I have no desire to debate this issue but, IMO, the contention that there is no difference between the effect of smoking a few tokes and smoking a whole joint or more is bizarre.
Just my personal experience, any time I smoked, whether it was 2-3 hits or we finished the whole thing. I couldn’t tell the difference. It all seamed the same to me.
Never touched it and never will. Personally, I'm against the use of all drugs, be it alcohol, mar1juana, tobacco, cocaine, heroin, etc... That being said, I don't think any of them should be illegal. If a person wants to do something to their own body, the government or anyone else shouldn't be able to stop them. However, when the abuse harms someone else (drunk/stoned driving, public high-ness), that's where the book should be thrown.
One of the best books I ever read on Public Policy was The Politics of Sin by Kenneth J. Meier. Here is a synopsis of the book: In the book, The Politics of Sin, Kenneth J. Meier looks at United States national and state-level policy in the area of drug prohibition. He looked at policies concerning illegal drugs - mar1juana, cocaine and heroin - and a legal drug, alcohol. He began with a premise that public policies that deal with issues of morality, while they may be extremely popular, they are rarely effective. Meier looked at the problem in relationship to a number of variables. One group of variables were called "citizen forces" and they included demand for drugs, attitudes toward drugs, race, salience of the drug issue and the existence of self-help groups that address drug-related issues. Second, he looked at industry-related forces, based on the industries, legal and illegal, that produce drugs. Next are political forces, which include political institutions, politician values and party competition. Another group of variables stem from the bureaucracy - bureaucratic capacity, bureaucratic leadership, federalism and bureaucratic competition. He also looks at individual policies, enforcement and policy outcomes. Meier found that drug prohibition policy typically failed to achieve the goals it is created to achieve. The costs associated with the policies are generally higher than the benefits such policies produce. When he looked at alcohol prohibition, he found that, while the prohibition of alcoholic beverages reduced their consumption, it failed to eliminate the consumption and lead to an increase in illegal activity. Furthermore, the policies relating to the other drugs he looked at - mar1juana, cocaine and heroin - were even less successful. The difference, Meier points out, is that the prohibition of alcohol, when found to be ineffective, was repealed. The same cannot be said for the other drugs prohibitions. Drug prohibitions, Meier says, lead to three general costs. These costs arise in the areas of civil liberties, corruption and violence. As far as the violation of civil liberties is concerned, he points out court cases related to the drug war that have concerned the kidnapping of foreign citizens, automobile searches without warrants, profiling, and the granting of search warrants based on anonymous tips. He also discusses the disproportionate arrest and prosecution of minorities for drug offenses (considering their drug use levels were approximately the same as whites). In addition to civil liberty violations, Meier points out that corruption of drug policy enforcement agents has existed as long as the drug policies have existed. Additionally, he brings up evidence that the level of violence associated with drug prohibition is quite high. He also finds that political actors tend to have a large amount of autonomy when it comes to the implementation of policy. Actors use their own preferences when they are making decisions that affect policy implementation, particularly in the area of morality issues such as drug prohibition. This autonomy is important because Meier argues that "policy implementation is the real policy" (247). This is particularly true, he says, in morality policy. Meier finds that citizens are able to have some influence in the area of drug policy. Morality issues, like drug policy, tend to be more salient and easier to understand, and are, therefore, easier for citizens to participate in. On the other hand, Meier finds that industries have very little influence on drug policy. Most drugs are illegal and therefore the "industries" that create them are outside the law and unable to influence the process of policy making or policy implementation. Even in industries that are legal, such as alcohol, Meier finds little influence on policy. Policies that are concerned with morality, Meier argues, are often subject to failure. This chance of failure comes from the inherent nature of many types of morality-based policies. Policies based on morality often are unopposed, at least in theory. Everyone is opposed to things such as drug abuse or drunk driving and this leads to an absence of discussion of the issue and policies that arise concerning the issue. Meier argues that without debate and discussion on the issue and the policy, policies will become ineffective and will fail to achieve the goals they are designed to achieve. According to Meier, most morality policies tend to be symbolic, having no direct impact on most individuals. Drug policies, on the other hand, are redistributive. They provide benefits to some individuals and impose costs on others. Unlike other redistributive policies, however, not much controversy is caused by drug policies because of the opposition by most people toward the abuse and misuse of drugs.
Are there alot of you having trouble getting pot or spending months on end in jail when you get caught w/ a spliff?
Won't do it, even if it legalized, but I feel if Tobacco is illegal, the pot should be too, but, since tobacco isn't, I don't believe pot should be.
Yes it should be legalized. If i want to go home, burn a spliff, and chill. That's my business, not the governments. It's hypocritical to ban pot all the while alcohol and cigarettes remain legal. Oh, and mar1juana IS NOT gateway drug.
I've touched, smoked and even eaten the stuff. As long as it is regulated like alcohol, I don't have a problem with legalizing it.
I voted yes just b/c I personally do not see it as a big deal. I know and have known many many folks who use it almost daily, and just do not see it affecting them as people nor has their use affected me or anyone else. But this is just a curiosity question: How could you regulate it like alcohol? If some one can buy seeds off the internet, and plant them or build an elaborate hydroponics system and grow it their self, how can that be regulated? You can regulate cigarettes & alcohol b/c they are too difficult for the average person to make themselves. The FDA is able to regulate some things, but the food that I grow on my farm for my personal use is coming from a bag of seeds and there isn't a damn thing the gov't does to regulate it. What will they do to regulate pot? I really think that is one of the reasons the gov't does not or has not legalized it b/c there really is no way for them to profit from or regulate it.
Just reading this thread makes me want to puke. I mean I, for one, have never smoked weed (out of a unicorn's horn), but I just find it highly hypocritical for alcohol consumers to even argue against this proposal. I agree with the point that legalizing another "sin" tax-able item might not be the best idea morally, but if that's the case, I'm gonna start a Prohibition II campaign for the sole reason of putting an end to all this hypocrisy. PS, I posted almost the same poll a few months ago and found that over 3/4 of people here were for straight-up legalization of mar1juana.
What are you talking about? I think I saw maybe five people who were against it, none of whom admitted to drinking alcohol. Do you just assume they all did? I'm all for alcohol being illegal, but the chances of that happening are nil, so there's no point to even put up an argument.
I agree, anyone who consumes alcohol really can’t argue with this proposal, But why should we stop with weed ? Why not heroin, coke, x, acid , etc. ?????
That's my fault, I combined two separate thoughts into one sentence that made no sense because of it. I meant to just say "This thread makes me want to puke." and then go on to say "I find it highly hypocritical for alcohol consumers to even argue against this proposal." with a whole different thought. I agree with you on the alcohol illegalization issue though, but the part I meant to emphasize was that the topic makes me actually angry by teeming with such hypocrisy all around in the way that drugs with corporations backing them remain legal for that sole reason and then amoral values are placed on another because free trade is being denied to potential pot corporations because of these moral values that money created in the first place. Whew! Talk about run-on sentences...
Drugs are very bad and can alter brain chemistry. Many people say that mar1juana should be legalized, but what it does to the body hurts more than it helps.
For all of you who are for mar1juana become legal give me at least four reasons why the drug should be legalized. I want to see proof, a credible website or a doctor, because some people say whatever they want that aren't always true. I think cigarrettes, alcohol, and mar1juana should all be illegal. Most cigarrette smokers start smoking when they were teens. Smoking works in a terrible cycle. A teen may see adults, such as their parents or any other family member or friend, smoking then they'll decide to try it. That teen would grow up and become a smoker and regrettably so. That person who started smoking as a teen may have a child and that child, who admires that parent, may want to emulate their role model by doing things that they do, such as picking up that horrible habit. It would be easy for that kid to pick it up because 1. they feel that their parent(s) are Mr. or Mrs. Right and try everything they do and 2. it would be easy to obtain the stinkarrettes as they can steak it from parents.
Cigarettes maybe, but definitely not alchahol. Have you ever heard of moonshine. I knew a kid in high school that brewed his own beer in those 5 gallon water jugs. Anyone can make alchohol, especially if they look up directions on the internet.
