Should Arizona legalize marijuana in 2016? (Tempe: statistics, eat, activity)

[whitem3]

A couple links concerning the legalization in Arizona.

https://www.mpp.org/states/arizona/

https://www.regulatemarijuanainarizona.org/

[coolbeans2000]

Earlier someone used the word "dope" which is almost the equivalent of saying dadgummit or whippersnapper. I think that brings up another point. I've noticed that many of the people today who are adamant against any kind of decriminalization or legalization tend to be seniors. And I think that is not an accident.

If you've lived 70+ years in a society and culture that has always stereotyped certain groups of individuals (pot smokers), and have also been systematically mislead by the government about scientific research for many decades. Then I'm not sure any amount of new evidence or persuasive logical arguments could change your change your mind about anything at that age.

Remember when Ronald Reagan claimed that he has absolute proof that smoking one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-Bomb blast? Yes he really said that, and he was serious. Just like millions of other seniors today, he was raised to fear certain things like marijuana, Communists and minority groups.

Nothing against these people, we should take better care of our Seniors, but it's a waste of time to argue with them about anything.

[whitem3]

Originally Posted by coolbeans2000

Earlier someone used the word "dope" which is almost the equivalent of saying dadgummit or whippersnapper. I think that brings up another point. I've noticed that many of the people today who are adamant against any kind of decriminalization or legalization tend to be seniors. And I think that is not an accident.

Young Adults More Likely to Support Legalization
Americans 65 and older are the only age group that still opposes legalizing marijuana. Still, support among this group has jumped 14 percentage points since 2011.
In contrast, 67% of Americans aged 18 to 29 back legalization. Clear majorities of Americans aged 30 to 64 also favor legalization.
[CENTER]

[/CENTER]
For First Time, Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana

[GeneR]

Perhaps boomer's experience has taught lessons not yet learned by the younger (more naive?) age groups. Use of weed was extremely prevalent in the 1960's onward. It's hard to find a boomer (now people in their 60's and 70's) who wasn't a regular user or surrounded by regular users. This, young folks, is not our first rodeo.

I refer to marijuana as 'dope' because that was the common term used for decades in the San Francisco Bay Area where I lived. Granted today it may not be hip, slick or cool. But today the term seems more applicable as science continues to show use by adolescents (and others) results in loss of intelligence quotient. Why do you think it was (is?) called DOPE?

Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife

I agree that many seniors are against legalization. It may be after watching peers imbibe for 5 decades perhaps we know where it can lead.

[Bondurant]

Originally Posted by whitem3

A couple links concerning the legalization in Arizona.

https://www.mpp.org/states/arizona/

https://www.regulatemarijuanainarizona.org/

Thanks for posting these links. I find the MPP petition to be superior to Safer Arizona. The 15% tax for pet projects Safer Arizona is selling as a "small tax" really turns me off. MPP has 30k signatures already. They should be able to make the '16 ballot with ease. Look forward to signing their petition and voting in favor on the '16 ballot.

[TKO]

Don't feel bad Gene, I'm a Gen Xer and we called it dope too. Nowadays though if something is dope it means it's really cool.

[GJJG2012]

Well, it could be saving their life! Isn't that important? 26% of those who use it for medical purposes say they are using it to treat depression, which causes 41,000 Americans a year to take their lives, sometimes after taking other lives. If that isn't a problem for you, you might want life sentences for the harmless. If that's a problem, you should want legalization. Helps with all mental health problems when smoked, as well as physical pain.

What is the advantage for law enforcement & law makers in keeping it illegal if it can save their lives, too? If they get cancer & die from cut, burn & poison, what good is their $$? They really should side with the public. 96% on recent internet polls say it should be legal for all adults & kids with conditions. This shows the more one knows, the more they favor it. People fear the unknown, but cannabis isn't unknown to those who are willing to do the research. Main motivation in stating supposed negatives is money.

In oil form, cannabis can cure many cancers & other fatal illnesses, & Federal govt opposes that because of bribes by pill cos. & others. It was in pharmacies from 1840s to as late as 1937 in some states. 100 years of lying causes confusion, for sure. 94% of studies only got funded if negative. Big Pharma's pills kill 265,000 a year & they're rewarded with $2 trillion a year, so can afford billions in bribes to pols. Cannabis has been used since Genesis & kills 0 year. Best wishes.

Originally Posted by GeneR

I'm trying to figure out what the advantage is when more people smoke (or ingest) more dope.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by GeneR

As is the case with much of secular law the concept of drug use is considered in the realm of moral turpitude. Moral turpitude is the legal term for what is considered depravity in one's private or public life. To this point our society has decided that use of illegal drugs (including weed) is an example of such depravity. Supporters of legalization obviously disagree.

Doing something which some would consider "morally depraved" is really none of anybody else's business, so long as it's done in private, and is consensual. Doing something that might be considered morally reprehensible in public is a different matter, especially if it violates somebody else's Constitutional rights or creates victims as a result.

Originally Posted by GeneR

We do in fact restrict some behaviors in our society to protect people from themselves. Is this the proper role of law? Should we care that some people will destroy their own lives if given the freedom to do so?

As a conservative Libertarian, I am completely against laws which attempt to save people from themselves. First of all, trying to save everybody from themselves is on the same line as socialism. Second, if certain people are so stupid that they risk their own lives, I say TOO BAD! I'm a huge believer in survival of the fittest. If we lose a few idiots along the way because of their own irresponsible behavior, I see it as a form of weeding out the lowest common denominator, which is the best form of population control. We don't need to save every living thing on the planet!

Originally Posted by GeneR

I believe it is a proper role for us as a society to care for our fellow man, to legislate what we consider moral behavior. There are many other examples of what is considered immoral: incest, beastiality, pornography, statutory rape. All of these acts can be done in the privacy of one's home and between consenting individuals yet we forbid them by law.

All of those examples you listed (except pornography in most cases) are usually not consensual. I'm all in favor of the laws that make things like incest and rape criminal acts. Pornography is different because the ones involved consented, and are completely aware of the situation. The exceptions to that would be child pornography and voyeurism in which the person(s) being photographed or video taped did not consent to being on display.

[GJJG2012]

Lying is where the money is, don't plan to tell the truth if you want your study funded by taxpayers! In 1976, Gerald Ford gave the FDA (lobbying arm of pill cos.) sole say as to who gets funded.

Cannabis has been proven to increase the number of healthy brain cells in adolescents. Researchers trying to convince people that a greater number of healthy brain cells lowers intelligence! All that happens when people use cannabis is some might pay less attention to info from other people so they might mot remember as much of what was said, but that is not the same as permanent brain damage.

There are many who have smoked it daily for 40-50 years & have no major health complaints and seem to be quite intelligent: good vocabulary, logical reasoning, knowledge of subject, etc.

Cannabis kills 0, alcohol maybe 90,000 Americans a year, pills 265,000 a year, tobacco 400,000 a year, bad food + too much food 500,000 Americans/yr. And you choose to worry about the non-killer? Can you explain why?

Nixon Administration wanted to arrest people for being black, poor, or young, but knew they couldn't use that for reason, so they criminalized their common pleasure. Sound crooked to you? If not why not? From book Smoke & Mirrors, as told to author by Nixon aide John E.

Originally Posted by GeneR

Perhaps boomer's experience has taught lessons not yet learned by the younger (more naive?) age groups. Use of weed was extremely prevalent in the 1960's onward. It's hard to find a boomer (now people in their 60's and 70's) who wasn't a regular user or surrounded by regular users. This, young folks, is not our first rodeo.

I refer to marijuana as 'dope' because that was the common term used for decades in the San Francisco Bay Area where I lived. Granted today it may not be hip, slick or cool. But today the term seems more applicable as science continues to show use by adolescents (and others) results in loss of intelligence quotient.

Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife

I agree that many seniors are against legalization. It may be after watching peers imbibe for 5 decades perhaps we know where it can lead.

[coolbeans2000]

Originally Posted by GeneR

Perhaps boomer's experience has taught lessons not yet learned by the younger (more naive?) age groups.

Doubt it.

It's much more likely because Seniors formed their opinions on Marijuana many years ago before much information on the subject was even readily accessible. A lot of the research hadn't even been done yet. But just like the boomers before them, people today in their late twenties, thirties and forties have already learned all their life lessons on drug use. They have mortgages and families now. In many ways they actually know more about the world than any previous generations due to technology.

They have something that earlier generations did not have access to before shaping all their opinions. The Internet. Tonight from the convenience of my home with my laptop I can go online and access countless different studies on Marijuana. I very much doubt many Seniors today are tech savy or inquisitive enough to keep current on new developments in science via their computers.

Were you aware that in 2011 only 66% of Americans age 65 or older approved of inter-racial marriage? While 97% of 18-29 year old's DO approve of it. But perhaps you're right about young people today. Like earlier generations they just haven't had the life experience and been taught enough life lessons and are still just too naive to know any better as had you said.