To everybody, this topic evolved from 'General Homophobic interest' but was too big and important not to have it's own title.


Tiassa, Boris,
do we decriminalise or legalise?
Do we only do this for marijuana, or do we include other currently illegal drugs? if so, which ones do we keep banned?
How desirable would it be to give everyone legal access to marijuana, let's say.
How might it affect a society's productivity,
or propensity for accidents?
This is actually a huge subject, I'm wondering whether we should start a new thread for it!
...

... http://users.esc.net.au/~nitro/chef_tab.gif


------------------
"The crows are already stoned", he said.
With a look of dispassion on his sad face.

IP


[This message has been edited by tablariddim (edited February 12, 2000).]

Tab,

Actually, I'm not sure this topic should properly belong in the Religious Debate forum. Maybe it's better off in the World Affairs. Though perhaps there is something "religious" to it after all -- at least as far as trust, freedom and choice go.

Anyway, I am definitely for legalization of marijuana. That is not to say that I believe in legalization of all drugs; however marijuana is a clear exception. But let me elaborate.

I know of at least one thing as addictive and detrimental to health and safety as marijuana -- but currently legal. That thing is alcohol. Now, United States had tried to outlaw alcohol early last century -- and ended up reaping more harm than benefit. Clearly, by a very simple analogy, all the current crime concentrated around marijuana will become nonexistent if marijuana is legalized.

Marijuana is not physiologically addictive for the vast majority of us. I have heard of physiological addiction to pot in a few cases -- but this is not any different than the relatively rare incidence of alcoholism (which is merely a tendency to become physiologically addicted to alcohol.) As for psychological addiction -- this would not be a marijuana-specific issue. The same people who tend to become psychologically addicted to alcohol, will be the ones getting addicted to marijuana. So, I expect that the overall addiction toll country-wide from legalization of marijuana will be very minor if at all significant.

As for physiological harm, I would agree that <u>smoking</u> ANYTHING is bad for your health. Human lungs did not evolve to handle concentrated products of carbohydrate combustion on a daily basis. So, if those who crave a little THC had access to smokeless inhalers (akin to asthma devices) that spray solutions containing extracted and purified THC -- then I would actually expect the overall pulmonary health of the nation to improve! As for tobacco (which is actually proven to be physiologically addictive) -- that should be the drug banned instead of marijuana.

But legalization of marijuana will not only have repercussions on health and crime. THC is a potent (and non-addictive!) pain killer, and as such would be immensely valuable for medicine. Industrial hemp, which is currently outlawed because it looks too much like marijuana, would be an immensely valuable crop. Hemp can be easily made into paper, fabrics, ropes and other fibers, and construction materials. It could save enormous quantities of forests from getting cut, especially if it is re-adopted world-wide. It is an ecologically and industially wonderful substitute for cotton (there are no cotton worms to spray for when it comes to hemp! It is a weed, and as such it is extremely resilient and doesn't need herbicides or insecticides to be productive! It also does not require exhorbitant amounts of fertilizer, and does not need a lot of labor to be cultivated!)

Legalization of marijuana might result in slight increases of accidents due to intoxication. Then again, who would start using marijuana were it to become legal, who is not using it already right now? But in any case, the benefits here by far outweigh the costs. And, there is no reason why marijuana cannot be placed under the same restrictions as alcohol. For example, we could pass laws prohibiting child use of marijuana until a certain age. We could pass laws prohibiting being under influence of marijuana while driving or doing other hazardous things. There is always a need for a health-oriented campaign to stop people from inhaling anything that is harmful (including smoke of any kind) -- so marijuana is nothing special in that case. In fact, if people have access to cheap legal inhalers (akin to wine bottles currently in stores) with all the "benefits" and none of the costs of smoking marijuana (like all the benefits and none of the costs of drinking illegal toxic booze), then overall public health will actually be improved!

On the other hand, consider all the money, people and resources currently wasted on a "War" against something as relatively harmless as marijuana! This is money, people and resources that might better be put to use in a war against the really dangerous drugs like opium, hashish, cockaine, or meth. These are the drugs that result in fast and strong physical addiction. They are the real killers, they are the real danger to public health and the society as a whole. You can't even start trying to put marijuana into the same category as these other, "hard" drugs. The primary reason to wage a war on hard drugs is because they actually ensnare and kill people. For many addicts, there is no way out once they get trapped by a drug. And it is the physiological addiction that drives people to spend all of their resources on their habit -- and then resort to desperate crimes trying to finance the drug. None of this is true for marijuana.

So as I see it, there is practically no incremental price to pay for legalization of marijuana; yet, there are immense benefits to reap. In my view, it's a no-brainer.

<hr>

And, as an altogether different kind of argument -- from an integrity viewpoint, marijuana must be legalized purely because otherwise its opponents would be hypocrites. Namely, I would observe that most opponents to legalization of marijuana in United States tend to be Republican (Conservative). Yet, these same people are advocating for transferrence of responsibilities and programs from the government "back to the people". But, if you are really going to advocate for the capacity of Americans to make their own decisions and manage their own lives -- how can you justify at the same time pampering them like children when it comes to marijuana? If you are going to treat Americans as rational adults, why don't you go all the way?

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited February 12, 2000).]

A few random thoughts on this, to be getting on with..

Decriminalise or legalise?
If you decriminalise possession of marijuana for personal use, then subject to the quantity one's allowed to keep, the user avoids a criminal record for that partircular crime. This is the only benefit of such a scheme.
It does not however take the big time importer or dealer out of the picture, neither would it improve the quality or the price of the available drug.

Another option would be to allow the cultivation of the herb for personal use, again subject to quantity allowed, based on size of plot or number of plants.
This would effectively take the importer and dealer a fair way out of the picture.
So the government saves a fortune on anti cannabis related resources, because the crime element is eliminated. Both for the user/cultivator and the importer/dealer.Or so it would seem.

But then, other problems will manifest. Firstly, is the fact that marijuana now is in effect legal! I mean they could have laws banning the buying/selling and even the giving away of it, with strict penalties for supplying minors with it. But honestly, once personal use cultivation becomes legal, the product will become as ubiquitous as the eggs in peoples fridges and laws won't mean fuck. ( ;) Lori I cussed!)

If the stuff becomes as easy to obtain as basil, you can be sure that a lot more people will get into it than presently exist. I don't think that this won't have a detrimental affect on productivity, services and education.
Why? well, because the strains that will be imported, developed and widely available are bound to get more and more potent , as presumably more and more people succumb to its seducing pleasures over time.

Marijuana, at its most potent is a subtle but very powerful hallucinogen and I don't really think is ideal or beneficial for most of working society.But this is where I see the danger, if the drug is freely available (that is, without penalty) and cheap, by any means, then I can imagine a great chunk of the working population getting hooked and abusing it, (that is, by being high, while working, driving, drinking, looking after children or making very important decisions).

So I think that this is one problem that we would probably encounter. But there's another.
The importer/dealer now moves out of cannabis stock and into the more lucrative and still illegal hard drugs futures market!
The price of crack, coke and smack plummetts as the market is inundated with cheap, imported, competition for the almost free weed now growing in almost every household in the country!

Dillema...

I'll continue this later, I'm very trdi.,..



------------------
"The crows are already stoned", he said.
With a look of dispassion on his sad face.

Tab,



If the stuff becomes as easy to obtain as basil, you can be sure that a lot more people will get into it than presently exist. ...because the strains that will be imported, developed and widely available are bound to get more and more potent , as presumably more and more people succumb to its seducing pleasures over time.


Were marijuana to be legalized, would <u>you personally</u>, Tab, start stoning yourself, losing your job, destroying your family, etc.? You mean to tell me that the only thing keeping you from unraveling your life with drugs is their illegality? I doubt it! And I doubt that the vast majority of Americans are that irresponsible. Remember, there was a time when there was NO war on drugs at all. People were free to consume whatever their heart desired. So, did everyone end up stoning themselves 24/7? Why should it be any different now?



Marijuana, at its most potent is a subtle but very powerful hallucinogen and I don't really think is ideal or beneficial for most of working society.But this is where I see the danger, if the drug is freely available (that is, without penalty) and cheap, by any means, then I can imagine a great chunk of the working population getting hooked and abusing it, (that is, by being high, while working, driving, drinking, looking after children or making very important decisions).


Why is the "working society" unable to see that for themselves, Tab? Why do they need you to tell them? Are you somehow superior, to be making their decisions for them? Don't they have as much common sense as you, Tab?

Besides, what's all this talk of people growing stuff? Were marijuana to become legal, you wouldn't need to grow it! You could buy it at your corner drug store. Unless you really enjoy growing things -- but most people wouldn't bother. I mean, now that alcohol is legal, do you see many people trying to make their own moonshine?

And why would people drive, work or look after children while intoxicated, if we pass laws making such activities as illegal as they are now with respect to alcohol? If you faced losing your driver's licence, your car, being fined, and encarcerated for a very long time (just like you do now if you drive while intoxicated) -- would you still smoke pot and drive? It would be incredibly stupid of you to do that, wouldn't it?



So I think that this is one problem that we would probably encounter. But there's another. The importer/dealer now moves out of cannabis stock and into the more lucrative and still illegal hard drugs futures market! The price of crack, coke and smack plummetts as the market is inundated with cheap, imported, competition for the almost free weed now growing in almost every household in the country!


Why would that happen?? First of all, we would still retain all the laws and enforcement against the hard drugs. Furthermore, the resources currently wasted on battling marijuana would be also diverted against hard drugs. So in fact, we'll be able to wage an even more effective "war"!

<hr>

Tab, you are not making much sense in your case against marijuana. May I suggest that you haven't thought it through very carefully and <u>independently</u>? I think it's the timber, tobacco, aspirin, and cotton industries talking. A long time ago, hemp used to be legal and widely used. And the end of the world didn't arrive; instead, the United States of America got created. There were never any good reasons to ban marijuana (other than public hysteria, similar to what led to the alcohol prohibition.) And there still aren't any good reasons. Even if you try to look for them reeeal hard.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited February 12, 2000).]

Topic moved to World Affairs...