posted
How is pot so much different than tobacco or alcohol? I have never used, and so I do confess ignorance in this arena.
Posts: 16 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all pot really can't be compared to tobbaco. Other than the means of delivery, there are few similiarities. Additionally, growers have been able to develop every increasingly potent strains of weed. Users ask for them by name. The pot being smoked now carries a exponentially greater high than just 20 years ago.
I agree that alcohol is in some ways comparable to pot. But I do not think that having one legal problematic substance is reason to have two. There will also remain the problem of MJ being a gateway drug. Even if it is legal it will pique interest in other highs. All though I realize that some people debate whether or not it is a gateway drug, in my personal experience I don't know anyone who didn't start there.
posted
Perhaps at the producer level they may have specialization. But, all the drug dealers I knew would sell whatever they could get their hands on.
And, Pete, I think you overestimate how much is spent dedicated to pot enforcement. All the police are equally aware that cocaine, heroine, crack, and meth are more harmful to society. They spend their dollars proportionate to the risk to society.
Even if a particular drug is made legal, the hunt for the other drugs will remain highly dangerous work. I am not willing to endanger any lives because a narrow (in the sense of current priorities and dollar allocations for enforcement) segment of the drug trade has become legal.
Also, I really doubt that people became more and more addicted. The great truism of people is that they stay the same. That's why you never tell a prospective boss you left a previous company because of people issues, people are the same (except perhaps in Utah, see UTAH! thread). I do not believe my ancestors were more saintly people then those today. If any thing changed over time it was the accessibility to substances.
And if accessibility is the key thing that changed what will making pot even more accessibile do to society? Will we as a people be creating a group of people who drain or promote our culture?
The smokers who get sick when they're old and demand increased medical care, are they a drain or a boost for society?
I will not support pot as a legal substance unless this drain to society is addressed in the laws. And if the people really want it, I'm all for allowing them to die younger with reduced medical care.
If I knew that future medical expenses were built into the price of illicit substances (tobacco and alcohol too) my only objection is the decreased chance they will come to Christ. All mind altering substances increase the spiritual distance between us and Christ. I have seen to often that smokers do not get even that testimony promissed by Moroni as long as they continue to smoke.
Having found the gospel for myself I desire that others come unto it, just as Lehi desired that Laman and Lemual partake of the fruit. I cannot condone a course of action that will make it even harder for more people to come unto Christ.
Posts: 10893 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: but you have to admit that it costs a lot to keep marijuana illegal even apart from other drugs.
Actually, I don't, at least not compared to the amount spent dedicated to other drugs. We need to compare apples to apples. Dedicated dollars to dedicated dollars.
Posts: 10893 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
FlyByNight, I’m not sure which part of your post you fear may have been too harsh. I take issue only with the following:
quote:I will not support pot as a legal substance unless this drain to society is addressed in the laws. And if the people really want it, I'm all for allowing them to die younger with reduced medical care.
This is a very un-charitable attitude, but your next statement reveals it to have been hyperbole:
quote:Having found the gospel for myself I desire that others come unto it… I cannot condone a course of action that will make it even harder for more people to come unto Christ.
quote:Whether I like it or not, pot smokers can and are (at least moderately) productive members of society. And pot is generally not categorized as "devastatingly harmful".
I don’t know any pot-smokers, so I’ll have to take your word for it that they are moderately productive members of society. However, I believe that pot, tobacco and alcohol are all "generally categorized as 'devastatingly harmful.'"
quote:I would be interested in learning why drugs were made illegal earlier in U.S. history. There was a time when cocaine, heroine, essentially everything were legal substances. At what point did they become illegal and why?
I saw a documentary on cable television that linked the illegalization of marijuana with racism against Mexicans. Mexican’s smoked marijuana and were viewed by many Americans as violent and dangerous. By making their drug of choice illegal, we created an excuse to arrest and deport them. A campaign was launched to increase public support which portrayed marijuana users and violent and dangerous. The poor fellow put in charge of enforcement that first year had to deal with thousands and thousands of acres of weeds. The how of making marijuana illegal had to do with licensing. The federal government passed a law stating that no one could grow or sell marijuana without a license. Then is proceeded to issue exactly zero licenses. It’s not exactly constitutional, but the scenario had already passed through the courts when the federal government banned machine guns. The public was terrified of machine guns and supported the legislation with fervor. It was harder to sell the public on the dangers of a weed.
Posts: 1378 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, the second of the two quotes (the devastatingly harmful one) you attribute to me was not made by me, it was Pete that wrote it.
My tone was too harsh. And as far as health care, I really don't think its right that a person who's primary problems are because they smoke tobacco can get things like a power wheelchair paid for by medicare (my tax dollars are paying for their comfort?). Unless they're health care needs are built into the cost of the product harming them, then I'm all for restricting them to essential medical care. I do not think something that improves quality of life is essential, treatments that keep a person alive are essential.
Personally, I think its hypocritical of a nation to make alcohol and tobacco legel and pot illegal.
However, I have more reasons to support making them illegal then to make them legal.
Posts: 10893 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't believe decriminalizing pot would be a very bad thing, but I view this purely from the perspective of promoting the general welfare. As far as that goes, it might be a good thing to let states experiment with it to help inform good public policy nationally. Decriminalization might actually be better use of public dollars and resources, but few drugs could possibly boast this.
I'm disturbed when I hear people talk about drug-using "rights" though. Libertarian arguments generally unnerve me, but when people talk about decriminalizing very dangerous and currently inexpensive (hence not crime-contributing) drugs like LSD, it scares me. A significant part of the decriminalization crowd are these kinds of libertarians, so I worry that marijauna might be a gateway to drug tolerance in public policy. Yeah, it's a slipery slope argument (and therefore tenuous), but it worries me.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote:Whether I like it or not, pot smokers can and are (at least moderately) productive members of society. And pot is generally not categorized as "devastatingly harmful".
I don’t know any pot-smokers, so I’ll have to take your word for it that they are moderately productive members of society.
Unfortunately, I grew up around pot smokers. And from my experience they are among the very least productive members of society. While I cannot make a sweeping generalization of all pot smokers, I can say that the ones I know would rather live in a camper parked in somebody's back yard and collect welfare than go out and get a job. It's an easy life. Food stamps keep you fed and the welfare check pays for the pot and the latest video game. As long as you have an extension cord for the TV and Playstation, life is good.
Posts: 865 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:All though I realize that some people debate whether or not it is a gateway drug, in my personal experience I don't know anyone who didn't start there
People say this a lot, but I don't know anyone who didn't start with alcohol or tobacco. I also know many more people who used marijuana and never moved on to any "harder" drugs. Most of them have stopped using pot as well.
I personally don't believe in the gateway drug hype.
However, I am undecided on the decriminalization/legalization of pot. On the one hand, if it becomes a controlled substance it can be regulated and taxed. On the other hand you have OSCs comments above in regards to the legalization making more people likely to try it.
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think its a gateway because in order to get it currently you need to interact with a dealer. A dealer who more likely then not, will sell whatever he can get his hands on. I would be surprised if those that only used marijuana were not at some time offered other drugs. So, if it did become legal that interaction would be reduced or eliminated.
As for them being productive members of society, well, if it became legal we could cross check purchase habits and deny welfare to those that use it to buy marijuana. I wonder why we don't do that now with alcohol.
A stoner is perfectly capable of handling mundane jobs. Though you are right, they would rather find any way possible to not work and just party all the time.
posted
I was curious about Erin's assertion that it was a racist ploy that caused marijuana to become illegal. All the sites I found are pro-legalization. This supports Erin's assertion fairly directly. A brief history of the criminalization of cannabis This next one, while it does have its disjoint parts places the blame primarily on Harry J. Anslinger: Why is Alcohol Legal and Marijuana Illegal? And this site combines the blame on racism and economic prejudices (lumber wanted hemp to be illegal). Marijuana FAQ Note, that to find the reason why for the FAQ do a search for P A R T T W O (Put 2 spaces between each letter and 6 spaces between the two words. Don't copy paste as the BB preprocessor eliminates "redundant" spaces.)
quote: I personally don't believe in the gateway drug hype.
Nor do I. In fact, I know many stoners who are content with their dope and don't care to move on to anything else. However, if they didn't have their dope, they would have to find some other mind-altering chemical to get them through the day.
Sure, it is a gateway drug in that most people use it before they use harder drugs, but I take issue with the idea that those who smoke dope will probably go on to use harder drugs. I can't count the number of times I've heard well-meaning people say, "if you use marijuana, you'll most likely end up using harder drugs."
quote: All though I realize that some people debate whether or not it is a gateway drug, in my personal experience I don't know anyone who didn't start there
That's like saying that if you go to college, you will most likely end up becoming a lawyer. After all, how many lawyers do you know that did not go to college?
Posts: 865 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've known, and know, some good people who smoke pot only occasionally, as a recreational drug, who do not waste time partying all the time, and who successfully hold full time jobs. In that case, why is it worse than tobacco or alcohol, both of which are socially acceptable in the world outside the Church? I would hate to see people like this end up in prison, where they would be exposed to far worse, more damaging influences. Further more, not all pot smokers get their weed from international sources...some grow their own, for personal use, not for distribution. Shouldn't it be judged on an individual case basis?
I have mixed feelings on this topic. On the one hand, as a Latter-day Saint, I understand how it fits into the WOW, as a banned substance. On the other hand, I don't see why it can't be decriminalized, because, it really doesn't do as much damage to society as alcohol. For example, I never saw a violent pothead, unless he was also drinking.
I also think that medical use of marijuana should be legal. If it were, then patients with cancer, or other diseases, who needed it, could get it from sources other than drug pushers.
Why couldn't there be a state-run board like the ABC in some states, where it could be bought? It could be a booming cash crop for states, who could tax it, just as tobacco is taxed.
Posts: 1305 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel the stigma now about pot use is too deeply ingrained. The arguments mostly are polarised in the extreme.
I guess also, the image of the opium dens of the late 19th century had some influence, but this is similar to the emptyhead type of pot user mentioned above - who dosses in campervans and lives for 'highs'.
In the event of legalisation, not all would use. Some people just don't enjoy the effects. Some don't 'notice' the effects and some become extremely ill. Some will always refuse to use pot just as many do not use alcohol - partly due to the stigma and partly as a matter of simple preference and/or distaste.
So to my mind, the single feature most worthy of discussion is the impact of criminality. I agree the main 'gateway' aspect of pot is that users must associate with criminal elements.
I should throw in also that smoking is not necessary as it can just as easilly be eaten, along or with various foods (strawberry jam was famous in the 60s).
But the whole debate has farther to go yet. Western society is not about to suddenly embrace a soft stance on drugs. There are many vested interests, financial and commercial interests, that have a strangle hold far stronger than any moral concerns expressed by you or I.
Posts: 886 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: I should throw in also that smoking is not necessary as it can just as easilly be eaten, along or with various foods (strawberry jam was famous in the 60s).
And brownies, too. Posts: 1305 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I also think that medical use of marijuana should be legal. If it were, then patients with cancer, or other diseases, who needed it, could get it from sources other than drug pushers.
This is not true. As stated above, Oregon has legalized medicinal marijuana, but you can't buy it in a pharamacy. You have to buy it from the same guys who sell it to everybody.
Posts: 1378 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
