.

Some people seem to think their misinformed dislike for the herb should translate into controlling others' bodies.

FUCK that noise!

[Warren DeMontague]

141. I like the idea how everyone who smokes pot needs to be put in rehab.

Hell, even though alcohol is major poison for me, I can't fathom ever trying to argue that every person who has a glass of wine with dinner needs to be hauled off to prison and/or forced into mandatory rehab.

Wow, that would be productive.

[Zhade]

175. Yeah - people like me who don't want to GO BLIND should be in rehab?

Fuck that ignorant noise.

[The Backlash Cometh]

153. Where did you get the idea that I'm in favor of putting drug users in jail

Let me try to make it clear:

(1) Rehab for the (ab)user.

(2) Prison for the supplier.

(3) No free ride of conscience for any user who thinks that his use of drugs doesn't encourage kids to do the same. Any parent who thinks that he isn't influencing his kids to drink or smoke, when they do it freely in their presence, is kidding themselves. But, that's their right. They have a right to send as many mixed signals as they like to their children and others. And we have the right to tell our kids, "Hey, you don't want to grow up smelling like an ashtray like Mr. Greenjeans, do you?" Or, "Hey, Mr. Freebird is drinking again. Let's see if he'll pee in the hydrangeas again and change the color of the bushes." So why would you think that it's going to be any kinder for pot users?

Once it gets decriminalized, do what you have to do, but don't expect people to hold you up as a role model of the community to their kids. There is not going to be any free ride of conscience.

[Warren DeMontague]

164. Actually, I've been clean and sober for years.

"don't expect people to hold you up as a role model of the community to their kids."

So if people want to choose their kids' role models based upon clean living, I personally may still make the cut.

And, yet, I am still outspoken on the need to allow consenting adults to make their own choices- even choices I may not partake in, agree with, or even like. Somehow, my own addictive battles (with alcohol, primarily) didn't turn me into a prohibitionist- rather, they made me more of a jaded realist on the effectiveness of prohibition and what really motivates (versus de-motivates) addicts to seek help.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

158. great post.

good stuff.

I love the argument that it's "harmful", and that's the reason for prohibition. Wrong on its face. But it seems if it were harmful there would be no problem lifting prohibition. Harm means big bucks in the US. Indeed, the harmful path has been chosen and pursued with a vengeance.

[Zhade]

115. I'd have to look it up, but a majority (or close) support legalization.

(And not just for medical use.)

Second, your information on marijuana is clearly not whole. For example, smoking pot is not automatically a "bad habit". And there's only one type of marijuana that "slows" people down - indica. Sativa strains have the *opposite* effect, as they affect the mind rather than the body.

It sounds like you either have no, or bad, experience with marijuana, a beneficial plant that has helped literally millions in a myriad of ways. I sense some hostility toward the plant. That's your right, but you should probably have more information to make informed criticisms, not assume all marijuana causes all users (not abusers, not addicts - it's not physically addictive) to "tune out". Many of us are living examples that that is NOT true of all users.

[The Backlash Cometh]

117. NOT legalization. Perhaps decriminalization.

I don't believe that if you count all the fifty states that the majority of Americans would support legalization. Maybe, decriminalization.

I'm going by personal observation on the other. Most of the friends that I hung out with in high school who smoked, weren't rocket scientist. Great, good-hearted people. But not really ambitious types who were college bound. On the other hand, the nerds in the National Honor Society were, well clean as a whistle.

So, I guess, my personal observation has been that in high school, people who were college bound were pretty straight-laced. Once they got in college, however, well, that's a different story, I'm sure. Everything is fair game in college these days. God help the kids if our colleges were given the same scrutiny as our "high crime" areas.

[Zhade]

119. I dispute that, but don't have time at work to hunt up sources.

I also concede it's possible I'm misremembering, though I don't think I am.

As far as your friends, they are of course anecdotal evidence that doesn't even begin to describe all recreational/medicinal users, of course.

Perhaps your friends were unmotivated to begin with. Who knows? I know that I've become far MORE prolific in a lot of areas of my life, so my experiences disprove (at least for me and those I know) the "pot makes you do nothing with your life" nonsense that a lot of drug warriors (not necessarily you!) spew.

[The Backlash Cometh]

124. I would compromise to continue clamping down on usage in the high school

years. Then, maybe, through decriminalization, we can just offer rehab to those who aren't handling it so well in their adult lives.

[Zhade]

125. Legalization is the right thing to do.

Of course, no one is encouraging kids to use any substance, legal or otherwise.

[The Backlash Cometh]

128. Oh, please. If they see you do it, it encourages them to do it too.

[Zhade]

131. So do you want to ban alcohol? R-rated movies? M-rated games?

Your misguided puritanical dislike for a beneficial plant doesn't give you the right to ban it for others.

Your argument is ridiculous on its face. Should we ban Nascar? After all, kids might want to drive fast after watching a race!

[The Backlash Cometh]

149. And that's the difference between a libertarian and a pragmatist.

You don't get a free ride of conscience on this. Oh, how I laughed when I read your NASCAR example. Speeding is illegal and we have traffic cops more than willing to slap $700.00 tickets on anyone caught going over the speed limit by a certain amount. So your NASCAR example actually supports my position. Yes, kids do test their limits wherever they can, and on the roads is one place where we can't tolerate it, which is why we have high penalties for those who break the infractions and why we have the roads loaded with traffic cops. Not exactly a pretty picture if you transfer that method of policing to every other aspect of our lives -- especially not to a libertarian.

Libertarians, or libertarians, just want to do whatever they want to do with the least bit of inconvenience to their lives. You called me misguided, I call you self-interested and selfish. Most Libertarians are, in the end.

Pragmatists want to keep the world safe for the lowest common denominator, the kids. Notice I never once mentioned the banning of your precious plant, and yet you go off in a tither, just like the old crotchety folks in my neighborhood. I mention filling the pot holes in the common ground, and they accuse me of wanting to build a $30,0000 soccer field. Some straw man argument there.

Now, take a toke and relax.

[Zhade]

176. Simply put, YOU don't control MY body. Period.

We WILL fight if you try to impose your ignorant, misinformed puritanical views on marijuana (which you are wrong about, laughably so) on others.

[Warren DeMontague]

136. There's $40 Billion a year in the drug war kitty as we speak.

That would fund a lot of treatment on demand.

Real addicts -drugs, booze, whatever- will not just accept treatment, they will seek it out if it's available.

[The Backlash Cometh]

151. Well, I'm in favor of the two prong approach:

Rehab is one, and deterrence of drug running is the other. If we're going to decriminalize this, we should decide who gets the proceeds from the sales. I'm sure our good liberal and libertarian friends would be shocked, SHOCKED, to learn that the drugs they buy are paying off the good lifestyle of the very people in Turkey which Sibel Edmonds is trying to bust, for example. Or, heaven, forbid, if the drugs came from Afghanistan to arm Al Qaeda operatives. Or am I wrong, and you all don't really care where the drugs come from?

[Warren DeMontague]

165. "you all". Again, when alcohol was illegal the money went to Al Capone.

The way to take the criminal element out of the drug trade is to end prohibition.

As for Turkey and Afghanistan, I think you're talking about heroin. Last time I checked, this thread was about marijuana.

(Now, I can't imagine you'd conflate heroin and marijuana, because lord knows that's never been done before by anti-drug crusaders! :eyes:)

That said, take the criminality out of the equation, regualte the process, and you're far less likely to
finance criminals. Doesn't matter what substance. There's nothing inherently evil about opium poppies that causes only criminals to grow them- except the fact that legitimate farmers can't do it legally. And for some reason, the DEA gave the Taliban (and, by default, Al Qaeda), some 50 Million Dollars immediately after Bush took office, because of their supposed effectiveness fighting the opium trade. So if you support the DRUG WAR and the DEA, you're financing Al Qaeda, too. How does that work, again?

[The Backlash Cometh]

168. Since I'm not convinced that our gov. agencies have put up a

credible fight against the drug trade, I certainly am not going to close the door on where drugs are coming from.

As for the 50 mil. to the Taliban, I think the reason is pretty damn obvious. They claim they need they sell opium because they need the money to take care of their own people, so 50 million was given to them to stop the growth of a crop or two. I believe it worked, but not for long because of the obvious political complications.

[truedelphi]

170. It didn't work, because they didn't burn it but store it

And while they were storring it, that made the price of any opium not being stored go higher and higher

[The Backlash Cometh]

171. First, where's your link to back up that they stored it?

Second, if they stored it, and didn't grow a crop for a season or two, then they are a season or two behind in their "cycle."

That means that 50 million dollars bought us a year or two of production. Whether that's a cost benefit is for someone with more information to determine, on how it impacted on our criminal departments. Here, I'd like to see stats, and not just anecdotes.

[truedelphi]

177. I first reported that several years ago

It would take me a day or so to figure out which article I wrote that contains the info - let alone figure out the source

And by now the actual contact info is in a banker box in storage

As a reporter who is a head of the curve, I am always wrong - for the first cycle I am so far from what is being accepted as truth that I could not possibly be believed

The second cycle is that when the subject finally comes up for discussion - I have dee p sixed everything in terms of research

If I only wrote one thing a year, I could keep things more accessible - but as it is, my bedroom is stacks of paper.

It's possible that this particular tidbit was inspired by postings on the official governemnet pages of the CIA - though if it was there years ago, don't know if it would still be there

[truedelphi]

179. here's the relevent text

The Coastal Post Article by Carol Sterritt
January 2002 - Afghan Pipeline article
February to April 2001. Government officials from both the United States and Afghanistan meet to discuss the possibility of building this pipeline. Corporations most interested in this development are Unocal * and Amoco. Participating officials include Laila Helms, a relative of Richard Helms, former director of the CIA, and Sayed Ramatulla, aide to Taliban Mullah Mohammed Omar. Also around this point in time, over 40 million dollars were released to Taliban government of Afghanistan in the name of the American War on Drugs. In accepting these monies, the Taliban agreed to see that the opium in local drug lords' warehouses would stay there. This policy of course, did very little to influence the local drug lords, who simply raised the price of their product to cover for the curtailment of supply.

I think if memory serves that I found a great deal of the information for this article on the CIA offical website.

At the time, there was a rather well done website that critiqued specific CIA policies reports procedures, etc. And if memory serves they were the ones saying that the drug lords were allowed to store the product - they got their money and payouts from our government just for agreeing not to put it in the market place for that growing cycle.

If you wanna read the whole article, google carol sterritt + opium (Jes' don't tell my mother that I am linked in any way to this thing called dope)

[Warren DeMontague]

133. Look carefully at your last sentence.

That's another reason why the drug war is a crock of shit. One recreational cocaine user in Texas goes to prison for 20 years, and it's prison - NOT the drug - which destroys his life. Another, well, he might just go on to be President.

It's hypocrisy, and it's a sham.

[The Backlash Cometh]

152. The drug war needs to be directed at the suppliers.

And let's be frank. If we were really honest about cleaning up this mess, we should be prepared to deal with the fact that our own criminal agencies are either involved in the drug trade to supplement their budgets, or are protecting very powerful political families in this country who are. THAT's why the drug war is a joke. Because what we're doing is like cleaning a windshield with a muddy rag.

[Warren DeMontague]

163. Criminal agencies were involved in the alcohol trade, too.

The way to remove them from the process was to end prohibition.

[The Backlash Cometh]

167. You're not listening.

The solution is to ensure that our political and legal agencies are 100% in support of ending the drug trail, no matter where it leads. That means the CIA & FBI would have to be willing to turn in their own, or even our own allies.

I don't sincerely believe we've even tried, yet.

[Warren DeMontague]

169. Ignoring human nature, which is the core reason why prohibition of

any kind is always doomed to fail- (and at $40 Billion a year, how much more do we have to spend before we "even try"?) this thread is about marijuana, the vast majority of which is produced domestically.

Legalize it, and then people can grow their own - which removes not just the criminal trade element, but any trade element whatsoever.

[The Backlash Cometh]

172. Decriminalize, not legalize.

If someone wants to grow pot for themselves, that's one thing. But selling it should require a license. But the penalities to selling to a minor should be severe.

[Warren DeMontague]

173. I agree about minors. What I don't agree with is your idea that

"decriminalization" does and should equal "mandatory treatment for users". I don't think everyone who smokes pot (like the late Carl Sagan) is a drug addict who needs rehab any more than everyone who enjoys the occasional glass of wine is an alcoholic.

Also, "legalization" wouldn't mean a "free for all". Alcohol is legal, and regulated, and you need a license to sell it. As I stated elsewhere in the thread, in many places, illegal drugs are easier for kids to get than alcohol, precisely because the black market doesn't "card".

[SlavesandBulldozers]

130. the pharm companies wouldn't get a product niche.

in fact, they'd lose one. count this among the top reasons for the current policy. it would be very hard to corporatize and profit from.

[Quantess]

154. Pharmaceutical companies are a HUGE reason

it is still illegal. In most West Coast metropolitan areas, the sentiment for decriminalizing it is popular, especially for those who need it for their medical problems.
But now some doctors are listening to the propaganda from big pharma, who assert that marijuana is useless in medicine, and that their factory-controlled pain meds are somehow much better. Well, I suppose the pills are better at making money for Pharmaceutical CEOs. Marijuana is just competition.

[truedelphi]

181. Even as we type, Big Pharma is investigating

the various cannibinoids that allow for so many of the medicinal gains of using this drug.

It is "known" that marijuana inhibits certain tumors' growth.

It is known that marijuana helps parapalegics and multiple sclerosis sufferers deal with the nervous tremors that they endure.

They publish their findings in various top notch health research journalsing journals on neurology.

Then they pay off various government officials to state the opposite - that marijuana has absolutely NO health benefits. (COuld be they are paying these officials with product, eh?)

[silverweb]

106. They updated the test!

I'm down there with you and southwest of Ghandi. Lots of new questions in the test. Very interesting!

[Warren DeMontague]

142. I took it again and got very similar results to last time:

Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.77

[Mabus]

17. Other: Make it legal and pardon those convicted of selling it

I advocate going one step further. Not only should it be legalized but those who have been convicted of possession and related charges should have those convictions removed from their records. There's no reason to continue penalizing people for convictions once it is no longer illegal.

[JuniperLea]

18. Take the billion, buy pot

make brownies for the Repugs...

The world would be a better place.

[CrispyQ]

21. ...

;) :thumbsup:

A life spent searching for the perfect hashish brownie is a life well spent. -Zonker Harris

[YOY]

24. That would just make 'em paranoid

They'd claim to be looking for WMDs in the Doritos bag

[JuniperLea]

32. At least it would be limited to the Doritos bag:)

The only real hold up to making it legal is the drug companies. No more big money for drugs to regulate blood pressure. Or ease glaucoma. Or help you sleep. Or help you overcome the side effects of chemo therapy and AIDS medications... this list is long...

[WinstonSmith4740]

25. Nevada has it on the ballot.

This time they're approaching it from the business point of view, so it may work. Let's face it...this is probably going to be the only way to truly access legalization. The right to privacy issue never worked, being no worse than alcohol and cigarettes didn't work, needs of medical patients didn't work, and being just plain stupid law didn't work, so let's not play "republican lite" here and claim the only way is to "stay the course", 'cause the course isn't working.

But put out numbers like a billion of our tax dollars to incarcerate people for pot may just hit home. Add another 8 billion for criminal justice costs, and like a true conservative republican once said (believe it or not) "A billion here and there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money." Think we could fund, say universal health care for $9,000,000,000? Let's not also forget...this idiot "war on drugs" has been going on since NIXON for cryin' out loud. We're in the 3rd generation of people who have witnessed first hand just how stupid and expensive this bullshit is.

I personally don't care what it takes. These laws must end. Nevada law has changed over the last few years to really tone down what had been some of the most draconian laws in the country regarding weed. Until a couple of years ago, I could go to jail for a long, long time for what could be found in my ash-tray. Now, possession of an ounce or less is a misdemeaner. The problem is, it's still illegal, and even though the state would "slap my wrist", I'll be willing to bet I'd still lose my job. :smoke: :hippie:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. I've never heard a good reason why...

it's illegal in the first place.

[Beelzebud]

34. Watch Reefer Madness. It's illegal from scare tactics.

Reefer Madness was made to show the "evils" of marijuana.

The movie depicts people smoking pot as turning into drug-crazed criminals.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. This is why I said "good" reason.

I've heard all sorts of stupid reasons.

[Beelzebud]

42. For sure. Thats all there is are stupid reasons. No good reason at all.

It's often said, even by those in law enforcment, that the only bad thing about pot is that it's a crime to use.

[winter999]

48. I heard an urban legend once that when like this...

Back in the early 1900's when pot was still legal and hemp fiber was becoming popular in making books (doesn't deteriorate as fast as white pulp paper). Anyway the president of the leading paper manufacturer complained to his wife. His wife was friends with a congressman's wife who then introduced the bill to get pot restricted.

Someone check into it, I'm too stoned.
:smoke:

[VeggieTart]

60. William Randolph Hearst?

He'd make a big deal over accidents in which a joint was found, but bury alcohol-related accidents in back pages. Legalize the stuff.

Of course, my dad says to me, would you want a doctor who has just had pot doing an operation. I say, no, but I wouldn't want someone who's just had a drink doing one either. The same rules for booze apply to pot: pilots say eight hours bottle to throttle. It's illegal to drive drunk. There are many activities that require concentration for which having a drink would be a very bad idea. Well, the same applies to pot. If a bunch of people want to sit around the house sharing a joint and talking and eating, fine. But nobody drives until the stuff is out of their system.

Let's go after violent criminals, jail their asses, and leave the pot-smokers alone. However, there are far more dangerous illegal drugs, such as cocaine and heroin, that really ought to remain illegal.

And for the record, hemp nuts are a good source of Omega-3 fatty acids.

[RaleighNCDUer]

50. It may not be a "good" reason, but coincidentally the first big

push against marijuana came in the 30s, when we had high unemployment and a big problem with (are you ready for it?) Mexican immigrants illegally crossing the border looking for work in America. Its use was highest in immigrant and rural black populations, so by making it illegal they could incarcerate them, opening up the jobs they had for white men.

Like I said, not a "good" reason, but the real one.

[WinstonSmith4740]

81. There's an excellent series about this

It's carried on the Discover Channel, and chronicles the road to illegality by different drugs. Yes, marijuana was made illegal around 1937 in response to farmer's in the Southwest who wanted to "discourage" migrant workers from Mexico from coming in to work the fields, mainly because it was the time of the mid-west dust bowl and the folks from there were willing to work cheaper. Since the AMA wouldn't go along with criminalizing weed (it was used mainly by veterinarians), the slime started flying about how the Mexican men would get "hopped up" (their words!) on weed and (wait for it) attack while women! Now, there are few things in this country that would and still will get the electorate up and howling than an "epidemic" of minority men attacking white women, so down the road we went.

Originally, the law stated that you couldn't sell or possess marijuana without a tax stamp, much like the tax stamp you see on cigarettes. But then no money was appropriated to print the stamps. Plus you had to have your product "in hand" when you applied for the stamp. But since you didn't have a stamp to possess the product, you were now if violation of the law. Nice Catch 22, huh? So you had a bad law, based on bad science, and fueled by bad politics. In fact, the law was written SO badly written, that in 1968 the Supreme Court overturned it as unworkable. So weed was legal for about 2 weeks until our brilliant reps at the time gave us the laws we have today.

And the beat goes on. People are being incarcerated, and their lives ruined, for using a plant our Founding Fathers grew, and not only for fiber. I heard once that Washington's growing diaries bemoaned the fact he didn't separate the males and females soon enough...only one reason to do that, folks. The cloth made from hemp fibers is so strong, there were farmers during WWII that HAD to grow hemp for the war effort, as it was used for rope and life jackets. In fact, a lot of you here will remember the ads for George the Elder during the '88 and '92 campaigns showing him being pulled out of the sea after his plane was shot down. Guess what his jacket was made from?

These law are stupid, but unfortunately, our "leaders" are such cowards, even the ones who KNOW the laws are stupid are too afraid to stand up and speak the truth. This is an herb, and just like most herbs, has fantastic medicinal properties. I will SWEAR the fact that my husband smokes weed is what saved his life when he had a stroke. I KNOW it's the reason he was finally able to break through the aphasia and start talking again. The hope this stuff can bring to people who are fighting cancer, AIDS, & MS, just to name a few, is unbounded. We need to legalize now!!!:rant:

[Quantess]

98. These days, I think it's the Pharmaceutical companies

keeping it illegal. Legalizing marijuana would a conflict of their interests.

Welcome to DU, by the way.:hi:

[Zhade]

126. It literally saved my sight.

If I didn't use it, I'd have glaucoma - or so says my doctor.

Sad to see some ignorance on the herb among liberals. Hope they educate themselves one day.

Glad to hear about your husband's breakthrough!

[Warren DeMontague]

148. To be fair, it's hard to find more unambiguous poll numbers on DU.

In fact, the only (non "Does Bush Suck" type) issues-based poll questions I've seen close to being this lopsided are the ones asking whether consenting adult porn should be legal for consenting adults.

Yeah, us wacky social libertarians- such a minority viewpoint!

[Irreverend IX]

70. DuPont company developed nylon fiber.

They helped to push the Marijuana Tax act through, which had the convenient side effect of banning hemp so that there was no competition for their product.

[Homer Wells]

83. The reason for criminalization ,

from what I have read, is really quite simple.

When Prohibition ended in the late '20s, there was this pretty good sized bureaucracy that had been in charge of enforcing the ban on alcohol, and they saw their usefulness coming to an end. Bureaucracies have a tendency to resist being terminated, just as life is fought for by organisms when threatened with destruction.

This being the case, the powers-that-be (were) cast around for another EVIL substance to fight.
During that era, the herb was being used by mostly the lower classes, such as jazz musicians, Mexican immigrants, and other powerless people.

A campaign of fear was generated, with public awareness campaigns, fear generating movies such as "Reefer Madness", and others. No matter that it was all lies and distortions, such pesky matters as truth and reality play little part in the propagandists minds.

The momentum for this campaign grew and grew over the decades. As we know, if a statement is said enough times, in various ways and in various media, the statement becomes "Truth" for those willing to accept it without finding out for themselves its veracity.
Even when presented the facts regarding POT, they will parrot out the TRUTH as they see it, and will irrationally resist any attempts at reason.

And so it goes.....
:eyes:

[killbotfactory]

145. That's because there is no good reason

[Ms. Clio]

182. racism

weed was linked with black musicians and Mexicans during the early twentieth century.

[shadowknows69]

29. Yes its worth it

and I do my part every day to smoke...uh..er...destroy, as much as that evil weed I can. For the greater good. B-)

[orpupilofnature57]

30. If buying a beer is acceptable ,smoking weed should be encouraged.

[Beelzebud]

31. Other: It should be legalized.

Alcohol is a far more dangerous drug than marijuana.

"Isn't saying Marijuana is bad, just saying god made a mistake?" --Bill Hicks

[951-Riverside]

33. There should be a war on those who drive while intoxicated on pot

...thats all.

[High Plains]

41. Maybe we should try to get past all this "war on" thinking.

If you mean we should enforce laws against impaired driving, well, yes.

But declaring wars on inanimate objects (marijuana) or abstract notions (terror) doesn't seem to work too well.

[Auggie]

57. It worries me that too many people will drive stoned.

I can't support legalizing it for that reason.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

61. Really? It doesn't worry me at all.

Is there any evidence that marijuana actually impairs driving?

[Homer Wells]

74. Well, I can tell you

it played hell with my trying to ride a small motorcycle across a few miles of north Tampa when I was a much younger, much more stoned college student. Screws up my balance big-time

:hippie: :smoke:

[Dora]

63. You have more to fear from people on cell phones. n/t

[Quantess]

64. There are already laws against driving under the influence.

DUII stands for Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants. It's not called DUIA. "Intoxicants" covers marijuana.

[Auggie]

68. It scares the crap out of me. I want people driving who are focused on

just driving and not under the influence of anything that may impair a motor response.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

71. You mean like wine?

[Auggie]

79. Of course

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

80. So you're saying wine should be illegal.

Given post #57.

:rofl:

[Quantess]

84. What's in a name....

Oh, the irony.:rofl:

But seriously, if a cop notices a driver seems impaired, they will pull them over and do a sobriety check. As I mentioned earlier, DUII isn't Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (no, not Driving Under the Influence of Wine, either, LOL). Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants includes marijuana.

[RaleighNCDUer]

93. Or maybe you're afraid of the competition

if "Winebrat" is truly descriptive?

:smoke:

[Warren DeMontague]

100. That is ridiculous. First off, anyone who wants to smoke pot, now, can.

It's legal in the Netherlands, and their rates of drug abuse are LOWER than they are in the USA.

And if carnage on the roadways was the prime factor in determining what should be illegal, alcohol would be gone in a SECOND. I had a friend killed by a drunk driver. No one should drive under the influence- but THAT is what should be illegal, not merely putting the substance in your own bloodstream without endangering others.

We spend $40 Billion a year on the drug war, and it's aimed primarily at pot smokers. We're the number one per capita incarcerator of non-violent offenders in the industrialized world. Half the people in prison are there for non-violent drug offenses.

You really think that's worth it, because if pot was legal tomorrow, the road would be filled with stoned drivers? How is it we've managed to reduce the rates of drunk driving, without criminalizing alcohol?

[951-Riverside]

111. Winebrat just for the record I'm for legalizing pot

My point was if there are any crackdowns it should be limited to those who abuse the substance in a way that endangers others lives (ie driving while under the influence). Pot itself is not any more dangerous than alcohol, cigarettes or prescription drugs.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

160. so you advocate alcohol prohibition then?

you know who I worry about when im on the road: DRUNKS, senior citizens, anybody on cell phones, teenagers, and idiots - in that order. There's plenty of worry to go around on the roads.

[RaleighNCDUer]

53. Because they drive soooo sslooooly.

It does impair, yes, but it doesn't tend to make a driver reckless and agressive. If anything, from my experience, when stoned people drive more slowly than necessary due to paranoia. But it does tend to increase distractability, like "wow, that's some sunset out there........"

[Alexander]

123. What if they never crash, speed or hurt anyone?

I know people who can drive safely not only "while intoxicated on pot", but while they are passing around joints, bowls, blunts, whatever.

And I also know people who can't drive safely 2 hours after they take a hit of weed.

Alcohol, on the other hand, severely impairs everyone's driving ability, without question.

Making blanket statements like this is not helpful. We'd do better to punish stoned-drivers-who-cause-accidents on a case-by-case basis.

[nebenaube]

157. I'd rather see a war on sleep deprived drivers.... n/t

[slackmaster]

37. Decriminalization is a cop-out

It should be legal for adults to grow and use.

[Beelzebud]

39. Agreed.

[jdlh8894]

40. Legalize ? Hell yeah! But ?

Where you gonna smoke it? With all the anti-smoking laws,you won't be able to burn one in the7-11 when you go to get the munchies.

[Beelzebud]

43. Just like alcohol. You can't get drunk in the 7-11 either...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. Alright, I'll just smoke outside.

Or in my own home.

It's not like smoking bans in stores, restaurants, etc. are actually a nuisance or anything.

[smokey nj]

77. You can always serve it in baked goods.

[Quantess]

49. I despise weed.

But it would like it to be legalized, or at least, decriminalized, and the lowest law enforcement priority.

If there is going to be a crackdown on drugs, meth should be the law enforcement priority. Meth is a scourge. Marijuana is no comparison to meth, when looking at the health damage and crime meth causes.

Prosecuting otherwise good citizens for marijuana is unfair to everyone.

[brentspeak]

52. I'm split on this

I think it's stupid that people have gone to jail because they got caught with a bag of pot or hashish. Jail time, an undeserved black mark on one's record, and wasted law enforcement time and dollars.

On the other hand, I'm 100% against using narcotics. The TV ad depicting two stoners sitting in front in their television set, doing absolutely nothing with their lives, describes to a 'T' the potheads I've known.

[tridim]

56. Do you know any of these people?

They're all pot smokers and hardly couch-locked.
http://www.slatts.fsworld.co.uk/famous.htm

Aaron Sorkin, creator of ''The West Wing".
Art Garfunkel , singer, Simon and Garfunkel.
Abbie Hoffman, Activist.
Al and Tipper Gore Politicians
Aleister Crowley, Author and Famous Satanist.
Alexander Dumas, Author - "The Three Musketeers"
Ali Campbell, Singer with UB40
Alice B. Toklas. Famous Cook - Wrote recipe for Hash Fudge Filmed as. 'I Love You Alice B. Toklas'
Allen Ginsberg, Poet.
Andrea Corr, musician, "The Corrs".
Anjelica Huston, Actress.
Arnold Schwarzenegger. Actor. ``I did smoke a joint and I did inhale.''
Art Garfunkel. Singer of, "Simon and Garfunkel" fame.
Arthur Rimbaud.
Balzac.
Beatles.
Benjamin Franklin, Many claims but little proof.
Bill "...but I didn't inhale." Clinton, Politician.
Bill Gates. Not confirmed, just very strongly hinted at in his Playboy interview.
Bill Murray Arrested for possession.
Bing Crosby. Famous crooner of "I'm dreaming of a White Christmas". Now the Film "High Society" makes sense!
Bix Beiderbecke Jazz musician.
Black Crowes, musicians
Bob Denver, Star of "Gilligan's Island".
Bob Dylan, musician.
Bob Marley, musician
Burt Reynolds, actor. He left his first wife because of her drug use. But he has been seen in Cannabis Cafes.
Bruce Lee.
Cab Calloway, Jazz musician. Claimed he only used it once.
Carl Sagan, Scientist - SiFi writer - film "Contact" More info here.
Carlos Santana musician.
Carrie Fischer, Actress
Charlie Sheen, actor.
Charlize Theron, Actress. More here.
Charles Beaudelaire, Author.
Cheech Marin, Actor, Don Johnson's sidekick in the TV detective series "Nash Bridges."
Chris Conrad, Author and expert on Cannabis Hemp
Chris Farley. Comedian.
Chrissie Hynde, musician.
Chris Rock, Actor, Comedian, Producer, Screenwriter.
Chubby Checker, Musician. Sang; "Lets Twist Again".
Cilla Black, Musician and presenter. Tried it in the '60's but didn't like it.
Claire Rayner, Agony Aunt.
Cody Kasch Actor. TV series Desperate Housewives
Conan O'Brian TV Host
Count Basie, Jazz Ban Leader. He was on an DEA file of marajuana users.
Dame Margot Fonteyn, Prima ballerina. Also see entries for Rudolf Nureyev.
David Bailey, Photographer .
Dan Quayle . Politician.
David Hockney, Artist.
Diego Rivera Mexican Artist
Dion Fortune Welsh occultist.
Dionne Warwick, Famous singer of "Walk on by".
Dioscorides Pedanius, 1 st cent. AD. Greek physician. Wrote 'De Materia Medica', used for 1,500 years.
Dizzy Gillespie, Jazz musician He was on an DEA file of marajuana users.
Dr Francis Crick. Nobel Prize winner.
Dr Lester Grinspoon.
Dr R.D.Laing
Dr W.B. O'Shaugnessy Re-introduced cannabis to European medicine.
Drew Barrymore, actress.
Duke Ellington, Jazz Band Leader. He was on an DEA file of marajuana users.
Elliott Gould. Actor.
Eminem, musician.
Emperor Liu Chi-nu, made medical recomendation for its use.
Emperor Shen-Nung, made first known medical recommendation for its use.
Errol Flynn, Actor
Evelyn Waugh. Author.
Francis Ford Coppella, Film Director. Mentioned in "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls" by Peter Biskind
Frances McDormand , Actress. Raising Arizona, Burning Mississippi, Fargo.
Fats Waller, musician.
Fitz Hugh Ludlow - wrote 'The Hasheesh Eater'.
Francois Rabelais. 16 th French author. Recommended it as a food not a high.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Used it as a medicine.
Gary Johnson. Governor of New Mexico - Reformer.
Gene Krupa, Jazz musician.
George Gurdjieff , Russian Mystic.
George W Bush Politician and professional hypocrite.
George Melly, Jazz musician.
George Soros, Financier and reformer.
George Washington , grew it and there is evidence that he prepared it for smoking.
And incidentally many other US presidents use to smoke Hemp.
Thomas Jefferson.
James Madison.
James Monroe.
Andrew Jackson,
Zachary Taylor.
Franklin Pierce.
Also see entries for Bill Clinton and George Bush.
Gerard de Nerval French writer
Graham Greene, Author.
Grateful Dead musicians.
Harrison Ford, Actor. This is a claim made by Bill Maher that has not been denied.
Hasan I-Sabah (Hasan-bin-Sabah) Leader of the Assassins.
Heinrich Khunrath, Medieval Alchemist. and Philosopher.
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Russian Theosophist.
Henri Michaux poet and painter
Howard Marks. Ex-smuggler and Raconteur.
H R H Prince Harry, Third in line to the British throne.
H R H Princess Margaret, sister to Her Majesty the Queen. Her son disputes the claim.
Howard Stern, admitted it on the radio.
Hua T'o Medical use as anaesthetic .
Hunter S. Thompson, Author
Isabel Allende, Chilean author. Mentioned in her book "Paula".
Jack Kerouac, Author
Jack Nicholson, actor.
Jackie Gleason, actor. Another whom the DEA kept on their pot files.
James Brown, musician
Janis Joplin, musician. Tried it but "... she didn't like marijuana, it gave her the jitters."
Jane Fonda, Actress.
Jennifer Aniston, actress. "I enjoy smoking cannabis and see no harm in it", Daily Mail, 11/9/01.
Jennifer Capriati, Tennis champ.
Jesse Ventura, Governor of Minnesota.
Jesus Christ. 'healed using cannabis'.
Jim Morrison, musician.
Jimmy Dorsey, Jazz musician, He was on an DEA file of marijuana users.
Jimmy Hendrix, musician
Joan of Arc, was accused of using witch herbs (another name cannabis).
John Belushi, actor. Perhaps not a particularly good role model!
John Denver, musician. He recorded a song about it.
John F Kennedy. Politician.
John Kerry . Politician. US Senator and Presidential candidate. Also see
John Lennon. musician.
John Le Mesurier. Actor. Tried it but said it's not for him.
John Wayne, Actor, "I tried it once but it didn't do anything to me."
Jonathan Miller, Theatre Director.
Johnny Cash, musician. Sang songs for NORML album.
Jon Snow, Channel 4 News presenter. (UK)
Julia Roberts, Actress, "I smoked dope twice," ..." It made me too sleepy..."
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, legendary Los Angeles Lakers Basketball star
Kary Mullis, Nobel Laurate, Biology. Is on NORML Board of directors.
Ken Kesey, Author of "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" (1975)
Kenneth Tynan, Playwright.
Kurt Cobain, musician.
Larry Hagman, actor, of "JR" fame.
Led Zeppelin, musicians.
Lenny Bruce, Comedian.
Lewis Carroll, Author
Lewis Wolpert, biologist.
Little Richard, musician.
Louis Armstrong, Jazz musician. The 'bust' in his own words.
Luke Perry, actor.
Louis Hebert, French Botanist
Macaulay Culkin. Actor, Home Alone.
Mark Stepnoski. two-time Super Bowl champ, Dallas Cowboy.
Mick Jagger, musician
Mike Bloomberg. New York City Mayor.
Mike Tyson, Boxer.
Miles Davis, Jazz musician.
Milton Berle, Actor another one on the DEA list of smokers
Mo Mowlam, Minister recently in charge of UK drug policy.
Modigliani. Sculptor.
Montel Williams Chat show host.
Montgomery Clift, actor, mentioned in his biography.
Neil Diamond, musician.
Neil Young, Musician.
Newt Gingrich Speaker of the US Senate.
Norman Mailer, Author.
Oasis, Noel Gallagher "smoking cannabis is as normal as having a cup of tea"
Ocean Colour Scene, "the hardest smoking band in music" Q Magazine. 02/02.
Oliver Stone, Film Director.
Oscar Wilde, Author. "Bosie and I have taken to hashish,"
Pablo Picasso, Artist.
Pancho Villa, Revolutionary Leader.
Peregrine Worthstone, former editor of the Sunday Telegraph.
Peter Fonda, actor. "I don't trust anybody who didn't inhale."
Peter Sellers, actor.
Peter Tosh, Poet.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau, Former Prime Minister of Canada.
Pink. Musician. Mentioned in Playboy interview (11/02).
Pink Floyd, Musicians.
P. J. O'Rouke. Author.
Pythagoras, Mathematician.
Queen Victoria.
Ram Dass, Philosopher.
Ray Charles, musician.
Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Laureate physicist.
Richard Pryor, actor.
Robert Anton Wilson. Philosopher .
Robert Mitchum, Actor, was jailed in the 40s for possession of marijuana.
Rolling Stones, musicians.
Rosie Boycott, former Editor of the Daily Express and The Independent.
Ross Rebagliati, first ever snowboarding Gold Medallist, 1998 Winter Olympics.
Rudolf Nureyev, Ballet dancer. Also see entry for Margot Fonteyn.
Rudyard Kipling . Author.
Ryan Farrell, Australian Sprint Car champion.
Salvador Dali, Artist.
Samuel Beckett, Author.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Author.
Sidi-Hidi. Sacred religious figure of Morocco, believed to have brought cannabis to the Atlas.
Sinead O'Connor, musician.
Sir Paul McCartney, Musician.
Sir Mick Jagger, Musician. Of whom it was written; "Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel".
Snoop Dogg, musician.
Steve Martin , Actor.
Stephen King. Author, "Tommy Knockers".
Steve Jobs, co-creator of the Apple computer.
Steven Soderbergh, Film director.
Stephen Sondheim. Broadway composer and lyricist.
Sting / Gordon Sumners, musician.
Ted Turner, of CNN fame. This is a claim made by Bill Maher that has not been denied
Terence McKenna.
Terry Pratchett. Author of the "Diskworld" books. A bit of a cheeky claim perhaps, in that he did not object to being given a "cake".
The Who, musicians.
Thelonious Monk, Jazz musician.
Timothy Leary
Tomas Enge, Formula 3000 World Champion.
Tommy Chong. Actor with Cheech Marin in "Up in Smoke " - "Cheech & Chong".
Tommy Lee, Musician.
Tony Booth, the father-in-law of Britain's Prime Minister. Smoked it in No 10.
UB40, Band.
Victor Hugo. Author 'Les Misérables'
Walter 'Stumpy' Brennan actor.
Walter Benjamin, Philosopher.
Wesley Snipes, actor. Has been seen in Cannabis Cafes.
Whitney Houston, musician.
William Butler Yeats. Famous Irish Poet and Occultist.
William S. Burroughs, Author.
William Shakespeare. Dramatist. More here.
Willie Nelson, musician.
Woody Harrelson, Actor and reformer.
Zoroaster, Persian prophet.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. Those ads are so fundamentally stupid.

I like the one where the guy's driving around all his pot smoking friends, running errands for him.

At the end of the commercial he says something like "just wait until I go to college."

Yeah, when he goes to college he's going to be running errands for all his pot-smoking college friends.

:rofl:

[tridim]

112. Jon Stewart should be on that list too

but my post is way too old to edit. :)

[Ms. Clio]

183. Also Dave Chappelle

just heard him joke about it on Comedy Central's "Secret Stash" Sat. night.

[spacelady]

144. Beautiful, add me to that list - L.A. Robinson, artiste extraordinaire.

[Dora]

62. Apparently you don't know enough "potheads." n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

69. Their Problem Wasn't The Dope

Their problem was them! The dope was a secondary characteristic of their desire to do nothing and the lack of ambition or inherent talent to fight that desire.
The Professor

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

72. The irony of those commercials...

is that the people watching them are couch potatoes themselves.

[Warren DeMontague]

88. Ever known any alcoholics?

I sure have. I've seen the damage alcohol does, and it blows away anything pot could ever manage.

I still think prohibition is horribly misguided- for alcohol and certainly for pot.

[Warren DeMontague]

89. Legalize it. Regulate it, tax it.

End of story.

[mvd]

101. No - I would emphasize treatment (when needed)

It's harder drugs that might need to stay illegal.

[bluedogyellowdog]

107. Wow - this vote is rather lopsided

I hope the politicians are paying attention. Marijuana prohibition is like the 55 mph speed limit and the 21 drinking age. When a law is widely reviled, ridiculed, unpopular, and ignored, that law needs to go. Governments get their authority by the consent of the governed.

[sweetheart]

108. Marijuana should remain legal...

...like it has for thousands of years with a short eclipse from white racists.

[Zhade]

109. What morons voted yes?

How is this war on a beneficial plant (one that has helped save my vision, for example) worth it? How is it even SANE, when it does pretty much no damage compared to alcohol and cigarettes?

Please tell me those voting yes are just freeper idiots, and not liberal idiots!

[Gregorian]

110. Of course it's working!

We got jails instead of schools.
Pot is now something like $5000 per pound.
It was a test to see what Americans would tolerate. And the discovery was amazing.
We got more cops.
Americans are now afraid of their country.

All of these and many more. So if you're a republican, yes, it's working.

[Brazenly Liberal]

113. Other

Not just decriminalized. It should be fully legalized and taxed to high heaven.

This would bring in some much needed revenue for programs this regime cut. Add in the money saved not chasing after pot users and sellers and jailing them and you have a nice little bump for the economy.

And by removing pot sales from drug dealers, it would make marijuana no more a gateway drug than beer or coffee is. Even with outrageous taxes, it could still be cheaper than it is now, so everyone should be happy.

This is not likely to happen, though. I can't think of a single congresscritter I believe has the balls to introduce or support legislation making pot legal.

[Festivito]

114. BUT BUT BUT, How will the unChurched CIA support the MIC???

CIA members who were not caught by Senator Church's sweep need to fund operations against pansy democratic policies, rather for the Military (Congressional) Industrial Complex. CIA or any of the other super secret spy agencies...

[Dragonbreathp9d]

118. I am allergic to weed

however, I still think it should be legalized

[Alexander]

120. Not "decriminalized". LEGALIZE, TAX, REGULATE. nt

[T Town Jake]

122. Legalize it, tax it, cut your prison population in half. Win/win.

(n/t)

[petepillow]

127. i thought the war on pot was just an excuse to pick on hippies

and liberals. you know, get em so they can't vote.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

129. Marijuana Should Be 100% Legal. Its Illegality Is One Of The Biggest

crimes against humanity.

[Zhade]

140. I fully agree.

IMHO, and there's evidence to suggest it may be correct, natural 'drugs' like pot and magic mushrooms probably accelerated our evolution.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

146. Hear Hear To That!

My wife refuses to let me smoke pot at all. She's never touched it and is a real goodie two shoes in that way. Thing that gets to me though, is her only reasoning for being so against it is because it is 'illegal'. When I tell her how much worse alcohol is in so many ways, none of the arguments matter because alcohol isn't 'illegal'.

Drives me nuts. I want my kind bud dammit! LOL

[spacelady]

137. Cannabis should be completely legal.

For recreation, for medicine, for food, for fiber,and for fuel. This beneficial plant (weed) grows without depleting the soil, without excessive fertilization, and with abundance and the technology is in place to use it without toxic effect in almost every aspect of civilization. I just cannot emphasize enough how the demonization of this beneficial plant has harmed us.

[hedgehog]

139. My kids were bored sitting through the same anti-drug lectures I

got back in high school. All the lectures ever did was bring us up-to-date on the latest street names. The money spent on enforcement and incarceration would better have been spent on voluntary de-tox and rehab for anyone who wanted it.

[cherokeeprogressive]

174. My Favorite Part of Those Lectures

Was when the deputy said we could spot a "marijuana user" by the brown stains on his/her fingertips... We'd giggle and ask amongst ourselves "can't we just buy them roach-clips?" and laugh our asses off...

[spacelady]

143. I have never believed anyone needed rehab for simply using

cannabis unless they were complying with a court order. This plant has a chemical structure that is almost wholly beneficial and lends itself to many uses beyond recreational. It is truly a gift from our "Creator". Only in recent history has it been demonized because it threatens the oil industry, the paper industry, and how it got started was through racism and fearmongering along those lines. It is way past due to be re-evaluated for illegality,

[mark414]

147. more than just decriminalized, it should be completely legal

it's a fucking PLANT for crying out loud

i would like to ask george how it could be bad since god lets it grow?

[Quantess]

155. let's see now...

George is a big hypocrite if he thinks a plant should be illegal. Cocaine comes from the Coca plant!
;)
Remember those days when your nostrils were frosted with coke, W?:evilgrin:

[Random_Australian]

150. Other:Remain illegal, yes, use any of the methods of control thus far, no.

And incarceration for possession is just plain silly.

[stepnw1f]

156. COme to Boston and I'll Smoke You Up! (nt)

[dkofos]

161. I would actually prefer it to be legalised.

Decriminalization is not enough!!

[Wcross]

162. Ok, so why won't our elected representitives follow our wishes?

I have always wondered why nobody up on capital hill stood up and said "enough is enough"! I can only hope come January when our newly elected majority in the house and Senate take office they take a serious look at this poll.
I feel that if we in fact do need a "DEA" they should focus on drugs that kill people and are highly addictive. Crack, Heroin and Meth.

[Warren DeMontague]

166. Good question.

Personally, I think if our party takes a series of strong social libertarian stances- end the drug war, protect reproductive choice, respect the Bill of Rights and Sep. of Church & State, allow personal self-determination throughout life to end-of-life, etc. coupled with populist, real world solutions to people's problems like a liveable min. wage and a SPHC system-

-we could forge a coalition that would ensure long-term majorities while kicking the ass of the religious right once and for all.

[Unvanguard]

178. We should end the entire War on Drugs.

It's immoral and ineffective, and only strengthens the socioeconomic marginalization of parts of our society.

[upi402]

180. I am 100% anti drugs -even anti alcohol

and I think it should be legal.
In fact, maybe the Bushler needs to spend some nights face down on the old skull bong and think a spell.