More Pot Talk

[KevinWestern]

I've noticed that some of the more conservative posters here can be quite hostile towards marijuana legalization.

Two questions:

1.) As a conservative, why do you advocate for more rules, more restrictions, and more spending over a plant that's relatively non-addicting, impossible to overdose on, and is even sometimes recommended by doctors for chemo patients? Can't our resources be used more efficiently?

2.) If you're anti-marijuana, is it common to be anti-alcohol as well (given it kills brain cells, it's toxic, thousands die each year from consuming it, etc)?

Just picking some brains.

Thanks...

 

[martybegan]

I've noticed that many of the more conservative posters here can be quite hostile towards marijuana legalization.

Two questions:

1.) As a conservative, why do you advocate for more rules, more restrictions, and more spending over a plant that's relatively non-addicting, impossible to overdose on, and is even sometimes recommended by doctors for chemo patients?

2.) If you're anti-marijuana, are you also anti-alcohol as well (given it kills brain cells, it's toxic, thousands die each year from consuming it, etc)?

Just picking some brains.

Thanks...

I would treat it like alcohol. States and local municipalities are free to ban/allow it as they see fit. We have dry towns and counties now, what is the difference with having "non stoner" towns and counties.

 

[KevinWestern]

I would treat it like alcohol. States and local municipalities are free to ban/allow it as they see fit. We have dry towns and counties now, what is the difference with having "non stoner" towns and counties.

I'm definitely fine with the democratic process of regulating the drug, however more curious regarding the personal opinions of folks on the drug.

In other words, if you want to ban marijuana, would you also ban alcohol? Or why would you like to see resources used to keep the drug illegal?

.

 

[jwoodie]

Let's dispense with the Straw Man argument about Conservatives being "hostile" towards Marijuana legalization. Although I do not pigeon hole my thoughts into labeled categories, I am concerned about "legalization" from the standpoint of its effect on children. Unlike alcohol and most other intoxicants, marijuana is most commonly ingested by smoking. As a result, children who are in close proximity to it (same room or car) also ingest this drug. Just because it is legal to smoke tobacco around children is no justification for adding to the list of harmful substances to which they are exposed. After all, if tobacco were invented today, it would be banned as a known carcinogen.

Other than needing to deal with the DWI issue, I would not be opposed to smoking bars where marijuana could be legally consumed by adults.

 

[martybegan]

I would treat it like alcohol. States and local municipalities are free to ban/allow it as they see fit. We have dry towns and counties now, what is the difference with having "non stoner" towns and counties.

I'm definitely fine with the democratic process of regulating the drug, however more curious regarding the personal opinions of folks on the drug.

In other words, if you want to ban marijuana, would you also ban alcohol? Or why would you like to see resources used to keep the drug illegal?

.

I see certain drugs as being so destructive that keeping them illegal is warranted. That being said starting with pot being legal and seeing what happens is a good start to seeing if legalizing other drugs would be better than our current situation.

One tactic I might use is that if you get caught committing a serious crime with drugs in your system (robbery, burglary, assault) that drug is now illegal specifically for YOU and if you get caught with it in your system again, 10 years in jail minimum.

 

[Katzndogz]

I've had too much personal contact with potheads to ever be convinced of its harmlessness.

While alcohol is destructive, no doubt about it, there is no purpose served by adding millions of potheads to the number of alcoholics and expecting a better result.

I have discussed marijuana legalization with a friend of mine who is a magistrate for the world court at the Hague. In his opinion, as a magistrate that has adjudicated international drug cases around the world, that the real destruction isn't with the existence of marijuana at all. It is the number of people who want to get high. No country (and he has been to all of them) survives a population that has become so hopeless and pointless that they resort to drugging themselves.

Schools with a high percentage of drug users fail and when they fail they take the few performing students with them. Companies with a high percentage of drug users fail unless they clean out the druggies first. Countries with high drug use like Yemen and Portugal stumble and fail. It isn't the legalization or criminalization of marijuana that helps or harms, it's the number of users. Unless America can somehow convince it's people that the hopelessness and pointlessness that leads them into drug use is wrong, no amount of legalization will help. We will be a nation of primarily drug addled zombies with a few people trying to support them and get protection from them.

 

[Katzndogz]

Let's dispense with the Straw Man argument about Conservatives being "hostile" towards Marijuana legalization. Although I do not pigeon hole my thoughts into labeled categories, I am concerned about "legalization" from the standpoint of its effect on children. Unlike alcohol and most other intoxicants, marijuana is most commonly ingested by smoking. As a result, children who are in close proximity to it (same room or car) also ingest this drug. Just because it is legal to smoke tobacco around children is no justification for adding to the list of harmful substances to which they are exposed. After all, if tobacco were invented today, it would be banned as a known carcinogen.

Other than needing to deal with the DWI issue, I would not be opposed to smoking bars where marijuana could be legally consumed by adults.

Now that marijuana is legal in Washington, they want to ban all marijuana use in any business with a liquor license. Maybe having zombies both drunk and high isn't as acceptable as they thought it would be.

 

[KevinWestern]

Let's dispense with the Straw Man argument about Conservatives being "hostile" towards Marijuana legalization.

Fair enough, but note I said “some” conservatives. DI’m usually a conservative myself when it comes to gov’t policy and are not hostile towards legalization.

Although I do not pigeon hole my thoughts into labeled categories, I am concerned about "legalization" from the standpoint of its effect on children. Unlike alcohol and most other intoxicants, marijuana is most commonly ingested by smoking. As a result, children who are in close proximity to it (same room or car) also ingest this drug. Just because it is legal to smoke tobacco around children is no justification for adding to the list of harmful substances to which they are exposed. After all, if tobacco were invented today, it would be banned as a known carcinogen.

Interesting point. Will note that if marijuana were legalized, more people would take the drug by ingesting it vs smoking it (because smoking is a very unhealthy and inefficient way of absorbing THC). Currently, folks generally only have access to the buds (which are a very expensive part of the plant to convert into food); however, if pot were legalized it be much easier to access to the entire plant (ie cheaper stems/leaves) and marijuana-laced food production would become much more economical. That’s why we’re seeing an explosion of it in Colorado right now.

Will also mention that I’d imagine smoking marijuana outdoors would be regulated just like drinking outdoors (you generally can’t walk by a school, or a store with an open beer).

 

[whitehall]

I don't think conservatives are advocating any more laws against marijuana sales than are already on the books. It's true that pot is just a weed but so is the poppy and tobacco. At a time when an incredible amount of taxpayer resources are being used to deter and restrict tobacco use it is ironic that the pot heads want to legalize the growing, manufacture and sale of another dangerous and unhealthy product

 

[KevinWestern]

I see certain drugs as being so destructive that keeping them illegal is warranted. That being said starting with pot being legal and seeing what happens is a good start to seeing if legalizing other drugs would be better than our current situation.

Definitely.

On the flipside, I think sometimes folks tend to not to think about the cost to society that comes with prohibiting a drug. We use up valuable police/court/legal resources (and tax dollars), we give power and revenue streams to violent cartels and street gangs, we put people in jail who are non-violent and probably could be productive and non-dangerous members of society, etc.

So when deciding to make something illegal, we need to weigh those two sides and figure out what makes the most sense. I think for things like heroin you could make the case, however it’s much more difficult with marijuana.

One tactic I might use is that if you get caught committing a serious crime with drugs in your system (robbery, burglary, assault) that drug is now illegal specifically for YOU and if you get caught with it in your system again, 10 years in jail minimum.

Interesting, but I think there would be some hurdles to this. First, do you treat all drugs the same and is it worthwhile to force taxpayers to foot the bill for a person’s living expenses for ten years because he smoked marijuana at some point? Also, many drugs stay in people’s system for weeks if not months. What happens if the guy has been clean for 4 weeks, commits a crime, and is shown to have pot in his body afterwards?


.

 

[Katzndogz]

Death penalty for anyone who commits a crime with drugs in their system.

 

[KevinWestern]

I've had too much personal contact with potheads to ever be convinced of its harmlessness.

Again, there are costs on BOTH sides of the equation.

By making marijuana illegal, we give the cartels and street gangs another viable product they can sell, profit from, and grow powerful with. Marijuana is in a class of its own , and a lot of people smoke it. We cut that out of the cartel’s businessmodel and they’ll lose close to half of their revenue almost overnight. Could they bounce back with something else? Perhaps, but not for a long time (if ever). There’s no other product like it.

Personally, I think society would benefit from having those thugs’ revenue streams taken down a huge notch. Less money = less guns = less violence. The only reason they have so much leverage right now in Mexico is because they’re loaded. When they are unable to bribe the police, they will be no more.

 

[KevinWestern]

Death penalty for anyone who commits a crime with drugs in their system.

Doesn't make a lot of sense, and not the type of society I'd want to live in. I don't want to see an 18 year old kid put to death because he smoked pot at some point and stole a candybar at a convenience store. I'd much rather try to reform him.

 

[KevinWestern]

I don't think conservatives are advocating any more laws against marijuana sales than are already on the books. It's true that pot is just a weed but so is the poppy and tobacco. At a time when an incredible amount of taxpayer resources are being used to deter and restrict tobacco use it is ironic that the pot heads want to legalize the growing, manufacture and sale of another dangerous and unhealthy product

I'm quite sure that we spend many more dollars keeping it illegal (and policing it) than we would spend regulating it. This is especially true when you count in the added tax revenue that's generated (how many $'s does the gov't make off of each pack of cigarettes?). In the city of Chicago cigarettes are about $5 more a pack than in the suburbs; where do you think those extra dollars are going?

Think about the police resources, the court resources, and the prison resources that cost tens of millions (if not billions) of dollars. Heck, we have an entire Fed Gov't agency which is solely dedicated to hunting down major drug dealers.

If you're talking $'s, I think you're on the wrong side of the argument.

.

 

[martybegan]

I see certain drugs as being so destructive that keeping them illegal is warranted. That being said starting with pot being legal and seeing what happens is a good start to seeing if legalizing other drugs would be better than our current situation.

Definitely.

On the flipside, I think sometimes folks tend to not to think about the cost to society that comes with prohibiting a drug. We use up valuable police/court/legal resources (and tax dollars), we give power and revenue streams to violent cartels and street gangs, we put people in jail who are non-violent and probably could be productive and non-dangerous members of society, etc.

So when deciding to make something illegal, we need to weigh those two sides and figure out what makes the most sense. I think for things like heroin you could make the case, however it’s much more difficult with marijuana.

One tactic I might use is that if you get caught committing a serious crime with drugs in your system (robbery, burglary, assault) that drug is now illegal specifically for YOU and if you get caught with it in your system again, 10 years in jail minimum.

Interesting, but I think there would be some hurdles to this. First, do you treat all drugs the same and is it worthwhile to force taxpayers to foot the bill for a person’s living expenses for ten years because he smoked marijuana at some point? Also, many drugs stay in people’s system for weeks if not months. What happens if the guy has been clean for 4 weeks, commits a crime, and is shown to have pot in his body afterwards?


.

There has to be some other mitigating circumstance, but if it can be shown your criminal behavior is due to your drug problem, WHAM, off to the slammer. And this doesnt have to be a maximum security facility. I can be a nice work farm that produces a product, and gives you time to clean your ass up.

 

[KevinWestern]

There has to be some other mitigating circumstance, but if it can be shown your criminal behavior is due to your drug problem, WHAM, off to the slammer. And this doesnt have to be a maximum security facility. I can be a nice work farm that produces a product, and gives you time to clean your ass up.

Sure, and like I said it's an interesting idea. Personally, I totally (but respectfully) disagree with it as I'd much rather see my tax money doing something other than paying for some non-violent drug user's clothing, water, electricity, food, and bedding for 5-10 years. Just not my idea of a good collective investment. Plus, when the person gets out he/she will have a hell of a time finding a job (who wants to hire a guy who was in prison for 10 years), and is likely to... commit more crimes.

.



.

 

[Katzndogz]

I've had too much personal contact with potheads to ever be convinced of its harmlessness.

Again, there are costs on BOTH sides of the equation.

By making marijuana illegal, we give the cartels and street gangs another viable product they can sell, profit from, and grow powerful with. Marijuana is in a class of its own , and a lot of people smoke it. We cut that out of the cartel’s businessmodel and they’ll lose close to half of their revenue almost overnight. Could they bounce back with something else? Perhaps, but not for a long time (if ever). There’s no other product like it.

Personally, I think society would benefit from having those thugs’ revenue streams taken down a huge notch. Less money = less guns = less violence. The only reason they have so much leverage right now in Mexico is because they’re loaded. When they are unable to bribe the police, they will be no more.

You have a delusion that justifies legalizing marijuana and makes it beneficial if everything you think would happen works out just the way you think it should. Of course it wouldn't. The illegal sellers would still sell illegally. They would just undercut the legal market. Or, throw pot in as a freebie if they buy something more deadly and more powerful. You absolutely do not understand how creative a criminal mind is. Just because YOU can't think of a way to turn legalization into a criminal advantage doesn't mean that no one can. You have a business model for the cartels, it's not their business model. It 's just what you think it should be.

 

[martybegan]

There has to be some other mitigating circumstance, but if it can be shown your criminal behavior is due to your drug problem, WHAM, off to the slammer. And this doesnt have to be a maximum security facility. I can be a nice work farm that produces a product, and gives you time to clean your ass up.

Sure, and like I said it's an interesting idea. Personally, I totally (but respectfully) disagree with it as I'd much rather see my tax money doing something than paying for some non-violent drug user's clothing, water, electricity, food, and bedding for 5-10 years. Just not my idea of a good collective investment. Plus, when the person gets out he/she will have a hell of a time finding a job (who wants to hire a guy who was in prison for 10 years), and is likely to... commit more crimes.

It would be people that are two time losers, who would know the consequences of thier action and would choose to continue thier way into being a dreg on society. Such person in society will be a drag no matter where they are. I'd rather they be in a nice agrarian setting laboring under the sun and cleaning thier system out of the drugs.

These prisons would be minimal security and minimal cost, after all these people are probably not really that violent. If they escape, you find em, and dump em back in the farm.

 

[KevinWestern]

You have a delusion that justifies legalizing marijuana and makes it beneficial if everything you think would happen works out just the way you think it should. Of course it wouldn't. The illegal sellers would still sell illegally. They would just undercut the legal market. Or, throw pot in as a freebie if they buy something more deadly and more powerful. You absolutely do not understand how creative a criminal mind is. Just because YOU can't think of a way to turn legalization into a criminal advantage doesn't mean that no one can. You have a business model for the cartels, it's not their business model. It 's just what you think it should be.

Katz, come on. Undercut the legal market? Kind of like how black-market alcohol dealers still supply beer and wine to Chicago? Don't mean to be condescending, just pointing out that it's a ridiculous notion.

Why would someone buy unregulated, costly marijuana that needs to be shipped thousands of miles from Mexico, and have to deal with some shady criminal drug dealer when they could instead walk to their local store and pick up a legal and more consistent and cleaner product?

Not going to happen, Katz. You have to think this through.

 

[martybegan]

You have a delusion that justifies legalizing marijuana and makes it beneficial if everything you think would happen works out just the way you think it should. Of course it wouldn't. The illegal sellers would still sell illegally. They would just undercut the legal market. Or, throw pot in as a freebie if they buy something more deadly and more powerful. You absolutely do not understand how creative a criminal mind is. Just because YOU can't think of a way to turn legalization into a criminal advantage doesn't mean that no one can. You have a business model for the cartels, it's not their business model. It 's just what you think it should be.

Katz, come on. Undercut the legal market? Kind of like how black-market alcohol dealers still supply beer and wine to Chicago? Don't mean to be condescending, just pointing out that it's a ridiculous notion.

Why would someone buy unregulated, costly marijuana that needs to be shipped thousands of miles from Mexico, and have to deal with some shady criminal drug dealer when they could instead walk to their local store and pick up a legal and more consistent and cleaner product?

Not going to happen, Katz. You have to think this through.

Even with all the taxes, it would still probably be cheaper as well. The "tax" that is created when something is illegal is pretty damn big in most cases.