Fight Crime - Legalize Marijuana

I completely agree with you. A big step would be the decriminalizationn of Marijuana -- which would also take pressure off of overflowing prison systems and put more (fine) money into better regulation. And as you hinted at, it would take power away from drug traffickers who cause a high percent of the violent crime near our borders. Medical Marijuana users would also benefit from regulated growth and straightforward, unbiased studies to isolate the specific benefits and hazards of use.

But I don't see it ever happening.

I agree as well, but it won't happen. Too much money flows to police forces for the War on Drugs, and if you eliminate the criminality, they won't get all that nice money. Ergo, the drug laws stay as they are. It gives the police things to do, and it gives them new toys to do them with, and it plays well to the public when you want votes. Sad, but that's reality.

I strongly agree. The War on Drugs, which treats substance possession as a criminal offense (rather than decriminalising mere possession and treating addiction as a medical problem, as we should), does nothing but waste government money, prison space, police time and resources, and harmless people's lives. Given that marijuana is no more mind-altering than, say, alcohol, and that its smoke has actually been found less harmful than tobacco smoke, not to mention the medical benefits, it is absurd and absolutely unjustifiable to keep it illegal.

Marijuana became illegal in the US after intense lobbying by newspaper magnate William Randolf Hearst. Hemp-based paper was a threat to his vested interest in the timber industry, and so, after collaboration with Harry J. Anslinger, of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, public sentiment turned against cannabis. It was actually they who popularised the term "marijuana"; they did this to associate it in people's minds with Mexicans. Indeed, playing on racism was a large part of their strategy. Anslinger said, "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others." (Yeah, watch out for those "entertainers"!) He also informed people that "Marijuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing." Meanwhile, articles published in Hearst's newspapers spread disinformation to the public, such as: "Was it marijuana, the new Mexican drug, that nerved the murderous arm of Clara Phillips when she hammered out her victim's life in Los Angeles? [...] Three-fourths of the crimes of violence in this country today are committed by dope slaves — that is a matter of cold record." (A fabrication, of course.) Within a few years, marijuana possession was criminalised.

Clearly, the criminalisation of marijuana was motivated by nothing more than profit, political gain, and racism. It had nothing to do with scientific study of the properties of marijuana. This fact should be enough to get most individuals to reconsider any beliefs against marijuana, but to get the government to reconsider something, reason is not enough (*sigh*). To get the government to change this will require an influential pro-marijuana lobby, with a lot of money behind it. That's the only way to get things done. Of course, politicians should take note that legalizing it would allow production and distribution of it to operate as a legitimate industry — i.e. an industry that can be taxed. If nothing else, that should provide a little incentive for them.

I'm all for it if:

a) I, nor anyone but yourself has to pay for your medical bills 40 years from now.
b) People caught driving under the influence of marijuana are severely punished.
c) It is taxed heavily like cigarettes, since more than likely somebody else will be paying your medical bills when you end up getting cancer...
d) It's illegal to smoke anywhere but inside your own home. I don't want to get high off your crap ever.

I wouldn't go the route of trying to justify its use by saying it's an effective appetite booster or pain killer though. That's not why most of the people who want it legalized do it.

@Pope Pol: you tell a fascinating history of which I wasn't aware. Can you point me to some good sources where I can learn more about these bits of the cannabis prohibition story?

I don't have a problem with b), c), or d), but a) would be an issue. If you say that, you have to include cigarettes too, and alcohol abuse, and overeating, and lack of exercise, and everything else that can lead to medical problems 40 years down the road.

I am for it too.

Do what they do here in Portland when they want to legalize something or impose a new tax...

Tell us that it will be for education. If you don't do this then your kids will be stupid because we are going to layoff all the teachers, and we cannot buy books.

Tell us that it will be for the criminal justice system. If you don't let us sell and tax this then we will be forced to let all the burglars, rapists and pedophiles out.

It's totally up to you!

I think it would be a good thing to legalize it. I agree with the poster above that it shouldn't be on the street. Should be taxed fairly heavy. They should use it to offset some of the other more critical items that we face.

Well, it seems that internet users support pot legalization. I wonder what the monster truck crowd thinks about the topic.

The problem with your reasoning is that, simply, Marijuana is illegal; alcohol, tobacco and caffeine are not. It is true that there probably is a conspiracy with these industries to quash the legalization of marijuana due to losing profit on its use, but the fact remains that it is still illegal at this moment.

And to compare sexual assault and burglary to some stoned idiot using pot for fun is asinine.

I wonder what the monster truck crowd thinks about the topic.

Whatever they're told to think about the topic.

Seriously, I'm not picking on the monster truck crowd for what I said above is true of most groups of people. Most people don't really think about an issue on the merits of the issue. Most people get their opinions formed by professional propagandists (aka the media and advertisers) who have an agenda to push. They get influenced by simple slogans (D.A.R.E.), not detailed discussions. And if religion gets into the picture ("drugs are evil!"), then forget it. Mind closed.

But I am fairly confident that if every American (yeah, all 300 million of 'em) could be set down and forced to think through this issue in great detail, and with all sides presented fairly, most of them would decide to legalize pot if there were some basic controls in place.

@Grey: Here is a detailed history of how marijuana became illegal in the US.

mabye i'm a square but i don't see the big deal. just don't toke up. how hard is that. you can enjoy your cheetos and pringles without pot people.

One thing no one realizes about the possible legalization of marijuana is that the government cannot make a material amount of tax revenue from it. Sounds great in theory to legalize it and tax it, but if they can't control it's use and distribution as a illegal substance now, how the hell are they going to when it's legal?

When it's legal, the Philip Morris types will move in and market it. They will sell it at drugstores, and people will flock to that instead of from some shady dealer on the street (which will still be illegal). So with an easy, cheap (market forces), safe alternative, the Philip Morris pot will become the pot of choice for 99% of the market. That's easy to tax.

Those who want to buy illegally on the street instead of the cheaper drugstore version, well criminals avoid taxes all the time.

Brenn:
Maybe this isn't a perfect analogy, but think back to the Prohibition. Alcohol was made legal and it seems the government had no trouble establishing control with time. Also, legal means cheaper, generally speaking, even with the heavy taxes.

Basically, assuming marijuana was made legal: would you buy from a drug dealer or your local drug store, given a choice and, on top of that, knowing the drug store had cheaper prices? There's how you establish control.

mabye i'm a square but i don't see the big deal. just don't toke up. how hard is that. you can enjoy your cheetos and pringles without pot people.

Yeah, ya know, that's a great point. And come to think of it, there's a big deal that I don't see. Just don't drink. You can enjoy making an ass out of yourself, vomiting on your shoes, and having no memory of it tomorrow without beer, people.

Wait, didn't I read somewhere that we already tried outlawing alcohol at some point?

(And I say that having never smoked pot a single time. Seriously.)

I'll never be sold on any "health benefits" of marijuana. I'm all for legalization though. People will always find a mind altering substance of some sort or another. So may as well legalize, tax, make a profit, and reduce crime.

Since I don't use the stuff I don't have any personal reason to push for legalization. Is there some reason that you "enthusiasts" can give me that I should care about this on your behalf? If so, I will at least consider it. That "history of marijuana illegality" claims that racism is to blame -- I hope you guys can come up with something better than that... even in your current "state". You have to remember, those of us on the listening end are not stoned like you are, and we may be "hindered" by that stupid brain of ours imposing reason and/or logic ;)

On the other hand, I have seen pot have very negative effects on some personal friends. Some will openly state that they can't even get to sleep without using it -- and it is a serious source of anxiety and monetary expense for them. I believe that is a sign of a problem. As you know, drugs that are far less psychoactive are required to be regulated by prescription simply because they carry a similar risk of mild dependency. Neither Marijuana nor Cocaine are addictive (in the medical sense) -- but clearly both run a strong risk of dependence -- and do influence peoples behavior. Some friends exhibit symptoms similar to depression -- this is a known potential side effect. As a friend, I find it troubling when I see these detrimental effects. This is a separate matter from the legalities, but one which I feel personally obligated to mention. This is not propaganda, I don't have some slogan, I am a person that thinks for myself -- and yet these have been my personal observations.

As far as the legalities go. I really think Matt Kennedy hit the nail on the head and raises the larger issue that is at play here. A libertarian approach would be awesome. However, every day we lose liberties due to expanding Socialism. Self-reliance and responsibility, once American traits, are hardly even in our political vocabularies. Though not the most important, the clearest example I can give is the helmet law in CA. Because peoples medical bills are very often covered by the state or absorbed by the medical facility, they become an interested party in most every risky behavior. Once someone else is covering your ars for you, they have a say in what you do because it affects them (and rightly so). If you invite society at large to cover all your medical needs, you invite them to regulate virtually all your actions. The only way to preserve your liberty is to take responsibility for yourself (and behave responsibly most of the time), apply personal charity in a wise fashion for those truly in need, and not buy the free-lunch, class-warfare and "you'll never make it on your own" attitudes that Socialists will coax you with.

In fact, if you look into it, you will find that almost all drug laws are under the "health code". This is revealing.

I do have to say that it's easier to chase down a criminal that is stoned than one that is on crack! Maybe this would help with crime ;)

Since I don't use the stuff I don't have any personal reason to push for legalization. Is there some reason that you "enthusiasts" can give me that I should care about this on your behalf? If so, I will at least consider it. That "history of marijuana illegality" claims that racism is to blame -- I hope you guys can come up with something better than that... even in your current "state". You have to remember, those of us on the listening end are not stoned like you are, and we may be "hindered" by that stupid brain of ours imposing reason and/or logic ;)

On the other hand, I have seen pot have very negative effects on some personal friends. Some will openly state that they can't even get to sleep without using it -- and it is a serious source of anxiety and monetary expense for them. I believe that is a sign of a problem. As you know, drugs that are far less psychoactive are required to be regulated by prescription simply because they carry a similar risk of mild dependency. Neither Marijuana nor Cocaine are addictive (in the medical sense) -- but clearly both run a strong risk of dependence -- and do influence peoples behavior. Some friends exhibit symptoms similar to depression -- this is a known potential side effect. As a friend, I find it troubling when I see these detrimental effects. This is a separate matter from the legalities, but one which I feel personally obligated to mention. This is not propaganda, I don't have some slogan, I am a person that thinks for myself -- and yet these have been my personal observations.

Okay, like I said, I've never smoked pot. Not once. So that's my answer to the first paragraph there.

As far as the second one goes, umm, do you know any people who smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol? Aren't the effects of those two vices just as detrimental just as often (if not far, far more detrimental far, far more often)? And if it's dependency we're worried about, couldn't we add coffee, Coke, and just about anything else with significant amounts of caffeine in it to that list?

The argument has to be either that those things should be just as illegal as marijuana, or marijuana should be just as legal as they are. Otherwise you're legislating taste (which we do a lot of in this country, but never mind about that).

I see the debate for legalizing marijuana on blogs far more often than I see it on the political agenda (then again, I never read any of these agendas, and I read only slightly more blogs). If you choose to be passionate about something, why marijuana!?

I mean, didn't all the hippies used to smoke pot and argue for world peace? Now they just smoke pot and argue for the legalization of pot. What happened to world peace?

I'd agree to a non-executive privilege to smoke pot during wartime, but there has to be some checks-and-balance. And no, telling eight of your best friends doesn't count.

I'm only implying "those in favor must be stoned themselves" as a joke. Just a way to have fun with the issue ;) Though I do think one's judgement IS affected by this drug, I'm really just joking on this particular point.

Absolutely, "grey" is right to bring up both cigarettes (or chew/snuff) as well as alcohol. Your point is well taken -- I don't have statistics to site about the overall population -- but in line with my earlier anecdotal evince, I can say that more of my personal friends (myself included) use alcohol on a regular basis, and many use tobacco. Though there may be, I don't know any redeeming medical uses of either. I have read from an "authoritative medical source" that alcohol can be physically/medically addictive in extreme cases but typically it doesn't reach that point. I don't remember the details about tobacco other than the physical "withdrawl" lasts just a couple days. The rest of the risk is a mental dependency like most other common pleasure-seeking drugs induce.

To my knowledge, caffeine isn't much of a threat, health wise. You might have a headache for a day or two if you're dependent on it, but not much beyond that. Tobacco is similar in the short term affects, but rather insidious in cancer and stroke effects later (statistically) -- IMHO this makes it one of the worst since those who smoke it, usually do so very frequently. Then would be alcohol, which enjoys social acceptance, and also plays the middle ground very well by being reasonably effective yet easy to manage (1-2 beers is highly predictable in effect, onset and duration). You have to admit that "being legal" is a big part of the reason tobacco and alcohol are so prevalent, and thereby so detrimental to the public at large.

Sighting problems with alcohol and tobacco do not favor the premise of this article. If you are implying that alcohol and tobacco cause great public expense, I have to agree with you. Keep in mind that my personal political position is that people need to take responsibility for themselves. Sadly, this "libertarian" point of view has virtually zero influence on actual modern political discussion now-a-days, though.

"grey" I'm not agreeing that each of these different drugs are totally "equivalent", but I do think we agree on the larger matter.

Miss Dev -- Many of the facts of the Mens' Health article the author sites are in line with what I have read in "official" medical sources. Certainly there is "no such thing" as observed clinical physical overdose -- same with psychedelics for that matter -- "he's already pulled over, he can't pull over any more" -- but I never read anything outside of this article about 18 joints a day ;) I'm not sure where that would come from. I'm also not so sure about the "sad lack of research" claim. I actually know someone that was offered a chance to participate in such an experiment (involving more than just pot), and there are many that do so outside of the "formal research" context, but may still be observed ;) (You should know that I attended UC Berkeley for a period of time and have actually witnessed some of the things of which I speak!)

Please keep in mind that when most of us are choosing what to do today, our decision making process will NOT be -- "hmm, will it cause brain damage? if not then I'll do it!" The question is not whether something as extreme as brain damage is involved, but weather or not it is a healthy decision to make -- particularly on a regular basis. That is, in fact, what a real health study should focus on -- not simply an extreme such as brain damage. The article conveniently glosses over many of the more subtle issues that are the meat of the issue. I'm talking about personal choices again here -- which need to be very informed on these issues in my opinion... especially given that I am generally in favor of a libertarian a.k.a. "responsible individual" approach on this, and several more important issues.

But back to the issue of legality, I personally don't see a huge reason that pharmaceutical uses must be outlawed 100%. I do understand the reasons for the Federal government position on this, but it is not something that I have a lot of passion about either way, and I personally wish for as few issues to be taken on at the Federal level as possible.

This article would benefit from greater fact-checking and less generalizations. I grew up in Vancouver B.C. where the "pot problem" is a fiercely debated issue.

"Also, if it is legalized, people will no longer turn to drug dealers to obtain it and those individuals will lose some of their power."

Really? Marijuana produced by Health Canada is much less potent than your average illegally-grown plant in BC.

"More and more students are turning to Cocaine because it can be done quietly in their rooms"

Somehow I don't think that's a logical conclusion. The recent cocaine explosion is a seperate phenomenon and I don't think it's in any way linked to marijuana use. Many people I know who smoke Marijuana regularly say they can't afford to do any other drug -- cigarettes included.

I agree that legalizing weed will take the power away from dealers and growers 100%. That's the main advantage to legalizing marijuana, as Vancouver police forces are swamped by grow houses and drug-related homocides.

If the government wants to address the issue of misuse of Marijuana, then they must also closely examine the misuse of such things as alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine. All of which are "mind altering drugs" and all of which are used by high school students in larger amounts than Marijuana.

I don't really think "caffeine" fits with misused products such as alcohol and tobacco. When is the last time somebody has been arrested for driving under the influence of caffeine?