Poll: legalizing marijuana

[Nodak]

YMMV

You're right, that test involved only 3 or 4 adult drivers in their 30s. They were all very good drivers to begin with. In my experience as far as MJ is concerned the personality of the individual is more important than the drug. A few will use the fact of being "stoned" to just drop all inhibitions but most won't. Alcohol seems to cause all users to lose most of their inhibitions.

 

[kcowan]

Try some brownies sometime. You might like it.

Not a chance. I made a concious decision when I was about 10 years old not to smoke (anything). Watching my parents (both smokers) die of lung cancer ~40 years later only reinforced my decision.

You will have a heck of a time lighting them!

 

[dex]

I think you are raising a false bogeyman. You are undoubtedly correct that MJ related crashes would increase with legalization. An outfit named druglibrary.org reports that currently in the US 1.1% of traffic fatalities show MJ in the blood (vs 58% alchohol) So, if we decriminalized, lets assume MJ use tripled (per Leonides' UN study of Amsterdam). That would mean ~3% of traffic fatalities would involve MJ. I believe the appropriate way to deal with a risk like that is anti high/drunk driving campaigns like those that have reduced drunk driving.

Is avoiding the relatively small increase in traffic danger from MJ use worth the current impact of the war on drugs (read Audrey's posts)? If so, how could you possibly not demand a return to prohibition of alcohol?

You're making my point, the only thing we disagree on is the percentage of use - there is room for more death and injury in every aspect of USA life - from the highways to the work place. Just don't complain about it when it happens. I don't want to see pictures of little boys and girls killed by someone under the influence. An then read the person's indignation about the 'drug problem' on the roadways. Nor do I want to read about the cost of policing, courts, jail, insurance increase, family problems etc.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...ujgBw&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0

DUI Stories And Pictures From Other Citizens And Law Enforcement

Legalization means that the drug could then be sold in stores with increased distribution, lower cost and easier access. Legalization eliminates obstacles currently with it being illegal - fear of breaking the law, not easy to find for the average person, social stigma, etc. With those and similar obstacles removed more people will use it. In addition, over time it would become more socially acceptable.
So there might not be a black Friday rush on it but usage would increase over time. Also, it isn't just the use of the drug alone but when used with others. That is why caffeinated alcohol drinks were outlawed.

All legalization does is increase the problem and move it around from interdiction to cleaning up the dead, injured and impaired after the harm is done.

I would also add that the legalization of MJ does not change anything - criminal activity, law enforcement, prison etc. since other drugs will still be illegal. To change that we would then have to move onto phase two - the legalization of METH, Heroin LSD, Barbiturates, Amphetamines, Ecstasy, Cocaine, crack, PCP and any other drug that is developed. And again all we need to say is 'I don't see them as any different than using alcohol or MJ' 'we have to stop the violence' 'the war on drugs has been going on all my life and it is still a problem and cost too much' and 'we'll clean up the mess at the back end'.

 

[M Paquette]

This is probably going to surprise some but, in 1977 or 78 Car and Driver magazine did a comparison test on people driving under the influence of both alcohol and MJ. They found that those under the influence of MJ were far less dangerous than those that had been drinking. In fact, there was almost no deleterious affect from MJ.

My highway patrol friend mentioned this. "The drunks are the ones driving the wrong way or weaving through lanes on the freeway. The dopers are the ones doing 30 miles an hour in the right lane."

 

[devans0]

Off topic to the poll, but if mj was legal, I still would not waste early retire money on it. I am amazed that this poll has gone on so long.

 

[NW-Bound]

Off topic to the poll, but if mj was legal, I still would not waste early retire money on it. I am amazed that this poll has gone on so long.

People are debating about making it cheaper, for purchasing as well as not having to pay legal fees to get you out of jail. And the LBYM and DYI types can grow their own. No money wasting here.

 

[NW-Bound]

My highway patrol friend mentioned this. "The drunks are the ones driving the wrong way or weaving through lanes on the freeway. The dopers are the ones doing 30 miles an hour in the right lane."

Hey, I am the type who would drive 30mph if I get drunk (I am too smart to be driving drunk though).

And now, I drive slow even when I am sober.

 

[BigNick]

Now, it also probably indicates that there are a number of tourists causing problems and weed smoking is involved. (From what I have read about the tourist ban, drunk Brits partaking in weed holidays are especially vexing after they add a little cannabis to the booze, and the Amsterdamers are fed up with the trashed Inselaffen and their shenanigans.

I don't think they'd use the word "Inselaffen".

But you highlight a good point: decriminalisation or legalisation by a small country will tend to concentrate the social problems associated with usage into a small area, thus magnifying them ("we shouldn't follow the Dutch, because since the coffee shops opened, Amsterdam is full of dope tourists"). As with many other aspects of social policy, the Prisoner's Dilemma is lurking here too.

Another aspect of the same thing is the tendency of opponents of legalisation to factor in the cost of policing current laws as a "cost to society of drug X". I've seen this particular crime against logic in government policy papers from the UK, for example.

 

[kumquat]

And now, I drive slow even when I am sober.

Please tell us you drive the speed limit on freeways.

 

[NW-Bound]

...decriminalisation or legalisation by a small country will tend to concentrate the social problems associated with usage into a small area, thus magnifying them ("we shouldn't follow the Dutch, because since the coffee shops opened, Amsterdam is full of dope tourists").

I brought up the defeat of Proposition 19 in California earlier. These Californians are no fools. They can hardly afford to have more drug users moving there, along with drug traffickers moving in to "buy low" there in order to "sell high" in other states.

 

[NW-Bound]

Please tell us you drive the speed limit on freeways.

Speed limit is the upper bound, not the lower bound.

Years ago, in the 70s and early 80s during the energy crisis, the interstate freeway sign said "55 Max, 45 Min". Now, there's no Min.

Just kidding! I usually drive the speed limit when I need to rush. Else, when I am my mellow self or when I drive my motor home, 5 mph below. So, sue me!

 

[kumquat]

So, sue me!

I`ll leave that to someone who drives the same roads you do.

 

[NW-Bound]

Good! Because if you want to, you must take a number. The line is long!

 

[donheff]

I'm still for legalization but for you worry warts I just read this which, as a cyclist, was distressing:

Associated Press Nicole Winfield, Associated Press – 54 mins ago
ROME – A speeding car plowed head-on into a group of cyclists in southern Italy on Sunday morning, killing eight of them, officials said. The driver had been smoking marijuana, police said.

 

[Nodak]

I'm still for legalization but for you worry warts I just read this which, as a cyclist, was distressing:

That is tragic but I wonder if something more than MJ was involved

 

[Gone4Good]

I would also add that the legalization of MJ does not change anything - criminal activity, law enforcement, prison etc. since other drugs will still be illegal.

Really, it changes nothing? It seems it must change something, the question is the magnitude of the change. For it to have only a negligible impact then both the revenues to drug lords and the consumption of interdiction resources associated with keeping marijuana illegal must also be negligible. I don't think either are the case.

The attached chart is a few years old, but it shows drug arrests in Europe by narcotic. Arrests for Cannibis account for 59% of all drug arrests. That doesn't sound negligible to me.

Saying it won't completely solve the problem is quite different from saying it won't change anything. The former is certainly true. The latter is certainly false.

 

[Martha]

Here is a paper on the economic effect of marijuana prohibition: Costs of Marijuana Prohibition: Economic Analysis I didn't read it so if it is crap, don't kill the messenger.

Shouldn't we step back and see why it is illegal in the first place? It was perceived as an addictive, gateway drug with no medical use. All of these claims are questionable. So, we are left with a substance that likely is much like alcohol, you can be impaired when you use it and shouldn't be driving or operating dangerous machinery. Some will use it too much and too often. Is that a reason to destroy people's lives by making users into criminals?

 

[REWahoo]

Shouldn't we step back and see why it is illegal in the first place? It was perceived as an addictive, gateway drug with no medical use. All of these claims are questionable. So, we are left with a substance that likely is much like alcohol, you can be impaired when you use it and shouldn't be driving or operating dangerous machinery. Some will use it too much and too often. Is that a reason to destroy people's lives by making users into criminals?

Sounds like you need another brownie...

 

[Martha]

Actually, I rarely drink, never to excess, and would rarely if ever use dope. Not into lack of control and not into altered states of consciousness.

 

[REWahoo]

...not into altered states of consciousness.

You sure fooled me...

 

[Martha]

I try.

 

[dex]

Here is a paper on the economic effect of marijuana prohibition: Costs of Marijuana Prohibition: Economic Analysis I didn't read it so if it is crap, don't kill the messenger.

I didn't read it either so, don't shoot the commentator.

"The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco."

Like many points raised for legalization the above looks only at one variable. It does not look at the increased costs to 'clean up the mess at the back end' - increased the cost of policing, courts, jail, insurance increase, family problems, health problems etc.

Shouldn't we step back and see why it is illegal in the first place? It was perceived as an addictive, gateway drug with no medical use. All of these claims are questionable. So, we are left with a substance that likely is much like alcohol, you can be impaired when you use it and shouldn't be driving or operating dangerous machinery. Some will use it too much and too often. Is that a reason to destroy people's lives by making users into criminals?

If it is questionable why have few (see previous posts by someone who mentions them) countries legalized it? What do they think that lead them to that conclusion?

It isn't questionable to this guy.
The Surgeon General's Warning on Marijuana
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001143.htm

The Public Health Service concludes that marijuana has a broad range of psychological and biological effects, many of which are dangerous and harmful to health, and it supports the major conclusion of the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine.

 

[Martha]

If it is questionable why have few (see previous posts by someone who mentions them) countries legalized it? What do they think that lead them to that conclusion?

Inertia. Look at all the sodomy laws still on the books.

 

[Nords]

Inertia. Look at all the sodomy laws still on the books.

Public relations, too. Who wants to be the guy known for making sodomy legal?

 

[RonBoyd]

Public relations, too. Who wants to be the guy known for making sodomy legal?

Ah, yes. Politics... "Read my lips."