Marijuana decriminalization bill gaining support in Congress

[BOBA-GA-NUSH]

Support Barney Frank's Personal Use Act!

Marijuana decriminalization bill gaining support in Congress..

July 30, 2008

Barney FrankMPP's Rob Kampia and Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) held a press conference to support H.R. 5843, the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008...

Click here to ask your member of Congress to support this legislation...

Congressman Frank's legislation would decriminalize the possession of up to 100 grams of marijuana and the not-for-profit transfer of one ounce of marijuana. It would not affect laws prohibiting drug sales or the cultivation of marijuana, and it would not affect state or local laws regulating marijuana possession...

"It's time for the politicians to catch up with the public on this [issue]," Congressman Frank said. "The notion that you lock people up for smoking marijuana is pretty silly."...

The bill incorporates the basic recommendation of the
National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse(also known as the Shafer Commission). The commission, which was administered by the White House and published its findings in 1972, recommended that then-president Richard Nixon decriminalize possession of marijuana in amounts that constituted "simple possession."..

Thirty-six years later, Rep. Frank will try to do just that...



Why support this legislation?

- Currently, 1 out of every 100 Americans is behind bars, and many of these prisoners are non-violent drug offenders...

- Arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating people simply for possessing marijuana for personal use is an illogical waste of our government's limited resources...

- Each year, more than 700,000 people are arrested for marijuana offenses, costing American taxpayers more than $7 billion annually. Despite this, marijuana is still easily available, both to adults and minors...

- The money saved from ending marijuana prohibition could provide health insurance each year to 4.5 million uninsured children in the U.S. This legislation would be an important first step towards that...


https://secure2. convio. net/mpp/site/Advocacy?page=SplashPage&pagename=homepage&id=177& JServSessionIdr010=ttbotsjp24. app5b

ASK CONGRESS TO VOTE. YOU HAVE A VOICE "USE IT"


http://www.mpp.org/victims/
CHECK OUT JUST SOME OF THE VICTIMS

[BanginJimmy]

- Currently, 1 out of every 100 Americans is behind bars, and many of these prisoners are non-violent drug offenders...

No such thing as a non-violent drug offender. Marijuana isnt enarly as bad as harder drugs, but it does lead to crimes.

- Arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating people simply for possessing marijuana for personal use is an illogical waste of our government's limited resources...

If you are possessing it in quantities that fall under personal use the govt doesnt spend much on your prosecution. Many times it is simply a fine and maybe a short probation.

- Each year, more than 700,000 people are arrested for marijuana offenses, costing American taxpayers more than $7 billion annually. Despite this, marijuana is still easily available, both to adults and minors...

Crack is readily available too. Should that be legal also?

- The money saved from ending marijuana prohibition could provide health insurance each year to 4.5 million uninsured children in the U.S. This legislation would be an important first step towards that...

Pointless arguement as the money would then be spent to crack down on smugglers and illegal dealers who would sell it tax free.

[The12lber]

No such thing as a non-violent drug offender. Marijuana isnt enarly as bad as harder drugs, but it does lead to crimes.

The reason illegal drugs lead to violence is because they necessarily have to be bought and sold on a black market - you know, because they're illegal. Remember prohibition much? It happened to coincide with the most visible growth in organized crime in U.S. history. All of those gangs were making money selling illegal booze. No parrallels there, right?

Make them legal and there's no problem.

as a side note. roflskateslolzers@ "No such thing as a non-violent drug offender". I don't know how much Rush Limbaugh you've been listening to, but everyime I've ever smoked pot we just sat in the basement and laughed our asses off. VERY VIOLENT INDEED.

[Total_Blender]

No such thing as a non-violent drug offender. Marijuana isnt enarly as bad as harder drugs, but it does lead to crimes.

- Most crimes related to marijuana are related to the sale and posession of marijuana. If its is brought into the open the relatively minor amount of criminal activity behind it will diminish.

If you are possessing it in quantities that fall under personal use the govt doesnt spend much on your prosecution. Many times it is simply a fine and maybe a short probation.

If every marijuana crime didn't have to be prosecuted it would be considerably less expense to the local authorities. Imagine how short court sessions would be in there weren't posession cases on the dockets.

Crack is readily available too. Should that be legal also?

Booze is legal and readily available, and so is tobacco, gambling and guns. All of which do equal or more damage to society than marijuana. People should be allowed to do what they want to an extent. Crack, meth, etc obviously cross that line.

Pointless arguement as the money would then be spent to crack down on smugglers and illegal dealers who would sell it tax free.

Isn't the government blowing tons of unnecessary money chasing smugglers and dealers already? Allowing the legal distribution of small ammounts of marijuana through licensed regulated and taxed providers would generate tax revenue, and isn't that a good thing?

[DieselNuts]

No such thing as a non-violent drug offender. Marijuana isnt enarly as bad as harder drugs, but it does lead to crimes.

wow...Are you serious? I know plenty of people that have been busted for pot when they werent doing a damn thing but minding their own business.

If you are possessing it in quantities that fall under personal use the govt doesnt spend much on your prosecution. Many times it is simply a fine and maybe a short probation.

you are partially right here, but you get a year probation + jail time. Someone needs to find the stats for the amount of people that are in for 100grams or less and then you tell me that the govt. isnt spending much money on them.

Crack is readily available too. Should that be legal also?

This is just ignorant. You can, in no way, compair crack to pot. If you do, then you need to do some more research on the matter.

Pointless arguement as the money would then be spent to crack down on smugglers and illegal dealers who would sell it tax free.

The point is, the money doesnt have to be spent the way you claim it would be.

[tony]

The reason illegal drugs lead to violence is because they necessarily have to be bought and sold on a black market - you know, because they're illegal. Remember prohibition much?

Make them legal and there's no problem.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to The12lber again.

Exactly what came to mind when I read the response.

If you are possessing it in quantities that fall under personal use the govt doesnt spend much on your prosecution. Many times it is simply a fine and maybe a short probation.

You really think the war on Drugs will be just as expensive with Marijuana possession excluded? Seriously, lets use common sense here. Locking up for possession is a waste of police power and resources.. how about pursuing maybe, sex offenders?

Lets just put it this way, I just spent two weeks in a state (yes a state) where marijuana possession is legal in less amounts than proposed here. Drug useage actually DROPS after a year or two of legalization and trust me there is no chaos on the streets.. it was pretty laid back actually

[jfman]

No such thing as a non-violent drug offender. Marijuana isnt enarly as bad as harder drugs, but it does lead to crimes.

.

Yeah crimes against a box of twinkies maybe.

[BanginJimmy]

I guess I found all of the pot heads.

All of those gangs were making money selling illegal booze. No parrallels there, right?

Make them legal and there's no problem.

You forget that people are still smuggling cigs into the US. People are still smuggling and producing illegal alcohol and the ATF spends ALOT of money chasing them down. Like I said, this will simply become another black market industry.

This is just ignorant. You can, in no way, compair crack to pot. If you do, then you need to do some more research on the matter.

Actually I wasnt comparing the 2 at all. If you read the quote I was replying to you would understand that. My point was that just because something is readily available doesnt mean that it should be legal.

You really think the war on Drugs will be just as expensive with Marijuana possession excluded?

Actually I think it would be more expensive. The costs of regulating this industry would far outweigh the small amount brought in by taxes. The fact that there would no longer be any fear of arrest for being caught with it, I think it would increase usage and therefore it would increase demand for the illegal product sold at half the price.

[Lucky DAWG]

I guess I found all of the pot heads.



You forget that people are still smuggling cigs into the US. People are still smuggling and producing illegal alcohol and the ATF spends ALOT of money chasing them down. Like I said, this will simply become another black market industry.




Actually I wasnt comparing the 2 at all. If you read the quote I was replying to you would understand that. My point was that just because something is readily available doesnt mean that it should be legal.



Actually I think it would be more expensive. The costs of regulating this industry would far outweigh the small amount brought in by taxes. The fact that there would no longer be any fear of arrest for being caught with it, I think it would increase usage and therefore it would increase demand for the illegal product sold at half the price.

I don't understand you here Bangin Jimmy, usually i agree with you. I thought you were a through and through republican. We don't need the government upsizing itself to wage war on petty things and flood the jails.


I want my money to stay in my pocket, not supporting this kind of stuff.



I agree that we should be spending money on limiting the power of cartels bringing it into the country and therefore putting our money in the pockets of "bad people" in other countries. But its simply a changing of hands here usually for small quantities that is for personal use.



Why do i have to babysit someone who wants to throw their life away with a meth lab in their basement? Its called evolution, let them kill themselves off if they choose to live their life that way.



Drug usage is lower in the Netherlands and it is legal for "soft" drugs like marijuana and i think a few opiates, cocaine and the such are still illegal to my knowledge but still used less. I know a lot on this topic i had to write my college english paper on it.





Its petty and dumb, the government doesn't need to be any larger. By taxing this stuff if the same growers of medical marijuana would feed it into the market of consumers then that money would increase our tax revenue and lower tax burdens on the general population.




The drug war hurts both sides, sometimes you have to choose the battles you can win and this is not one of them. As long as drugs exist there will be a desire for them by certain groups of people.



Most if not ALL of the criminal activity due to drugs does not occur because of the effects of the drugs... it happens because the sales are criminalized and you can not call the police if someone steals your merchandise. So drug dealers take it to the streets and resort to drug wars for faster and bigger "get rich fast, live in the fast lane" lifestyles. Leaving hundreds of innocents dead with stray gunfire.




Its dumb and if you can't see this then you are living in a fantasy world.

[alpine_aw11]

I don't understand you here Bangin Jimmy, usually i agree with you. I thought you were a through and through republican. We don't need the government upsizing itself to wage war on petty things and flood the jails.


I want my money to stay in my pocket, not supporting this kind of stuff.



I agree that we should be spending money on limiting the power of cartels bringing it into the country and therefore putting our money in the pockets of "bad people" in other countries. But its simply a changing of hands here usually for small quantities that is for personal use.



Why do i have to babysit someone who wants to throw their life away with a meth lab in their basement? Its called evolution, let them kill themselves off if they choose to live their life that way.



Drug usage is lower in the Netherlands and it is legal for "soft" drugs like marijuana and i think a few opiates, cocaine and the such are still illegal to my knowledge but still used less. I know a lot on this topic i had to write my college english paper on it.





Its petty and dumb, the government doesn't need to be any larger. By taxing this stuff if the same growers of medical marijuana would feed it into the market of consumers then that money would increase our tax revenue and lower tax burdens on the general population.




The drug war hurts both sides, sometimes you have to choose the battles you can win and this is not one of them. As long as drugs exist there will be a desire for them by certain groups of people.



Most if not ALL of the criminal activity due to drugs does not occur because of the effects of the drugs... it happens because the sales are criminalized and you can not call the police if someone steals your merchandise. So drug dealers take it to the streets and resort to drug wars for faster and bigger "get rich fast, live in the fast lane" lifestyles. Leaving hundreds of innocents dead with stray gunfire.




Its dumb and if you can't see this then you are living in a fantasy world.

QFT. However, it seems pretty obvious to me that the government isn't fighting this pointless war on drugs due to the safety of our citizens, as it does provide quite a lot of funding for them. It just seems odd to me that after we removed the Taliban from Afghanistan that we did nothing to stop the rampant growth in heroin production, yet over here weed is a huge concern. The US government has actually helped and funded drug lords in other countries(ex.-the president of Afghanistan's brother, who is one of the largest heroin dealers in the world-at least 80% of heroin here comes from this source which we allowed to be created). This petty drug war does nothing but imprison the innocent, and has done absolutely nothing to prevent drugs from getting into our hands. I could get weed anytime I wanted to with a couple phone calls, wouldn't take more than a couple minutes. Maybe if it was actually working I could understand their motives, but the actions taken by the government have done nothing but put a tiny dent on the drug trade.

[Lucky DAWG]

QFT. However, it seems pretty obvious to me that the government isn't fighting this pointless war on drugs due to the safety of our citizens, as it does provide quite a lot of funding for them. It just seems odd to me that after we removed the Taliban from Afghanistan that we did nothing to stop the rampant growth in heroin production, yet over here weed is a huge concern. The US government has actually helped and funded drug lords in other countries(ex.-the president of Afghanistan's brother, who is one of the largest heroin dealers in the world-at least 80% of heroin here comes from this source which we allowed to be created). This petty drug war does nothing but imprison the innocent, and has done absolutely nothing to prevent drugs from getting into our hands. I could get weed anytime I wanted to with a couple phone calls, wouldn't take more than a couple minutes. Maybe if it was actually working I could understand their motives, but the actions taken by the government have done nothing but put a tiny dent on the drug trade.

exactly.


As long as their is lucrative money involved in drug trading, then people will assume the risk. I think the creativty and desperation of most people to make a lot of money quick is underestimated.


The drug dealers as a whole are usually ahead of the government. You may get a few big fish in the pond, but they will always regroup and just have someone else take the other guy's spot.



Its simple economics, by eliminating competition all they do is just make another cartel more lucrative.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't understand you here Bangin Jimmy, usually i agree with you. I thought you were a through and through republican.

not a republican at all. I am a conservative.

We don't need the government upsizing itself to wage war on petty things and flood the jails.

the DEA isnt going anywhere whether or weed is legal, but the govt would be larger if it was legalized for the regulatory bodies that would need to be set in place.

I want my money to stay in my pocket, not supporting this kind of stuff.

again, legalizing it would mean more money out of your pocket, not less.

I agree that we should be spending money on limiting the power of cartels bringing it into the country and therefore putting our money in the pockets of "bad people" in other countries. But its simply a changing of hands here usually for small quantities that is for personal use.

legalizing it would increase the power of the cartels. Not only would their product be legal, but it would also be more widely used. This would eliminate 1 more level of secrecy in the chain.

Why do i have to babysit someone who wants to throw their life away with a meth lab in their basement? Its called evolution, let them kill themselves off if they choose to live their life that way.

this is a joke right?

Drug usage is lower in the Netherlands and it is legal for "soft" drugs like marijuana and i think a few opiates, cocaine and the such are still illegal to my knowledge but still used less. I know a lot on this topic i had to write my college english paper on it.

We arent the netherlands though, the US has a tendency of taking any simple freedom and abusing it to the point that its legality should be questioned.

Its petty and dumb, the government doesn't need to be any larger. By taxing this stuff if the same growers of medical marijuana would feed it into the market of consumers then that money would increase our tax revenue and lower tax burdens on the general population.

the added costs of regulation would easily surpass the taxes added. Then add in the fact that law enforcement would have no leverage on the users so they can work up the chain to the dealers and suppliers.

Heres another one for you. A smoker is paying $4.00 for a pack of Marlboros from the gas station. One day he learns that Joe down on the corner has illegally packaged Marlboros for $2.00 a pack. Where do you think the smoker is going for his next high?

The drug war hurts both sides, sometimes you have to choose the battles you can win and this is not one of them. As long as drugs exist there will be a desire for them by certain groups of people.

I agree. I could also say the same thing for any number of illegal activities. I will bring up child porn because I just learned a bit about it on Friday. 10k+ arrests are made every year for possession of child porn. Law Enforcement knows who several of the sources are, but because they are overseas they cant be touched. Should child porn be legal also because there will always be a supply and demand for it?
Yes I know its a drastic leap from weed to child porn, but it is the same concept.

Most if not ALL of the criminal activity due to drugs does not occur because of the effects of the drugs... it happens because the sales are criminalized and you can not call the police if someone steals your merchandise.

wrong, most drug related crimes are robberies and burglaries so they addicts can get the money for their next fix. The number of people killed as retaliation is barely worth mentioning in comparison.

So drug dealers take it to the streets and resort to drug wars for faster and bigger "get rich fast, live in the fast lane" lifestyles. Leaving hundreds of innocents dead with stray gunfire.

not at all, most larger dealers keep as low a profile as possible. Its mostly the small timers that live in the last lane.

Its dumb and if you can't see this then you are living in a fantasy world.

I live in the real world, you are the one in the fantasy world.

[Lucky DAWG]

not a republican at all. I am a conservative.




the DEA isnt going anywhere whether or weed is legal, but the govt would be larger if it was legalized for the regulatory bodies that would need to be set in place.




again, legalizing it would mean more money out of your pocket, not less.





legalizing it would increase the power of the cartels. Not only would their product be legal, but it would also be more widely used. This would eliminate 1 more level of secrecy in the chain.





this is a joke right?





We arent the netherlands though, the US has a tendency of taking any simple freedom and abusing it to the point that its legality should be questioned.








the added costs of regulation would easily surpass the taxes added. Then add in the fact that law enforcement would have no leverage on the users so they can work up the chain to the dealers and suppliers.

Heres another one for you. A smoker is paying $4.00 for a pack of Marlboros from the gas station. One day he learns that Joe down on the corner has illegally packaged Marlboros for $2.00 a pack. Where do you think the smoker is going for his next high?






I agree. I could also say the same thing for any number of illegal activities. I will bring up child porn because I just learned a bit about it on Friday. 10k+ arrests are made every year for possession of child porn. Law Enforcement knows who several of the sources are, but because they are overseas they cant be touched. Should child porn be legal also because there will always be a supply and demand for it?
Yes I know its a drastic leap from weed to child porn, but it is the same concept.





wrong, most drug related crimes are robberies and burglaries so they addicts can get the money for their next fix. The number of people killed as retaliation is barely worth mentioning in comparison.




not at all, most larger dealers keep as low a profile as possible. Its mostly the small timers that live in the last lane.






I live in the real world, you are the one in the fantasy world.

Your entire argument is void considering you keep telling me it will cost MORE money. You explain to me how just another sales tax is going to cost MORE money then the hundreds of operations under way resulting in dead agents, millions in technology, millions in pay of preperation for busts and so forth.


What i got from your argument is that we should get rid of sales tax because it takes too much "regulation". And you are the one pushing Fair Tax.




Please explain to me where this logic comes from.

[The12lber]

not a republican at all. I am a conservative.

Actually, based on the kind of things you've said throughout the posts I've seen you make, you fall in line more with neo-conservative political ideology. This is viewed by political scientists to be a liberal political ideology, especially considering that its origins are with prominent disenfranchised liberals of the 70s.

[The12lber]

legalizing it would increase the power of the cartels. Not only would their product be legal, but it would also be more widely used. This would eliminate 1 more level of secrecy in the chain.

You are insufferably stupid. Do you know why illicit drugs are produced by drug cartels, roaming the jungle/desert (Afghanistan is the world's largest opium exporter, after all) in armed militias, refining their product in underground labyrinths or at remote airstrips?

BECAUSE IT IS ****ING ILLEGAL AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT THAT WAY.

When something becomes legal, its producers become corporations and business. When prohibition ended did the mob gain more power? No, they lost revenue. They had to rely on their racketeering and gambling/white slavery/whatever the **** else they had going on. When legitimate business can produce a product, there's no niche for the criminal underworld to produce it. NONE.

Are there violent groups of criminals, roaming Texas, setting up illicit oil derricks and refineries?

[DrivenMind]

not a republican at all. I am a conservative.

Big surprise there... You do drive a lowered American SUV after all.

the DEA isnt going anywhere whether or weed is legal, but the govt would be larger if it was legalized for the regulatory bodies that would need to be set in place.

How would it need to be larger? Law enforcement agencies across the country already have huge portions of their precincts dedicated to busting those harmlessly "crazed" marijuana smokers. It would take a lot less resources and man power to make a few regulatory laws regarding the sale and distribution of cannabis, than it would to keep trying to push prohibition, and forced prosecution on a substance that more than 50% of the countries population has tried.

again, legalizing it would mean more money out of your pocket, not less.

Wrong. It costs $19,000 annually per inmate in the US. Considering in 2006 alone, 800,000 people were arrested for "marijuana" violations that seems like a pretty quick way to save some bank. Not to mention the businesses, and industries that could be created if hemp were allowed to create some competition within the textile industry. Do you really believe that it costs the government less to hunt, and prosecute violators? You realize despite the aging war on drugs cannabis use is at an all time "high". Clearly the drug war isn't working.

Since 1992, six million tax paying Americans have been locked up for deciding to smoke a little weed. Does that number not sound outrageous to you?

legalizing it would increase the power of the cartels. Not only would their product be legal, but it would also be more widely used. This would eliminate 1 more level of secrecy in the chain.

Wrong again. He's an unlikely idea, what if it turned them into legitimate business people, who contributed more of thier profits into taxes to help fuel our economy. Just because a drug is legal doesn't mean it's any more widely abused. I wonder if the people over at Budwiser were called "cartels" during alcohol prohibition.

And could you also explain to me, where in the medical industry they require patients to ingest alcohol. Or inhale cigarette delivered nicotine.

this is a joke right?

Yea, the war on drugs has been a joke since the foul criminal Nixon introduced it in 1971.

"This scourge will stop!"
No it won't. You'll just blow a lot of our money trying to stop it.

We arent the netherlands though, the US has a tendency of taking any simple freedom and abusing it to the point that its legality should be questioned.

Did you just say that? It's not a freedom if you can get arrested for doing it. How can you abuse a freedom, that isn't a actually freedom? It's legality should be questioned because it ISN'T a freedom.

the added costs of regulation would easily surpass the taxes added. Then add in the fact that law enforcement would have no leverage on the users so they can work up the chain to the dealers and suppliers.

Law enforcement has the ultimate leverage on dealers already anyway. It's called a prison sentence. You keep saying the added costs of regulation would surpass the taxes added, as if you're deliberately ignoring the fact that there would be a reduction in costs when the government isn't spending it's time prosecuting almost a million extra non-violent "offenders".

Heres another one for you. A smoker is paying $4.00 for a pack of Marlboros from the gas station. One day he learns that Joe down on the corner has illegally packaged Marlboros for $2.00 a pack. Where do you think the smoker is going for his next high?

Depends. If the smoker knows he's going to get a reliable quality product from the gas station every time, why would he waste his time sourcing out another distributor just to save $2 a pack? Most people would pay the extra $2 just to avoid the risk of having to deal with the potential law involvement.

I agree. I could also say the same thing for any number of illegal activities. I will bring up child porn because I just learned a bit about it on Friday. 10k+ arrests are made every year for possession of child porn. Law Enforcement knows who several of the sources are, but because they are overseas they cant be touched. Should child porn be legal also because there will always be a supply and demand for it?
Yes I know its a drastic leap from weed to child porn, but it is the same concept.

No it's not, that's absolutely ****ing ridiculous.

wrong, most drug related crimes are robberies and burglaries so they addicts can get the money for their next fix. The number of people killed as retaliation is barely worth mentioning in comparison.

Source your information. This is blantant intellectual dishonesty. You're talking about junkies. Usually it's the opiate addicts that behave this way. Not pot heads. You think a "lazy, unmotivated" pot head is going to commit a burglary so he can get smoke?

I live in the real world, you are the one in the fantasy world.

This is false too. You might exist in the real world, but you're living in the conservative propoganda day dream.

[Total_Blender]

And could you also explain to me, where in the medical industry they require patients to ingest alcohol.
.

Alcohol is administered in cases of antifreeze poisoning. It is also one of the main ingredients in over the counter cough remedies. And its been proven in many studies that red wine is good for people with heart disease.

But all that is beside the main point

[The12lber]

Yea, the war on drugs has been a joke since the foul criminal Nixon introduced it in 1971.

In all fairness, overall, Nixon was in actuallity probably the best postwar (you know, the big one) President of 20th century.

Did you just say that? It's not a freedom if you can get arrested for doing it. How can you abuse a freedom, that isn't a actually freedom? It's legality should be questioned because it ISN'T a freedom.

Yeah, that's the whole deal with America. We have freedoms here, not privileges. You don't ban things simply because something is considered immoral by a select few, but it can't logically be explained why. You don't ban things because said things in question might be dangerous to them Smoking is literally sentencing yourself to premature death, I don't see a ban on tobacco. People are given the responsibility to make their own choices here. If people don't feel comfortable for this, they should look up Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism on Wikipedia and move accordingly. China and North Korea, especially, would be lovely choices

A short list of things that would have to be banned if we followed this rule (banning things that are potentially unsafe to the participant or considered immoral by some) in all cases
-Bicycles
-Motorcycles
-Cars
-Planes
-Swimming (you could drown)
-Pleasurecraft (your boat could sink, see above)
-Christianity
-Islam
-Jeudaism
-Pre-marital sex
-Homosexuality
-Buttsecks
-Fellatio
-****, everything but missionary
-Unprotected sex
-Standing up
-Fishing
-Hunting
-Eating meat (meat is murder, PETA told me so)
-Lying down

[TIGERJC]

Drug usage is lower in the Netherlands and it is legal for "soft" drugs like marijuana and i think a few opiates, cocaine and the such are still illegal to my knowledge but still used less. I know a lot on this topic i had to write my college english paper on it.

Those drugs are still illegal, but the gov't still gives those drugs out at gov't owned clinics and supplies clean needles. Also they try to counsel the users while they are there, and because they look at it as a disease and they know that this is really the only way to help them get better or least live a somewhat decent life

[tony]

I don't smoke it, I can't (military) but I do see it as a waste of time in use and in the war on drugs. It has no different effects than alcohol, any justification for outlawing marijuana is the same argument for making alcohol illegal.

And read studies of countries who have legalized it, contrary to what you think useage drops. Imagine if alcohol was illegal, people would have it everywhere but since it is legal you realize how stupid it is to drink all the damn time. (Some of us at least)

[BanginJimmy]

I don't smoke it, I can't (military) but I do see it as a waste of time in use and in the war on drugs. It has no different effects than alcohol, any justification for outlawing marijuana is the same argument for making alcohol illegal.

Both alcohol and cigs should be illegal, in fact I would rather majijuana was legal and cigs were not. At least marijuana isnt physically addictive. Since pure tobacco isnt nearly as addictive as the niccotine laced cigs sold in the country now, I think that will eventually happen to marijuana.

And read studies of countries who have legalized it, contrary to what you think useage drops. Imagine if alcohol was illegal, people would have it everywhere but since it is legal you realize how stupid it is to drink all the damn time. (Some of us at least)

The US does not work like any other country in the world though. Things that work in MANY eurpoean countries simply have not worked here.

[tony]

Both alcohol and cigs should be illegal, in fact I would rather majijuana was legal and cigs were not. At least marijuana isnt physically addictive. Since pure tobacco isnt nearly as addictive as the niccotine laced cigs sold in the country now, I think that will eventually happen to marijuana.




The US does not work like any other country in the world though. Things that work in MANY eurpoean countries simply have not worked here.

Doubt it will become legal, one thing I cannot argue is that Weed is a gateway drug. I didn't believe this at first but when I was in Alaska my friend told me that all of a sudden cocaine is becoming very common there since Marijuana has been legal. He says he sees it everywhere at parties now and studies do support this, so its a matter of what are you willing to deal with.

[Maniacc]

Both alcohol and cigs should be illegal, in fact I would rather majijuana was legal and cigs were not. At least marijuana isnt physically addictive. Since pure tobacco isnt nearly as addictive as the niccotine laced cigs sold in the country now, I think that will eventually happen to marijuana.

I've been smoking cigarettes for quite some time now and they haven't been addicting to me. I could stop, if I wanted to. I just don't see a reason why I should. I drink from time to time, and again, it has not been addicting. I also like to get baked, atleast twice a week and no addiction there.

You have to understand that 'addiction' will only occur if you allow it to.

[DieselNuts]

I've been smoking cigarettes for quite some time now and they haven't been addicting to me. I could stop, if I wanted to.

lol, I cant count how many times I have heard this one...

[Maniacc]

lol, I cant count how many times I have heard this one...

Don't know what's so humorous about my post, but I know exactly what you're talking about. I personally know a few people who would make these kinds of claims and never follow through. Yet, I'm not one of them. I've proven it, several times actually.

[Nissangeek]

You have to understand that 'addiction' will only occur if you allow it to.

Actually, a real addiction is caused by your brain reacting to certain chemicals. Usually ones that cause the body to release endorphines(sp?) or dopamine, or that mimic the effects of them.

On another note: why should any drugs be illegal? What right does the government have to tell me what I can and cannot put in my body. If you take the position that alcohol and cigs and drugs kill people or are dangerous for your health, then why not outlaw cars, or even bathtubs. More people are killed by falling in their bathtubs than from cigs each year, and we all know how dangerous cars are. You know why pot was made illegal in the first place? Because the hemp industry threatened the paper industry in the 20's. Pot has only been illegal for about 90 yrs, as has cocaine and opiates.

[BanginJimmy]

On another note: why should any drugs be illegal? What right does the government have to tell me what I can and cannot put in my body.

Because people addicted to drugs routinely commit crimes to pay for their habits. It is s simply public safety issue, not an issue of choice.

[DieselNuts]

Then why did you spend 5 mins typing anything? You apparently care enough to continue wasting your time on me. And I'm not getting defensive, far from it actually. I just don't know why you kept coming back with the same, "lol heard that one before." Like saying I was full of sh*t.

My teeth are fine, I always smell good, and I could care less about cancer because I refuse to live a boring and rule following life. You only live once, and after you die you no longer exist. Which is why I continue to smoke. If you don't care about me and my posts, then don't respond to this one.

lol, you make me laugh. You try to make it a lose lose situation for me by writing that last sentence...nice try. You smoke cigs = you lose.

On another note: why should any drugs be illegal? What right does the government have to tell me what I can and cannot put in my body. If you take the position that alcohol and cigs and drugs kill people or are dangerous for your health, then why not outlaw cars, or even bathtubs. More people are killed by falling in their bathtubs than from cigs each year, and we all know how dangerous cars are.

and what right do they have to make me wear my seatbelt? One thing you mention is that "more people are killed by falling in their bathtubs than from cigs each year". Can you provide proof of this claim? I just find it VERY hard to believe.

[lilguy]

I also like to get baked, atleast twice a week and no addiction there.

right on bro

[The12lber]

Both alcohol and cigs should be illegal, in fact I would rather majijuana was legal and cigs were not. At least marijuana isnt physically addictive. Since pure tobacco isnt nearly as addictive as the niccotine laced cigs sold in the country now, I think that will eventually happen to marijuana.

I agree, cigs and alcohol should both still be illegal.

Afterall, when Alcohol was last illegalized, it wasn't produced, distributed, sold and consumed. And the aforementioned scenario didn't create a tremendous gap in the economy for organized crime to fill after legitimate business was forced out of it.

Oh wait, it did? So not only did prohibition not stop people from drinking, it actually created a tremendous niche in the market for the nefarious and inherently criminal black market to fill?

YES, YES IT DID. THIS IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE. HOW ARE YOU SO STUPID?

This is really all there is to be said about this matter.

[TIGERJC]

It will never pass, you know why? Privately owned Prisons would not let that bill pass, the same way companies like black water and Haliburton won't let a Person like ron paul ever get in the white house do to his view on making the u.s. no longer the world police. It comes down to money with everything, LOCKING people up is big business and companies make more money running prisons than schools. That is why you will never see student vouchers, but you will see the state of the art prisons that can hold 10k people and that don't do a good job at rehabilitating even though they have a lot of money to spend. The state I bet spends more money on 1 prisoner than they do on 4 students

[Revmaynard]

It will never pass, you know why? Privately owned Prisons would not let that bill pass, the same way companies like black water and Haliburton won't let a Person like ron paul ever get in the white house do to his view on making the u.s. no longer the world police. It comes down to money with everything, LOCKING people up is big business and companies make more money running prisons than schools. That is why you will never see student vouchers, but you will see the state of the art prisons that can hold 10k people and that don't do a good job at rehabilitating even though they have a lot of money to spend. The state I bet spends more money on 1 prisoner than they do on 4 students

A few years ago I wrote a paper on capital punishment, if I remember correctly it costs 1-2k a day to house a prisoner. It could be more now.

[GIXXERDK]

Haha

[BanginJimmy]

What tobacco company do you work for? They are the only ones that ahve EVER said that smoking isnt addictive.


Anyone that claims they could quite smoking but they dont want to is a lair. Its like saying a crack head could quick smoking crack, but he likes it too much.

[Ran]

It's illegal. It will probably stay illegal. That's the way it should be.

lol @ potheads

[Revmaynard]

It's illegal. It will probably stay illegal. That's the way it should be.

lol @ potheads

I'd rather the world be full of potheads than child molesters. Just my .

[Ran]

I'd rather the world be full of potheads than child molesters. Just my .

I'd rather both be done away with personally.

The difference here is that I just joke on the pedo thing while the potheads in this thread are, in fact, actually stupid.

[Mike Lowrey]

I'd rather both be done away with personally.

The difference here is that I just joke on the pedo thing while the potheads in this thread are, in fact, actually stupid.

QFT

[DieselNuts]

the potheads in this thread are, in fact, actually stupid.

I cant speak for the people in this thread, but I have friends that smoke wiid regularly that are very intelligent. Saying that all potheads are stupid isn't an accurate statement at all. I myself have quit smoking pot just over a month ago, but I still have no problem with the people that do smoke it.

[uproot]

lol @ a plant being illegal.



and lol @ people who drink alcohol and who are anti pot. alcohol is so much worse than pot it's ridiculous.