This is quite an interesting subject. Well, here's my two cents in the matter: In my mind I don't see any more harm in mar1juana than in alcohol, the only difference between the two is that one is legal and one is not. In fact, my personal preference is that it become legal for people to partake in responsibly. Unfortunately the fact that it is already an illegal substance, in my mind, just makes it practically impossible for it to ever become a legal substance. I say this because of the organizations already in place that oppose alcohol consumption. I mean, I can already see M.A.D.D. becoming M.A.D.D.A.M.S. (Mothers Against Drunk Driving And mar1juana Smoking) I think that organizations like this will always hold clout over their public official - enough clout to dissuede them from ever voting for the legalization of weed. And no matter how many of us say how weed needs to be legalized and how cool it is to smoke, there will always be some dumbass who goes out and lights up then goes and drives around the city, which puts people in danger. And even though that is a small majority (I hope) of weed smokers - they are the ones who represent all mar1juana smokers and they represent a threat to society by smoking mar1juana. That is why I don't believe I will ever see legal mar1juana in America. -Turbo -------------------- Damn, that has to be more than just two cents.
Turbo: I think MADD is (like me) against drunk driving more than just drinking alcohol. If tobacco and alcohol are legal, than pot should be as well. A little bit of weed never hurt nobody. ------------------ I need a new signature. 302
mc mark, I definitely don't have the strongest will in the world. It just didn't interest me. It wasn't like I was having to actively fight a compulsion or was having it offered to me every single day. I probably turned it down... two? three? dozen times before deciding I wanted to try it. Long run for a short slide. Twenty years from now, we're going to think it's hilarious that some people were willing to disqualify a candidate from public office (say, the Presidency) because he or she had toked up once or twice in college. ------------------ You bring the bullets, I'll bring the wine.
Did anybody notice how strangely quiet the politicians were on the subject of drugs during both conventions? In conventions past, they used to go on and on about "the scourge of drugs", and vulnerable youth, etc., each party trying to outdo the other with their drug war rhetoric. But this year, the b*stards were quiet as mice on the subject, knowing the electorate is far less likely to swallow their b.s. I found that quite interesting. Anyone else? ------------------
