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.
I'm voting no. Marijuana might have some medicinal benefits under a doctor's supervision, but I don't see how society benefits from it being legalized for recreational use. I always hear that it should be legalized because prohibition failed, it's impossible to ban it, etc. Do we stop enforcing speed limits because too many people speed? Do we not enforce tax laws because too many people falsify their tax returns? Getting high is not a good thing and should not be condoned or supported by the law.
I'm voting no. Marijuana might have some medicinal benefits under a doctor's supervision, but I don't see how society benefits from it being legalized for recreational use. I always hear that it should be legalized because prohibition failed, it's impossible to ban it, etc. Do we stop enforcing speed limits because too many people speed? Do we not enforce tax laws because too many people falsify their tax returns? Getting high is not a good thing and should not be condoned or supported by the law.
Those aren't the best comparisons. The big one is alcohol. Similar failed policies. Are you for bringing back Prohibition? If not, what is the difference?
The Justice Department has said they cracked down in California because the regulations weren't clear and strict enough unlike in Colorado and Washington.
Oh ok. Thanks for clarifying. Obviously, I need to do some more reading on the subject.
I'm voting yes. I view decriminalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana is a step in the right direction, although ultimately I believe in the complete legalization, regulation and taxation of marijuana sales.
People that want to smoke are already smoking. The product is not regulated for consumer safety and it supports enterprises whose crimes ultimately extend well beyond the sale of a marijuana. The cost, both human and financial, of law enforcement and criminal justice related to marijuana is absurd to me.
I view it as a more innocuous vice than alcohol.
I'm not sure if the lame duck session in Congress helps or hurts the chances that Congress lets it stand.
The product is not regulated for consumer safety and it supports enterprises whose crimes ultimately extend well beyond the sale of a marijuana. The cost, both human and financial, of law enforcement and criminal justice related to marijuana is absurd to me.
I'd vote yes. I've never smoked it nor do I plan to but these are reasons are why I think it should be legalized.
I know about a dozen or so people from my youth that have OD'd on coke, heroin or booze, but marijuana? Ha. C'mon. Make it 21 and over to buy and posses, and lets save a our taxes dollar for real problems.
Those aren't the best comparisons. The big one is alcohol. Similar failed policies. Are you for bringing back Prohibition? If not, what is the difference?
The difference is that Prohibition took alcohol from being perfectly legal to being illegal overnight. Pot has never been legal in the first place. Had Obama not been president, it's likely that we would not have seen the feds "look the other way" as state decriminalization is at odds with federal law.
And yes, I think that if alcohol was introduced to the market today as a new product, it would never be allowed because of the tremendous risk it brings. Same goes for tobacco. I just don't understand how society benefits from condoning people getting high.
The difference is that Prohibition took alcohol from being perfectly legal to being illegal overnight. Pot has never been legal in the first place. Had Obama not been president, it's likely that we would not have seen the feds "look the other way" as state decriminalization is at odds with federal law.
And yes, I think that if alcohol was introduced to the market today as a new product, it would never be allowed because of the tremendous risk it brings. Same goes for tobacco. I just don't understand how society benefits from condoning people getting high.
Alot of American culture, particulary music, developed in bars, nightclubs, speak-easys, honky-tonks, etc., etc. Jazz, Blues, Country, Rock, etc. Virtually all of the popular music in America today has its' origins in smoke filled drinking establishments. If the bible thumpers and prohibitionists had their way there would be no popular music today. Nothing but christian hymns. Anybody up for a rousing chorus of "Onward Christian Soldiers"?
The difference is that Prohibition took alcohol from being perfectly legal to being illegal overnight. Pot has never been legal in the first place. Had Obama not been president, it's likely that we would not have seen the feds "look the other way" as state decriminalization is at odds with federal law.
And yes, I think that if alcohol was introduced to the market today as a new product, it would never be allowed because of the tremendous risk it brings. Same goes for tobacco. I just don't understand how society benefits from condoning people getting high.
Marijuana was perfectly legal, sometimes with restrictions and sometimes without, and went from being that way to illegal in the 30's and 40's.
I think that it is up to the individual to decide if they want to put things into their bodies and feel whatever it makes them feel. It's also about the cost to society (monetarily and otherwise). Is it better to lock up and spend money on small times dealers and users, creating wave after wave of felons, as well as continue to fuel the need for gangs and groups murdering over turf related to drugs or is it better to regulate, tax, and allow the sale of it?
When you take into account that usage tends to drop during the initial enactment of prohibition and then, once underground channels are established, it ticks back up and goes back to normal or has a possible increase the fight isn't one that makes much sense.
I mean, I don't condone tobacco use, in the sense of approving it, but I also wouldn't criminalize it. There is a separation between personal approval and understanding how it effects society to make laws which prohibit and punish usage.
The difference is that Prohibition took alcohol from being perfectly legal to being illegal overnight. Pot has never been legal in the first place. Had Obama not been president, it's likely that we would not have seen the feds "look the other way" as state decriminalization is at odds with federal law.
And yes, I think that if alcohol was introduced to the market today as a new product, it would never be allowed because of the tremendous risk it brings. Same goes for tobacco. I just don't understand how society benefits from condoning people getting high.
Look up a man by the name of Harry Anslinger. Marijuana, aka cannabis, was perfectly legal and used by many doctors until the man came along. If you really care about this issue and read about what this man did you will understand that marijuana prohibition is a complete joke!
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.
