the other one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:30 AM
Original message |
How many Americans consume marijuana in a year? |
|
Reliable numbers are impossible because many people will not admit to a crime, but consider this:
More than 800,000 arrests for possession in each of the last few years. What percentage of the total number of consumers does that represent?
If 1 of every 10 pot consumers is arrested, then there are 8 million american consumers yearly.
If 1 of every 100 pot consumers is arrested, then there are 80 million american pot consumers per year, fully 1/4 of the population of the country.
I think the latter number is more accurate; most pot-smokers I know have smoked for more than two decades and have never encountered the law.
But if 80 million people are marijuana consumers, does this not rise to the level of a civil rights issue? If 10 percent of the population is gay, then approximately 35 million americans are affected by marriage equality concerns, and we consider that an issue of civil rights. Does not an issue that affects more than twice that number also demand civil rights consideration?
|
no_hypocrisy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:31 AM
Response to Original message |
mike_c
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:34 AM
Response to Original message |
2. rec'd-- this is a fascinating question.... |
|
I think it does rise to the level of a civil rights matter.
|
notesdev
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:34 AM
Response to Original message |
3. It's beyond civil rights |
|
it's human rights. Do you own your own body or does your government own it?
|
Mayflower1
(43 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
just as cigarettes do? Always wondered if it was a carcinogen.
|
the other one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. How does that relate to my question? |
notesdev
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
12. Apparently just the opposite |
|
Not only does it not cause cancer but it is in fact the most broadly useful medicine known to man.
|
uncommon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. Sucking smoke into your lungs doesn't cause cancer? |
|
I'm sure it causes any number of health concerns related to smoke inhalation.
That said, I am 100% pro-legalization and an occasional user myself.
|
notesdev
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. It depends what's in the smoke and how it is used |
|
You have to realize that pot smoking isn't like cigarette smoking... in general people don't smoke pot 20+ times a day as is common with cigarettes. Pot smoke is an extremely complex combination of compounds, the overall effects of which on the human body we don't fully understand. Just as there are some substances which will cause cancer in a very very short period of time, there are others that may technically contain trace carcinogens but the exposure period necessary to trigger cancer is longer than the human lifespan.
|
the redcoat
(510 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:45 AM
Response to Original message |
4. That's not the underlying issue |
|
It's been an argument for decades that the sheer numbers of users prove how ineffective and pointless these laws are.
But that hasn't changed things much because that's not the issue. The issue is the billions Big Pharma stands to lose if pot were made legal. OTC medication is bullshit. Most people think it cures common ailments, but all it does is make you feel better until your body cures itself naturally. But give people that knowledge, and make pot legal, and suddenly Tylenol and Advil aren't household names anymore.
|
the other one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. I would answer you by saying |
|
that the issue isn't about ineffectiveness or about the profits that the prohibitionists make.
The issue is that marijuana consumers are seen as apart from society, but are actually a large junk of society who are having their civil rights and maybe their human rights violated.
This is more than just a matter of economics.
|
the redcoat
(510 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. I respectfully disagree |
|
I don't think it's the case anymore that marijuana smokers are seen as outsiders of society. There's a growing awareness in this country that tens of millions of people use (and many more have tried) marijuana, and a growing awareness that other nations are utilizing the drug to their benefit.
I didn't mean to make the focus economical, what I meant (and I understand how this wasn't immediately clear) is that the focus is political.
|
AngryAmish
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:55 AM
Response to Original message |
8. The scientific answer is...many. |
Scuba
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 11:56 AM
Response to Original message |
9. Too many, resulting in ... |
exboyfil
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:02 PM
Response to Original message |
10. I think 80 million out of 300 million is much too large |
|
Not much of it going on around my neck of the woods. With addicts Meth is the drug of choice. Of course I would much prefer them smoking weed than meth.
Maybe I live in a cocoon, but I have only had one exposure to pot smoking since I was a kid 30 years ago. Last week in Honolulu while on vacation, two hippies (yes really hippies) asked if they could light up. I said that it was fine, and that I would just ignore them. Nice kids - very friendly. Sounds like the life smoking weed in paradise. I was never interested in drugs though.
I agree that it should be legalized to the same level as tobacco or alchohol. Just because large numbers of individuals engage in an action does not make it a civil rights issue. I personally think that an individual should do with their body whatever they chose so long as it is an informed choice. Individuals should also be prepared to live with the consequences of their actions. For the above mentioned hippies, I do not think that I should work to maintain their lifestyle of toking up on the beach.
Legalizing pot would free up dollars and resources, generate more revenue, and stop criminalizing something no worse than drinking beer in my opinion. It is the smart choice, and I surprised more politicians are not on board.
Of course if someone tries to sell it to my girls, then we are going to have problems.
|
uncommon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. Maybe it's because I live in MA, but most people I know here smoke at least |
mike_c
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
16. in my personal circle of friends, aquaintances, and colleagues... |
|
...I would estimate that 70 percent or more are semi-regular or regular pot smokers. Of course, I live in Northern California where pot is the undisputed backbone of the local economy.
|
reggie the dog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 03:23 PM
Response to Original message |
17. lots of us smoke cannabis |
|
i personally think that as an adult i have a moral right to put anything i want into my body
|
HopeHoops
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 03:53 PM
Response to Original message |
18. No clue, but I figure I covered for about 250 people when I smoked it. |
|
And I gave it up over 20 years ago!
|
gatorboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 04:00 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Now I know why so many are out of work. |
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-10 04:12 PM
Response to Original message |
20. it's overt civil disobedience...that's when it should be decriminalized |
|
the people have decided they want this.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 01:41 AM
Response to Original message |