Are you for or against legalization of marijuana and why or why not?
I am torn on this issue. On the one hand I see marijuana advocates points about taxing it to create revenue, bringing prison/jail populations down, and helping those who are ill, and stopping criminal enterprises that exist because of it and etc. But on the other side I see the point of those who don’t want it legalized: it could get to kids easier, it may be a gate-way drug, etc. I lost a friend to a drunk driver and I am afraid that if it’s legalized there may now not only be drunk people on the road but also more high people driving creating a hazard. So as you can see I am torn. So why are you for or against legalization?
It would be interesting to know what parts of the medical claims are “frauds” like some people have mentioned. Anyone know?
I am for it. Because I like getting high. Hate going to jail though.
I am for it. As a conservative I believe in a small government that does the minimum that is allowed by the Constitution. Nowhere does the constitution address saving people from bad decisions. I say legalize marijuana and end the war on drugs! We lost!
and it won’t get to kids an easier than alcohol which really hurts them!
Drugs are bad, Mkay?
If you’re using then you’re a criminal.
If you’re using then you’re buying. If you’re buying your contributing to tax fraud and tax evasion. You’re a criminal.
If you’re using and buying then you’re ensuring that organized crime thrives. You’re an accessory to other crimes.
Kudos. I don’t align myself with criminals.
For legalization, because it creates peace. And because all the medical “facts” involving the dangers of prolonged use are not really facts…only a fraud for less intelligent people to get scared.
I’m against it…I’ve seen what it has done to people my age. Granted, it’s their fault and it is their choice…but even still making it easier to get it to people is just not right to me.
I am for the legalization of marijuana and equate the marijuana laws to the failed alcohol prohibition experiment between 1920 to 1933 in the United States. It cost billions to enforce the prohibition of marijuana and sends billions to criminals.
There is a great exodus of US capital ($) headed to drug lords. LOTS of dollars, and these dollars kill people, just look just south of the US boarder. There is also an exodus of US capital for legal items from overseas, but at least there is some accountability of taxation and legal operations to the imports of these China/others made goods/services.
There seems to be a strong logic for the legalization of pot from the import and taxation stand point. There is also a strong logic about the failure of prohibition of alcohol in the 1920-30’s. There is logic involved to support the legalization. Basic human nature is: If you want to do something, you are going to do it unless there is a strong deterrent that overcomes the desire.
I have a desire to go 55mph down a stretch of city thoroughfare that could easily and safely carry traffic at 45MPH. Sadly, it’s set at 35mph. No one is stopping me from going as fast as I want, however, the city police are known to set up shop on this stretch. If a person gets caught speeding too many times, then they lose the privilege of driving. Some will still drive, and in time they will be a guest of the county, looking out through the iron bars. So, there are consequences for breaking the law.
There are consequences from the effects of pot usage. I had an employee that had the oddest behavior, and It wa due to his pot usage. He was a very bad employee.
There is nothing wrong with the here and now, of living in reality. Pot and others allows people to chemically escape reality into a world other then the real one. That in itself should be a clue as to the problem of drug usage. A doped up society is a problem.
The way things are set up now, there is nothing else we can do on the war on drugs. What you see is what we got. Our prisons are full, and when 2 get caught, prosecuted and imprisoned… 5 more drug pushers are willing to take the chance of fast money and push the stuff. Just like taking the chance of going 55 mph down that 35 mph stretch of road.
I am in favor of caning. I feel this would have more of a deterrent then anything else. 3 strikes for the first joint, 5 for the second and so forth. Caning is much more cost effective then prison/county jail. It would not be long at all for the end users to decide that the consequences are not worth the risk. Once the end users won’t buy the stuff (demand), then the suppliers will be out of business.
.
I believe this is an example of people learning to mind their own business.
I could ask why do they make Oxycontin, Vicodin, etc., and there would be different oppinions on that as well depending on who was injured because of abuse.
Compared to other “drugs” marijuana is very tame and less addictive.
Cigarettes could be claimed as a gateway drug as well as coffee.
The question whether adults should be able to do something that another adult finds offensive is, in my own oppinion, offensive.
Like all things, one must take responsibility for their own actions.
If they violate anothers rights by standing on their own rights, there should be consequences.
Otherwise, mind your own business.
Tolerance breads peace.
If cannabis is a gateway drug (and there is certainly no good evidence for that) then the reason would probably be because it involves people in a culture of illicit drugs. Cannabis users have contact with drug dealers and they get used to habitually breaking the law. Those factors would be eliminated by legalisation.
And I don’t see why it would get to kids easier. It’s already extremely easy to get hold of cannabis. If anything prohibition probably makes it easier for kids, since drug dealers obviously don’t ask for ID. It’s a bit of a hassle for kids to get cigarettes or alcohol (although they regularly do, of course) but they can get cannabis in exactly the same way as if they were adults.
There already are people driving while high. There is no evidence to suggest that legalisation would result in more cannabis users, or more people driving while under the influence of cannabis. The evidence from the policy of cannabis tolerance in the Netherlands actually shows a slight reduction in the number of citizens using the drug (that’s not counting tourists, however).
There are obviously a lot of arguments in favour of legalisation, including the effect on tax revenue, prison populations, et cetera. But in my view it all comes down to this: In a free society nothing should be criminalised unless there are cogent reasons for doing so. No such reasons exist for criminalising cannabis. Therefore cannabis should not be criminalised.