So, the economist and time agree: It's about fucking time to LEGALISE IT

[Z³]

I didn't say more adults would start using, though I do believe some would, I said more would possess it.  If it is legal to have marijuana there is no need to hide marijuana or to only buy as much as you are going to use.  There will be more access points for kids and those access points, because it is no longer illegal, will tend to have larger supplies.  I mean, look at alcohol and cigarettes.  Adults buy both by the cases and the cartons.  You think that would be different for marijuana?

I disagree. What I have seen from people in countries where weed is illegal, is that they have much larger stashes.

Most people in the netherlands only have one or two grammes at home, cause they can go to the coffeeshop whenever they want to buy more.

When it's illegal you want to buy more, because it's such a hassle to buy. You wouldn't go to your dealer every time you want to smoke, you buy a larger stash in one go and then use it as you see fit.

Its one extreme or the other, you either purchase in larger quantities to alleviate the pain/risk of buying anyway...
or you buy in smaller quantities because the legal penalties arent as severe.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I didn't say more adults would start using, though I do believe some would, I said more would possess it.  If it is legal to have marijuana there is no need to hide marijuana or to only buy as much as you are going to use.  There will be more access points for kids and those access points, because it is no longer illegal, will tend to have larger supplies.  I mean, look at alcohol and cigarettes.  Adults buy both by the cases and the cartons.  You think that would be different for marijuana?

I disagree. What I have seen from people in countries where weed is illegal, is that they have much larger stashes.

Most people in the netherlands only have one or two grammes at home, cause they can go to the coffeeshop whenever they want to buy more.

When it's illegal you want to buy more, because it's such a hassle to buy. You wouldn't go to your dealer every time you want to smoke, you buy a larger stash in one go and then use it as you see fit.

Its one extreme or the other, you either purchase in larger quantities to alleviate the pain/risk of buying anyway...
or you buy in smaller quantities because the legal penalties arent as severe.

I dunno, this whole line of argument seems extremely subjective and based on feeling rather than any data either way. If I could legally buy pot, I would probably buy enough for a week. Currently, the amount on hand depends on q

[Z³]

I didn't say more adults would start using, though I do believe some would, I said more would possess it.  If it is legal to have marijuana there is no need to hide marijuana or to only buy as much as you are going to use.  There will be more access points for kids and those access points, because it is no longer illegal, will tend to have larger supplies.  I mean, look at alcohol and cigarettes.  Adults buy both by the cases and the cartons.  You think that would be different for marijuana?

I disagree. What I have seen from people in countries where weed is illegal, is that they have much larger stashes.

Most people in the netherlands only have one or two grammes at home, cause they can go to the coffeeshop whenever they want to buy more.

When it's illegal you want to buy more, because it's such a hassle to buy. You wouldn't go to your dealer every time you want to smoke, you buy a larger stash in one go and then use it as you see fit.

Its one extreme or the other, you either purchase in larger quantities to alleviate the pain/risk of buying anyway...
or you buy in smaller quantities because the legal penalties arent as severe.

I dunno, this whole line of argument seems extremely subjective and based on feeling rather than any data either way. If I could legally buy pot, I would probably buy enough for a week. Currently, the amount on hand depends on q

It is subjective, if for no other reason because marijuana legislation is different state to state.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Err, somehow that got posted while I was typing,... let me try again:

I dunno, this whole line of argument seems extremely subjective and based on feeling rather than any data either way. For me personally, I don't think legality would modify the amount of weed I purchased. If you have weeks worth of weed, you gotta keep it fresh or at least make sure it doesn't dry out and crumble into shake.

People that buy a carton of smokes, are people that smoke A LOT. I don't know anyone that smokes marijuana in nearly those quantities.. (a pack of joints a day? You'd be comatose)...

[BabylonHoruv]

if i am following the RWHN argument correctly, your liberty as an adult to smoke weed in the same manor and conditions as alcohol must be sacrificed for the safety of the children...

That is exactly what I have gotten from his arguements as well, both here and on the other board I debated this with him.

If that's not what he's arguing than either fomenter and I need to work on our reading comprehension or he's being unclear.

As I just posted, And my impression from you, fomenter, RCP, others is that it is necessary to sacrifice the futures of a portion of our youth for the pleasure of a portion of our adults.  Is that incorrect? 

Yes.  That is not my position.  If it were just about pleasure I would not care.  For me the main problems with prohibition are those which effect the non users.  The fact that drugs are a huge financial boon for organized crime (sorry RCH, but I don't mind the small time dealers losing out if the people who stuff it inside babies lose their living) the fact that our tax money is being spent to prosecute, convict, arrest, and imprison people who have done things that i do not consider crimes.  The fact that becuase it is illegal, and thus unregulated marijuana and other drugs are of unknown potency and contain unknown adulterants, the fact that as an illegal, but mild, drug marijuana serves as a gateway to hard drugs.  All of these are why i want prohibition to end.  The fact I would be able to smoke pot unmolested is a benefit to me.  I won't deny it, but it is a pretty minor one.  I am a father, I would like to be working full time, I really don't have room in my life to smoke pot more than maybe once every few months and honestly something I do once every few months that I enjoy, but not a huge incredible amount is not something that is going to motivate me to get involved to the level I have with attempting to get prohibition overturned.

[BabylonHoruv]

you seem to be equating any recreational use of drugs with "having a drug problem".

I don't recall making that specific statement.

hence my use of the word "seem".

while I certainly agree with you that assessment, counseling, and treatment are better options than fines, jail, and seizure of property, I vehemently disagree that being caught with a "personal use" amount of marijuana should be any reason for the government to involve themselves in an adult's life in any way.

It's just not a plausible scenario.  But what is plausible is to make that involvement fit the "crime".  An adult pulled over with a joint should not be spending any time in jail.  If they are driving under the influence it might be a slightly different matter in that behavior is jeapoardizing the safety of others on the road.  But it wouldn't make any sense to waste the time and resources to throw the book at an adult who has a minor amount of marijuana.  But it just isn't plausible for their to be no involvement whatsoever.  

at the risk of being overly-simplistic, why not?

I, too, am curious about this.  I see no reason why an adult should not be able to use weed under the same conditions that they are allowed to use alcohol.

Sorry I missed this...

Let me just flat out say that it is essentially an arbitrary distinction.  Alcohol is legal for adults and I doubt that would ever change.  Currently marijuana is not.  In a perfect world, if it could be legalized and have 0 impact on youth, I would be in favor of legalization.

The thing is we live in a society.  If you could take two identical societies and put them side by side, then poison say a quarter of the youth in that society.  It isn't a lethal poison, just one that impedes development, stunts personal growth, and generally leaves them directionless and unproductive, which society is going to function better, all other things being equal?  That is essentially my argument for not legalizing marijuana.  Yes, it already is poisoning a portion of our youth.  But I really believe based upon my research and experience that it would be that much worse and I just don't believe that is something our societies needs.  

Kids who smoke weed now are breaking the law already.  Changing the law to allow adults to smoke weed will somehow increase the number of kids willing to break the law?

It increases access, making it easier for kids to get. They don't need to get to a dealer, they just need a local pothead who is willing to buy it fro them from the local liquor store.

I hold that a few more kids getting stoned is an acceptable tradeoff for drasticaly cutting the funding of organized crime and thus keeping a few kids and adults from being shot.

[BabylonHoruv]

don't know anyone that smokes marijuana in nearly those quantities.. (a pack of joints a day? You'd be comatose)...

I do.

The woman and her husband that run one of our local dispensary's smoke probably more than that per day. At least a half ounce of very good strong stuff. Y'see, I'm guessing that the searing pain of cancer removal surgery, tends to take the edge off you "high". EIther that or they are both used to it from years of heavy smoking.

I;ve seen  ounces and ounces knocking about the house in home canning jars. stays nice and wet if you like it like that. Always feel its better dried out a week or three mind you, as then the crystals look nice and crystaly. Always thought shake was the leafy junk, and the tiny buds, and the bits that fell of during the drying and curing process meself also but there ya go.

anyway's my point stands. you want DECRIMINALIZATION not legalization. as tax sucks.

I'd greatly prefer it were taxed.  Not so high as to encourage a black market, but the budget of the local, state, and federal government where i live could all do with the boost that tax revenues from weed could bring.

[P3nT4gR4m]

The whole argument for me seems to be distillable into a simple formula - Adults shouldn't be allowed to do things because children might gain access.

I'm sorry but that's just pissweak IMO. That fucker led to censorship in the early 90's (cos kids might watch the videos and kill someone) and it puts parental responsibility in the hands of the "nanny state" instead of in the hands of the parents where it belongs. Meanwhile me (a tax paying adult) isn't allowed to walk down to the video store and rent the new Childs Play movie. My rights are acceptable collateral? Fuck that noise! 

[AFK]

I've not seen a single legitimate cost/benefit analysis that would lead me to believe there would be a net societal and monetary gain if we legalized marijuana.  I've read pieces that suggest it would be a huge boon because of tax revenues.  I have serious doubts about that.  And there are no guarantees those revenues would go towards any kind of treatment or prevention.  So the state makes more money, more kids use, but no more services?  That is a recipe for failure. 

Slanket hops in because he feels like being an argumentative dick today.

Bullshit. It would still be illegal for kids and I don't know if you remember what it was like being a kid but it was way easier to acquire illegal drugs than it was to acquire alcohol (which, by the way, is one of the most dangerous drugs ever). Also, are you saying that you do not believe a new heavily taxed industry would create more revenue for the government and legitimate (read: taxable) jobs?

Yes, because here in Maine we've put big taxes on legal drugs like cigarettes and alcohol, and, nada.  The extra revenues that do come in don't even come close to filling in budget gaps, and they are certainly not going towards funding more prevention and treatment programs.  It is getting sucked up by the State Government to try to plug up other holes in the leaky dam.  And I seriously doubt that this would be any different in other states or the federal level. 

Additionally, it would decrease the tax burden on the general population because we wouldn't have to pay for the people imprisoned for marijuana-related offenses. Whether or not the funds go towards treatment relies on you and your fellow constituents to write letters to your representatives and/or organize a lobbying group to push for more treatment funding.

I can assure you that we do the latter.  I am part of an advocacy group with considerable pull in the state.  However, when there is no money coming it, it does little good.  As far as people being imprisoned for marijuana-related offenses.  That can be alleviated without legalizing the substance.  If this is happening in your state, for example, I would want to look at the schedule of consequences for marijuana-related offenses.  Are people being caught with a small amount going to jail?  If so that is clearly something your state government should look at and fix.  Now, traffickers and sellers are a different ball of wax, because their stuff is going to kids and adults.  That is something that would stay in place if you legalized it.  Anyone supplying a minor would still be going to jail, and I can assure you the penalties would be even harsher and prison times would be longer.  So I think you would find that particular cost is a wash if not higher if marijuana was legalized. 

Furthermore, how do The Kids benefit from being locked up for smoking pot? All that accomplishes is giving them a criminal stigma that could affect the rest of their lives and put them on the path of being a lifelong offender because their label prevents them from earning a legitimate income?

Well, in Maine they aren't locked up, unless of course they are trafficking.  We have diversion programs to keep kids out of jail.  Now, there will be kids who for whatever reason don't want to go through a diversion program and do the time.  But that is their choice. 

It looks like whatever you do for a living is severely distorting your view of the situation.

I completely disagree.  I would argue that what I do for a living gives me a view on the situation that you guys do not have.  Namely, dealing one-on-one with the children and families affected by substance abuse.  It's easy to look at some numbers on a piece of paper and argue for or against legalization.  It's a far different thing when you see it in the flesh. 

Last night I attended a fundraising dinner and there were 3 individuals who had gone through our programs.  They each got up to share their story of addiction and recovery.  And when I say recovery I mean they are still in that process, and still going through the programs.  To a person, their first drug was marijuana.  To a person, marijuana was the key agent for change from happy-go-lucky normal kid, to dropping out of school, having babies at 15.  Granted, that is just 3 kids.  But do you all really think they are that unique?  That we just created them in a lab somewhere?  That they are just kids who suck at using marijuana? 

[AFK]

Before we continue this, though... I want to apologize to you. I come to PD.com for the LULZ and the interesting discussions. I would HATE to have to talk about data security all the time. I don't come here to preach legalization or convert bad punsters. If the discussion is draining to you and if its detracting from your enjoyment of pd.com then let's stop the conversation.

also, THIS. if it bothers you, of course I don't care that much about the drug policy in America, we could be discussing non-drug related discordia topics instead, that's okay (I can tell it's stressing you out at least somewhat)

Well, I was getting a little pissed off when my professionalism was being challenged.  The actual debate of legalizing or not-legalizing doesn't stress me out in the least.  I mean, it's not like I just learned today I am in the extreme minority in my position on this board.  I just expect to be able to debate with you all without my credibility being challenged. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I've not seen a single legitimate cost/benefit analysis that would lead me to believe there would be a net societal and monetary gain if we legalized marijuana.  I've read pieces that suggest it would be a huge boon because of tax revenues.  I have serious doubts about that.  And there are no guarantees those revenues would go towards any kind of treatment or prevention.  So the state makes more money, more kids use, but no more services?  That is a recipe for failure. 

Slanket hops in because he feels like being an argumentative dick today.

Bullshit. It would still be illegal for kids and I don't know if you remember what it was like being a kid but it was way easier to acquire illegal drugs than it was to acquire alcohol (which, by the way, is one of the most dangerous drugs ever). Also, are you saying that you do not believe a new heavily taxed industry would create more revenue for the government and legitimate (read: taxable) jobs?

Yes, because here in Maine we've put big taxes on legal drugs like cigarettes and alcohol, and, nada.  The extra revenues that do come in don't even come close to filling in budget gaps, and they are certainly not going towards funding more prevention and treatment programs.  It is getting sucked up by the State Government to try to plug up other holes in the leaky dam.  And I seriously doubt that this would be any different in other states or the federal level. 

Additionally, it would decrease the tax burden on the general population because we wouldn't have to pay for the people imprisoned for marijuana-related offenses. Whether or not the funds go towards treatment relies on you and your fellow constituents to write letters to your representatives and/or organize a lobbying group to push for more treatment funding.

I can assure you that we do the latter.  I am part of an advocacy group with considerable pull in the state.  However, when there is no money coming it, it does little good.  As far as people being imprisoned for marijuana-related offenses.  That can be alleviated without legalizing the substance.  If this is happening in your state, for example, I would want to look at the schedule of consequences for marijuana-related offenses.  Are people being caught with a small amount going to jail?  If so that is clearly something your state government should look at and fix.  Now, traffickers and sellers are a different ball of wax, because their stuff is going to kids and adults.  That is something that would stay in place if you legalized it.  Anyone supplying a minor would still be going to jail, and I can assure you the penalties would be even harsher and prison times would be longer.  So I think you would find that particular cost is a wash if not higher if marijuana was legalized. 

Furthermore, how do The Kids benefit from being locked up for smoking pot? All that accomplishes is giving them a criminal stigma that could affect the rest of their lives and put them on the path of being a lifelong offender because their label prevents them from earning a legitimate income?

Well, in Maine they aren't locked up, unless of course they are trafficking.  We have diversion programs to keep kids out of jail.  Now, there will be kids who for whatever reason don't want to go through a diversion program and do the time.  But that is their choice. 

It looks like whatever you do for a living is severely distorting your view of the situation.

I completely disagree.  I would argue that what I do for a living gives me a view on the situation that you guys do not have.  Namely, dealing one-on-one with the children and families affected by substance abuse.  It's easy to look at some numbers on a piece of paper and argue for or against legalization.  It's a far different thing when you see it in the flesh. 

Last night I attended a fundraising dinner and there were 3 individuals who had gone through our programs.  They each got up to share their story of addiction and recovery.  And when I say recovery I mean they are still in that process, and still going through the programs.  To a person, their first drug was marijuana.  To a person, marijuana was the key agent for change from happy-go-lucky normal kid, to dropping out of school, having babies at 15.  Granted, that is just 3 kids.  But do you all really think they are that unique?  That we just created them in a lab somewhere?  That they are just kids who suck at using marijuana? 

So was that because weed caused the problems, or was weed an escape from problems? Or did they go into a worse situation because they were involved in the black market and got onto harder stuff because it was available? Did they smoke only weed or also drink alcohol? Is weed a cause here, or a symptom?

IS this causation or correlation?

[AFK]

So was that because weed caused the problems, or was weed an escape from problems?

Well, they were speeches, not interviews, but I would wager that it was an attempt to escape from problems that only served to exacerbate the problems. 

Or did they go into a worse situation because they were involved in the black market and got onto harder stuff because it was available?

In pretty much every case they sought out harder stuff because marijuana wasn't cutting it anymore.  I highly doubt any of these kids would've gone from alcohol to heroin.  It's pretty atypical in my experience.  Which is to say it happens but not very often. 

Did they smoke only weed or also drink alcohol? Is weed a cause here, or a symptom?

They did drink as well.  It seems though that the drinking and marijuana were pretty much simultaneous.  And I think that is more the case now.  It's rare you see a kid who is involved in only one substance.  But they all articulated that the way it evolved was that marijuana was what led them to the next substance.  And part of it of course was that it was available and part of it was a tolerance to marijuana where the effect just wasn't cutting it anymore.  Alcohol was the tricycle and marijuana was the bike with training wheels.  Eventually the wheels come off, and then, well, the wheels come off. 

IS this causation or correlation?

Does it matter?  The point is that the substance exacerbated some obvious underlying issues.  But, because the issues existed before the substance was introduced should not suggest the substance gets some kind of amnesty.  It would be like arguing against gun control measures to protect kids because the kid obviously had some issues thinking he could play with a gun and not get hurt, or that he was severely depressed before blowing a hole through his head.  If the implement used to deal with the issue can cause greater harm, my argument is that it is in our best interest to make sure that implement is regulated and kept, as best as possible, out of the hands of kids. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I must say I read a lot about Marijuana tolerance but I have never met anyone that seems to have a strong tolerance to marijuana. After 8 years of being a regular smoker, I can still get stoned on a single bowl. Even low-grade crappy weed still gets me stoned after two bowls. This seems to be the case with every stoner I know, most of them with years more exposure than I. I'm not saying it isn't possible or doesn't exist, but it does seem that 'tolerance' and 'addiction' get a lot of play on the prevention/recovery/help side.... but I have not yet met an adult with any of these issues.

About a year ago, the market around here dried up and no one had anything for about three months. No one seemed to be freaked out, no one was traveling huge distances to get a hook-up, if there was any irritability , it appears to have been manageable. So maybe my friends and I are some kind of strange anomoly, or maybe its confirmation bias... but I would think, given the number of stoners I know, that at least some of them would experience these kinds of issues.

Now, the kid I mentioned before who screwed up his life... he claimed that when he came home. It was all marijuana's fault because he built up a tolerance and had to go on to harder stuff... of course, he still bought weed and got stoned with no problem. He's 21 now and he smokes regularly on a normal dose of weed and doesn't say a word about tolerance.

Of course, what I perceive as the real issue is still there. He still doesn't deal with his problems so he has serious anger management issues and will turn to a bottle of alcohol as soon as things go wrong.

I don't want to be at cross-purpose here. I do not think that kids should smoke pot, I personally have never seen a 'successful' adult (in many senses of the word) come out of that.  In effect, I agree with your conclusion "t is in our best interest to make sure that implement is regulated and kept, as best as possible, out of the hands of kids" I just disagree that prohibition is regulation and I disagree that it is the best possible way to keep marijuana out of the hands of kids. Statistics can be tweaked and manipulated, but of the statistics I've seen, more kids are smoking now than 15 years ago and more kids claim that pot is very easy for them to get. That fits with what I've seen. I've gone without weed a number of times because  I refuse to buy pot from a kid.... even though somehow they have better connections than me :-/

I mean seriously, I have had a lot of kids approach me and say "Hey man, if we give you money can you grab a 12-pack?"... I have never had a kid say "Hey man, if I give you money, can you buy me weed?" Though once I had a kid say he was willing to trade a 20 sack for a case of cheap beer. Maybe its just a difference between Maine and Ohio, I dunno. Or maybe its the inner city areas of Columbus that are somehow an anomaly... I don't know.

[East Coast Hustle]

The whole argument for me seems to be distillable into a simple formula - Adults shouldn't be allowed to do things because children might gain access.

I'm sorry but that's just pissweak IMO. That fucker led to censorship in the early 90's (cos kids might watch the videos and kill someone) and it puts parental responsibility in the hands of the "nanny state" instead of in the hands of the parents where it belongs. Meanwhile me (a tax paying adult) isn't allowed to walk down to the video store and rent the new Childs Play movie. My rights are acceptable collateral? Fuck that noise!  

this.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The whole argument for me seems to be distillable into a simple formula - Adults shouldn't be allowed to do things because children might gain access.

I'm sorry but that's just pissweak IMO. That fucker led to censorship in the early 90's (cos kids might watch the videos and kill someone) and it puts parental responsibility in the hands of the "nanny state" instead of in the hands of the parents where it belongs. Meanwhile me (a tax paying adult) isn't allowed to walk down to the video store and rent the new Childs Play movie. My rights are acceptable collateral? Fuck that noise!  

this.

Yes.  Liberty trumps safety, health, and even The Children™.