Legalizing Marijuana?

Why do you say that?

ok first off less people would smoke legal marijuana because of the forbidden fruit factor. just look at prohibition on alcohol in the 1920s.the largest percentage of the population in american history drank alcohol at that time, and we have yet to beat those numbers even today. Also looking at prohibition, what do you think gave rise to organized crime and importing the heavy drugs later. The longer we stay like this the worse things are going to get. Furthermore, is marijuana really that bad? Compare a homerolled joint to a menthol cigarette in the amount of deadly additives and youll see what I mean.Example:cigarette paper is dipped in cyanide to make it burn longer. The drugs controlled by the aristocracy are a lot worse than homegrown. The only reason we don't have legalized marijuana is because it hurts big business.AP_Work_R wrote:
And to think...what kind of country let's drugs be legal? Not a good one...lol the jamestown colony was starving until john rolfe cultivated tobacco.An estimated 438000 people die in the US from tobacco use each year.Hmmmm..........

and oh yeah db 1 in 5 people uses tobacco and we all drive carbon monoxide emitting cars so if youre worried about polluted air youre a little late.... im tired of this arguing man! lets all get high and just talk about it....rofl....

Tucker wrote:ok first off less people would smoke legal marijuana because of the forbidden fruit factor. just look at prohibition on alcohol in the 1920s.the largest percentage of the population in american history drank alcohol at that time, and we have yet to beat those numbers even today. Also looking at prohibition, what do you think gave rise to organized crime and importing the heavy drugs later. The longer we stay like this the worse things are going to get. Furthermore, is marijuana really that bad? Compare a homerolled joint to a menthol cigarette in the amount of deadly additives and youll see what I mean.Example:cigarette paper is dipped in cyanide to make it burn longer. The drugs controlled by the aristocracy are a lot worse than homegrown. The only reason we don't have legalized marijuana is because it hurts big business.lol the jamestown colony was starving until john rolfe cultivated tobacco.An estimated 438000 people die in the US from tobacco use each year.Hmmmm..........
Hmmm...I don't think so. More people would smoke marijuana because it IS legal. Think about alcohol. Legal? Yes. Do lots of people drink it? Yes. Despite underage drinking, what happens to kids with families who consume alcoholic beverages? Hmm, almost over half of them drink it when they grow older. Legalize marijuana? I guess the number of marijuana smokers would probably double, or triple, in 3 years...

Your question about what gave the increase of crimes and imports of drugs? Well let's see...drug dealers make extremely high profits...now there are dealers who get into fights with other dealers...so, there's the crime rates... drugs get people addicted so the more drugs, more people which equals more money....hmmmm....

As for your alcohol statistics, could you give me the numbers in the 1920s and today? Last time I checked, the numbers were higher than what you think...wonder what happened there?

And about your John Rolfe fact. True, tobacco saved them, but did the colonists smoke it? Um, some may have but the tobacco was used for economic gains! Oh, just to let you know, John Rolfe did help, but it was actually John Smith who put the lazy gold-diggers to work (read your history please!). John Rolfe contributed by selling the tobacco... I'm pretty sure he didn't save Jamestown by growing and smoking plants.

So, I guess we should start smoking to make air pollution even worse? Besides, cars will probably become useless because we only have enough oil to last us probably +50 years. If you don't think that's true, look at China now. Population of +2 billion people, and they are starting to buy more automobiles, plus the world population is increasing... Gas prices go up, amount goes down...

For getting high and forgetting...that's weak. Seriously. In my opinion, only fools get high from drugs - they mess themselves up even though they know the consequences.

AP_Work_R wrote:Hmmm...I don't think so. More people would smoke marijuana because it IS legal.

Impossible to say for sure, but his point was that less people will do it because it's "cool" and illegal.

Quote:Think about alcohol. Legal? Yes. Do lots of people drink it? Yes. Despite underage drinking, what happens to kids with families who consume alcoholic beverages? Hmm, almost over half of them drink it when they grow older. Legalize marijuana? I guess the number of marijuana smokers would probably double, or triple, in 3 years...

Maybe. But look at cigarettes, the amount of smokers are decreasing as time goes on, thanks to awareness programs (the truth campaign, etc.).

Quote:Your question about what gave the increase of crimes and imports of drugs? Well let's see...drug dealers make extremely high profits...now there are dealers who get into fights with other dealers...so, there's the crime rates... drugs get people addicted so the more drugs, more people which equals more money....hmmmm....

Well yes, but that's because since alcohol was criminalized, (and I hate how cliche this sounds) only criminals controlled the inflow of alcohol (which people were going to drink anyway, legal or not). If marijuana gets legalized, it can be regulated and kept track of (hopefully big business won't screw it up and add nasty additives and whatnot).

Quote:For getting high and forgetting...that's weak. Seriously. In my opinion, only fools get high from drugs - they mess themselves up even though they know the consequences.

There you go.

While there are plenty of reasons not to smoke marijuana, I still can't see any reason to keep it illegal.

According to Thomas Coffey, "the death rate from poisoned liquor was appallingly high throughout the country. In 1925 the national toll was 4,154 as compared to 1,064 in 1920. And the increasing number of deaths created a public relations problem for . . . the drys because they weren't exactly accidental."[18] Will Rogers remarked that "governments used to murder by the bullet only. Now it's by the quart."
Prohibition may actually have increased drinking and intemperance by increasing the availability of alcohol. One New Jersey businessman claimed that there were 10 times more places one could get a drink during Prohibition than there had been before.[20] It is not surprising that, given their hidden locations and small size, speakeasies outnumbered saloons. Lee found that there were twice as many speak easies in Rochester, New York, as saloons closed by Prohibition. That was more or less true throughout the country. Prohibition also led many people to drink more "legitimate" alcohol, such as patent medicines (which contained high concentrations of alcohol), medicinal alcohol, and sacramental alcohol.[21] The amount of alcoholic liquors sold by physicians and hospitals doubled between 1923 and 1931. The amount of medicinal alcohol (95 percent pure alcohol) sold increased by 400 percent during the same time.[22] Those increases occurred despite rigorous new regulations. Cirrhosis of the liver has been found to pose a significant health risk, particularly in women who consume more than four drinks per day.[24] However, deaths due to cirrhois and alcoholism are a small portion of the total number of deaths each year, and alcohol can be considered only a contributing cause of most of those deaths.[25] Many people who do not drink develop cirrhosis, and the vast majority of heavy drinkers never develop it.[26] Dr. Snell of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, reported in 1931 that "we know now that cirrhosis occurs in only 4 per cent of alcoholic individuals."[27] Even in the worst pre-Prohibition year, recorded deaths due to alcoholism and cirrhosis of the liver amounted to less than 1.5 percent of total deaths. Not only did the number of serious crimes increase, but crime became organized. Criminal groups organize around the steady source of income provided by laws against victimless crimes such as consuming alcohol or drugs, gambling, and prostitution. In the process of providing goods and services, those criminal organizations resort to real crimes in defense of sales territories, brand names, and labor contracts. That is true of extensive crime syndicates (the Mafia) as well as street gangs, a criminal element that first surfaced during Prohibition
All From:http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157.html
Also See:http://www.mpp.org/harmful.html
I think those can start to justify my statements

The early experience of the Prohibition era gave the government a taste of what was to come. In the three months before the 18th Amendment became effective, liquor worth half a million dollars was stolen from Government warehouses. By midsummer of 1920, federal courts in Chicago were overwhelmed with some 600 pending liquor violation trials (Sinclair, 1962: 176-177). Within three years, 30 prohibition agents were killed in service.

Other statistics demonstrated the increasing volume of the bootleg trade. In 1921, 95,933 illicit distilleries, stills, still works and fermentors were seized. in 1925, the total jumped to 172,537 and up to 282,122 in 1930. In connection with these seizures, 34,175 persons were arrested in 1921; by 1925, the number had risen to 62,747 and to a high in 1928 of 75,307 (Internal Revenue, Service, 1921, 1966, 1970: 95, 6, 73). Concurrently, convictions for liquor offenses in federal courts rose from 35,000 in 1923 to 61,383 in 1932.

The law could not quell the continuing demand for alcoholic products. Thus, where legal enterprises could no longer supply the demand, an illicit traffic developed, from the point of manufacture to consumption. The institution of the speakeasy replaced the institution of the saloon. Estimates of the number of speakeasies throughout the United States ranged from 200,000 to 500,000 (Lee, 1963: 68).
The withdrawal of wine on permit from bonded warehouses for sacramental purposes amounted in round figures to 2,139,000 gallons in the fiscal year 1922; 2,503,500 gallons in 1923; and 2,944,700 gallons in 1924. There is no way of knowing what the legitimate consumption of fermented sacramental wine is but it is clear that the legitimate demand does not increase 800,000 gallons in two years (Dobyns, 1940: 297).The per capita rate for the Prohibition years is computed to be 1.63 proof gallons. This is 11.64% higher than the Pre-Prohibition rate (Tillitt, 1932: 35). Based on these figures one observer concluded: "And so the drinking which was, in theory, to have been decreased to the vanishing point by Prohibition has, in fact, increased" (Tillitt, 1932: 36). Perhaps indicative of a gradual process of adjustment, however, the results of later Gallup polls suggest a gradual decline in the use of alcohol. Of a national sample, 67% indicated they used alcohol in 1945, in contrast to 60% in 1950 and 55% in 1958 (Gusfield, 1963: 135).
All From:http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2a.htm
Also, some of the recent rises in alchohol consumption are due to other factors such as stress. I saw another interesting study on teen drinking at this site:http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2a.htm

AP_Work_R wrote: Oh, just to let you know, John Rolfe did help, but it was actually John Smith who put the lazy gold-diggers to work (read your history please!). John Rolfe contributed by selling the tobacco... I'm pretty sure he didn't save Jamestown by growing and smoking plants.
I have read my history and the famous comment made by John Smith "He who shall not work, shall not eat" came sometime before John Rolfe(1608)(the famed starving time was 1609-1610)(during this time one man killed, salted, and ate his wife because he was so hungry). Although his comment caused the people to work harder, they did not possess necessary skills, they were under constant siege by the Indians, and the swampy recess of Jamestown was prone to malaria outbreaks and inhospitable soil. John Rolfe, who didn't just sell the tobbacco, but beforehand perfected the methods of raising and curing it, was able to remove the weed's bitter tang by 1612.(botanist before businessman) This caused an insatiable European demand for the plant, and it was said you could see tobacco plants being grown in the streets of Jamestown. The many amateur tobacco farmers however, knew nothing of crop rotation and needed more and more land. They began to fan out and form farms and plantations throughout the South. So, in essence, half of our country was founded by drug dealers.

AP_Work_R wrote:So, I guess we should start smoking to make air pollution even worse?

Last time I checked 1 in 5 people already smoke. While I was able to find that cigarette smoke affects indoor pollution I found no sources supporting it affects outdoor pollution. If you can find anything please let me know. Besides, marijuana is a plant of the earth, a weed that grows naturally and abundantly. Tobacco is difficult to grow and is known as a soil killer, probably causing it to release more pollutants because of its heavy mineral intake. And the 'lets all get high" comment was a joke Oh yeah one last thing: Everyone who supports legalized marijuana should go here:http://www.petitiononline.com/ML66/petition.html

If you think that the effects of marijuana are harmless as legalization advocates would have you believe, then you are gravely mistaken. I have seen households torn apart by it, marriages ended, kids put in the middle of custody battles, and people throwing their lives away. Marijuana is not a harmless drug. Legalizing marijuana makes no sense at all. Basically the argument breaks down to since everyone does it anyway, let's just make it legal. So if something seems like it's out of control we should just let it go. Nice. So if gang violence seems to get out of control, just let it go? If sexual harassment and sexual predation gets out of control, just let it go? Sounds pretty stupid to me.

dwalk4 wrote:If you think that the effects of marijuana are harmless as legalization advocates would have you believe, then you are gravely mistaken. I have seen households torn apart by it, marriages ended, kids put in the middle of custody battles,

What are you talking about?

Quote:Marijuana is not a harmless drug. Legalizing marijuana makes no sense at all. Basically the argument breaks down to since everyone does it anyway, let's just make it legal.

No, it breaks down that people should have the right to do what they like to their own bodies. It's not the government's job to monitor our morality.

Quote:So if something seems like it's out of control we should just let it go. Nice. So if gang violence seems to get out of control, just let it go? If sexual harassment and sexual predation gets out of control, just let it go? Sounds pretty stupid to me.

None of those crimes are even slightly similar to inhaling an intoxicating substance on your own time, without directly affecting anybody else.

Of course some people abuse marijuana, like anything else, but believe it or not it is possible to use it responsibly.

Do you believe alcohol should be illegal?