Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fewer children will obtain access to either substance when it is prohibited by law. Period.
Whether the prohibition results in ZERO children obtaining marijuana or alcohol is quite beside the point, obviously, since the idea behind such a prohibition is to reduce to the most manageable level the social pathologies that accompany abuse of said substances. In order to reduce the social pathologies (addiction, overdoses, accidents and injuries, arrested development, etc.) one does not have to prevent each and every child from obtaining these deleterious substances. But if society is able to prevent a majority of children from obtaining these substances, then the goal of mitigating the social pathologies arising therefrom is achieved.
You seem to have difficulty understanding that with juveniles, there are already prohibitions against obtaining both alcohol and marijuana. One is somewhat easier for school children to obtain than the other, but both are generally available for those kids who want to dedicate the time and effort to obtain them. But the overarching reality is that fewer school children obtain either precisely due to the restrictions on their availability than would do so if both were completely legal for juveniles to purchase.
However, I will add that with legalization, of course, the "glamour factor" is replaced by the far more powerful factor of tacit social approval of substance abuse. In any event, the "glamour factor" is wildly overstated as a motivation for substance abuse, and I'm inclined to discard it out of hand on that basis. There may be a few juveniles who are enticed by this silly nostrum you refer to as the "glamour factor," but most juveniles who avail themselves of pot and booze do so because they want to get drunk and stoned.
Edited to add: Personally, I'm not set in stone as being against legalization of marijuana. But we already have one drug (alcohol) that, while it exacts a great toll in terms of social pathologies, nonetheless has been a part of human culture for thousands of years. Marijuana, of course, has no such long-standing tradition, but offers mostly the opportunity to compound the social ills already wrought by alcohol.
If you are going to legalize marijuana, you'd best be ready for the problems (and the social and financial costs) that legalization will bring.
Humans and cannabis have a 10 thousand year relationship.
Edited to add: Personally, I'm not set in stone as being against legalization of marijuana. But we already have one drug (alcohol) that, while it exacts a great toll in terms of social pathologies, nonetheless has been a part of human culture for thousands of years. Marijuana, of course, has no such long-standing tradition, but offers mostly the opportunity to compound the social ills already wrought by alcohol.
The ills to society and its citizens caused by prohibition far outweighs any ills the plant itself could ever cause.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milton Miteybad
If you are going to legalize marijuana, you'd best be ready for the problems (and the social and financial costs) that legalization will bring.
5 years into legalization in Colorado has produced NONE of the problems you appear to be worried about. The feared social impact failed to materialize (our Governor admits that), and the financial impact has been one-half billion in the green. Not only that, our jails, courts, and police officers are no longer burdened with low-level pot cases which has allowed them more resources to go after the real criminals. So what in the world are you talking about?
Millions have been using it daily for over 40 years.
Prohibition has not worked. The war on drugs is a total failure. Why not let's try something different?
Regardless, the % of teens looking for marijuana is a not a pre-condition for ballot measures.
To conservatives, "protecting the children" only matters when it comes to controlling grown adults' personal choices. They are fine with gunmen killing children and they are fine with children being denied healthy school lunches. However, we have to "protect the children" by locking up grown adults for wanting to get high on a plant that's less deadly and addictive than alcohol.
Its funny seeing someone push liberal agenda while insisting it is conservative. Wouldn't it be easier to say he/she is conservative on some issues and liberal on others?
Small government out of people’s lives is a conservative agenda regardless of what the evangelicals push through the GOP.
Cannabis is a psychotropic and has catastrophic effects on your brain. Especially the young.
Irrelevant even if true. People are going to do what they're going to do anyway. This is nothing more than big daddy government trying to tell people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their body.
A true Conservative should hate this in theory.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
