# Want to Keep Pot Illegal? Time to Justify...



## KevinWestern (Mar 15, 2013)

It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal. 

Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:

1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect). This money comes out of my paycheck.
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, violent crimes, courts could be freed up).
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions of non violent people who pose no threat to anyone behind bars every year. This breaks up families, ruins career opportunities.
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent activities. If pot were legal, much of their revenue stream (to buy guns, ect) would be cut. 
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal enterprise in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico in the hands of criminals (tax free).

Now, I'm open for a discussion (of course), but I think it needs to start with providing the benefits of Marijuana prohibition (specifically), and how those benefits *outweigh all of those combined*. 

These things are currently impacting us each and every day, so I think it's a very important discussion.

If the US was a company, is prohibition worth the cost? *I say NO WAY.*

Thanks everyone...


----------



## Dugdale_Jukes (Mar 15, 2013)

_*n light of those consequences, what are the benefits that we receive as a society for pot prohibition... ?*

We get to read about zipperheaded pigs behaving like Gestapo. 

We get to see news splibs of ZILLIONS of dollars worth of dope seized in basements. 

We get to see potgutted food and alcohol addicts claim pot is addictive.

We get to see govamet "experts" claim there is no medicinal value to pot. 

We get to see the fear of independent thought in legislators' eyes. 

Basically keeping a God given herb illegal lets us see the worst elements of human scum._


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 15, 2013)

Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?  

Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption.   Should we make it better or worse?  

The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not.  The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.


----------



## Dugdale_Jukes (Mar 15, 2013)

If people are otherwise law abiding, what LEGITIMATE business is it of anyone's if other folks want to be high?


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 15, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> 
> Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption.   Should we make it better or worse?
> 
> The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not.  The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.



Katz, I listed five huge negative consequences to pot prohibition, that IS a problem if those costs are not giving us any (at least equal) value in return.

I don't know about you, but I'd like to see the drug cartel's revenue stream cut in half. I'd like to see an end to all this violence. Is prohibition worth the costs?


----------



## Circe (Mar 18, 2013)

Moot question.

Obviously we are now on a track to legalize pot nationally, with it being decriminalized and legalized in several states now, via the "thin entering wedge" of "medical marijuana."

So just wait it out. It's happening now and soon there will be a tipping point. Most states will legalize it and a few will stay "dry" for a couple decades like after Prohibition. Then they'll fold, too.

Same as with no-fault divorce, abortion, etc. No, no, no, no, maybe, a few, then suddenly yes, yes, yes. That's how it works.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

That is exactly how it works.   Then people will start to exercise their own forms of prohibition.

Guys will just love having big boobs of their own.

Attention Pot Smokers: You May Be Growing Man Boobs - RealSelf blog


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

Dugdale_Jukes said:


> If people are otherwise law abiding, what LEGITIMATE business is it of anyone's if other folks want to be high?



As long as they aren't driving, working, in school, or taking care of children, nothing.   Pot smokers should be allowed to get high and rejecting them should be part of a personal exercise of freedom.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> 
> Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption.   Should we make it better or worse?
> 
> The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not.  The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.



For one Pot is not addictive in the sense that alcohol is.  No one ever died from marijuana withdrawals.

And just as in alcohol there can be prohibitions about driving high, working high etc.

There will have to be a test developed though that can tell if pot was used within a certain time frame. After all If a guy smoked a joint on Saturday it would be unjust to cite him for driving under the influence on Monday.

And people have been altering their consciousness for as long as people have existed so I don't see a problem with people getting a buzz.


----------



## earlycuyler (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> ...



Not in money, and not in lives lost. Pot is the bread and butter of the Mexican drug cartels. Legalizing it would put a serious dent in their pocket books for a long time.


----------



## emilynghiem (Mar 18, 2013)

I would require that people have the option of funding research in and access to FREE SPIRITUAL HEALING as opposed to depending on medical marijuana which does not cure addiction while spiritual healing does.  People who want drugs can pay for their own health care programs that cover the costs of side effects; people who want all natural healing with NO SIDE effects and NO addictions should not have to pay the costs of those who depend on drugs to placate symptoms instead of curing the root disease as spiritual healing does.



KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



If you REALLY REALLY want to cut the costs of crime, abuse, addiction, disease including mental and criminal illness, then you would support research into spiritual healing which has been shown to cure Rheumatoid Arthritis, Schizophrenia, Cancer, Diabetes, and other medical and mental conditions, where medicine alone often just placates symptoms.

We would save a lot more money on health care by curing and preventing diseases, rather than spending billions on symptoms after the fact, including crimes from abuse and addictions that spiritual healing has long been applied to cure, in various forms of therapy.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

earlycuyler said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Not even CLOSE.   It might start a trade war as the US government becomes the newest cartel on the block but it won't dent the cartel's income.   How many cartels are there?   Is there not a war over market share going on?   Legalizing pot would be beneficial only for the level of violence it would bring.  

As far as revenue stream, the cartels are preparing and moving on.   If the US has a weapons ban and gun control, it will open up an even more lucrative source.   There is also kidnapping for ransom, many other drugs.   The Netherlands just banned a strain of marijuana called Skunk because it went beyond what even they could tolerate.  Then there is the growing popularity of bath salts.     There is no end to means of illegal lucre.

Sadly, though, very sadly, there are Americans who see the legalization of pot as cutting into the cartel's income.


----------



## Circe (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> As far as revenue stream, the cartels are preparing and moving on.   If the US has a weapons ban and gun control, it will open up an even more lucrative source.   There is also kidnapping for ransom, many other drugs.   The Netherlands just banned a strain of marijuana called Skunk because it went beyond what even they could tolerate.  Then there is the growing popularity of bath salts.     There is no end to means of illegal lucre.



Interesting points, that organized crime will go wherever a human want is illegal.

Kidnapping for ransom is a big concern. 

I often wonder if it wouldn't be better just to make EVERYTHING legal, no matter what, and then do a comprehensive educational campaign along with a draconian penalty system when someone does crimes coked up or whatever. Domestic violence under cocaine or PCP, for instance. 

There would be an early die-off as addicts all overdosed, but.....really, wouldn't that be for the better?

And then the El Stupidos would still take drugs, but they could have all they like so they'd drop out and become addicted and die young, and so this policy would have a pro-high-IQ effect on the whole society. A way to breed for the smarter and more able as the people into drugs drop out and go away.

I'd like to see that tried.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

Circe said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > As far as revenue stream, the cartels are preparing and moving on.   If the US has a weapons ban and gun control, it will open up an even more lucrative source.   There is also kidnapping for ransom, many other drugs.   The Netherlands just banned a strain of marijuana called Skunk because it went beyond what even they could tolerate.  Then there is the growing popularity of bath salts.     There is no end to means of illegal lucre.
> ...



I'd like to see that tried too.   The prisons would be just as full because of the crimes committed while high, but that might be just temporary until they die off.   It is an excellent measure to really deal with the drug problem.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> I'd like to see that tried too.   The prisons would be just as full because of the crimes committed while high, but that might be just temporary until they die off.   It is an excellent measure to really deal with the drug problem.



I'm going to have to strongly disagree. There are currently millions of non-violent offenders in prison simply for their connection to marijuana. That's a lot of people you're going to need to "replace" to fill up the prisons once again.

*When you get high, you don't just go on a crime spree*, lol. We're not talking Bath Salts or LSD or something that severely changes your perception of the world and ability to think rationally. You are the exact same person that you were before smoking the drug (specifically when we're talking marijuana); in fact, you're likely to be a bit more paranoid and cautious and _much less likelier_ to commit a crime in my view. 

Have you tried marijuana? If so, compare to your experience with alcohol. I'd say that a person is much more likely to commit a crime while drunk than while high.

.


----------



## konradv (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> I'd like to see that tried too.   The prisons would be just as full because of the crimes committed while high, but that might be just temporary until they die off.   It is an excellent measure to really deal with the drug problem.



Are you just talking pot or other, harder drugs?  I don't believe the prisons would be nearly as filled or that people would die off any faster, if MJ were legalized.  One big upside is that taxing it like alcohol and cigarettes, would help pay for prisons and drug treatment.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

emilynghiem said:


> I would require that people have the option of funding research in and access to FREE SPIRITUAL HEALING as opposed to depending on medical marijuana which does not cure addiction while spiritual healing does.  People who want drugs can pay for their own health care programs that cover the costs of side effects; people who want all natural healing with NO SIDE effects and NO addictions should not have to pay the costs of those who depend on drugs to placate symptoms instead of curing the root disease as spiritual healing does.
> 
> If you REALLY REALLY want to cut the costs of crime, abuse, addiction, disease including mental and criminal illness, then you would support research into spiritual healing which has been shown to cure Rheumatoid Arthritis, Schizophrenia, Cancer, Diabetes, and other medical and mental conditions, where medicine alone often just placates symptoms.
> 
> We would save a lot more money on health care by curing and preventing diseases, rather than spending billions on symptoms after the fact, including crimes from abuse and addictions that spiritual healing has long been applied to cure, in various forms of therapy.



I'm definitely all for the spiritual healing stuff, but I doubt anyone connected to the gov't (and ultimately the huge Pharm industry) would support such a measure. If it's cheap, inexpensive, and works very well than it's going OFF the list because it won't make any money!

I support medical marijuana not as a cure all (by any means), just a nice, cheap, non-toxic alternative to some of the more artificial and devastating cancer meds that can really do some damage to you.

Spiritual healing is great, but sometimes (when it comes to pain, nausea) you need some immediate, tangible results. I'd rather someone smoke natural marijuana than take an artificial drug born in a lab with chemicals...


----------



## Circe (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> I'm going to have to strongly disagree. There are currently millions of non-violent offenders in prison simply for their connection to marijuana. That's a lot of people you're going to need to "replace" to fill up the prisons once again.
> 
> *When you get high, you don't just go on a crime spree*, lol. We're not talking Bath Salts or LSD or something that severely changes your perception of the world and ability to think rationally. You are the exact same person that you were before smoking the drug (specifically when we're talking marijuana); in fact, you're likely to be a bit more paranoid and cautious and _much less likelier_ to commit a crime in my view.



No crimes, no problem, is the idea.

If everything is legalized, what would it matter if someone took a non-toxic drug in careful circumstances where they wouldn't kill or die or hurt someone?

But when they take bad drugs like meth or PCP or "bath salts" and, you know, eat someone's face off, that would send them to prison or they'd die soon. And everyone else would be better off. 

I figure it might be quite a circus for 20 years, but then all the people who do that sort of thing would be dead or marginal and the rest would be smart enough to stay away from bad drugs.

I would pair this freedom with educational campaigns. Now there is not much education against drugs, not as much as there could be, because drugs are illegal so it's a bad idea to publicly assume everyone can get them anyway, though of course that is probably true to some extent. It could be like the anti-smoking campaigns. Assume people are freely doing this and hit it hard as incredibly stupid and unhealthy and generally bad. That would help young people and confused people, maybe.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to see that tried too.   The prisons would be just as full because of the crimes committed while high, but that might be just temporary until they die off.   It is an excellent measure to really deal with the drug problem.
> ...



This is a very popular myth.  There has been alternative sentencing for simple possession cases for decades.   There is community service, rehab, counseling, there are dozens and dozens of alternatives so that the casual pot smoker does not get sent to prison.   Where they are sent to prison is where the pot use was coincidental to some other crime.  Or, when the suspect is a well known criminal and there is insufficient evidence to get them off the street so they charge him or her with some pot offense and give the surrounding neighborhood a vacation.

I have never tried marijuana.  I have been drunk one time in my entire life.   My experience with pot users is the vast number of users I have known personally,  those that have been my criminal case clients and civil case clients who were the victims of someone else's pot use.  Those number in the hundreds.  

I have known a number of criminals who plea bargain a more serious criminal charge by admitting to possession or even possession for sale.  Yes, they go to prison, but for a far less period of time they were facing.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Circe said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > I'm going to have to strongly disagree. There are currently millions of non-violent offenders in prison simply for their connection to marijuana. That's a lot of people you're going to need to "replace" to fill up the prisons once again.
> ...




I agree with a lot of what you said, but at this time I think we should just focus on Marijuana specifically. 

It's a HUGE source of revenue for the drug cartels (whereas Meth/Bath Salts not so much), and people smoking it do not pose the same type of threat to society as when they take some other drugs (alcohol, meth, bath salts). Just seems like an easier fight at the moment to stick to one thing, taking things slowly with a plant that clearly poses no significant threat to society yet costs us so much to prohibit. 

There's just too many costs we pay for Marijuana prohibition (prisons, broken families, police force, court time, all the revenue lost from private enterprise, ect) that don't seem to be offset by whatever 'benefits' society gains as a result of it being prohibited. 

I mean, sure we'll have a few more people smoking more frequently, and some of those people might be marginally less productive, but is preventing that worth *ALL *of those costs? I don't think so. 

It's like investing $50 million into saving a company that only generates $50,000 of revenue each year. Doesn't make sense....


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

Circe said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > I'm going to have to strongly disagree. There are currently millions of non-violent offenders in prison simply for their connection to marijuana. That's a lot of people you're going to need to "replace" to fill up the prisons once again.
> ...



The difference is, smoking doesn't make someone high.   Drug addicts will chase that high to their deaths, and the deaths of anyone else too.    The way to deal with those who feel good and get high, then eat someone's face off is really to allow more concealed weapons.  Strengthen laws supporting self defense AND defense of others.  There's no reason why these killers should go to prison.  Drop them where they stand, save a lot of money.


----------



## Circe (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's a HUGE source of revenue for the drug cartels




It won't be, soon. Very soon, probably within two years. I'd say we're close to the tipping point now when marijuana becomes commodified and gets local production and taxation. 

Then the illegal drug trafficers will switch entirely to very dangerous drugs like meth and the incidence of crime would go way up.

I'm not actually interested in marijuana; it's a done deal. I worry about the hard drugs causing the crimes around my county ----------- and that's not marijuana, be sure.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Circe said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Not sure how involved you've been with marijuana in the past, but "chasing the high" generally doesn't apply to pot as much as it does something more intense like heroin. People will drain their life savings, steal from friends, ect to experience the first "mega high" from heroin and will become highly addicted and enslaved to the drug.

Marijuana is non-addictive, and more or less a simple plant that makes people relaxed (while still retaining all normal cognitive function). I'd compare it to no more dangerous or mind altering than many over the counter pain medications.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

Marijuana users don't go on crime sprees.  Their crimes are ones of negligence.   The mother who put her baby on top of the car then drove off.  The person who forgot they left the stove on, candle burning or the baby in the bathtub.   Like my step granddaughter who put a six year old as baby sitter of an 8 month old, took the three year old to the store and forgot the child until she got hit by a car.   That's what pot users do.   Pot users don't beat their wives, they forgot to put the brownies away until the children are poisoned.  I have relatives in Colorado, since pot was declared legal, the veterinarians have seen a boom in treating animals that have been poisoned by pot.   Use among children has skyrocketed with the result that schools are dealing with kids too high to learn anything.

Pot might be worse than heroin simply because it is more insideous.  However, there is nothing to stop legalization as long as others are permitted to protect themselves without legal impediment.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Circe said:


> It won't be, soon. Very soon, probably within two years. I'd say we're close to the tipping point now when marijuana becomes commodified and gets local production and taxation.
> 
> Then the illegal drug trafficers will switch entirely to very dangerous drugs like meth and the incidence of crime would go way up.
> 
> I'm not actually interested in marijuana; it's a done deal. I worry about the hard drugs causing the crimes around my county ----------- and that's not marijuana, be sure.



I might be wrong, but given how difficult the marijuana fight has been (I agree though, it is at a tipping point), I think we're a long way off from seeing meth (and some of the actual dangerous drugs) legalized.

Too, I think if Pot becomes legal, many folks will decide to just go with that instead of having to cook up fantastically dangerous meth labs filled with chemicals, ect just to get high. 

They'll have a nice, safe, and legal alternative to choose from.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Marijuana users don't go on crime sprees.  Their crimes are ones of negligence.   The mother who put her baby on top of the car then drove off.  The person who forgot they left the stove on, candle burning or the baby in the bathtub.   Like my step granddaughter who put a six year old as baby sitter of an 8 month old, took the three year old to the store and forgot the child until she got hit by a car.   That's what pot users do.   Pot users don't beat their wives, they forgot to put the brownies away until the children are poisoned.  I have relatives in Colorado, since pot was declared legal, the veterinarians have seen a boom in treating animals that have been poisoned by pot.   Use among children has skyrocketed with the result that schools are dealing with kids too high to learn anything.
> 
> Pot might be worse than heroin simply because it is more insideous.  However, there is nothing to stop legalization as long as others are permitted to protect themselves without legal impediment.



Yes, but all those things you mentioned... wouldn't alcohol have the same effect?

If you wake up and get slammed, you can leave the stove on, put the kid on the top of the car (and forget), ect, ect. Because alcohol is legal, shouldn't we already be experiencing this epidemic of everyday people with impaired judgement? 

Like alcohol, it will be up to the user to use responsibly; you can smoke all day, everyday, but good luck getting a job.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Circe said:
> ...



Pot makes SOME people more relaxed.  Pot also skrockets the heart rate and leads to heart attack and stroke.   Take you chance which one are you.

I've known MANY heart attack and stroke victims from marijuana use.  Now if you really think marijuana does not impair cognitive functioning you might be too high to accept that it really does.  Not only during use, but for at least a day after use.

The Effects of Marijuana on Cognitive Functioning


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Hi Katz, the article says that although marijuana can affect short term memory, it likely does not impact the intelligibility of the user (see conclusion).

Either way, yes, Marijuana has effects on its users, but enough to justify the billions of dollars, prison space, court resources, and police offers used to enforce prohibition?

I think the answer is a resounding no.

I would like the people who are for prohibition to step forth and justify those costs.

Again, if marijuana prohibition was free and had no negative financial impact on society (other than the prohibition of marijuana), my plea for legalization would be more difficult. But because prohibition costs us SO MUCH in a time of deep deficits, I think those who want it to stay legal must justify why.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

The benefit of alcohol has never justified its cost.  There is nothing that evidences adding pot users to the numers of drunks will show any reduction to the costs.  At best the alcoholic will leave the baby in the bath tub and so will the pot user.  

If you think of all the dire prediction made by the prohibitionists against alcohol   they were all true.  The most outrageous actually came to pass.  There are those who imagine based on no evidence at all that pot will be used responsibly.  After all you use pot responsibly so will everyone else.  

Legalize it all and let them use themselved to death.  Just don't burden others with the medical care.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 18, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



You are magnifying the costs of prohibition.  When someone is arrested for shoplifting and found to be in possession of marijuana, is this a marijuana offense?   I wish I had a nickle for every defendant who told me they were arrested because they had a joint on them.  Then I find out that although there is a charge of possession, they were really arrested for three armed robberies.   If you are keeping statistics for purposes of legalization you will only record arrest for a single joint.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Legalize it all and let them use themselved to death.  Just don't burden others with the medical care.



Well, again, you're for legalization so there's really no argument here.

Also, I think that any incremental burden that results from medical care will be VASTLY offset by the costs we save from not having to pay for (1) the millions of prisoners (that's food, shelter, medical, ect) in jail right now for marijuana, (2) the thousands of resources (cops, courts, Fed Drug agents) that are dedicated to policing pot, (3) new revenue streams that result from marijuana being legally marketed and produced in US vs Mexico.

If you want to talk costs, legalization is a no-brainer.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 18, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Marijuana prohibition costs us a lot of money. Even if a person gets caught shoplifting and it's found they have marijuana on them, it still counts as extra charges, extra time (on whatever sentence they get), and extra paperwork. That extra year someone gets for "possession" is one full year that we have to pay for that person's food, clothing, housing, ect. 

Too, we have entire Federal agencies that dedicate large swaths of time tracking down marijuana dealers, sources, ect, specifically.

Finally, if Marijuana is legalized, think about how much value will be added to our economy via the brand new industry that would be created? Instead of the Cartels keeping all of the revenues, imagine all of the US shipping companies, all of the US marketing companies, all of the US stores, ect that would stand to gain real value from the change in law. 

Currently, the Cartels make the largest sums of money and keep that money within Mexico (we're talking Billions every year); wouldn't you like that to instead remain in the US in the hands of non-violent criminals? I would..


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 19, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Would you say the same thing if it were human trafficking instead of marijuana?


----------



## AquaAthena (Mar 19, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> 
> Look at it this way, the societal costs of alcoholism far, far outweigh the benefits of alcohol consumption.   Should we make it better or worse?
> 
> The problem is not whether pot should be legal or not.  *The problem is that so many people have a need to get through the day high.*



And I work with one of those. While she is dependable is many ways, her short-term memory loss causes her to make many more mistakes than those who work with her. 

Yesterday, after leaving her car for a minute to run back to her house because she forgot something, she came back to her car, with the engine on and found she had locked herself out....

Can this happen to someone who isn't on the good weed? Yes, but these kind of things happen to her on a daily basis. She drives loaded, all the time, too and the other day, while looking, ( but not driving ) for something on her car floor, thoughtlessly opened the driver's side door into oncoming traffic and BAM. Her door was hit but all were safe.

Her pot dependency has been the source of most of her challenges in life. It also alters her personality and brings out a more extroverted person, which is why I think she needs the weed. I know for others, it induces a more solitary state. I like being around her better, when her "high" has worn off and she resumes her more natural personality state of mind. Either way though, she is a wonderful person in most every way.

No, to the legalization of pot.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 19, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Would I want human trafficking to be legal in the US? Of course not, that business model violates basic human rights, whereas marijuana growing/selling does not. What's your point?


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 19, 2013)

Someday your friend will cause a traffic accident and someone will end up dead.  It won't be her fault, the victim shouldn't have done whatever it was they did.   And, when she goes to jail for criminal negligence, when she's prosecuted she will say that she was prosecuted just for smoking a little weed.   The criminal act will be completely forgotten and ignored.  She will be one of those jailed under unfair and draconian marijuana laws.

A friend of mine, a Judge for the international court at the UN has been all over the world, in every country, who explained what's going on.  For whatever reason, a large number of people feel that their lives are so incomplete that they have to get high.   The father could be out playing ball with his son, but he would rather get high.  A mother accepts her daughter's abusive boyfriend because he will get high with her and it makes mom feel young.  That's where the problem is.   Drugs have always been available and they will always be available in some form.   The difference today is that we have a population of unusually selfish and hopeless people who will sacrifice anything if it leads to getting high.    They get no satisfaction from their jobs, their families, their communities.   The only satisfaction they get in life is when they are high and that is where the problem is.  That's what makes drugs so intractable today.   

In Yemen khat is killing the country.
Is Yemen Chewing Itself to Death? - TIME

"You sit up discussing all your problems and think you've solved everything, but in fact you haven't done anything in the last four hours, because you've just been chewing khat and all your problems actually got worse," says Adel al-Shujaa, a professor of political science at Sana'a University and the head of the Yemen Without Khat Association. Plus, he says, "all the decisions you've made are bad because you've made them while on khat."

Portugal decriminalized drugs and that was a failure.  Decriminalisation Of Drugs In Portugal Was Not A Success, Says Dr Manuel Pinto Coelho

Why would legalization work in Amsterdam and not in Yemen?   In Amsterdam the brothels and cannibis shops are controlled by organized crime.   Proponents in the US think, in some sort of drug delusion that legalization will stop the money going to the cartels when it obviously won't.  It will work the same way it does in Amsterdam.  The control and money will flow straight to the cartels.

Tackling organized crime in the Amsterdam Red Light District | Amsterdam Gangland

Organized crime is firmly embedded in the Amsterdam Red Light District, which means, for example, that they have a firm grip on the prostitution sector. Human trafficking, exploitation and forced prostitution are common. Also there is a growing nexus of organized crime with the backdoor activities of coffee shops. In order to tackle these structural problems a continuation of close cooperation between government agencies is needed. This is the key recommendation in the final report of the Emergo Project that was presented to Minister of Security and Justice Opstelten and Amsterdam Mayor Van der Laan.

So we will take all these solutions that have been proven not to work and apply them in the United States.   All because we have a population that wants to get high more than anything else in the world.


----------



## slackjawed (Mar 19, 2013)

While I would like to see marijuana legal, I think a couple things have to happen;
1) Give notice to the other countries we have treaties with that make marijuana smuggling an international crime. Until these treaties are either negated or revised, we would be in violation of existing internatiuonal treaties to legalize marijuana. Might not sound like a big deal, but broken treaties can affect our credit rating, credibility and could conceivably cause other countries to issue trade sanctions (far fetched extreme case)against the usa.

2) Marijuana must be rescheduled to a class 3 or 4 drug by our federal government. Until this is done there is no chance of legalization. The "medical marijuana" laws should have directed their energy to this end. The medical marijuana crowd didn't work to accomplish this, without rescheduling marijuana to at least a class 3 drug, the real doctors can't and won't prescribe it, even if they believe it will help their patient. If marijuana was rescheduled to a class 3 drug you wouldn't need dispenseries, it would be available in the local pharmacy just like it was in the early 1900's in the USA. The entire 'medical marijuana' movement is nothing more than a dishonest attempt to legalize marijuana through a perceived backdoor. It ain't working.

You want marijuana legal like I do, work to get it reclassified by the feds as a class 4 drug like alcohol. there is no reason it shouldn't be. Part of this effort must be addressing the international treaties that deal with marijuana.

Too many people who claim to know how our government works seem to think that if they can get a referendum and the voters vote for legalization, that it would over rule constitutional law and international law. It doesn't work that way. You could easily get a majority of voters to vote yes on a referendum to execute child molesters without a trial, and it would still be illegal under US law. 
That's the beauty of our constitutional republic, the rest of the population cannot be forced to do anything by a 'tyrannical majority'. 
If we want marijuana legal, we must grow up and work within the existing mechanisms of the law, anything else just looks like a bunch of children stamping their feet in a temper tantrum.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 19, 2013)

Real doctors won't prescribe marijuana because it is harmful and does not help anyone.   I know people that take marijuana for medical reasons.   Each and every one of them was told by their doctor that he or she would not continue to treat them if they continued to use pot.   One of my friends, her son actually, just gave up treatment in favor of pot.   The other, an older woman, goes to a free clinic where they don't care.   She hasn't got long to live anyway.  She just won't have as long to live.

The underlying cause of marijuana legalization is a population that is firmly convinced that their reason for living is to get high.  Smoke a little pot and forget all about it.   Address that and we don't have pot to think about at all.


----------



## slackjawed (Mar 19, 2013)

Katz, my own experience is that marijuana erases the "pain memory". When I got sick I hadn't touched marijuana for over 30 years. I do have pain, which at times is horrible. If I take a pain pill, that's all I do. I can't read, can't go outside and walk around or anything. When I wake up I feel 'hungover' from the oxycotin or flexeral or whatever.('scuse my spelling') If i smoke a pipe when I hurt, I still hurt, but there is no hangover the next day, and my body isn't all stiff and sore from the previous day's pain. When I have pain, I unconsiously 'tighten up', even grit my teeth. When I smoke, I don't do that. I am not stiff and sore from that the next day. However; for me marijuana does not stop the pain, you could say it just makes it less unpleasant.
As for side effects, there is no drug that doesn't come with risks. none. Everyone is not the same, and while I see your point about people that wanna be stoned all the time, I actually use marijuana because it helps me stay more alert and I can do more than if I take pharmecutical drugs.


----------



## High_Gravity (Mar 19, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



Its icky.


----------



## High_Gravity (Mar 19, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Katz thats totally different things, human trafficking is dealing with people marijuana is a substance.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 19, 2013)

slackjawed said:


> Katz, my own experience is that marijuana erases the "pain memory". When I got sick I hadn't touched marijuana for over 30 years. I do have pain, which at times is horrible. If I take a pain pill, that's all I do. I can't read, can't go outside and walk around or anything. When I wake up I feel 'hungover' from the oxycotin or flexeral or whatever.('scuse my spelling') If i smoke a pipe when I hurt, I still hurt, but there is no hangover the next day, and my body isn't all stiff and sore from the previous day's pain. When I have pain, I unconsiously 'tighten up', even grit my teeth. When I smoke, I don't do that. I am not stiff and sore from that the next day. However; for me marijuana does not stop the pain, you could say it just makes it less unpleasant.
> As for side effects, there is no drug that doesn't come with risks. none. Everyone is not the same, and while I see your point about people that wanna be stoned all the time, I actually use marijuana because it helps me stay more alert and I can do more than if I take pharmecutical drugs.



You THINK it helps you.  

I have a friend with fibromyalgia.   She smoked heavily when she was younger, but quit for years.  She married a man that wouldn't tolerate it.   When she was diagnosed with fibromyalgia her pain was intolerable.  She went to a pot-doc and got a medical marijuana card.  It would help her.   Her treating doctor informed her that he no longer wished to have her as a patient so she now goes to a free clinic.  Smoking pot actually increased her pain.   Pain was what she used to justify smoking pot.  If she had no pain, there was no reason for her to use.   Psychologically her pain became intolerable.   She could do nothing but lay in bed, screaming in agony and vomiting.   The more she smoked, the worse the pain became when she wasn't smoking.   She had to smoke more to deal with the increased pain.  This is what psychological addiction is like.   It could be anything.  Whatever the fixation is.   For some it's chocolate.  There are men who think they are totally sexually dysfunctional unless they have watched an hour or two of porn.   Gamblers suffer intense pain unless they are distracted by gambling.  The addiction creates it's pain, then treats the pain.  Without the treatment, the pain increases.  

Of course marijuana doesn't keep you alert.  Marijuana keeps no one alert.  You aren't different.  But you think it keeps you alert.  Now you need it to stay alert.   Marijuana has created conditions which require marijuana for treatment.   And you believe it, you can prove it.  You need to use pot.

An experiment was conducted several years ago with spiders.  The spider would spin a web.  A perfect spider web.  Then the spider was given marijuana.  The web was haphazard, it was poorly constructed.  It would never catch a fly.  But the spider sat in some off center spot that the spider thought was the center and waited for its food to arrive.  The spider didn't know it had built a poor web.  It was convinced that the web would serve its intended purpose because it was a spectacularly constructed web.   Then it starved to death.


----------



## whitehall (Mar 19, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...


Let's see, "policing" illegal alcohol and guns is expensive so why not legalize the manufacture of alcohol and guns? It costs a lot to prosecute rapists and afford shelter to abused women. Should we forget about it? It almost seems funny that at a time in history when cigarette smoking has become almost illegal the pot heads want to make a buck selling narcotics to our kids.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 19, 2013)

Big Macs are the threat, not the drug addled behind the wheel of a car.


----------



## High_Gravity (Mar 19, 2013)

If marijuana becomes legal can we start relaxing a little bit on the ciggarette smokers?


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 19, 2013)

whitehall said:


> Let's see, "policing" illegal alcohol and guns is expensive so why not legalize the manufacture of alcohol and guns? It costs a lot to prosecute rapists and afford shelter to abused women. Should we forget about it? It almost seems funny that at a time in history when cigarette smoking has become almost illegal the pot heads want to make a buck selling narcotics to our kids.



Whitehall, let me explain this very simply.

It does indeed cost a lot to prosecute rapists and women batterers, however those costs are offset by the _massive benefit to society_ (specifically from a human rights perspective) that we gain from cutting down and preventing those atrocities from occurring. The benefit we get in return is worth the cost we pay. 

However when it comes to marijuana, the costs we pay (I argue) come nowhere close to being offset by whatever benefits we receive from marijuana being prohibited. *I'm not saying marijuana is useful or completely without negative side effects*, I'm simply saying that prohibiting private marijuana use is NOT worth the billions of tax dollars we pay in prison costs, the resources we waste that could otherwise be policing/prosecuting murderers/rapists, and the immense power it gives to the cartels. 

I mean, just focusing on the cartel issue alone should be enough to convince you. Marijuana legalization will cripple these cartels temporarily if not permanently; much of the violent marijuana drug trafficking (which leads to literally tens of thousands of deaths every years) will disappear and in it's place we'll have a non-violent industry appear much like the current tobacco and alcohol channels. 

It all comes down to the old phrase... *'is the juice worth the squeeze'*? You need to ask yourself that. Is all the money we're spending, and all the violence that surrounds the illegal marijuana market really worth it? I think the answer is an obvious no.

This isn't about wanting to get high, or even proving a single useful reason to smoke marijuana; it's a simple cost/benefit analysis of prohibition. 



.


----------



## editec (Mar 19, 2013)

The only completely non-toxic psychotropic substance known to man so naturally it's prohibited here in the land of the free and home of the brave.

God bless the American slaves.


----------



## slackjawed (Mar 19, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > Katz, my own experience is that marijuana erases the "pain memory". When I got sick I hadn't touched marijuana for over 30 years. I do have pain, which at times is horrible. If I take a pain pill, that's all I do. I can't read, can't go outside and walk around or anything. When I wake up I feel 'hungover' from the oxycotin or flexeral or whatever.('scuse my spelling') If i smoke a pipe when I hurt, I still hurt, but there is no hangover the next day, and my body isn't all stiff and sore from the previous day's pain. When I have pain, I unconsiously 'tighten up', even grit my teeth. When I smoke, I don't do that. I am not stiff and sore from that the next day. However; for me marijuana does not stop the pain, you could say it just makes it less unpleasant.
> ...



I dod not say it knocked out pain. I also did not say it made me alert. Read my post again. It seems to eliminate the soreness left over from being in pain. Big difference. It lets me stay more alert than oxycotin (spelling) my dr.'s drug of choice it seems. 
I can't take pain meds all the time, nor can I smoke all the time.

On top of everything else I don't have to miss out on life in general because I'm zombified from oxycotin. 

Btw-doctors don't know it all, 8 years ago I was diagnosed with insulanoma and metasized tumors on my kudney. List the kidney but I was told 7 years ago I had no more than 2-3 years left. 

A big rasberry to uc-davis medical because I am still here.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## PaulS1950 (Mar 19, 2013)

OK, make marijuana legal. At the federal level so that anyone who wants to can toke their life away. Most won't - they will use it in much the same way that people use alcohol. Some will use it for medicinal purposes, that's fine too. The minority that use alcohol and drugs abusively will have one more drug at their disposal. They will have another crutch to escape and evade life but it will be available until someone decides that second hand marijuana is a public health issue. Then they won't be able to smoke it in certain areas until the only place they can is in a private home. Then the children's advocacy folks will say it is bad for the children to be exposed to second hand smoke and it will be legal but only on your own property, outdoors and only as long as you are at least twenty feet from a door or window.

Think that's funny? it already happened for smokers! 
If you are going to villify smoking tobacco then why is marijuana any different? it uses the same paper and produces the same gases and even has some nicotine in it - though less than tobacco.

I am not against legalizing marijuana - although I have never used it and don't plan to in the future (yes, I really am one of the 10% that has never tried it) whether it is legal or not.


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 20, 2013)

My Grandparents got in a lot of trouble for trying to buy some farm land by growing marijuana in Minnesota...My Grandfather got like four federal feloneys and spent a lot of time in prison.My Grnadmother got off because she was still a teenager.
It grew wild and the cultivated kind blended in real well but he was charged as a bigger dealer yet because they counted all the plants, even the wild hemp as belonging to them....But such is life that is how the dice fell and they lost..

Now for the first time it is now legal to grow in Colorado and does well here if it don't get to hot.Loves summer weather between 70 and 80 degrees if grown outside.Will do fine even above 9,000 ft.Lot more will be grown probaley even tho' the county is riddled with growers
already.

My boss at the restuarant takes a hit every two hours and has every since he came back wounded from Viet Nam way way back ( he gets a 20 percent disability check for having part of his shoulder blown any and a bullet is still by his backbone).I guess it don't hurt him any.Of the 987,264 kinds grown here he says he likes Blue Moonshine, or Colorado Pine bud  the best...Purple Cush tho' is getting very popular.Stawberry cush is probaley grown the most....
I have never grown Marijuana, nor do I intend to,any knowledge I pass alone is what I get from seeing those who do...It is after all still a federal crime...I personally don't want to be layed back,,,I need to go...go...go....


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 20, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> OK, make marijuana legal. At the federal level so that anyone who wants to can toke their life away. Most won't - they will use it in much the same way that people use alcohol. Some will use it for medicinal purposes, that's fine too. The minority that use alcohol and drugs abusively will have one more drug at their disposal. They will have another crutch to escape and evade life but it will be available until someone decides that second hand marijuana is a public health issue. Then they won't be able to smoke it in certain areas until the only place they can is in a private home. Then the children's advocacy folks will say it is bad for the children to be exposed to second hand smoke and it will be legal but only on your own property, outdoors and only as long as you are at least twenty feet from a door or window.
> 
> Think that's funny? it already happened for smokers!
> If you are going to villify smoking tobacco then why is marijuana any different? it uses the same paper and produces the same gases and even has some nicotine in it - though less than tobacco.
> ...



I don't think the Lord likes me to waist my time with it.Everything can be abused and it often does but there is worse things...Congraulations on never doing it You have not missed that much.Everything can be abused including peanut butter.My Mother sure had a probalem with it and was a true mariholic, would hit it everynight after coming home from working at Bluebells Blue Jean Factory (wrangler) in nearby Ada, Oklahoma(Closed and went to Mexico and China now)Boyfriends were chosen if they could supply, and if they offered protection, as my Mother had been kidnapped and raped for over two days when she was 19...May have suffered from PTSD.

The first time I tried it was under a trailor inside a big cardboard box we played house in right after I turned seven years old...Older kids had dared us to do it.I cannot ever remember being that sick in my life.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



Seems that the po-po agree.

LEAP | Law Enforcement Against Prohibition


----------



## NoNukes (Mar 20, 2013)

Circe said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > It's a HUGE source of revenue for the drug cartels
> ...



If the authorities are not going after marijuana, they can focus on the dangerous drugs.


----------



## NoNukes (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Marijuana users don't go on crime sprees.  Their crimes are ones of negligence.   The mother who put her baby on top of the car then drove off.  The person who forgot they left the stove on, candle burning or the baby in the bathtub.   Like my step granddaughter who put a six year old as baby sitter of an 8 month old, took the three year old to the store and forgot the child until she got hit by a car.   That's what pot users do.   Pot users don't beat their wives, they forgot to put the brownies away until the children are poisoned.  I have relatives in Colorado, since pot was declared legal, the veterinarians have seen a boom in treating animals that have been poisoned by pot.   Use among children has skyrocketed with the result that schools are dealing with kids too high to learn anything.
> 
> Pot might be worse than heroin simply because it is more insideous.  However, there is nothing to stop legalization as long as others are permitted to protect themselves without legal impediment.



Do you have a link proving these accusations concerning Colorado? They just passed the law in November.


----------



## NoNukes (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Someday your friend will cause a traffic accident and someone will end up dead.  It won't be her fault, the victim shouldn't have done whatever it was they did.   And, when she goes to jail for criminal negligence, when she's prosecuted she will say that she was prosecuted just for smoking a little weed.   The criminal act will be completely forgotten and ignored.  She will be one of those jailed under unfair and draconian marijuana laws.
> 
> A friend of mine, a Judge for the international court at the UN has been all over the world, in every country, who explained what's going on.  For whatever reason, a large number of people feel that their lives are so incomplete that they have to get high.   The father could be out playing ball with his son, but he would rather get high.  A mother accepts her daughter's abusive boyfriend because he will get high with her and it makes mom feel young.  That's where the problem is.   Drugs have always been available and they will always be available in some form.   The difference today is that we have a population of unusually selfish and hopeless people who will sacrifice anything if it leads to getting high.    They get no satisfaction from their jobs, their families, their communities.   The only satisfaction they get in life is when they are high and that is where the problem is.  That's what makes drugs so intractable today.
> 
> ...



Cannabis is not legal in Amsterdam.


----------



## Article 15 (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



You were never going to win because you are on the wrong side of the debate but this post is definitely where you lost.


----------



## editec (Mar 20, 2013)

If you don't own you own body?

Telling yourself that you live in a land of freedom is delusional.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 20, 2013)

NoNukes said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Marijuana users don't go on crime sprees.  Their crimes are ones of negligence.   The mother who put her baby on top of the car then drove off.  The person who forgot they left the stove on, candle burning or the baby in the bathtub.   Like my step granddaughter who put a six year old as baby sitter of an 8 month old, took the three year old to the store and forgot the child until she got hit by a car.   That's what pot users do.   Pot users don't beat their wives, they forgot to put the brownies away until the children are poisoned.  I have relatives in Colorado, since pot was declared legal, the veterinarians have seen a boom in treating animals that have been poisoned by pot.   Use among children has skyrocketed with the result that schools are dealing with kids too high to learn anything.
> ...



Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana « CBS Denver

Colorado Vets See Spike In Cases Of ?Stoner Dogs? « CBS Denver

Dogs getting high on marijuana is an increasing problem in Colorado, vets say  - NY Daily News

What a very sad world we are creating.    Perhaps, in time, the addicts will kill themselves off, but between now and then, we have a very bad way to go.

How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse

Those poor children, thinking they are just having fun.  But then the whole world has come down to just having fun.


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 20, 2013)

Since December 10th Marijuana has been legal here.I don't think it has made any difference so far.But a lot of people are planning on growing it.I'm talking Grandpa's and Grandma's to give them more retirement income.
What has increased is the number of people from out of state on a ski vacation asking where they can get some..
This rural county is known as the Humbolt county of Colorado, and growers were never harassed by law enforcement for a long time.
I work as a waitress in town, and now that it is Spring break in parts of the country, the college people are constantley,constanley asking for where.....I could make a fortune as I know growers but it is still impolite to mention names.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 20, 2013)

How long will it be before these growers get socked with a tax evasion charge?

Colorado was expecting to become a pot tourism hub so none of this is a surprise.


----------



## NoNukes (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Are they having the same problem in Washington? It seems that they came up with these statistics quickly, considering that it was just passed in November. Can you even buy it legally in Colorado yet?


----------



## earlycuyler (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> earlycuyler said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Its pretty simple. Why in the hell would someone buy an inferior product, when a superior product is available? And yes, it will cut deeply into there income. Pot is there money, not meth, coke, heroin, but pot. The DEA and border patrol agrees with me on that to the point they say as much on TV at times.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 20, 2013)

You are actually very wrong.  The big money isn't drugs.  The really big money is in weapons and women.  While drugs were where the money was, it's now almost a sideline, the way cigarettes have been added to drug smuggling.

That's even not considering that cartel chemists are busily coming up with more drugs all the time.  Where do you think bath salts came from?


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 20, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> You are actually very wrong.  The big money isn't drugs.  The really big money is in weapons and women.  While drugs were where the money was, it's now almost a sideline, the way cigarettes have been added to drug smuggling.
> 
> That's even not considering that cartel chemists are busily coming up with more drugs all the time.  Where do you think bath salts came from?



Katz- I think you're very, very wrong here. The main source of income for the cartels are drugs, period, and marijuana makes up a huge percentage of that. This is because the drug is so prevalent and widely accepted.

Sure, the cartels will continue to push illegal drugs, but guess what? They'll no longer have their star product, and will be hurting for revenue big time. Less revenue means less employees on the front lines (gangs, dealers), less money for guns, and less power overall.

Pot legalization will be devastating to their business.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > You are actually very wrong.  The big money isn't drugs.  The really big money is in weapons and women.  While drugs were where the money was, it's now almost a sideline, the way cigarettes have been added to drug smuggling.
> ...



I am not wrong.  Your information is just about ten years out of date.  Think about it.  Process the information.  How long has there been a movement to legalize pot?  Do you think that the cartels have been ignoring that?   They intend to just make money while they can and expect to give up.  These are businessmen.  They might employ ignorant gunmen but they are not ignorant gunmen.  The majority of pot clinics in Los Angeles are cartel owned and operated.  They can pedal other drugs, weapons and launder money through these facilities.   One of the factors in the US that helps drug dealers is how long it taked before a drug is banned.  Designer drugs like bath salts are sold legally.  Right out of a cartel lab.

Whether or not pot is legalized cutting organized crime income is not part of the issue.  

Up until the end of prohibition the Mafia had a hard and fast rule.  They did not deal in drugs.  To violate that was to bring instant death even for  a made man.  As soon as prohibition ended that rule went out the window.  All the producers and distributors became drug dealers.  As an extra bonus income went up with a more valuable product.

Criminals are always going to be a step ahead and they are now.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 20, 2013)

J





Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Katz, I agree with your point that they are businessmen and are currently looking into new avenues to make money.

However, they are currently making BILLIONS in revenue via pot and that will all go away. There will not be an equivalent replacement to full the void.

Did the Italian Mafia become weaker or stronger after the legalization of alcohol? 

Where are they now?


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> [...]Have you tried marijuana? If so, compare to your experience with alcohol. I'd say that a person is much more likely to commit a crime while drunk than while high..


There is abundant evidence to support that observation.  And any seasoned police officer, including narcs, will attest to it.  

There is in fact an organization of former (and existing) police officers, LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), who strongly advocate the legalization of marijuana.  LEAP | Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

This is a good organization.  These fellows stand in open opposition to the D.A.R.E. program and one need not be in law enforcement to join their organization and support them.  

It is worthwhile for anyone who opposes marijuana prohibition to support this organization because it represents a voice that people listen to.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> I'm definitely all for the spiritual healing stuff, but I doubt anyone connected to the gov't (and ultimately the huge Pharm industry) would support such a measure. If it's cheap, inexpensive, and works very well than it's going OFF the list because it won't make any money!
> 
> I support medical marijuana not as a cure all (by any means), just a nice, cheap, non-toxic alternative to some of the more artificial and devastating cancer meds that can really do some damage to you.
> 
> Spiritual healing is great, but sometimes (when it comes to pain, nausea) you need some immediate, tangible results. I'd rather someone smoke natural marijuana than take an artificial drug born in a lab with chemicals...


Also, there is no more effective tranquilizer available than marijuana -- and it isn't addictive as many prescribed tranquilizers are!

So consider that tranquilizers are among the most profitable prescription drugs.


----------



## Politico (Mar 20, 2013)

Hell no make it legal. You should have the right to smoke it. And I should have the right to shoot you in the face when you run your high ass into my car.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> I agree with a lot of what you said, but at this time I think we should just focus on Marijuana specifically.
> 
> [...]


And you're quite right in that belief, mainly because public opinion has become receptive to the truth about marijuana being relatively benign and non-addictive.  By focusing on marijuana, alone, there is a good chance the Congress can be swayed by a public majority to consider the first step toward legalization, which is decriminalization.  

Decriminalization is not a permanent status.  It can easily be withdrawn if the experiment produces negative results, which it surely will not.  And once the public realizes that marijuana is not the demon they've been convinced to believe it is, the next step, full legalization, will come naturally.

Then, and only then, and after a time, will it be prudent to suggest a similar experiment with heroin (which can be managed with relatively low negative effect).  But I don't believe it would be wise to consider legalizing such substances as as methamphetamine, which is known to impart severely pathological and socially destructive effects.  I would have no problem with the DEA focusing its entire efforts on such truly dangerous substances.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

Politico said:


> Hell no make it legal. You should have the right to smoke it. And I should have the right to shoot you in the face when you run your high ass into my car.


Your concern is highly exaggerated.


----------



## Politico (Mar 20, 2013)

I am neither concerned nor exaggerated.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...


That article is pure propaganda with a credibility level approximately equal to the _Reefer Madness_ film.  Just consider the source and the bona fides.

Anyone who wishes to read an authoritative summary of the biological effects of marijuana should read, _Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine,_ by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, MD, Ph.D., Professor of Psychiatric Medicine, Harvard University.  (Available from Amazon.)

There is a credential worth paying attention to, as opposed to the nonsense this Katzenjammer character is peddling.


----------



## jwoodie (Mar 20, 2013)

1.  Like tobacco, marijuana is primarily ingested by smoking, which causes lung diseases in people around you, especially children (in additional to other effects).

2.  Unlike alcohol, it is difficult to measure driving impairment and is more likely to be a gateway drug.

3.  The minimum age to be President should be 55, because people younger than that do not have sufficient life experience to appreciate the potential consequences of currently popular ideas.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 20, 2013)

Isn't Harvard the same university that hosted incestfest not long ago?  Didn't Harvard make obama editor of the HLR when he had never published a thing.   Harvard, Yale  the ivy league used to be such prestigious schools.  

I really can't fault you for dismissing the unpleasant facts.  You will learn.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> 1.  Like tobacco, marijuana is primarily ingested by smoking, which causes lung diseases in people around you, especially children (in additional to other effects).


First, smoking is not the only way to ingest marijuana, nor is it the best way.  If you've ever had a few bites of a properly baked "pot" brownie, carrot cake, etc., you would understand why.  

The reason smoking is presently the most common means of ingestion is cost and suppression.  It takes a lot more leaf and bud to render the necessary ingredient ("pot butter") for baking than to just burn it and inhale the smoke.  Baking with it also requires experience and certain expertise, which would be more common if it were legal.  But the suppresive effect of prohibition has driven the technique outside the grasp of the average person.  If marijuana were legally available you would see all sorts of edibles -- as presently are available from all legal medical marijuana dispensaries.

Also, the use of vaporizers, which carry the THC in vaporized (non-smoke) form are becoming popular.  Right now they are relatively expensive but will predictably come down in price as demand increases through legalization. 



> 2.  Unlike alcohol, it is difficult to measure driving impairment . . .


Again, suppression has eliminated the profit motivation to develop a useful test for impairment.  If marijuana were legal it is a matter of time before demand motivates research and development of a (probably saliva-based) test.  Right now there is no demand, mainly because there are very few instances in which police have cause to suspect marijuana DUI.  



> . . .  and is more likely to be a gateway drug.


That is pure _Reefer Madness_ nonsense.  And if you wish to continue believing it you will have chosen to remain ignorant of the facts.

If it were true that marijuana is a "gateway drug," considering the number of Americans who use marijuana (DEA estimates around 40 million) there would be hard-drug junkies nodding out in every doorway of every main street in America.  

The notion that marijuana is a "gateway drug" derives from the convenient fact that most junkies use it in addition to anything else that will get them high.  In the case of these _addictive personalities_ it may be said that chocolate and Pepsi Cola are "gatetway" substances.  

If you know a hard-core junkie who claims to have gotten started on pot, don't believe it.  That individual is inclined to use anything, up to and including paint-thinner, to assist in his self-destructive determination.  The vast majority of responsible marijuana users wouldn't consider using an addictive or harmful drug -- including alcohol!


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> ...


If you allow this one example of the _addictive personality_ to prejudice your opinion of a euphoric tranquilizer which many millions of Americans routinely enjoy with absolutely none of the dementia-related effects you've described, then you need to get out more and pay attention.  

It is likely that girl is using something else in addition to marijuana -- or she simply is using too much of it, which is a psychological dependency and is far from typical.  You might say she is analogous to the emerging alcoholic who carries a pint or a flask with them and needs a _slug_ every half hour.  They are forgetful, too.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

slackjawed said:


> While I would like to see marijuana legal, I think a couple things have to happen;
> 1) Give notice to the other countries we have treaties with that make marijuana smuggling an international crime. Until these treaties are either negated or revised, we would be in violation of existing internatiuonal treaties to legalize marijuana. Might not sound like a big deal, but broken treaties can affect our credit rating, credibility and could conceivably cause other countries to issue trade sanctions (far fetched extreme case)against the usa.
> 
> 2) Marijuana must be rescheduled to a class 3 or 4 drug by our federal government. Until this is done there is no chance of legalization. The "medical marijuana" laws should have directed their energy to this end. The medical marijuana crowd didn't work to accomplish this, without rescheduling marijuana to at least a class 3 drug, the real doctors can't and won't prescribe it, even if they believe it will help their patient. If marijuana was rescheduled to a class 3 drug you wouldn't need dispenseries, it would be available in the local pharmacy just like it was in the early 1900's in the USA. The entire 'medical marijuana' movement is nothing more than a dishonest attempt to legalize marijuana through a perceived backdoor. It ain't working.
> ...


*Thank you* for the refreshingly substantive and extremely useful commentary.

Everything you've said is relevant and important.  I am encouraged by the fact that such rarely considered but critical circumstances are finally being publicized.  Because until these facts become part of the marijuana dialogue the prospect of legalization is limited.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

whitehall said:


> Let's see, "policing" illegal alcohol and guns is expensive so why not legalize the manufacture of alcohol and guns? It costs a lot to prosecute rapists and afford shelter to abused women. Should we forget about it? It almost seems funny that at a time in history when cigarette smoking has become almost illegal the pot heads want to make a buck selling narcotics to our kids.


I don't say this to offend, but that is a shamefully ignorant commentary.

If there are "potheads" (a really stupid designation) who want to sell narcotics to our kids, do you believe legalizing marijuana will increase their activities?  The fact is they are doing that now, mainly because the price of illegal marijuana makes it irresistably profitable to them.  If marijuana were legal the reduced profit margin would make it not worth the risk to "push" it.  

The simple fact, whether or not you choose to accept it, is it is easier for kids to obtain marijuana today than it is to obtain beer, which is legal!  Because the price and availability of beer is such there is no profit in bootlegging it anymore.


----------



## jwoodie (Mar 20, 2013)

MikeK said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  Like tobacco, marijuana is primarily ingested by smoking, which causes lung diseases in people around you, especially children (in additional to other effects).
> ...



Nice try at deflection, but the facts remain:

1.  Smoking IS the most common means of ingestion; and

2.  People who first use marijuana are more likely to use harder drugs.   

3.  According to your assertion, the vast majority of marijuana users are either irresponsible or teetotalers.  Which is it?


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> If you are going to villify smoking tobacco then why is marijuana any different? it uses the same paper and produces the same gases and even has some nicotine in it - though less than tobacco.
> 
> [...]


First, you should know that smoking is neither the only way nor the best way to enjoy marijuana.  If you doubt that, try a pot brownie.  (Just take a couple of bites if it's your first time -- and wait.)   

Also, if you will closely examine any commercially available cigarette you will see a series of faint grey circles imprinted on the paper.  That is dried potassium nitrate.  It is there to keep the cigarette burning.  It also is carcinegenic when burned.  

The tobacco in all commercially available cigarettes is adulterated with all sorts of chemicals which are added to enhance the effect of nicotine.  Some of these chemicals are carcinogenic when burned.  And they are responsible for the intolerable stink of cigarette smoke.

The typical papers used to roll "joints" (Bambu, etc.), contain no potassium nitrate.  But the problem with a lot of bootleg marijuana is it does contain a lot of toxic chemicals, typically insecticides and growth-inducing chemicals.  This is one more good reason to legalize marijuana -- so the FDA can control its purity.  

Last, burning marijuana does not stink like cigarettes.  It smells a bit like leaves burning on a fall day.  Not at all unpleasant.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

KaliAndersson said:


> My Grandparents got in a lot of trouble for trying to buy some farm land by growing marijuana in Minnesota...My Grandfather got like four federal feloneys and spent a lot of time in prison.My Grnadmother got off because she was still a teenager.
> It grew wild and the cultivated kind blended in real well but he was charged as a bigger dealer yet because they counted all the plants, even the wild hemp as belonging to them....But such is life that is how the dice fell and they lost..
> 
> Now for the first time it is now legal to grow in Colorado and does well here if it don't get to hot.Loves summer weather between 70 and 80 degrees if grown outside.Will do fine even above 9,000 ft.Lot more will be grown probaley even tho' the county is riddled with growers
> ...


Hello, there!


----------



## whitehall (Mar 20, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > Let's see, "policing" illegal alcohol and guns is expensive so why not legalize the manufacture of alcohol and guns? It costs a lot to prosecute rapists and afford shelter to abused women. Should we forget about it? It almost seems funny that at a time in history when cigarette smoking has become almost illegal the pot heads want to make a buck selling narcotics to our kids.
> ...



When the government decided to get into the gambling industry it just created a generation of degenerate gamblers and organized crime didn't miss a beat. Legalizing marijuana would not eliminate drug cartels and would in fact increase their customer base for other drugs. As I said before a serious pot head will find a way to get the high he/she craves. They can get a couple of seeds and grow a marijuana tree and smoke it until their brains run out their ears. Marijuana use ain't what the argument is about. The high rollers see a way to cash in but it ain't gonna happen.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Nice try at deflection, but the facts remain:
> 
> 1.  Smoking IS the most common means of ingestion; and
> 
> ...


If you wouldn't mind answering some personal questions there are some things about you I'd like to know:

Gender

Age

Education

Occupation

Is anyone close to you addicted to drugs, now or in the past?


----------



## MikeK (Mar 20, 2013)

whitehall said:


> When the government decided to get into the gambling industry it just created a generation of degenerate gamblers and organized crime didn't miss a beat. Legalizing marijuana would not eliminate drug cartels and would in fact increase their customer base for other drugs. As I said before a serious pot head will find a way to get the high he/she craves. They can get a couple of seeds and grow a marijuana tree and smoke it until their brains run out their ears. Marijuana use ain't what the argument is about. The high rollers see a way to cash in but it ain't gonna happen.


When I was a boy growing up in South Brooklyn the _numbers racket_ was very common.  I don't believe it exists anymore.  Same with the illegal ("underground") gambling parlors.  They were commonplace back then, just like _speakeasies_ during Prohibition, but I haven't even heard of one anymore.  

So I don't know what you're talking about.   Do you?


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 20, 2013)

whitehall said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



Sure, and those are your valid opinions. 

However, I disagree and that's because I think the *billions* in revenue that the cartels currently make through marijuana won't be easily replaced. It's like saying a company can lose it's star product, but still be okay because "they'll figure out something else". I think that's much easier said than done; you can't just replace a finely tuned money engine like pot overnight. At the very least, the cartels will be crippled for decades..

Secondly, what this argument is about is justifying the costs of marijuana prohibition. It's not about proving whether or not marijuana is useful, or if marijuana has medical benefits, or if people who smoke it are worthless dopes; the argument is simply "should we continue to spend billions of dollars and untold resources policing a drug that is non-toxic and non-fatal"? 

Do the benefits of prohibition outweigh the costs? 

Theories about how marijuana might make certain people lazy or make spiders spin bad webs really don't stack up to the REAL tangible lives (cartel/gang violence) and costs we sacrifice for prohibition.



.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Mar 20, 2013)

Marijuana is in no way an addictive drug. It can be habitual but addiction requires more and more use to maintain the same level of intoxication - Marijuana doesn't do this. It also has no long term additive harmful effects. People who use it long term do not die from marijuana overdose. It does have a few problems. It interferes with short term memory in most people who use it regularly. It can, when smoked, cause hoarsness and a sore throat until the mucus membranes become accustomed to it. Prolonged heavy use can cause headaches in some people - not severe like Migraines but headaches non-the-less.
The only reason the users of marijuana rarely go on to hard drugs is because the same guy that sells the pot sells other illegal drugs too. these dealers pressure people to try the new thing and some get taken in. If marijuana is legal then the only people that users will get to know are their pharmisists. or the guy running the MJ store down the street - depending on how it is sold. They won't have the intimate contact with other illegal drugs anymore.

I can see no reason not to make it legal even though there is a part of me that says it is a bad idea. That is an emotional reaction because I was married to an addict for 13 years. When it nearly cost me my job and my house I filed for a divorce and lost the most important thing I had - My kids.  I did get them back after they moved out from living with their mother so even that turned out very well.


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 21, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> How long will it be before these growers get socked with a tax evasion charge?
> 
> Colorado was expecting to become a pot tourism hub so none of this is a surprise.



TAXES! That is why growers should still keep silent for the good of everybody.
Growing Marijuana has always been a cash business,they can't even put the money in the bank without risk, so they have spent a lot of it, if they have sold like my neighbor lady to an outside buyer in Kansas City, the money comes to the local economy....Buying good guard dogs,buying firewood,snowplowing their driveways, keeping the hardware store going during a bad nonexistant house building market by selling grow lights, fans, potting soil so on. 
Even the restuarant/bar makes money,all paid with cash and even the echo does not go into the black hole on the banks of the Potamac River, or into the Golden Dome in Denver. I know I have benifited from those dollars as a waitress tremendusly...Marijuana is by far the number one money making ag business here,as well as other rural areas.I know it was where we lived in Oklahoma...

And as far as money goes, helps take up the slack the timber business of logging and sawmills did,  that the Federal government crushed purposely during the 1990s (My Step-grandfather had several sawmills and a logging business that hired a lot of people.)...It is truly still a great American enterprize that is based on these peoples skill, knowledge, and very long hard work....My neighbor Lady during harvest time works long, long hours to deliver Americas Marijuana demand...And does nothing else from before daylight till way late into the night..
She can put out a crop year long from her basement every 7 weeks.And a boom crop on the hillside behind her house in the Ganbles oak brush during the summer time.She had one plant outside, and I saw it, that produced eight ounces of bud just from that one plant.I don't know how much suger leaf she made into Keif from it...She wanted to pay me $20.00 an hour to trim sugar leaf and bud during the harvest last Sepember.


----------



## jwoodie (Mar 21, 2013)

MikeK said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Nice try at deflection, but the facts remain:
> ...



Not that it is particularly relevant, but here you go:

Male

65

MBA, JD

Attorney

Yes

How about you?

P.S. Please explain why you think legalized marijuana cigarettes would be any less of a health hazard than legalized tobacco cigarettes.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 21, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



Cigarettes contain thousands of carcinogens and chemicals (to keep it burning, ect) whereas people generally demand the most 100% pure pot they can get. You don't need all those added carcinogens with a joint. The current assumption/culture is that a joint is just pot and paper. Less carcinogens = healthier product in comparison.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Mar 21, 2013)

The chemicals are in the paper - not the tobacco. The tabacco is smoked using the rest of the plant to enhance the nicotine levels and "mellow" the flavor. The paper is treated with chemicals in the production of it and then potasium and ammonium nitrates are added to keep it burning. Most of that has been mandated out of the paper production citing the "fire hazard" it can pose for smokers who fall asleep while smoking. Either way, unless you use a pipe to smoke it they both use the same chemicals in the papers.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 21, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> The chemicals are in the paper - not the tobacco. The tabacco is smoked using the rest of the plant to enhance the nicotine levels and "mellow" the flavor. The paper is treated with chemicals in the production of it and then potasium and ammonium nitrates are added to keep it burning. Most of that has been mandated out of the paper production citing the "fire hazard" it can pose for smokers who fall asleep while smoking. Either way, unless you use a pipe to smoke it they both use the same chemicals in the papers.



Well, at the very least, Marijuana won't contain nicotine - the addictive element (if I'm not mistaken) - so they will be less habit forming than tobacco cigarettes. People likely will generally be compelled to smoke less joints during the day than tobacco cigarettes.

Interestingly - too - is that chronic marijuana smokers generally don't experience the same lung cancer rates as cigarette smokers. Perhaps this is due to delivery methods...


----------



## Conservadude (Mar 21, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



The government should really never have a say about what an adult puts in their body, IMO. If you wanna drink acid, it's really not any of my business. 

Abortion is much different, IMO, because that is affecting another human being.

But if someone wants to get high, and isn't hurting anyone, be my guest. Legalize it.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 21, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...


It's not what I _think._  It's what I've learned over the years.  If you'd care to know more about this topic I recommend Jack Herer's informative, well-documented, interesting and entertaining book, _The Emperor Has No Clothes_ (available from Amazon).  It's an excellent primer.  Also, you can Google up NORML's website which contains a treasury of facts and authoritatively debunks all of the standard _Reefer Madness_ lies, exaggerations, misinformation, and absurdities.    

As mentioned earlier, the paper used on all commercially available cigarettes is ringed with dried potassium nitrate to keep the chemically treated tobacco burning.  The residue of burned potassium nitrate is carcinogenic.  In addition to that, the tobacco used in all commercially available cigarettes is treated with a number of chemicals which enhance the effect of nicotine.  Some of these chemicals are known carcinogens:   What in tobacco smoke is harmful? 

The papers used to roll marijuana "joints" need no chemicals because marijuana's natural oil keeps it burning at a comparatively lower temperature.  And legally produced marijuana would need no chemical additive to enhance its natural effect.  Compared to cigarettes marijuana is quite benign.  

Equally important; the average smoker ingests between 20 and 30 cigarettes per day, whereas the average (not degenerate) marijuana smoker ingests less than the equivalent of ten tobacco cigarettes in a week.  But, as previously emphasized, and unlike cigarettes, one need not smoke marijuana to enjoy it.  The problem is the cost of bootleg marijuana makes baking with it prohibitive.  If it were legal, once the methods of baking "pot" brownies, carrot cake, etc., became more commonly known, smoking it would soon become much less common.  Because the effect of digesting it, while not as immediate as inhaling it, is much nicer and lasts much longer.  

PS, I'm 76, male, I have an M.A. (along with some para-legal training), I'm retired, former civil service legal investigator.  I was primarily interested in the last question posed to you because it's been my experience that seemingly determined opponents of marijuana use and legalization have been personally affected by drug addiction and are motivated more by fear than by knowledge and experience.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 22, 2013)

MikeK said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



Excellent information. Just want to point out (correct me if I'm wrong) that I think a lot of people don't cook pot brownies, ect, because it's extremely expensive to cook with just the buds (the only thing that's usually available in prohibited zones). 

However, if you can get a hold of the marijuana leaves to make your shake for cooking (which is not so great for smoking), this method of ingestion will become a lot more affordable and widely used. This would be another benefit of legalization.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 22, 2013)

Conservadude said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> ...



I never understood why it's generally conservatives - who argue for fiscal responsibility and less gov't - who push for Marijuana prohibition. 

You'd think that they want to (a) not to waste money needlessly and (b) have LESS rules prohibiting free citizens from partaking in non-harmful activities that do not harm other people, not more.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 22, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



Oh my oh my.  You must get all your medical advice from NORML.

Recreational Marijuana: Are There Health Effects?

Putting smoke in your lungs is not good for the lungs," says Roland Lamarine, HSD, professor of public health at California State University, Chico. He reviewed published studies on the health effects of marijuana earlier this year for the Journal of Drug Education.

Smoking marijuana produces a nearly threefold increase of inhaled tar compared with tobacco, according to some studies. Other research suggests that marijuana smokers, compared to cigarette smokers, inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer.

"There are still questions that aren't answered about lung damage," Lamarine says. For cigarette smokers who also smoke marijuana, there may be an additive effect, he says.

Combining the two appears to be a trend, he says. "Some of the [college] kids tell me they buy cigars and put in some marijuana, so there is both marijuana and tobacco," Lamarine says.

Marijuana smoke contains cancer-causing substances, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Some research shows that marijuana smoke has up to 70% more cancer-causing substances than tobacco smoke, it says.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 22, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



I'm no expert on whether or not tobacco cigarettes are more or less healthier than marijuana cigarettes, so I'm not going to attempt a back and forth. I'm sure if you google with an agenda you can find evidence pointing in both directions, so the exercise is somewhat futile. 

One point I want to make, however, is that pot smokers generally demand the purest bud available (with the least amount of chemicals) whereas the tobacco cigarette smoker can generally care less. The tobacco companies have leeway to add flame retardants, carcinogenic paper, ect, with little question by their customer base. This customer/vendor relationship inherently will lead to a less healthier product for the majority tobacco smokers. Obviously we have our "all natural" cigarettes, but the volume pales in comparison to the Marlboros or Camels.


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 22, 2013)

Pot smokers demand the greatest high, they don't care about purity.    The goal is the biggest high.   They leave out nicotine and put in bath salts or PCP.


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 22, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Pot smokers demand the greatest high, they don't care about purity.    The goal is the biggest high.   They leave out nicotine and put in bath salts or PCP.




Katz - Are you a pot smoker? Bath Salts and PCP are completely mind altering and render you incapable of going about your daily business; that's something most pot smokers are NOT after. That's why they choose marijuana. Like alcohol, it's a drug that is meant to be a gentle relaxer that (when done in moderation) does not render you useless. 

Btw, I believe the quality of the high is directly related to the purity of the marijuana.


----------



## editec (Mar 22, 2013)

> I never understood why it's generally conservatives - who argue for fiscal responsibility and less gov't - who push for Marijuana prohibition.



I don't thing that's true of the people in power, but I agree that it is true in the rank and files of both parties.

the DEM party (hell liberalism generally) threw pot smokers under the bus a long long time ago.

Fucking cowards and hypocrites


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 22, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Pot smokers demand the greatest high, they don't care about purity.    The goal is the biggest high.   They leave out nicotine and put in bath salts or PCP.
> ...



Obviously there are pot smokers that are after exactly that!   Otherwise there wouldn't be these kinds of additives.    If you think about it, and I really doubt you have.  If we make pot legal, we will now have pot that's got additives, that will be illegal so the drug war such as it is, will rage on.

The issue isn't the legalization of pot, it's that so many people have a need to get high on a daily basis.  It feels good.  Anything that feels good has to be the right thing to do.   The future will be something close to The Walking Dead.    Not a single culture, ever, has survived a population dedicated to feeling good.  The ones who have such dedication today are failures.  We will just be one of them.  Not because we legalized pot, but because so many people want to get high and want it more than anything else in the world.


----------



## High_Gravity (Mar 22, 2013)

Feeling good is imporant.


----------



## jwoodie (Mar 22, 2013)

MikeK said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...


----------



## KevinWestern (Mar 22, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



What additives are you talking about exactly? I've heard of chemicals being added from time to time to 'enhance' extremely low quality marijuana, but I feel like legalization will change that (because high quality, pure marijuana will be more easily accessible). Again, do you smoke? It sounds like no..

Again, pot is just like alcohol; it's a relatively safe method for people to relax and relieve stress that has built up during the day (at work). Also, it can be smoked in moderation so that the user can still function just fine. Is that such a bad thing?


----------



## MikeK (Mar 22, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Oxymoron.  Being personally affected provides greater knowledge and experience than quoting some other person's biased study. [/B]


That seems logical until we consider the factor of *predisposition.* A Genetic Predisposition To Alcohol Dependence May Be Indicated By Sensitivity To Alcohol Odors

It is a well-established medical fact that some people are genitically predisposed to alcoholism.  As yet I am not aware of any similar research with respect to other recreational substances, but the Behavioral community is fairly certain of the problem and simple observation tends to confirm it exists.  But, simply stated, those who are similarly susceptible are a distinct minority, so because one individual is readily susceptible to becoming addicted to a given substance does not mean everyone else is similarly vulnerable.

While I haven't even seen any marijuana since the mid-1980s, both myself and my late wife enjoyed it on a regular basis throughout the 1960s and '70s.  But when Ronald Reagan escalated Nixon's drug war madness in 1981, the increasing cost and fear of prosecution caused us to abruptly stop using it.  While we both missed the enjoyment it afforded us, neither of us endured any of the _withdrawal_ discomforts described to us by a few others who chose to stop -- one fellow in particular who probably to this day is still a compulsive user if he's still alive.  Most of those we knew never complained of any discomfort from quitting.  

So you simply cannot apply your rule of personal experience as having any bearing on how others might respond to a substance.  Because the simple fact of the matter is marijuana is not an addictive drug -- except for an unfortunate minority of individuals who are best described as _addictive personalities._


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 23, 2013)

There is truth to what everyone says on both sides of the issue My Mother and me moved to Alaska when I was 8 back in the 1990s...
In 1975 Marijuana was made legal at least four ounces was.
then in 1990 it was made illegal I guess because of pressure to do so I don't think it was by voters.
Unless you had you could get a medical marijuana card, which my Mother jumped on, like a chicken on a Junebug.... claiming migraines. even tho' I don't think she ever had probalems with any  kind of headaches (sp?)..She just wanted to be legal.

When it was made illegal Alaska high Native population began using other stuff like mouthwash or even rubbing alcohol to off on.(Fedal Alcohol sydrone is a real probalem in Alaska)Alcohol consumtion went way up,so in 2003 it was made legal again, at least 4 ounces was.
Then in 2006 Gov. Murkowski(sp?) tried to make it illegal again but Alaskas supreme court said it was against the rights of privacey butnow only one ounce is legal.
It was unpopular and is one reason that Sarah Palin won the governorship.
Now in 2014 the 'folks' will get to vote on it, and it will be legal for four ounces again.

Younger kids did start smoking more when it was legal and probaley one of the worst things that happened was it did draw a lot of low-lives into the state that the Alaskian dividend fund had to be shared with.....Probaley will be the same here in Colorado but is the price one pays for freedom.

Researching Marijuana was made illegal by Federal law in 1937...when Democrats were in totall control who love making more laws, made it a federal crime....Millions of American have suffered loss of lot of legal fees, and have like my Grandfather done hard time in Federal prison because of it. 

Even when it was legal in Alaska my Mothers boyfriend told of being boarded on a fishing boat he was on by the federal coast guard, and seached for Marijuana and they found some in one guys coat...charges were made and the boat had to come back in which was a huge loss as they were fishing on shares(half for the boat, half for the crew).
Will DEA agents look for and bust taboo gardens in Colorado???.....I bet they do, they love that kind of stuff...their careers depend on it as Government gets boocoos of money from the folks that way..lawyers are dependent on it for their livelyhoods, and we had voted in lawyers who make laws for lawyers....yes?


----------



## Katzndogz (Mar 23, 2013)

The truth is that marijuana isn't the problem.  It really is that so many people can't get through the day without being high.  They will drink mouthwash, huff paint thinner.  What ever it takes.   They can't be counseled or educated.   They need to be removed.  Treat substance abuse like what it really is, a communicable disease.


----------



## MikeK (Mar 23, 2013)

KaliAndersson said:


> There is truth to what everyone says on both sides of the issue My Mother and me moved to Alaska when I was 8 back in the 1990s...
> In 1975 Marijuana was made legal at least four ounces was.
> then in 1990 it was made illegal I guess because of pressure to do so I don't think it was by voters.
> Unless you had you could get a medical marijuana card, which my Mother jumped on, like a chicken on a Junebug.... claiming migraines. even tho' I don't think she ever had probalems with any  kind of headaches (sp?)..She just wanted to be legal.
> ...


Looks to me like you know what you're talking about, Kali.


----------



## KaliAndersson (Mar 26, 2013)

MikeK said:


> KaliAndersson said:
> 
> 
> > There is truth to what everyone says on both sides of the issue My Mother and me moved to Alaska when I was 8 back in the 1990s...
> ...



Thanks, I might know more than some but not nearly as much as many do here that have grown...I know a little more than I did the other day, a neighbor showed me how to clone Sunday afternoon.

I have never grown marijuana, nor do I intend to, but it does pay to know things...
I sort of want to, now that it is legal...but my husband (who is working right now helping his Uncle build in North Dakota)who keeps us on the straight and narrow says," no way."......Probaley just as well.

I worked with one guy who one 25 years old at the resturant , who could talk about nothing else but Marijuana, he was so obcessed with it....That are people like that...Most just use it to relax in the evening like my Mother often would...

Sometimes it even helps people...My husbands Uncle joined the Army way back in the 1960s, to kill communis, even tho' he had a athelic schoolarship to go to colleget...He volunteered for hardcore night recon. stuff in Viet Nam and spent 2 1/2 years there before they sent him home because he started loving his job to much.

After coming home tho' he started having trouble sleeping and started taking stuff that was not good for him...when Ambian came out about 20 years ago he started taking that and took more and more tillo he was using it just to stay 'normal'.He got to where he took 7 day day till one day two years ago he had a seizure...They rushed him to the VA hospitol in Albuquerque, New Mexico and fromn there sent him to the VA in San Diego,California where he was 'dried out' finally treated for PTSD.....Now when he can't sleep he takes Marijuana in Cannabutter in some form and sleeps good...When he works construction tho' he doesn't have the probalem as he gets tried working long long hours (he is in very good shape for gbeing in his 60s)..In his case Marijuana is a god given medicine.


----------



## jwoodie (Apr 1, 2013)

Marijuana cigarettes would never get FDA approval, which is why we are subjected to all these gimmicky arguments.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 1, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Marijuana cigarettes would never get FDA approval, which is why we are subjected to all these gimmicky arguments.



Why? They seem to have no problem approving of Monsanto's GMOs that have been shown to give rats massive tumors. 

With that as the precedent, Marijuana - which is completely natural - wouldn't have too big of an issue, given that the FDA always is consistent with their standards.

.


----------



## MikeK (Apr 1, 2013)

KaliAndersson said:


> [...]
> 
> Sometimes it even helps people...My husbands Uncle joined the Army way back in the 1960s, to kill communis, even tho' he had a athelic schoolarship to go to colleget...He volunteered for hardcore night recon. stuff in Viet Nam and spent 2 1/2 years there before they sent him home because he started loving his job to much.
> 
> After coming home tho' he started having trouble sleeping and started taking stuff that was not good for him...when Ambian came out about 20 years ago he started taking that and took more and more tillo he was using it just to stay 'normal'.He got to where he took 7 day day till one day two years ago he had a seizure...They rushed him to the VA hospitol in Albuquerque, New Mexico and fromn there sent him to the VA in San Diego,California where he was 'dried out' finally treated for PTSD.....Now when he can't sleep he takes Marijuana in Cannabutter in some form and sleeps good...When he works construction tho' he doesn't have the probalem as he gets tried working long long hours (he is in very good shape for gbeing in his 60s)..In his case Marijuana is a god given medicine.


There is a very simple explanation for that:  Marijuana happens to be the best and most effective tranquilizer available.  Which is why the major pharmaceutical companies give so much financial support to NIDA and other anti-marijuana propaganda organizations.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 1, 2013)

Dear KW: Would you be satisfied with DE-Criminalizing marijuana while still holding people responsible for any addictions related to health problems nonusers don't want to pay for?

Would you support free and equal access to "spiritual healing" as a more natural/nonaddictive alternative to medical marijuana with even more benefits including
no side effects, and ability to cure causes of diseases (not just placate symptoms or reduce pain) ranging from cancer and diabetes to mental and even criminal illness (including addiction itself which of course marijuana does not cure).

Where spiritual healing can reduce costs of crime and health care costs, even more so than legalizing marijuana, would you support that? Or does it not fit your political agenda?



KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



P.S. I agree with decriminalizing things related to addictions or mental/criminal illness that are better treated medically as diseases. I believe we should have a third level of laws besides just criminal and civil, and put these other contested issues under "health and safety" ordinances that can be decided and managed democratically by district, instead of trying to impose a global policy across the board. these merit further study before making public policy, so that people make decisions by informed choice not just religion or politics.

I believe spiritual healing can be medically proven as a more natural and cost-effective process that will revolutionize our criminal justice, mental health and medical systems.
So I support much of the arguments you make, but just take it further to resolve the root problems and not just manipulate the symptoms which I agree wastes public resources we could be investing in prevention, correction and treatment of real causes of abuse and crime.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 1, 2013)

emilynghiem said:


> Dear KW: Would you be satisfied with DE-Criminalizing marijuana while still holding people responsible for any addictions related to health problems nonusers don't want to pay for?
> 
> Would you support free and equal access to "spiritual healing" as a more natural/nonaddictive alternative to medical marijuana with even more benefits including
> no side effects, and ability to cure causes of diseases (not just placate symptoms or reduce pain) ranging from cancer and diabetes to mental and even criminal illness (including addiction itself which of course marijuana does not cure).
> ...




Emily,

My argument is this: what we gain from marijuana prohibition is greatly, GREATLY outweighed by the costs we pay for marijuana prohibition. We put millions in jail, we give untold power to the cartels, and we waste untold resources (courts, police) patroling and prohibiting marijuana. For a drug that you can&#8217;t overdose on, and does not harm people in a meaningful or significant way in the long term, it simply DOES NOT make sense. 

Would you spend $1 million on a piece of gum? No! It's not worth it. Yes, you might get a little bit of benefit (the gum), but you just lost $1 million that could have been spent getting you much more benefit elsewhere (like buying a mansion). This is the same as saying should we spend $1 million policing marijuana? No! It's not worth it. We could have spent that $1 million in education, or putting rapists in prison...

I&#8217;m NOT arguing for legalization because of the fact that marijuana is beneficial medically, or at all. Something doesn&#8217;t have to be beneficial to be legal (if this was the case, we would not have Jersey Shore on TV). But if it's not that dangerous, why the heck should we dedicate all these resources to restricting it? 

Too, you mention paying for addiction. It think it's fair to say that any costs to society that are incurred from *incremental *addictions (because you have to take into account people are already smoking this en MASS), ect will be drawfed (to a very large degree) by the costs we save from all the prison bills (millions that we support 24/7, every day), police costs, court costs, ect. Not to mention our country would now be a producer of marijuana, and we&#8217;d open way to an entirely new industry that will generate real value in the US for law abiding citizens (vs just value for the violent criminals in mexico). If we&#8217;re talking costs here, I don&#8217;t think the prohibitionists have an argument. 


Finally, I&#8217;m all for spiritual healing, but I don&#8217;t know why the gov&#8217;t should be forced to provide free and equal access? Isn&#8217;t it already free? All you have to do is go on the internet and you can find a wealth of information. Not sure where you're going on this..


.


----------



## jwoodie (Apr 1, 2013)

MikeK said:


> KaliAndersson said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...



So why shouldn't marijuana be prescribed like other tranquilizers?


----------



## Spoonman (Apr 1, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



those all sound like very good arguments why we should put an end to this ridiculous assault weapons ban talk too


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 1, 2013)

Spoonman said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> ...



Not sure how the two are related, but agree that the assault weapons ban talk is both an aversion from the real issues (if you want to talk gun violence, you obviously should probably talk hand guns first), and an infringement on second amendment rights.

.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Apr 1, 2013)

The government has to show how a natural product is harmful to disallow its use. The people are otherwise free to use it. This was never done. It was made illegal because of induced hysteria paid for by the government.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 4, 2013)

My last  objection to legal pot has just been taken away.  The legal pot industty has been taken over by Russian and Armenian organised crime.  Marijuana is sold by weight so the pot is being treated with lead dust.  I'm so glad I found this out.  Now I have no complaints.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 4, 2013)

This is what I believe 
1# It should be a state issue. What it to the federal government to tell a state that approves or disapproves what to do?
2# It's their bodies. Choices...Abortion effects another human being so that of course should be illegal or very rare for that fact. Pot doesn't effect anyone besides the person about the same as drinking.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 4, 2013)

Pot affects every one around the user.  But if the pot they are eating and drinking is dusted with lead to increase the weight I'm okay with that.


----------



## MikeK (Apr 4, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> So why shouldn't marijuana be prescribed like other tranquilizers?


Some enlightened MDs do prescribe it in states where medical marijuana is legally available.  In fact its use as a tranquilizer is among the leading reasons for prescribing it.

Unfortunately the vast majority of physicians simply are not aware of its relative effectiveness.  And many of those who are aware of it are afraid of being stigmatized by marijuana's tainted reputation, so they stick to safe and uncontroversial tradition.  

Anyone who wishes to know more about marijuana's usefulness as a tranquilizer need only read, _Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine,_ by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, MD, PhD, Professor of Psychiatric Medicine and Psychopharmacology, Harvard Medical School.  (Available from Amazon.)


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

The enlightened doctors who prescribe marijuana just all happen to work for marijuana clinics.


----------



## High_Gravity (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> My last  objection to legal pot has just been taken away.  The legal pot industty has been taken over by Russian and Armenian organised crime.  Marijuana is sold by weight so the pot is being treated with lead dust.  I'm so glad I found this out.  Now I have no complaints.



So what does that do?


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

Lead poisoning.

Perhaps that's the reason for people exhibiting bizarre behavior and those that know them insist that they don't use any drugs but a little pot once in a while.  

We know that lead in the environment has contributed to all kinds of problems in the US, which has always been attributed to lead in the enviornment.  But we've had decades of removing lead, yet the adverse effects are still going on.   They are increasing rather than decreasing.   It might be because lead is being used to make marijuana heavier.

Lead Poisoning May Well Have Helped the Roman Empire Fall - NYTimes.com

 Dr. Herbert Needleman has shown that the median decrease of 4 to 5 points in I.Q. found in children with low to moderate levels of lead exposure is the sentinel for a much larger impact on populations: a quadrupling of the number of children with I.Q.'s below 80 and a total absence of children with I.Q.'s above 125. And the long-term consequences - school failure, dropouts and sociopathy - are only now being shown.

We've been eliminating environmental lead since the 80s.   It should be getting better, but lead toxicity is getting worse.   This could well be the reason why.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> The enlightened doctors who prescribe marijuana just all happen to work for marijuana clinics.



Katz, why are you so against people smoking marijuana? Do you hold this same level of distain towards ALL people who drink alcohol as well?

.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > The enlightened doctors who prescribe marijuana just all happen to work for marijuana clinics.
> ...



When I was much younger I really didn't care.  I didn't use marijuana myself but I knew plenty of people who did.  When in a pot smoked filled room my heart started racing so bad, I had to leave so I never used it.   A couple of times, I ended up in the emergency room to deal with these heart problems.   But that's not why.  It was years and years and Decades of seeing the severe damage that marijuana did.  Not only to the user, who never quite actually grasped the disaster around them, but the people close to the pot addict suffered so much, so much pain, death and loss that I developed the same antipathy against pot that I have against alcoholics.  Not everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner is an alcoholic, but everyone who smoked pot is a drug user.

The only solution is to let pot wind its way through the culture with as many being encouraged to die as possible and as young as possible.   I always knew that the pot clinics were owned/operated by organized crime, but to find out that they are increasing weight by the use of lead dust has got to help the death rate along.  We will just have to endure the insanity, failure, and all the other detriments until we work through it.   Meanwhile, my last objection to pot use has been taken away.   Legalize pot, let the lead treated pot proliferate and we might just make it through by the strength of non users.

It's not like alcohol isn't adultered, half the bars (and manufacturers too) cut the product with water.   Everyone does it.   Increase the weight of marijuana with lead dust.   It will eventually mean the right thing.


----------



## AquaAthena (Apr 5, 2013)

*"It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal." *

I personally love the good weed, but don't use it. Most people I know who also love it and are dependent upon it, have no problem acquiring it. It is everywhere. If people were responsible and wouldn't smoke it while driving or working, as they often do with alcohol, I would support legalization of marijuana. But irresponsible people will toke up anywhere as they are addicted and I am concerned that legalization would increase that dependency with other newbies to the weed. 

I also would never hire anyone I knew who smoked marijuana on the job. They are an accident just waiting to happen and YES! I have had experience with them. The short-term memory loss causes accidents also in cars/traffic.

So, in essence, I just don't support another mind-altering drug on the market, even though I do like the effects of the weed. I don't think people should be punished severely for possession of it, either. 

And, as I mentioned, marijuana is everywhere. You just can't believe the profitability factor in medical marijuana. This is where stoners get it, largely, and they don't take their whole allotment, thereby leaving some for the licensed medical marijuana "businesspersons."  Everybody wins in that market....lol


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> When I was much younger I really didn't care.  I didn't use marijuana myself but I knew plenty of people who did.  When in a pot smoked filled room my heart started racing so bad, I had to leave so I never used it.   A couple of times, I ended up in the emergency room to deal with these heart problems.   But that's not why.  It was years and years and Decades of seeing the severe damage that marijuana did.  Not only to the user, who never quite actually grasped the disaster around them, but the people close to the pot addict suffered so much, so much pain, death and loss that I developed the same antipathy against pot that I have against alcoholics.  Not everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner is an alcoholic, but everyone who smoked pot is a drug user.
> 
> The only solution is to let pot wind its way through the culture with as many being encouraged to die as possible and as young as possible.   I always knew that the pot clinics were owned/operated by organized crime, but to find out that they are increasing weight by the use of lead dust has got to help the death rate along.  We will just have to endure the insanity, failure, and all the other detriments until we work through it.   Meanwhile, my last objection to pot use has been taken away.   Legalize pot, let the lead treated pot proliferate and we might just make it through by the strength of non users.
> 
> It's not like alcohol isn't adultered, half the bars (and manufacturers too) cut the product with water.   Everyone does it.   Increase the weight of marijuana with lead dust.   It will eventually mean the right thing.



Alright, well I'm not doubting any of your personal experiences, but I have a few points to make.

Alcohol - like marijuana - is a drug. People who drink alcohol, by definition, are drug users just like those who smoke marijuana. There's non-alcoholic beer, right? However despite this, People choose to drink alcoholic beer because they like the effect it has on them (it's not simply a taste thing), and just like marijuana, it's up to the individual to be responsible enough to consume at appropriate times and in appropriate amounts. 

*Why is the occasional alcohol drinker somehow different from the occasional pot smoker?*

Too, why do you keep bringing up this ridiculous lead dust story? Sure, this thing might happen in Russia, but do you actually believe it's going to fly in the United States under State and Federal regulations? In this country, (in many cases) you can't even sell a _non-consumable_ product with lead traces in it! Not a strong point you're making, Katz..


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

In order to take the profit motive away from the cartels and keep it with the sick people who need it, marijuana outlets were set up as collectives.  Those who grew it, donated it to the collective to be sold to those who didn't grow it.

The pot shops largely get their product from the professional cartel growers and sell marijuana over the counter and any other kind of drug they can get their hands on under the counter.  Many outlets have expanded into weapons too.  That's a bigger profit margin.   Pot legalization is working basically the same way it worked in Amsterdam.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> *"It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal." *
> 
> I personally love the good weed, but don't use it. Most people I know who also love it and are dependent upon it, have no problem acquiring it. It is everywhere. If people were responsible and wouldn't smoke it while driving or working, as they often do with alcohol, I would support legalization of marijuana. But irresponsible people will toke up anywhere as they are addicted and I am concerned that legalization would increase that dependency with other newbies to the weed.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the response and for your opinion. 

Heres the thing (as I explained to Katz), Im not saying that marijuana legalization is necesarrily going to improve our quality of life; my main point is that we are paying very real and tangible costs for having it prohibited, some include:

1.) Millions of people (whod otherwise not be criminals) are in prison right now, breaking up families and stalling careers
2.) Billions of dollars of resources are being consumed policiing it, from officers to courts
3.) Ultra violent cartels are given the monopoly of all marijuana profits, and therefore are made into very powerful entities that perpetuate street violence in the US

My question is, are these costs WORTH preventing a few more people from driving high? You know what I mean? 

-KW


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > When I was much younger I really didn't care.  I didn't use marijuana myself but I knew plenty of people who did.  When in a pot smoked filled room my heart started racing so bad, I had to leave so I never used it.   A couple of times, I ended up in the emergency room to deal with these heart problems.   But that's not why.  It was years and years and Decades of seeing the severe damage that marijuana did.  Not only to the user, who never quite actually grasped the disaster around them, but the people close to the pot addict suffered so much, so much pain, death and loss that I developed the same antipathy against pot that I have against alcoholics.  Not everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner is an alcoholic, but everyone who smoked pot is a drug user.
> ...



It is actually a taste thing.   The occasional alcohol drinker doesn't get drunk.  There is no point to use of marijuana other than get high.  

Oh please.  Don't be deliberately dense.   

I actually just found out that lead has been used to increase the weight of marijuana.   Lead has actually been added for YEARS.    
Smoke Pot, Get Lead Poisoning?

Potential Toxins from Medical Marijuana Use

?You got lead in my marijuana. . .? ? Terra Sigillata

You are a heavy marijuana user.  You owe it to yourself to get tested.

The FDA can have all the regulations it wants and it still won't stop increasing the weight of marijuana with lead any more than all the FDA regulations in the world haven't done a thing to stop the corner bar from watering their alcohol.  

This news, old as it is, comes as quite a shock to me.


----------



## AquaAthena (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > *"It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal." *
> ...



*A few more* people from driving high?? You'll need to define "few," for all users put other drivers at risk when legalization permits all ages to drive, even though subsequent laws and penalties would apply to these drivers. 

As far as the profitability of "cartels" goes...it doesn't enter into my concerns of legalizing another mind-altering drug as the subsequent aftermath is unknown. 

Thanks for your response and I now bid you "adieu" as I am saying "bygones" to this thread. There is no perfect solution, only hypothesis as of this day and time.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> > *"It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal." *
> ...



You are willing to accept that a few more people might kill others by driving high as if driving high was an inconvenience to the people who were killed.

Marijuana use has already broken up millions and families and stalled careers.   Most of the users in prison aren't in prison for marijuana offenses, but for other offences, of which marijuana possession was just an additional charge.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> In order to take the profit motive away from the cartels and keep it with the sick people who need it, marijuana outlets were set up as collectives.  Those who grew it, donated it to the collective to be sold to those who didn't grow it.
> 
> The pot shops largely get their product from the professional cartel growers and sell marijuana over the counter and any other kind of drug they can get their hands on under the counter.  Many outlets have expanded into weapons too.  That's a bigger profit margin.   Pot legalization is working basically the same way it worked in Amsterdam.



Hi Katz,

If marijuana is legalized I can assure you that the cartels, the illegal activities, the lead dusting (which is illegal), it will all be out of the picture (with regards to pot in the US).  

We will see legal & non-violent growers pop up, legal distribution networks, and legal retail outlets.

Law abiding companies want NOTHING to do with illegal, non-law abiding companies because doing business with those entities lead to a slew of problems:

1.) You can't bring them to court, hold them accountable
2.) You can't transact in the normal fashion, any tax reporting activities will get flagged
3.) Illegal companies deal in intimidation and violence, which is generally best avoided in the business place. 

What's your point?


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > In order to take the profit motive away from the cartels and keep it with the sick people who need it, marijuana outlets were set up as collectives.  Those who grew it, donated it to the collective to be sold to those who didn't grow it.
> ...



You are dreaming.  You are dreaming of what you want instead of the reality that will be.  Meanwhile, as a pot user, you should really get tested for lead poisoning.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

AquaAthena said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > AquaAthena said:
> ...



Yea, a few more. We have to take into account that many, many people are currently driving high, so if pot is legalized we will see some sort of _incremental _increase which may or may not be very large. 

And, the profitability of the cartels _WILL _drop. Currently, they hold the virtual monopoly on recreational weed sales in the United States. If it's legalized, would you rather buy your marijuana from an illegal crime syndicate that jacks up the prices through shady dealers, or go to a trusted retail outlet with ingredients/processes that are inspected by the gov't & sell at fair market pricing?

The revenues of the cartels will drop in an extremely dramatic fashion given that marijuana is their #1 money maker. That's a fact (I don't think there's much speculation on that front).

I mean, I don't think there exists any powerful alcohol bootleggers in the US; we haven't seen that type of thing since the end of alcohol prohibition...

.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



What am I 'dreaming' about (explain Katz, your not elaborating enough)?

Why the heck would a fully legal American company choose to work with an illegal crime syndicate for marijuana when there would be other safer legal growers to choose from that are bound by US laws? 

Also, how many *powerful illegal alcohol companies do you know of in the US* (I really challenge you to answer this question)? Do you think it's a coincidence that the illegal alcohol business took a plunge after it was... legalized? 

Al Capone never would have existed without Prohibition. Remember that..
.


----------



## jwoodie (Apr 5, 2013)

What makes any of you think that legalized marijuana would be produced and marketed any differently than tobacco?


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Remember that the end of prohibition did not end illegal alcohol sales.   The illegal alcohol business was thriving after the end of prohibition.  The end of prohibition only ended federal prosecution.  Perfectly legal companies choose to work with crime syndicates all the time.  Every day.  A perfectly legal company that distributes fake oxycontin and knock off handbags will have no problem whatsoever with syndicate provided pot.  None.  

Do you really think that prohibition enabled the Mafia?  There was no organized crime before prohibition.  The Mafia alone is hundreds of years old.    If perfectly legal companies wouldn't do business with criminals Amsterdam wouldn't have such a problem with organized crime.  

You are relying on what you imagine will happen.  That is what makes you a dreamer.   I am only pointing out where you are wrong.  Distribution of lead laced pot will have an ultimate happy ending.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Remember that the end of prohibition did not end illegal alcohol sales.   The illegal alcohol business was thriving after the end of prohibition.  The end of prohibition only ended federal prosecution.  Perfectly legal companies choose to work with crime syndicates all the time.  Every day.  A perfectly legal company that distributes fake oxycontin and knock off handbags will have no problem whatsoever with syndicate provided pot.  None.
> 
> Do you really think that prohibition enabled the Mafia?  There was no organized crime before prohibition.  The Mafia alone is hundreds of years old.    If perfectly legal companies wouldn't do business with criminals Amsterdam wouldn't have such a problem with organized crime.
> 
> You are relying on what you imagine will happen.  That is what makes you a dreamer.   I am only pointing out where you are wrong.  Distribution of lead laced pot will have an ultimate happy ending.



Kat, obviously there is going to be a transition period.

How about instead of (sort of) insulting me and calling me a &#8216;dreamer&#8217;, you answer my question:

How is the illegal alcohol business thriving in the US today (vs the legal alcohol business)? If you want to deter
Too, the mob may have existed before prohibition, but it was prohibition that skyrocked its power to epic proportions. Capone made much of his money through bootlegging (do some research!). 

Too, you never answered this question either: why would it make sense for a company to work with the illegal drug cartels (and risk prosecution, high unfair prices, no liability) when they can simply team up with a legal grower in the states who&#8217;s regulated and bound with US law? I think the incentives for going the legal route are obvious. 

Please, try to answer my questions&#8230;


.


----------



## MikeK (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...


If marijuana is federally legalized the effect on the cartels will be the same as the effect repeal of Prohibition had on booze bootleggers.  They became defunct overnight.  Their service was no longer required by anyone.  

If marijuana is federally legalized its sourcing and production will be supervised and monitored by both federal and state governments.  Quality, distribution, and licensing standards will be imposed in states where it is legally available (there presumably will be "dry" states).  In time the process of buying marijuana products will resemble that of buying beverage alcohol products under present circumstances.  

One major development will be the availability of a wide variety of *edible* marijuana products, which inevitably will lead to a dramatic reduction in smoking the plant.  At my age I look forward to this and I predict that marijuana edibles will quickly become very popular with seniors.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

Overnight!

This is just going to be fun to watch.  

I had a friend who started using pot.  She's quite ill now.  After reading up on the subject it seems that her symptoms are that of lead poisoning including the palsy she developed.  I have not said a word to her since she got her pot card.  Moral dilemma.  Should I mention a blood test or let it go?  I'm inclined to just let it go.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Overnight!
> 
> This is just going to be fun to watch.
> 
> I had a friend who started using pot.  She's quite ill now.  After reading up on the subject it seems that her symptoms are that of lead poisoning including the palsy she developed.  I have not said a word to her since she got her pot card.  Moral dilemma.  Should I mention a blood test or let it go?  I'm inclined to just let it go.



Unless she's buying her marijuana from Russia, I don't think she has to worry about lead being in it. 

Come on Katz, try to be reasonable with this. Obviously no legal and regulated company would be allowed to put lead in a product that is to be consumed in the United States. 

Remember when there was recall for Chinese made toys with traces of lead? 

Anyways, I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing...


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

We have mexican candy all over the place with lead in the candy.  It's a flavoring and makes candy sweeter.  Lead will no doubt make for some very tasty pot cookies.

I know how important it is to you to think that the cartels will just fold up and go live in penury.   It just isn't going to happen.  At best it will have the same effect as a new cartel breaking into existing markets.  Do I care if cartels start hitting legal outlets, or go after customers?  Absolutely not.  I am looking forward to it.  Now that I know that lead has been added to pot since 1986 I don't have any objections to legalization.  You are one of the people who say "my dealer is my friend.  He would never let me buy something harmful and always tells me how safe his pot is".


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> We have mexican candy all over the place with lead in the candy.  It's a flavoring and makes candy sweeter.  Lead will no doubt make for some very tasty pot cookies.
> 
> I know how important it is to you to think that the cartels will just fold up and go live in penury.   It just isn't going to happen.  At best it will have the same effect as a new cartel breaking into existing markets.  Do I care if cartels start hitting legal outlets, or go after customers?  Absolutely not.  I am looking forward to it.  Now that I know that lead has been added to pot since 1986 I don't have any objections to legalization.



Katz, you really need to read into my arguments a bit more.

I never said the cartels would fold, all I said is that we are going to greatly impact their revenue stream (which is true). We give them money and power by making pot illegal, and I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s necessary. 

Also, do we have lead in cigarettes? Pipe tobacco? Cigars? Why not? 




Katzndogz said:


> You are one of the people who say "my dealer is my friend.  He would never let me buy something harmful and always tells me how safe his pot is".



So are you confirming that "Yes, it&#8217;s much dangerous buying illegal pot because you DON&#8217;T know where it&#8217;s coming from"? I agree with that 100%. 

If it was legal, you would know where it&#8217;s coming from and would be able to verify whether or not anything&#8217;s been added (because it will be regulated).

Are you trying to bolster my argument? 

.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> What makes any of you think that legalized marijuana would be produced and marketed any differently than tobacco?



Who cares? I don't see how this is an argument for prohibition of a substance. 


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Remember that the end of prohibition did not end illegal alcohol sales.   The illegal alcohol business was thriving after the end of prohibition.  The end of prohibition only ended federal prosecution.  Perfectly legal companies choose to work with crime syndicates all the time.  Every day.  A perfectly legal company that distributes fake oxycontin and knock off handbags will have no problem whatsoever with syndicate provided pot.  None.
> ...



Money and competition.  The cartels will undercut the price of the legal grower who has to fumble around with regulations.  Customers will keep buying from old reliable drug dealer because the won't have to pay tax.  The cartels will do just what they did in Los Angeled.  Open their own outlets selling their own product.   By the time prohibition ended organized crime knew they had made a terrible miscalculation.  They controlled manufacture and distribution.  They didn't own the stores or the bars.   They were reduced to protection rackets.  At least until they got into drug distribution.   Today's organized crime won't make that mistake.   Today's marijuana shops increase their profit by selling much more than marijuana.  Present it the right way and you can pick up a ten year old from Thailand.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Does the illegal alcohol business win out over the heavily regulated (super regulated!) legal alcohol business in the US because its cheaper for them to produce?

What do you think? Should I call my bootlegger tonight to see if he's got a new supply of whiskey from Wisconsin? Lol.





.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Apr 7, 2013)

First, pot is not addictive. It can be habitual but it is *NEVER* addictive. 
Clinics in those states where pot is legally a medicinal herb do not buy from illegal sources, they grow their own in order to maintain a pure product. Only the "black market" pot is laced with other chemicals and compounds to change the weight and characteristics of the herb. "Legal marijuana" is tested for THC content and purity in all aspects of its handling and processing. It is the best you can get and a lot cheaper than any "black market" pot available anywhere.


----------



## jwoodie (Apr 7, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> First, pot is not addictive. It can be habitual but it is *NEVER* addictive.



Sound like cigarette advertising in the 1950's.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 7, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> PaulS1950 said:
> 
> 
> > First, pot is not addictive. It can be habitual but it is *NEVER* addictive.
> ...



Nicotine is the addictive substance in cigarettes, what's the addictive substance in Pot?


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 7, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> First, pot is not addictive. It can be habitual but it is *NEVER* addictive.
> Clinics in those states where pot is legally a medicinal herb do not buy from illegal sources, they grow their own in order to maintain a pure product. Only the "black market" pot is laced with other chemicals and compounds to change the weight and characteristics of the herb. "Legal marijuana" is tested for THC content and purity in all aspects of its handling and processing. It is the best you can get and a lot cheaper than any "black market" pot available anywhere.



They buy from illegal sources.   Most of the time the pot shops are owned by the cartels who sell their own product through these "legal" means.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 7, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > PaulS1950 said:
> ...



Marijuana | Brown University Health Education

No one would argue that marijuana is as addictive as alcohol or cocaine. However, it's wrong to say that it is not at all addictive. More and more studies are finding that marijuana has addictive properties. Both animal and human studies show physical and psychological withdrawal symptoms from marijuana, including irritability, restlessness, insomnia, nausea and intense dreams. Tolerance to marijuana also builds up rapidly. Heavy users need 8 times higher doses to get the same effects as infrequent users.

For a small percentage of people who use it, marijuana can be highly addictive. It is estimated that 10% to 14% of users will become heavily dependent. In 2006 marijuana was responsible for 16% of all admissions to treatment facilities in the U.S. Because the consequences of marijuana use can be subtle and insidious, it is more difficult to recognize signs of addiction. Cultural and societal beliefs that marijuana cannot be addictive make it less likely for people to seek help or to get support for quitting.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Apr 7, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> PaulS1950 said:
> 
> 
> > First, pot is not addictive. It can be habitual but it is *NEVER* addictive.
> ...



Show your sources for the affirmation that state legal clinics buy from illegal sources.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 7, 2013)

I gave in.   Against my inclination, I did tell the woman I know that her symptoms might be explained by lead poisoning from the marijuana (legal, from a legal clinic) she's been using.


----------



## PaulS1950 (Apr 7, 2013)

I have been around pot smokers since the mid-60s. I have never smoked or eaten it but I have never seen any symptoms of addictions. No tollerance to the drug has been apparent and no withdrawal symptoms. My observations are only anecdotal but since there have been very few actual research studies done on the drug since then I would like to see your referrences to this information.
There is a big difference between addiction and dependence. Addictive drugs require more and more drug to maintain "normalcy" until the dosage builds to the point of overdose and addiction also requires gradual degredation of the body's systems until systemic failure occurs.
Dependence can be anything from habitual (the muscles become attuned to repetative movement) to enjoying the "down time" that one gets similar to fishing or a cup of warm milk before bed which are emotional responces and not chemical in nature at all. The mind misses the activity but the body is not physically addicted to it.
Please show the studies you are quoting from.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 7, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > PaulS1950 said:
> ...



To begin with, there are enough legal clinics around here to know.  
For another.

Report: Mexican Drug Cartels Infiltrating Calif. Medical Pot Industry

In Colorado

Colorado 420 Coalition

[News] Beware of RUSSIAN Owned Dispensary's - News & Political Discussion - WeedTRACKER

Most ordinary citizens are profoundly ignorant.  Criminals are two steps ahead of you right now.  They have always been two steps ahead of you and always will be.  By the time the ordinary citizen has muddled around and figured out that making illicit money off pot is impossible, criminals have already figured out 20 ways they can still make a fortune.    How long have we had legal gambling and horse racing?   Has one bookie been put out of business?


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> PaulS1950 said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Again Katz, (I don't think you answered me the first time) do criminals run companies like Budweiser, Maker's Mark, Jack Daniels, and Miller? Are criminals in charge of the distribution channels?

This is a historical precedent that we should reference when talking about a prohibited drug becoming a legal one.

.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > PaulS1950 said:
> ...



Companies like you describe were legal.   They had been legal and only made illegal during the few years of prohibition.  Alcohol remained legal for all purposes other than as a beverage.    They didn't start out as criminal enterprises and then become legal to only become illegal again.  By the time the federal prohibition amendment was passed, several states had already prohibited alcohol.   After prohibition ended localities were able to prohibit alcohol in their jurisdictions and they did.  Some still do.

If you are going to use a historical precedent, get it right.  Prohibiton of alcohol has more in common with the laws against tobacco than marijuana.  Understand some real history not just what the pro pots put out.

_Simplistic assumptions about governments ability to legislate morals, whether pro or con, find no support in the historical record. As historian Ian Tyrrell writes, each drug subject to restrictions needs to be carefully investigated in terms of its conditions of production, its value to an illicit trade, the ability to conceal the substance, and its effects on both the individual and society at large.66 From a historical perspective, no prediction is certain, and no path is forever barrednot even the return of alcohol prohibition in some form. Historical context matters.
_

Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation


----------



## editec (Apr 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > The enlightened doctors who prescribe marijuana just all happen to work for marijuana clinics.
> ...



Not in Maine, they don't.

Here in Maine one must find a doctor willing to perscibe marijuana, and THEN one purchase it either from a marijuana ONLY pharmacy, from one's personally and legally sanctioned marijuana health care provider, or one can grow it for oneself.

As a matter of fact I went to a marijuana perscribing MD last November who refused to prescribe it for me because I did NOT have a long history of complaining about the pain for which I have been illegally smoking POT for the last 20 years.

So in oder for me to get that presciption, I have to go to the doctor for the next 6 months complaining about that pain in order for that MD to give me a prescription.

This is true even though the MD clearly saw the how I was already benefitting from the illegal marijuana I'd been smoking all along I_LLEGALLY._

Essantially he told me this

Well you are obviously suffering physicallyin reality, son, but you do not qualify for this presciption ON PAPER!

Now tell me, please, that this society isn't  slighty nuts when it comes to this substance.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Katz, so you're saying that all of these United States retail locations and distribution channels are going to risk prosecution, violence by dealing with a ruthless illegal cartel instead of going with a legal, legitimate company that they can pay electronically and hold accountable for bad product, ect?

How is a legal pot store supposed to sue a Mexican drug lord when they find out their pot is laced with coke?

Do you get my point?

Lets go at it from a business angle...

.


----------



## editec (Apr 8, 2013)

I have absolutely no confidence in the claim that the russian mafia is lacing pot with lead.

This is, I suspect another of the WHOPPERS that the anti-marijuana folks have been passing off for decades.

And clearly whoever invested this nonsense knows NOTHING about he illegal marijuana business.


All one need do to increase weight to a bag is ADD WATER.

Adding lead would not only be STUPID because how does on add LEAD to  it, but is would also be much more expensive to cheat your customers that way.]


Honestly what are we talking to here,_ children?_


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 8, 2013)

editec said:


> I have absolutely no confidence in the claim that the russian mafia is lacing pot with lead.
> 
> This is, I suspect another of the WHOPPERS that the anti-marijuana folks have been passing off for decades.
> 
> ...



There are people who depend on your believing that.   After all didn't tobacco companies add dangerous substances to their product for years.  They got away with it too and no one would believe that tobacco companies would actually add expensive dangerous chemicals to their product.

For this alone, we should legalize marijuana and start reducing the drug addict population.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > I have absolutely no confidence in the claim that the russian mafia is lacing pot with lead.
> ...



So you're pro-legalization then?

Case closed..


.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



What I'm saying is that many of the legal retail locations will actually be fronts for some very illegal enterprises.   Just like they are now for other illegal products.   You don't think that pot is the only product that is or would be sold illegally do you?

The one thing about pot heads is, you can tell them anything.   The investment in drug addiction is so towering, they'll believe anything you tell them.

Marijuana is perfectly safe.  Keep using it.  The sooner the pot heads die off the better.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Katz, relatively speaking, marijuana is a pretty safe product. Alcohol (for numerous reasons) is much more dangerous..

1.) You can overdose on it in a single sitting
2.) It causes liver disease/cancer when consumed in bulk for a long time
3.) Removes inhibitions, causing people to make very poor decisions
4.) Extremely addictive


Would it be fair to assume that *you also want the alcohol-heads to die off too* (ie anyone who drinks)? 

.
.


----------



## editec (Apr 9, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



Because the chemicals found in marijuana are not carcenogenic.  Yeah yeahm I know you've heard otherwise.  You have been lied to.

In fact, marijuania is found to have anti-carcenogenic properties.

And, Epidemiological  studies show evidence that POT AND cigarette smokers have a lower incidence of lung cancer than cigarettes smokers who do not smoke pot.

Amigo?

Pretty much everything we have ever been taught about pot has been a lie.

Not a mistake, _a LIE._

Gateway drug?

Chocolate is the first drug most people take.

Chocolate (another harmless drug, one also o with antioxidents, just like po]t) is ALSO not a_ gateway _drug.

The concept of GATEWAY drugs is another of those FILTHY LIES brought to us courtesy of the Masters of prohibition.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 9, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Not everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner is an alcoholic.   Yes, let the alcoholics kill themselves off too.   And do it in a way that doesn't take out a family of five on the freeway.  

Yes.  I am pro legalization, as long as there are adequate protections for the non users.  Which is one of the reasons why you can't have legalization and gun control.   I am also pro drug cartel.   After all, they have taken 70,000 users and dealers off the streets of mexico permanently.   In all the years of "drug wars" we haven't managed a fraction of that.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 9, 2013)

editec said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



What is the level of cognitive impairment of chocolate?   And what causes more cognitive impairment, chocolate or pot?

Everything you just said is NORML propaganda and a lie.    Keep believing it.


----------



## FA_Q2 (Apr 9, 2013)

Do you have any actual evidence that shows pot as more harmful than alcohol?  More addictive?  More anything?

I really find it difficult to believe that pot has shown to be anywhere near alcohol.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 9, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Do you have any actual evidence that shows pot as more harmful than alcohol?  More addictive?  More anything?
> 
> I really find it difficult to believe that pot has shown to be anywhere near alcohol.



Did I ever say it was more harmful or addictive than alcohol.   Although, many people, the majority in fact, have a glass of wine or a champagne toast and don't get drunk.   Everyone who ingests pot does so to get high.  

It's when you start comparing marijuana to chocolate or cigarettes, or coffee, which have no cognitive impairment at all that the pot is good for you train goes off the rails.

Marijuana | National Institute on Drug Abuse

Is Marijuana Addictive?

Contrary to common belief, marijuana is addictive. Estimates from research suggest that about 9 percent of users become addicted to marijuana; this number increases among those who start young (to about 17 percent, or 1 in 6) and among daily users (to 25-50 percent). Thus, many of the nearly 7 percent of high-school seniors who (according to annual survey data) report smoking marijuana daily or almost daily are well on their way to addiction, if not already addicted (besides functioning at a sub-optimal level all of the time).

Long-term marijuana users trying to quit report withdrawal symptoms including irritability, sleeplessness, decreased appetite, anxiety, and drug craving, all of which can make it difficult to remain abstinent. Behavioral interventions, including cognitive-behavioral therapy and motivational incentives (i.e., providing vouchers for goods or services to patients who remain abstinent) have proven to be effective in treating marijuana addiction

Marijuana addiction is following the same line as tobacco addiction.   A total denial that it is addictive because some people don't get addicted.  Not everyone got addicted to cigarettes either.   Many people would go to a party or out to a bar, smoke, and never want a cigarette outside the social situation.   Very few people get addicted to alcohol.   As many alcoholics as there are, they are few because alcoholism isn't caused by drinking, but by someone with a genetic predisposition to alcoholism who drinks.  Researchers Identify Alcoholism Gene

Marijuana addiction might be caused by the same genetic predisposition.  

Marijuana Addiction Today | Psychology Today

What's absurd is the idea that by increasing the number of impaired by marijuana, it somehow means that the number of people impaired by alcohol is reduced!  The sane answer is you get a larger total of people who are impaired.   Including a large number of individuals who are both drunk and high.  

What are the effects of mixing marijuana and alcohol?

When people smoke marijuana and drink alcohol at the same time they can experience nausea and/or vomiting or they can react with panic, anxiety or paranoia. Mixing marijuana with alcohol can increase the risk of vulnerable people experiencing psychotic symptoms.

There is some evidence to support that having alcohol in your blood causes a faster absorption of THC (the active ingredient in marijuana that causes intoxication). This can lead to the marijuana having a much stronger effect than it would normally have and could result in greening out.

Greening out is a term commonly referred to in a situation where people feel sick after smoking marijuana. They can go pale and sweaty, feel dizzy, nauseous and may even start vomiting. They usually feel they have to lie down straight away.

It appears that this is more likely to happen if a person has been drinking alcohol before smoking marijuana rather than the other way around.

What are the risks of mixing marijuana and alcohol?
Marijuana: Factsheets: Alcohol and Marijuana

Unpredictable effects  if marijuana and alcohol are used at the same time there is a greater likelihood of negative side-effects occurring either physically (greening out) or psychologically (panic, anxiety and paranoia).

Drug addicts should be allowed to die on their own.   Whatever negative effects should be permitted to occur with the primary focus being on protecting those around the user from harm.  And that by any means necessary with an emphasis on self defense as primary.


----------



## KevinWestern (Apr 9, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Likewise, not everyone who smokes occasionally is a 'pothead'. 

By the way, what protections do you need from pot smokers anyways? There will be laws against smoking and driving but beyond that I can't think of anything else. 

Also, you're pro Cartel? That's kind of disturbing (given the level of violence they deal in and the types of horrible, horrible drugs they produce (like meth)). That doesn't say much about your character, Katz.

.


----------



## Katzndogz (Apr 15, 2013)

Of course I'm pro cartel.   Who do you think took these drug dealers off the streets?

Six strangled, one decapitated in Mexican resort of Cancun | Reuters

"It looks like the victims were independent drug dealers without any links to any specific cartel," said Juan Ignacio Hernandez, deputy attorney general of Quintana Roo state.

Last month six people died and five were injured after two men opened fire in a bar on the outskirts of Cancun.

In a separate incident, police on Sunday found the body of another man in Cancun who had been gagged, bound and wrapped in sheets.

Bring THAT to the "legal" pot shops.


----------



## MisterBeale (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Of course I'm pro cartel.   Who do you think took these drug dealers off the streets?
> 
> Six strangled, one decapitated in Mexican resort of Cancun | Reuters
> 
> ...



I'll bet  the name of one of the main Cartels responsible was the "Marijuana" Cartel.  Isn't that one of the real reason's why "Marijuana" needs to be illegal?


----------



## MisterBeale (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



Agreed. 

I guess we just have to warn the young instead of sticking our heads in the sand.  Damn shame to make the most beneficial and cheapest drug on the planet illegal because of this though, right?  Best legalize it, control it, warning our kids about it and making sure parents can keep it away from the children wouldn't you say?


----------



## MisterBeale (May 4, 2013)

High_Gravity said:


> Feeling good is imporant.


----------



## MisterBeale (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> slackjawed said:
> 
> 
> > Katz, my own experience is that marijuana erases the "pain memory". When I got sick I hadn't touched marijuana for over 30 years. I do have pain, which at times is horrible. If I take a pain pill, that's all I do. I can't read, can't go outside and walk around or anything. When I wake up I feel 'hungover' from the oxycotin or flexeral or whatever.('scuse my spelling') If i smoke a pipe when I hurt, I still hurt, but there is no hangover the next day, and my body isn't all stiff and sore from the previous day's pain. When I have pain, I unconsiously 'tighten up', even grit my teeth. When I smoke, I don't do that. I am not stiff and sore from that the next day. However; for me marijuana does not stop the pain, you could say it just makes it less unpleasant.
> ...



If all it is is in the mind, isn't believing enough?  What a wonder drug!  It helps by letting your mind allegviate your woes, instead of treating symptoms.  No wonder there are no side effects.  Your whole post was like a pro-marijuana treatment use argument.  Nice job!  

"It's not really helping you, you just think it's helping you.  It's like a placebo, your just too high to realize you're still in pain.  Dummy!"  And after you are sober again?  Your body and mind experience memory loss and don't remember you were in pain.

lol

Nice.


----------



## Rozman (May 4, 2013)

I want my weed!.....


----------



## Katzndogz (May 4, 2013)

Colorado is rethinking its legalization and might repeal the legalization law.  It is turning out to be more expensive than the taxes it would bring in.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 4, 2013)

Yay, they want to control your lives through throwing you in prison for smoking something. Idiocy.

Fucking control freaks on the right.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 4, 2013)

Matthew said:


> Yay, they want to control your lives through throwing you in prison for smoking something. Idiocy.
> 
> Fucking control freaks on the right.



Are the laws against smoking from fucking control freaks on the left?

It looks like the best and most effective way to make pot illegal is to legalize it!

My personal bet would be on the drug cartels.  They have no problem whatsoever with the death penalty.


----------



## NoNukes (May 4, 2013)

MisterBeale said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > slackjawed said:
> ...



A placebo that works is much better than putting medicine into your body, especially something that kills pain.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 4, 2013)

NoNukes said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



The only problem placebos have is that while the person is taking the placebo, the disease is still progressing.   Of course people who just imagine they have a disease to begin with, that's different.  A placebo can effect a complete cure.   Like the woman I know.  There's really nothing wrong with her at all.   She is in pain because she wants marijuana.  She needs to justify her desire to get high so when deprived she is in terrible pain.   Now she's bedridden.  That's a side effect of placebo therapy.  

There have been plenty of incidents of people who have deadly diseases, take some sort of placebo cure that doesn't work and died, when had they taken a real cure, would have lived.   Steve Jobs comes to mind as one of those.


----------



## jodylee (May 4, 2013)

the main problem with weed is it turns you into a social retard, that just wants to watch TV and fears the world outside. It is not a social drug! it makes you nervous, paranoid and lazy. which is frustrating as it makes you more creative, but making you too lazy to act on it. Still none of these are good reasons to make it illegal. If you look at the original reasons for the illegalisation of the drug you would laugh at how exaggerated and unfounded in science they are. which, right there, makes the law redundant.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 4, 2013)

If we didn't also have to support these lazy pot heads, no one would care if they sat around high on pot all day.


----------



## jodylee (May 4, 2013)

the majority of pot heads have jobs, good ones in many cases. the ones that sit there all day take some pressure off real job seekers. basically what im saying here is there's too many of us all working to chase the same money, its good that some people choose not to participate in the rat race.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 4, 2013)

jodylee said:


> the majority of pot heads have jobs, good ones in many cases. the ones that sit there all day take some pressure off real job seekers. basically what im saying here is there's too many of us all working to chase the same money, its good that some people choose not to participate in the rat race.



They just should not be supported.


----------



## NoNukes (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > MisterBeale said:
> ...



Has anyone here been talking about using cannabis to cure a deadly disease?


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 4, 2013)

We throw people into prison for years and it costs billions of dollars because someone wants to get stoned. You people don't bitch about the drunk as you damn well know it isn't worth illegalizing it as we learned long ago.

We as a nation need to throw out prison sentences for smoking a damn leaf. Sure, you break the law behind the wheal fine the person...The war on drugs is just stupid.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> If we didn't also have to support these lazy pot heads, no one would care if they sat around high on pot all day.



What happen to personal freedom? One can get drunk the night before and no one cares!


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Yay, they want to control your lives through throwing you in prison for smoking something. Idiocy.
> ...



I don't believe the left should have that power either.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 4, 2013)

jodylee said:


> the main problem with weed is it turns you into a social retard, that just wants to watch TV and fears the world outside. It is not a social drug! it makes you nervous, paranoid and lazy. which is frustrating as it makes you more creative, but making you too lazy to act on it. Still none of these are good reasons to make it illegal. If you look at the original reasons for the illegalisation of the drug you would laugh at how exaggerated and unfounded in science they are. which, right there, makes the law redundant.



I think you're dealing in some brash oversimplification a here. Many successful, active individuals smoke regularly.


.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> If we didn't also have to support these lazy pot heads, no one would care if they sat around high on pot all day.



Who's supporting who? I smoke and my wife and I make well over six figures (not to brag, just proving a point). We just got back from a run and a trip to the farmers market (supporting local businesses). 

Perhaps maybe you rescind some of your oversimplified assumptions?

.


----------



## Dot Com (May 4, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> The only problem placebos have is that while the person is taking the placebo, the disease is still progressing.   Of course people who just imagine they have a disease to begin with, that's different.  A placebo can effect a complete cure.   Like the woman I know.  There's really nothing wrong with her at all.   She is in pain because she wants marijuana.  She needs to justify her desire to get high so when deprived she is in terrible pain.   Now she's bedridden.  That's a side effect of placebo therapy.
> 
> There have been plenty of incidents of people who have deadly diseases, take some sort of placebo cure that doesn't work and died, when had they taken a real cure, would have lived.   Steve Jobs comes to mind as one of those.


 any links for any of that? You know you're in the CDZ right?


KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > If we didn't also have to support these lazy pot heads, no one would care if they sat around high on pot all day.
> ...



see above ^

as to the OP, its because we live in jesusland


----------



## MikeK (May 4, 2013)

jodylee said:


> the main problem with weed is it turns you into a social retard, that just wants to watch TV and fears the world outside.


This might be true only for those whose personal problems cause them to use it as an emotional anesthetic by remaining constantly tranquilized.  What you've said is analogous to blaming food for a given individual's compulsive gluttony.  



> It is not a social drug! it makes you nervous, paranoid and lazy.


Marijuana certainly is a social drug -- i.e., for those who are seeking a social experience rather than an anesthetic effect.  



> which is frustrating as it makes you more creative, but making you too lazy to act on it.


Again you are describing the effect of over-indulgence, which is typical in situations wherein the user is seeking escape rather than intellectual expansion.  Much of this problem is the result of marijuana prohibition, which has so effectively suppressed access that control of quality and potency is virtually impossible and ignorance about proper usage prevails.  Legalization would remove these barriers, enabling widespread education in proper usage.


----------



## MeadHallPirate (May 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> If we didn't also have to support these lazy pot heads, no one would care if they sat around high on pot all day.



ahoy Katzndogz,

when i was in me twenties and early thirties, i made six figures per year, me bucko...and i was busy (very busy) loadin' up herb and "C" and a bit 'o "H" into me blunderbuss at at pretty robust clip.

i also stimulated the economy a great deal by employin' makeup artists, assistants and stylists on a daily basis - plus, all them narcotics provided a huge multiplier effect to me earnings as the monies i made were joyously spent with a vigor and a joy that brings a smile to me face as i reminisce 'o me conquerin' years.

ye really have to loosen up and have yerself a spliff ondeck, me friend.  as the sun be settin' and the bracin' spray 'o the salt water breaks against the prow, thar be few things as relaxin' as unwindin' from yer day's labors with a pinch 'o kind bud.

wind at yer back, matey.

_*bows*_

- MeadHallPirate


----------



## Katzndogz (May 5, 2013)

Somehow, that reminds me of Dennis Hopper.   He thought he was brilliant as an actor when he was high.
He just wasn't.


How did Hollywood hellraiser Dennis Hopper make it to the ripe age of 74? | Mail Online

Or, maybe the more contemporary Charlie Sheen.  Remember WINNING.  Except he wasn't.

Sad, sad, sad.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Somehow, that reminds me of Dennis Hopper.   He thought he was brilliant as an actor when he was high.
> He just wasn't.
> 
> 
> ...



Lol, Charlie Sheen was pulling $48 million a year for doing one TV show. What's sad about him? That wasn't "winning"?


.


.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Somehow, that reminds me of Dennis Hopper.   He thought he was brilliant as an actor when he was high.
> ...



The operative word being WAS.   Even he admits that his drug binge ruined his career.   He threw it all away.   What's sad, is that somewhere in there is a truly talented man.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



He wasn't doing any drugs during "two and a half..."?

And I thought this conversation was about pot; I don't think his low points were attributed to this drug - correct?

.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Pot is its own failure.   I don't mind potheads dying, I mind when they take innocent people with them.   If potheads could be warehoused, give them all they want until their hearts stop.  That's a solution.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 5, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



All destroyed because we have to destroy a person for smoking a fucking leaf. What a sick joke.


----------



## MeadHallPirate (May 5, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> Somehow, that reminds me of Dennis Hopper.   He thought he was brilliant as an actor when he was high.
> He just wasn't.
> 
> How did Hollywood hellraiser Dennis Hopper make it to the ripe age of 74? | Mail Online
> ...



ahoy Katzndogz,

Dennis Hopper had a keen eye fer art, in addition to that, he acted, aye.

i don't know much 'bout Mr. Sheen, 'cept he was in some mighty films long ago.

as fer meself, i still make good monies.  i just got weary 'o New York, lifted anchor and moved to the South.  i earn a bit less, fer certain, but then again the cost 'o livin' in North Carolina makes me feel like i've moved to some foreign, devlopin'-world country.

all be well - i spend many a day utterly zooted with the wind at me back.  i be a tax payin' citizen and i employ folks.  a job creator, yarrrr!!!!!

_*cheers*_

- MeadHallPirate


----------



## Katzndogz (May 6, 2013)

In a rare exhibition of sanity, the California Supreme Court ruled that cities may zone pot dispensaries out of existence.  

California's high court upholds city bans of pot stores - latimes.com


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> In a rare exhibition of sanity, the California Supreme Court ruled that cities may zone pot dispensaries out of existence.
> 
> California's high court upholds city bans of pot stores - latimes.com



Katz - Sanity would be not throwing people in jail for smoking a natural plant, and giving people an option of clean, regulated marijuana instead of the alternative - illegal, unregulated marijuana that may or may not be sprayed full of pesticides, ect.

I think you have your definitions mixed up. 

You're a very tiring person, you know that?!

Lighten up a bit. Marijuana is at the 'least of our worries' list. We need to pour our law enforcement resources into things that actually save lives and benefit our country and the economy overall. 



.


.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > In a rare exhibition of sanity, the California Supreme Court ruled that cities may zone pot dispensaries out of existence.
> ...



You mean like putting pot users in jail for the crimes they commit while high?  Yes.  I agree with that.  Marijuana should be and often is treated with lead dust, which is a very good thing.


----------



## PaulS1950 (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern,
China used to allow the legal smoking of Opium until it nearly destroyed parts of the country. Opium is a natural plant too. I do understand the difference between the two; Opium is mildly addictive and very habit forming while Marijuana is not addictive and strongly haitual. Opium is a mind altering drug that induces a state of euphoria while Marijuana is a mind altering drug that has different effects on people at different times with the added side effect of a short term memory loss. 
Both can be debilitating drugs that cause problems - to varying degrees - in those that use them regularly. 
I do not believe that Marijuana is in any way as damaging as Opium but its effects on a society can be nearly as damaging.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> You mean like putting pot users in jail for the crimes they commit while high?  Yes.  I agree with that.  Marijuana should be and often is treated with lead dust, which is a very good thing.




Oh man, Katz, you truly are an unreasonable person to debate with. No budge room, no listening to other's ideas, ect. It's a waste of time. 

I'm for putting people in jail when they commit crimes (whether they're high or sober) - that's fine. 

I'm not for putting people in jail for smoking a natural substance in the privacy of their own home - that's *costly, wasteful, and breaks up families/destroys lives for no reason*. You are a person who is for this, and I'm coming to the conclusion that we'll never see eye to eye. 

Lead dust? First off, not only do I not believe this to be an actual issue, but if marijuana were legalized it wouldn't definitely not be an issue (would the FDA allow that??). I think that&#8217;s a pro-legalization argument you&#8217;re putting out there! 

Anyways Katz&#8230; It really hasn&#8217;t been that much of a pleasure, but thanks for your input.


.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

PaulS1950 said:


> KevinWestern,
> China used to allow the legal smoking of Opium until it nearly destroyed parts of the country. Opium is a natural plant too. I do understand the difference between the two; Opium is mildly addictive and very habit forming while Marijuana is not addictive and strongly haitual. Opium is a mind altering drug that induces a state of euphoria while Marijuana is a mind altering drug that has different effects on people at different times with the added side effect of a short term memory loss.
> Both can be debilitating drugs that cause problems - to varying degrees - in those that use them regularly.
> I do not believe that Marijuana is in any way as damaging as Opium but its effects on a society can be nearly as damaging.




Interesting input Paul. Yea, I see where youre coming from, but (like you said) this is specifically a conversation about marijuana and I think if we were talking about cocaine (or harder drugs)  for instance  the opium discussion would be coming to the table a bit more heavily.

I think you pointed out the #1 difference  marijuana is not addictive and doesnt give the same quick euphoria as cocaine, opium, or heroin would deliver. 

Too, even if marijuana was slightly more addictive, I think the point of my OP was thinking about the costs. Yes, there may be some negatives to uninhibited access to marijuana, however the costs we pay to prohibit the substance (in my opinion) far outweigh any of those negatives. We are hurting ourselves more by restricting it, than would be hurt if it wasnt restricted  you know?  

Whats worse  a father that smokes marijuana occasionally or a father thats in prison for 3 years? 


.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

I live in Colorado; legalizing pot really opened a Pandoras box. I have smoked marijuana; frankly it was a big letdown. Do we need an excuse to ban this crap? I dont smoke cigarettes either, because its a carcinogen and toxic. Tobacco has almost been banned from America public life, it's a health hazard and addictive. What is the point of legalizing marijuana? Didnt we learn anything from tobacco?


----------



## PaulS1950 (May 6, 2013)

What's worse? I don't think I can play that game. I am a father that did neither. I spent time with my kids - doing real time things. I gave my children unconditional love and was very strict on the boundaries between right and wrong. I enjoyed my children immensely and let them enjoy me too. I have seen some poor examples of parents who smoke dope and the way that kids respond. I have also seen what a parent in prison can do to children. Both can be devastating to the child. Both can serve as an example that children can learn from - for better or worse.
I have children that are happy, responsible adults with families of their own. Drugs are not a part of their lives as they are too busy living to bother with them. 
I guess that is where I am coming from; why hide from life in a drug induced state when you can get out and enjoy it. My children did have their mother as an example of what druds can do to you - she was an addict - is an addict to pain meds. She destroyed the relationship that she had with them even though the courts decided that she should have custody when we were divorced. I remained the parent that lived life with them while she was "not present" even when she was in the same house.
Funny how that works but I do hope that their mother can someday face the world and see what she has missed.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> I live in Colorado; legalizing pot really opened a Pandora&#8217;s box. I have smoked marijuana; frankly it was a big letdown. Do we need an excuse to ban this crap? I don&#8217;t smoke cigarettes either, because it&#8217;s a carcinogen and toxic. Tobacco has almost been banned from America public life, it's a health hazard and addictive. What is the point of legalizing marijuana? Didn&#8217;t we learn anything from tobacco?





To ban marijuana, these are the costs you need to pay:

Financial Costs:
1.) Millions of United States taxpayer dollars to pay for all of the 24/7 hour prisoners that are thrown in jail for marijuana related charges.
2.) Millions of $'s related to police work, court fees, and resources related to the enforcement of pot laws. 
3.) Millions of dollars in tax revenue that are lost to a potentially taxable substance. 
4.) Billions of dollars of economic value that are lost in the US (cartels generally make $2 billion + a year in revenue from marijuana; imagine if that money was predominately staying in the US).

Other Costs:
1.) Throwing people in jail for smoking something. What&#8217;s worse, a dad that smokes some pot on the side or a dad that&#8217;s in jail? 
2.) Untold power to the cartels. You legalize marijuana and they&#8217;re out of business.
3.) Health issues. People will smoke no matter what; do you want them smoking unregulated pesticide marijuana (then pay for their health costs down the road), or smoking regulated FDA marijuana?

Pot may not provide any sort of benefit to society, and in fact it may actually harm society to some degree. However, my argument is that the costs we pay to ban the substance far outweigh any tangible or intangible harm we can measure from the substance being legal. Police work isn't free! Keeping people in jail isn't free!

*Would you pay $50 million dollars to ban a substance that does only $1 million of damage every year?
*

. 


.


----------



## LoudMcCloud (May 6, 2013)

Drone strikes are legal, but smoking a joint isnt.  Lol.  Wake up folks.  Its almost over!


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 6, 2013)

LoudMcCloud said:


> Drone strikes are legal, but smoking a joint isnt.  Lol.  Wake up folks.  Its almost over!



Doesn't make sense I'll tell you what.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > I live in Colorado; legalizing pot really opened a Pandora&#8217;s box. I have smoked marijuana; frankly it was a big letdown. Do we need an excuse to ban this crap? I don&#8217;t smoke cigarettes either, because it&#8217;s a carcinogen and toxic. Tobacco has almost been banned from America public life, it's a health hazard and addictive. What is the point of legalizing marijuana? Didn&#8217;t we learn anything from tobacco?
> ...



Consider the cost? Most of the people I know who smoke also smoke pot.  My father and mother were both heavy smokers. They were addicted by big tobacco companies.  The cost?  My parents both died from lung cancer. We spend billions  fighting cancer, and we loose lives to addiction. I think I know the cost. We are trying to encourage people to live a healthy life here, not pander to addiction. I think, kiddo, you have an agenda here.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 6, 2013)

Next you'll tell me not to eat a cheese burger and force me onto a exercise program. It's called personal freedoms.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

LoudMcCloud said:


> Drone strikes are legal, but smoking a joint isnt.  Lol.  Wake up folks.  Its almost over!



I would add that not only are drone strikes legal, but being the Commander in Chief that conducts those strikes will actually get you a Nobel Peace prize.

Smoking a harmless, natural substance = Go to Jail
Drone Strike Commander = Peace Prize

You can't come up with this stuff! Reality is just too bizarre.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> Consider the cost? Most of the people I know who smoke also smoke pot.  My father and mother were both heavy smokers. They were addicted by big tobacco companies.  The cost?  Billions fighting cancer, and in lives lost. I lost plenty. I think I know the cost. We are trying to encourage people to live a healthy life here, not pander to addiction. I think, kiddo, you have an agenda here.



Yea, consider the costs Mary.  You seemed to slip in Tobacco there - a completely different substance when it comes to its addictiveness and carcinogenic nature.

Back to marijuana... 

1.) First of all, you have to consider that there are already millions and millions of Americans smoking today (regardless of it being illegal); if it&#8217;s legalized, how many (incrementally) do you realistically think will be added to the pool? 

2.) Secondly, what about the point that I brought up? What do you think is healthier; smoking marijuana that came from a pesticide field in Mexico, or a field in Iowa that&#8217;s heavily regulated in Iowa by the FDA? Which type of marijuana is more likely to give you *cancer*? How about the fact that if marijuana is legalized many people will choose to consume by eating instead of smoking (cutting down on lung issues)? The reason marijuana food isn't common in the states today is that only the buds are accessible (and they are the most expensive part of the plant); you can use the leaves/stems to make food. 

3.) What about the millions of jobs and economic value that legalization will bring to the United States? The new jobs? 

4.) What about the lives that are lost every day at the hands of the violent cartels (cutting people&#8217;s heads off, ect)? Do those lives count too? If you cut their revenue stream, what happens to their power and ability to purchase guns/ammo/gov't officials?

Aren't those valid points?
*
Encouraging a healthy lifestyle - sure - that's completely valid. But not at the costs we pay for prohibition. Doesn't make sense. Teach your kids not to smoke on the front lines (if you wish), but ultimately people aught to have the right to choose. 
*



.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> LoudMcCloud said:
> 
> 
> > Drone strikes are legal, but smoking a joint isnt.  Lol.  Wake up folks.  Its almost over!
> ...



It sure as hell shouldn't = a peace prize, but if you have to go to war, you go to war with the idea of losing the least amount of troops. Now I agree that the leaf should be legal.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

Matthew said:


> It sure as hell shouldn't = a peace prize, but if you have to go to war, you go to war with the idea of losing the least amount of troops.




Well, that's the problem; I get your point, but did we even need to go to war with half of these countries? Sure, if we had the Germans taking over half of Europe tomorrow, we'll send some drones to stop them and minimize American casualties... 

But did we need to send 6,000+ US kids to their deaths to take over a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? 

Anyways, off topic...


.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

We are talking past each other here. Your arguments are...sophistic.  I lost both of my parents to cancer.  Can you put a price tag on preventing death or addiction?


----------



## MikeK (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> I live in Colorado; legalizing pot really opened a Pandoras box. I have smoked marijuana; frankly it was a big letdown. Do we need an excuse to ban this crap? I dont smoke cigarettes either, because its a carcinogen and toxic. Tobacco has almost been banned from America public life, it's a health hazard and addictive. What is the point of legalizing marijuana? Didnt we learn anything from tobacco?


It seems your position is based on comparing marijuana with tobacco when there is no basis for that comparison.  The only similarity between the two entities is marijana is typically smoked -- which is a consequence of prohibition.  The only reason marijuana is typically smoked is it's the _easiest_ way to use it.  But smoking it is neither the only way nor is it the best way.

Smoking marijuana accelerates and intensifies its effect, but it also _compresses_ the effect and its duration.  In other words the effect is not as pleasant and long-lasting as that which follows ingesting edible forms of marijuana, of which there are many.  There are two reason why edible marijuana (e.g., "pot brownies," etc.) is not more common, one is cost: the preparation of edibles requires more plant material than smoking does.  But the main reason is cooking and baking with marijuana calls for knowledge and experience, which is hard to come by within an atmosphere of prohibition.  Legalization would eliminate both barriers.

Also, the use of vaporizers as a substitute for smoking marijuana is a newly emerging method of use which completely eliminates the harmful effect of smoking marijuana but retains the same level of effect (immediate and intense).  

To more assertively address your comparison of marijuana with tobacco; we know that smoking tobaco (cigarettes) kills and damages hundreds of thousands of Americans every year.  But even though smoking ("joints") presently is by far the most common means of using marijuana *there is no record anywhere in the annals of medical science to suggest that anyone has ever died from or been made sick from using marijuana!  Not one!*


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> We are talking past each other here. Your arguments are...sophistic.  I lost both of my parents to cancer.  Can you put a price tag on preventing death or addiction?



Mary &#8211; I&#8217;m sorry for your losses, however you (I assume) are referring to tobacco, which is a lot different than marijuana; it has more carcinogens, it&#8217;s much more addictive, and much more deadly. We&#8217;re talking two different things in both habit and substance. *Do you think people would go out for a &#8220;marijuana&#8221; break 5 times a day during work?* It&#8217;s a different drug, and people smoke it at a different frequency. You must acknowledge this. 

Which part of my arguments were &#8216;sophistic&#8217;? Please specify below:

Will we not save millions freeing up the jails, and freeing up police/court resources by legalizing marijuana? 
Will we not create thousands of new jobs (that support families) by opening up an entirely new marijuana industry?
Will we not cut the revenue streams of the cartels, diminishing their power to a significant degree? 

Let me better explain my position. I don&#8217;t want to encourage children to get addicted to drugs, ect, but in a free society we need to choose where we want our limited resources going towards (right?). 

Would you rather have a cop filling out paperwork for some kid he just caught with a joint, or policing the street to arrest gang-bangers and rapists? Would you rather fill up our prisons with non-violent marijuana users, or fill them up with murderers and fraudsters?


.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > We are talking past each other here. Your arguments are...sophistic.  I lost both of my parents to cancer.  Can you put a price tag on preventing death or addiction?
> ...



Sorry for my losses?  Yeah, right. Why is it, I have the funny feeling that perhaps you have vested interest in this issue? You constantly emphasize MONEY here.  That&#8217;s what people do to exploit others; I take it you are involved in profiting from the sale of marijuana. Do you?  Be honest here.  No law against THAT. Being a nice little capitalist. Or Honesty.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> Sorry for my losses?  Yeah, right.



Thanks for assuming I'm a heartless person. Ever for a moment considered that there _may _be other people on this forum besides you that have lost a loved one to cancer and would like to acknowledge their sympathy? 




MaryL said:


> Why is it, I have the funny feeling that perhaps you have vested interest in this issue? You constantly emphasize MONEY here.  That&#8217;s what people do to exploit others; I take it you are involved in profiting from the sale of marijuana. Do you?  Be honest here.  No law against THAT. Being a nice little capitalist. Or Honesty.



Lol, what? I work in completely unrelated industry. Really strange accusation.

By the turn of events, I can see that you're not ready for a serious, rational discussion on this issue..

.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry for my losses?  Yeah, right.
> ...



Do tell.  Can you answer a simple question? If I am wrong,  I can deal it. Marijuana is so trivial.  Please. You profit from this?  Simple little question.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Mary, you&#8217;re missing 70% of my argument; in fact, let&#8217;s not consider the economic value/profit at all &#8211; alright? We&#8217;ll move that argument aside.

What&#8217;s your take on the hundreds of millions we spend on (a) jailing people, (b) court costs, (c) police work? 
*
In a time of great State and Federal deficits *(and in a time when they&#8217;re thinking about cutting medicare, ect) do we really need to spend all of that money policing a drug that&#8217;s non-addictive, natural, and really doesn&#8217;t alter your state of being all that significantly (when compared to alcohol, cocaine, meth, crack, ect)? Shouldn&#8217;t we be pouring those $&#8217;s into things like education or healthcare? 

And what about this take; justify why it's important to throw non-violent people in jail for doing a drug like marijuana, saturating space for the murders, rapists, child pornographers, ect.

We can't have it all. We have limited resources and limited tax dollars. I don't think marijuana deserves all the attention it's getting... that's my point. 




.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

Personally, I love how you stand up for an issue and that&#8217;s great. Why is it you don't answer a simple question? What IS your interest here?   Bang up job here, kid.  When people mention money and profits all the time, then speak about morality or fairness that gets my feelers up. And you always have a ready answer. Good for you. I oppose legalizing Marijuana. Most  people in Colorado have  as much wisdom as YOU, and they are for legalizing pot. There is an old dictum here: Be careful of what you asked for, you might just get it.


----------



## MeadHallPirate (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> Consider the cost? Most of the people I know who smoke also smoke pot.  My father and mother were both heavy smokers. They were addicted by big tobacco companies.  The cost?  My parents both died from lung cancer. We spend billions  fighting cancer, and we loose lives to addiction. I think I know the cost. We are trying to encourage people to live a healthy life here, not pander to addiction. I think, kiddo, you have an agenda here.



ahoy MaryL,

imma unclear why yer makin' a linkage between tobacco and the fine herb, lass.

_*ponders and struggles with the topic*_

good herb be like addin' salt to food, me friend - it brings out the flavor in life and makes it more delicious.

i can see that 'tis not to yer tastes, and i don't think the Federal Government ought to be allowed to force ye to smoke it.  ye certainly should have the freedom to abstain.

MeadHallPirate believes in liberty, aye.

- MeadHallPirate


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> Personally, I love how you stand up for an issue and that&#8217;s great. Why is it you don't answer a simple question? What IS your interest here?   Bang up job here, kid.  When people mention money and profits all the time, then speak about morality or fairness that gets my feelers up. And you always have a ready answer. Good for you. I oppose legalizing Marijuana. Most  people in Colorado have  as much wisdom as YOU, and they are for legalizing pot. There is an old dictum here: Be careful of what you asked for, you might just get it.



My interest is making sure our tax dollars are effectively used to make our society safer, and that they're not throw away. I would like the hard earned money that I earn (that's taken from my paycheck) to go to things like education, healthcare, and keeping rapists, murderers, and thieves off the street. 

I don't consider this plant threat enough to spend the money we do policing it. 

I'm fine with cocaine, meth, and heroin remaining illegal because they are proven to be highly addictive and deadly. We spend millions policing these because these drugs can literally kill you the first time you use them. Doctors have never prescribed "meth" to a cancer patient and there's good reason for that..

And one last note, the money aspect isn't totally unrelated to morality. If we spend less money on something like policing marijuana and more on prosecuting murderers, we WILL save lives. If we spend less money on policing marijuana and more money on healthcare we WILL save lives. I don't think it's a totally shallow subject to start with because money - when spent correctly - might mean cancer medication for someone on medicare (for example).

Appreciate the discussion, and thanks for going back and forth.


.


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

It's just a coincidence that this thread was based on the unjust spending on drug prevention  and not  millions we spend weaning folks off drugs , please.  You never answered what your monetary interests are here. Is it really worth it? I forgot, this isnt about MONEY.  Its about. What?  Legalizing pot. Its funny how pot smokers are in denial here, just like my parents   were about tobacco. Funny how that works about denial and addiction.  Be careful, dude.


----------



## theDoctorisIn (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> We are talking past each other here. Your arguments are...sophistic.  I lost both of my parents to cancer.  Can you put a price tag on preventing death or addiction?



Not a single human being has _ever_ died from smoking pot.

And laws against it don't prevent "addiction".


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> It's just a coincidence that this thread was based the unjust spending on drug prevention  and not  millions we spend weaning folks off drugs , please.  You never answered what your monetary interests are here. Is it really worth it? I forgot, this isnt about MONEY.  Its about. What?  Legalizing pot. Its funny how pot smokers are in denial here, just like my parents   were about tobacco. Funny how that works about denial and addiction.  Be careful, dude.



Not sure what you're talking about Mary (starting to lose me).

My argument is simple; as a society, we are worse off by choosing to prohibit marijuana (taking into account all factors and all the other places we can be expending our resources). Not saying pot is beneficial, necessarily, but something doesn't need to be beneficial to be legal - right?

The costs we pay are too steep for something that doesn't pose much of a threat to begin with.

I have no specific monetary interest in the marijuana business. 

Does that answer your question?


----------



## MaryL (May 6, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > We are talking past each other here. Your arguments are...sophistic.  I lost both of my parents to cancer.  Can you put a price tag on preventing death or addiction?
> ...




Not a single person has ever died from smoking pot. Really? How many people  died trying to get that crap here. The cartels, the smugglers, that whole violent lifestyle, not to mention the DEA agents had to die or be put at risk  so that some of  you can suck on this crap? Laws don't prevent Murder, either.  So what. I say. let&#8217;s at least try to do the right thing. Got a problem with that?


----------



## theDoctorisIn (May 6, 2013)

MaryL said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



The cartels, smugglers, and the whole "violent lifestyle" comes entirely from the fact that Cannabis is illegal.

If it wasn't illegal, DEA agents wouldn't be dying, and cartels wouldn't be smuggling it.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > theDoctorisIn said:
> ...



Precisely. I'm pretty sure automatic weapons aren't included in Miller/Coors' annual operating plan.

. 

.


----------



## logical4u (May 6, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



1. Marijuana policing is still going to cost billions.  It is not legal to be stoned on most jobs, each accident requires a drug test, how much do you think that is going to cost?  That does not include the numbers of injuries or deaths from a person thinking they can perform their hazardous job, stoned.  It will still have to be policed for stoned drivers.  The police don't usually stop someone for lighting up, they stop them because they are not operating a vehicle in a safe manner.
2. See resources used on 1.
3. Many of those people bargained their original violent crime down to "drug possession".  There are very few people in prison for "using" marijuana.
4. This is like the argument that legalizing gambling would put the "mob" out of business.  It legitimizes them....
5.  Yes, true, now the money will be in the hand of "legitimatized" criminals.

6.  There are some studies out that link marijuana use and ADHD in their children.  Also, marijuana causes the same type of brain problems caused by dementia.  In a time when we are having the gov't pay for health care, we do NOT need those costs increasing by legalizing anything that will add to those costs.

7.  Legalizing marijuana will give more children access to marijuana at earlier ages.  If they imitate their parents (similar to alcohol use), their brains could be limited in development, or have other long time damage.  How many billions, and billions will that cost in "disabilities"?

One other thing, the American natives believed that marijuana was a "feminine" drug (once you use it and like it, you will be possessive and defensive of it).  In a country where it is getting harder and harder to find people of fortitude, legalizing marijuana will make the average voter even more compliant for the deceitful politicians to manipulate votes, and control the population.  The stoners will not even realize what happened.  Their children will pay for their mistakes.  And their grandchildren and their great grandchildren will pay for their mistakes.  Do the rest of us a favor, if you do a lot of marijuana, get yourself fixed so that you cannot have children that you will be too stoned to pay attention to, or will cause birth defects by the amounts you smoke.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 6, 2013)

logical4u said:


> 1. Marijuana policing is still going to cost billions.  It is not legal to be stoned on most jobs, each accident requires a drug test, how much do you think that is going to cost?  That does not include the numbers of injuries or deaths from a person thinking they can perform their hazardous job, stoned.  It will still have to be policed for stoned drivers.  The police don't usually stop someone for lighting up, they stop them because they are not operating a vehicle in a safe manner.



Wait, so you're telling me the _incremental_ smokers (because already 42% of American adults have reported using it illegally) are going to cause billions of dollars in *additional *accidents & stoned driving police work? Sounds like quite a gigantic assumption to me. Again, you have to base your reasoning on the fact that already millions and millions Americans are already using; it's not like we're starting from scratch here.




logical4u said:


> 3. Many of those people bargained their original violent crime down to "drug possession".  There are very few people in prison for "using" marijuana.


Here's a fact, in 2010 the FBI reported 850,000 people arrested for *marijuana related offenses*. That's roughly 97 people every hour. Do you have any facts backing up your claim? 



logical4u said:


> 4. This is like the argument that legalizing gambling would put the "mob" out of business.  It legitimizes them....


Funny you jump to "gambling" (little unrelated, huh). How about the mob and the *alcohol business*; how did that work out for them? 



logical4u said:


> 5.  Yes, true, now the money will be in the hand of "legitimatized" criminals.


You gave me an example of the mob going into gambling - not alcohol. Try again!



logical4u said:


> 6.  There are some studies out that link marijuana use and ADHD in their children.  Also, marijuana causes the same type of brain problems caused by dementia.  In a time when we are having the gov't pay for health care, we do NOT need those costs increasing by legalizing anything that will add to those costs.


Links? 




logical4u said:


> 7.  Legalizing marijuana will give more children access to marijuana at earlier ages.  If they imitate their parents (similar to alcohol use), their brains could be limited in development, or have other long time damage.  How many billions, and billions will that cost in "disabilities"?


Links? Backup? Evidence? 



logical4u said:


> One other thing, the American natives believed that marijuana was a "feminine" drug (once you use it and like it, you will be possessive and defensive of it).  In a country where it is getting harder and harder to find people of fortitude, legalizing marijuana will make the average voter even more compliant for the deceitful politicians to manipulate votes, and control the population.  The stoners will not even realize what happened.  Their children will pay for their mistakes.  And their grandchildren and their great grandchildren will pay for their mistakes.  Do the rest of us a favor, if you do a lot of marijuana, get yourself fixed so that you cannot have children that you will be too stoned to pay attention to, or will cause birth defects by the amounts you smoke.



You - to me - don't sound like a marijuana smoker. In my experience marijuana has given me greater clarity into various life issues, and has helped me appreciate some of the details that I normally gloss over when sober. If anything, marijuana will make me a more thoughtful, diligent voter. 

.


----------



## MikeK (May 6, 2013)

logical4u said:


> 1. Marijuana policing is still going to cost billions.


Why?  How much does beverage alcohol policing cost?  If marijuana is as legally available as beverage alcohol the criminal stigma will be eliminated -- as it was with booze when Prohibition was repealed.  



> It is not legal to be stoned on most jobs, each accident requires a drug test, how much do you think that is going to cost?


If alcohol were illegal it wouldn't be legal to be drunk on most jobs either.  Re: accidents: drug (and drunk) tests are required whether or not booze or marijuana use is legal.  So this is an irrelevant issue.  



> That does not include the numbers of injuries or deaths from a person thinking they can perform their hazardous job, stoned.


Those who are inclined to misuse any mind-altering substance while performing a hazardous job will not be encouraged to do so by legal access.  Such individuals are compulsive users and will pursue access whether their substance of choice is legally available or not.  The same applies to those who are inclined to drive while impaired.  They will do it whether their choice of drug is legal or not.  The most effective deterrent to impaired driving is persistent public education.  

The simple fact of this matter is anyone who presently is inclined to use marijuana has no difficulty obtaining it.  So the assumption that marijuana legalization will cause large numbers of presently constrained individuals to rush right out and buy an ounce is predicated on _Reefer Madness_ propaganda.  At the present time, those who are not inclined to use marijuana will not change their mindset if it is made legal.


----------



## MikeK (May 7, 2013)

logical4u said:


> Many of those people bargained their original violent crime down to "drug possession".  There are very few people in prison for "using" marijuana.


While it's true that those convicted of possessing small amounts of marijuana are rarely sent to prison the fact remains the entire process, which involves police, prosecutor, judge, court personnel, probation officers, and clericals is very costly -- and the arrestee's life is ruined by the criminal record.  

However, it simply isn't true that no one goes to prison for marijuana offenses.  

(Excerpt)

_It's a pretty large number, in the sense that, certainly, in the federal system, about one out of every six federal inmates is in federal prison for marijuana. That's a very large number. There are more people now in federal prison for marijuana offenses than for violent offenses. Out of the 1.1 million people in American prisons, the marijuana offenders are not the majority. But there are a lot of them. And certainly, at a time when there's a shortage of prison space and when murderers are serving on average about six years in prison, it seems absurd to have non-violent marijuana offenders locked up in those large numbers._

Interviews - Eric Schlosser | Busted - America's War On Marijuana | FRONTLINE | PBS

(Close)


----------



## MikeK (May 7, 2013)

logical4u said:


> Legalizing marijuana will give more children access to marijuana at earlier ages.


Actually, the reverse is true.  Marijuana presently is more accessible to children than beverage alcohol because it is illegal and _schoolyard dealers_ are plentiful.  But booze is restricted to adults and kids have a hard time obtaining it because availability is legal -- and controlled.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 7, 2013)

In Colorado marijuana use by children went up almost immediately after it was legalized.

Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana « CBS Denver

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (CBS4) &#8211; A drug testing company says it&#8217;s seeing a big spike in children using marijuana following the passage of Amendment 64.

The drug testing company, Conspire, says it&#8217;s now being called on a weekly basis to test students in one Colorado school district instead of monthly. It&#8217;s not just more students, but it appears they&#8217;re using pot more often.

The costs of legalization in Colorado have proven to vastly outweigh the financial benefits.   Colorado considered repealing the law legalizing pot, but it failed because the illicit drug lobby finally has some political clout.   That might change as the full detrimental effects of legalization gets felt.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 7, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> *The costs of legalization* in Colorado have proven to vastly outweigh the financial benefits.   Colorado considered repealing the law legalizing pot, but it failed because the illicit drug lobby finally has some political clout.   That might change as the full detrimental effects of legalization gets felt.



Costly how? 

Let's do some math. 

.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 7, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > *The costs of legalization* in Colorado have proven to vastly outweigh the financial benefits.   Colorado considered repealing the law legalizing pot, but it failed because the illicit drug lobby finally has some political clout.   That might change as the full detrimental effects of legalization gets felt.
> ...



I posted an article about it some time ago.  The supposed financial benefit was far outweighed by just the costs of regulation aside from any other costs.


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



It is more than this too.  The cost to the government is minor compared to the fact that prison itself is VERY destructive to ones life.  It is far more so than the weed itself.  There By jailing those that are smoking weed you are causing them more harm without cause.


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 8, 2013)

how about meth or heroin 

wont the cartel continue in that illegal drug trade 

if pot became legal on a national level 

if the goal is to end the cartel 

those drugs also 

must become legal


----------



## Truthseeker420 (May 8, 2013)

legalize it.


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 8, 2013)

my question 

is not to compare pot verses meth heroin or alcohol for that matter 

but to question the validity that legalizing pot would 

end the cartels 

while so many other drugs remain illegal


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 8, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> my question
> 
> is not to compare pot verses meth heroin or alcohol for that matter
> 
> ...



You would need to legalize them all.  That would be the best scenario.  Pot alone however would alleviate most of the problems as that is one of the largest imported drug and the number one reason for the violence along the southern border.


----------



## Fender (May 8, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > my question
> ...



Legalizing pot would free up police resources (to fight real crimes), as well as prison cells. Plus, it's a new source of tax revenue, and an economic activity for growers and sellers.
You can buy a gun more easily then you can buy pot, which doesn't make any sense.


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 8, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > my question
> ...



yes 

i see it as two separate issues 

1- freeing up prisons 

which is a good argument for legalizing pot 

2- the cartels 

as not as good argument for legalizing pot 

which would continue to smuggle meth and cocaine and heroin

and remain as violent if not more violent in an a smaller drug market 

personally i think all drugs should be legal


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 8, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> In Colorado marijuana use by children went up almost immediately after it was legalized.
> 
> Drug Testing Company Sees Spike In Children Using Marijuana « CBS Denver
> 
> ...



they really didnt do much testing back when i was in high school in the late 70s 

and most of the kids i knew smoked weed 

weed was pretty common


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 8, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Well, you hit a key there also.  In a SMALLER market.

The market for hard drugs is far smaller and therefore less prevalent than pot.  It would at least be a step forward.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 8, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> how about meth or heroin
> 
> wont the cartel continue in that illegal drug trade
> 
> ...



Definitely a good point, but (correct me if you know I'm wrong), marijuana is one of their largest and most profitable products. 

If - for instance - you tell a company that they will no longer be able to sell one of their best and most reliable products (literally in this case, a billion+ dollar brand), they without a doubt are going to take a pretty significant hit in revenue, which ultimately means less money for guns, less money to bribe officials, & less power overall. 

Sure, they can't try to recoup some of those losses by ramping up heroin or cocaine, but the fact of the matter is that those are *hard*, dangerous drugs that much of the US population want nothing to do with for a number of very good reasons. There's only so much demand for those types of drugs. 


.


----------



## MikeK (May 8, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> my question
> 
> is not to compare pot verses meth heroin or alcohol for that matter but to question the validity that legalizing pot would end the cartels while so many other drugs remain illegal


The idea that legalizing marijuana will put an end to the drug cartels derives from a misunderstanding.  

Because marijuana presently is the second most commonly used recreational substance in America, second only to beverage alcohol, legalizing it logically will eliminate what are the most sizeable and active of the cartels.  While those cartels which are engaged in importing and distributing other substances will remain active, what must be understood is the volume of illegal marijuana importation and distribution *vastly exceeds that of all other illegal substances combined.*  Thus the misunderstanding.


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > how about meth or heroin
> ...



i thought i read that around 1/2 of their revenue comes from weed 

and control between 70 to 90 percent of other drugs that enter the states 

i agree many folks steer away from heroin and cocaine because of its dangers 

and that is why i would say legalize them all and then it cuts off 

pretty much all of the drug  smuggling 

that is of course if the government doesnt screw it up 

by taxing it so much that it once again became cheaper 

to have it sold on the black market 


i seen today that Colorado made the news 

with the senate passing new marijuana laws 

licensing retail and production for recreational use 

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/cl...83C95E87257B1F005CDB59?Open&file=1317_rev.pdf


----------



## shaferar (May 8, 2013)

This is a good question unfortunately I do not have the answer! I have never tried marijuana but seems safer than alcohol


----------



## Katzndogz (May 8, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> ...



Legalization won't reduce cartel revenue by a cent.


----------



## logical4u (May 8, 2013)

Does Smoking Marijuana Cause Lung Cancer

"....... More recent studies, in contrast, do appear to link smoking marijuana with lung cancer.  ......."

Marijuana Brain Damage - How Does Marijuana Affect the Brain?

".......Among a group of long-time heavy marijuana users in Costa Rica, researchers found that the people had great trouble when asked to recall a short list of words (a standard test of memory). People in that study group also found it very hard to focus their attention on the tests given to them.

As people age, they normally lose nerve cells in a region of the brain that is important for remembering events. Chronic exposure to THC may hasten the age-related loss of these nerve cells.   ......."


Marijuana May Disrupt Brain Development | LiveScience

".......a study that suggests adolescents and young adults who smoked a lot of marijuana are more likely than non-users to have disrupted brain development. 

Using brain scans, researchers found abnormalities in areas of the brain that interconnect brain regions involved in memory, attention, decision-making, language and executive functioning skills.    ......."


Does smoking marijuana cause birth defects? - Yahoo! Answers

Studies of marijuana in pregnancy are inconclusive because many women who smoke marijuana also use tobacco and alcohol. Smoking marijuana increases the levels of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide in the blood, which reduces the oxygen supply to the baby. Smoking marijuana during pregnancy can increase the chance of miscarriage, low birth-weight, premature births, developmental delays, and behavioral and learning problems."

Source(s):

Using Illegal Drugs during Pregnancy - American Pregnancy Association


----------



## MisterBeale (May 8, 2013)

This whole thread is really preposterous.  I wonder what an alien civilization would think of us, trying to make a natural plant, illegal.  Making any plant, that grows out of the ground, illegal.  That's right, throwing people in jail for having the wrong plants on or near their homes.  It is the most god awful absurd thing when you think about it.  Criminalizing nature.

I recently re-read a Douglas Adams book.  In it, the useless humans colonized an early Earth and made the tree leaf legal tender.  Naturally, they had an inflation problem, so the solution of their early government was to embark on a massive De-foliation program.  

How fortunate.  This solved their massive unemployment problem.

The point is, the problem is not marijuana.  The problem is the industries that complete with the products that hemp would compete with.  The problem is government, not people.

So many people are distracted by false issues and that they don't know what the real issues are.



> The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.








The primary one being, THC destroys cancer cells.  It brings balance to your system.
http://www.alternet.org/story/9257/pot_shrinks_tumors%3B_government_knew_in_%2774

All of these discussions and debates are academic.  They go against logic and natural law.  You can't make nature illegal.  If you want to make the distillation of drugs illegal?  Fine.  But natural plants growing out of the ground?  Really?  It's like trying to make fermentation, a natural process, illegal.  (My buddy who fought in the first gulf war made his own hooch in his canteen even though alcohol was forbade in Saudi Arabia.  Like that stopped him.   Getting drunk in the dessert with GI issued grape juice and bread, who said you can't have R&R? lol )

I digress.

At this point, we are just messing with power grander and more complex than ourselves.  When did humanity presume to be wiser than the cosmos?  What next, making illegal all plants that are toxic and can kill people?  We can't over-legislate life.  If we try, society will surely collapse.




Hypocrisies and posturing, that is all that this thread contains by those who don't know any better.  At times, myself included.


----------



## MikeK (May 9, 2013)

logical4u said:


> Does Smoking Marijuana Cause Lung Cancer
> 
> "....... More recent studies, in contrast, do appear to link smoking marijuana with lung cancer.  ......."


"More recent studies..."  Who conducts these studies?  

While they appear under the banner of NIDA (the National Instutute on Drug Abuse), a federal agency, these studies, which have been popping up now and then since the mid-1980s, are funded by grants.  So if you are an MD whose practice isn't doing too well and you have time on your hands you can apply to NIDA for a research grant.  If you specify in your grant application that you have cause to suspect marijuana of causing lung cancer you stand a good chance of being funded.  If you specify the opposite you will never hear from NIDA.  If you wish to learn more about NIDA, read _Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine,_ by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, MD,PhD, Professor of Psychiatric Medicine, Harvard Medical School. Or read Jack Herer's excellent book, _The Emperor Wears No Clothes._ 

One of these "studies" was conducted by attaching respirator masks to four laboratory monkeys and pumping enough concentrated marijuana smoke into their lungs to suffocate them -- which in fact did suffocate one of them.  

Another "study" was conducted with samples of marijuana which was found by the DEA growing in a radioactive dump.  Others are conducted with seized samples which are contaminated with pesticides and growth-inducing, carcinogenic chemicals.  

The simple fact of the matter is in spite of these highly questionable "studies" there is no record in the annals of medical science of a single confirmed example of marijuana causing lung cancer -- or any other pathology.  As far as medical science is concerned, marijuana is a benign natural substance.  

Bottom line:  Note that the title of this "study" is, "Does" marijuana cause lung cancer?"  And according to medical science the answer is, no.  It doesn't.


----------



## auditor0007 (May 9, 2013)

Skull Pilot said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Do the costs of drug use outweigh the benefit of legalization?
> ...



At present, I believe law enforcement's biggest concern is how they will determine when someone is driving under the influence.  Once a test is developed that is accurate, I think the floodgates will open to legalization.


----------



## MisterBeale (May 9, 2013)

auditor0007 said:


> At present, I believe law enforcement's biggest concern is how they will determine when someone is driving under the influence.  Once a test is developed that is accurate, I think the floodgates will open to legalization.


I think you have nailed it.  It is about control.  People are, after all, idiots.  

Especially children.  It takes a long time to grow the wisdom and maturity to know that you should not be an idiot, nor act as such.  One must take driving with the utmost of all seriousness.  People don't.  They view themselves as invincible and think they can do everything.  

Knowing whether someone is high or not is purely subjective, there is no objective test that can be given on the spot.  That is the crux of the issue.  Once a test can be given to gauge whether a person's Endocannabinoid system has been compromised, sure, things might move along.  But again, you are missing the point.  That would mean research would be done on the plant.  That would never and could never be allowed.  It won't happen.  Then the secret would get out. . . .


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 9, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



LOL.  

Really, look at history.  Revenues for illegal alcohol certainly were not affected by enacting and repealing prohibition right?

What a silly statement.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 9, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



Revenues to organized crime were not affected by repealing prohibition.   Right now, organized crime including the drug cartels are making far more money than they were the day prohibition was repealed.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 9, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Katz, your reasoning (forgive me) makes not a single bit of sense. 

The cartels currently make billions of dollars in revenue from their marijuana crop. It's their biggest product, and funds much of their day-to-day operations.

If marijuana is legalized, the revenues shift to legal companies that will be located in the United States (ie cheaper to buy a product originating 50 miles away vs. 800 miles away in Mexico). Sure, they'll still have other drugs like cocaine, meth, but what happens to that giant hole left by (what was) a very lucrative marijuana business? Sure, they can start up some legal operations in the US but (obviously) will now have to compete with all the other legal businesses (driving down price, ect). 

How in the world can you say that 'they won't lose a cent'? I'm extraordinarily baffled. Please show us your reasoning.



.


.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 9, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> 
> Why is it on them? It's on them because prohibition means some very negative and real consequences that we as a society have to all deal with, namely:
> 
> ...



You should direct your concerns to Barack Obama.  Under his administration he has ordered the arrests of those using medical marijuana and the HLS has been systematically targeting these states and the suppliers.  You must have missed the John Stossel report a few nights ago where the medical marijuana providers have gone public to expose Barack Obama's hypocrisy in targeting them.  So you go ahead and address those concerns to the Obama people because they are the ones behind it.  Look up the John Stossel report on this and learn the truth for yourselves.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 9, 2013)

[ame=http://youtu.be/230d8d0zwfA]John Stossel - The War On Medical Marijuana - YouTube[/ame]



Have a look at who is targeting medical marijuana users now.  Is there any room left under that bus?


----------



## KevinWestern (May 9, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > It's time the prohibitionists justify why marijuana should remain illegal.
> ...



What do you mean by that? I fully understand that Obama is not a friend to marijuana legalization (despite the common misconception that he his). I did not vote for him in this past election.

However on the issue of legalization, I will say that (oddly enough) it's generally the Republicans who are against it (ie Katz) and not most Democrats that I talk to. You have to agree with me on this because it's generally the left leaning states like California and Colorado that are marijuana friendly. 

This is completely beyond comprehension because the Republicans claim to be for smaller gov't and for more personal freedoms. But I guess it's par for the course for the GOP because they're pretty well known for saying one thing and then doing another (ie Freedom reducing Patriot Act, ie Iraq War's extortionate spending, ie Freedom reducing NDAA, ie Freedom reducing DHS, ie Freedom reducing CISPA, ie Freedom reducing "Marketplace Fairness Act", ect).


.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 9, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> FA_Q2 said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



Which is why this administation is targeting medical marijuana users.  John Stossel just did a report about it a few nights ago.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 9, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Jeremiah said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol.   Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray?  That is wrong. 

 The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot.  Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned.  They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana.  This is big money, folks.  

Recently there was a case in which someones grandson was arrested for posession of pot due to his passenger carrying it - unbeknownst to him - the outcome?  The passenger admitted the pot was his but the boys grandfather still lost ownership of his cadillac. Why?  It was involved in the scene of a crime.  Asset forfeiture laws prevailed and the grandfather lost his vehicle over some pot that didn't even belong to his grandson.  

These are the stories the liberals don't want you to hear about because it is the liberal judges, attorneys, police departments,  etc who are getting rich off of it. 

 The only logical answer is legalize it.  I have to tell you I believe drinking is far more dangerous - yet it is legal.  This makes no sense to me whatsoever.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 9, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol.   Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray?  That is wrong.
> 
> The real reason the government hasn't legalized it is because this is big business for their lawyers, judges, police, probation and parole depts - everyone is getting rich off of these kids smoking pot.  Not to mention the criminal asset forfeiture laws which allow them to seize your property even if you as the owner were unaware of the use of marijuana on a property you owned.  They have over 38,000 cases in the courts right now of govt seizures of property concerning marijuana.  This is big money, folks.
> 
> ...




Definitely, I agree with all that you have said. 

Only thing I'd add is do you agree with me in that many Republican congresspeople don't support the repeal of prohibition, and that this is very hypocritical of their mission statement? 


.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 9, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Jeremiah said:
> 
> 
> > I am a Republican and I believe it should be legalized with same guidelines they use for alchohol.   Do you realize there are cases in which kids have been sentenced to hard prison time ( one case in Texas I remember hearing of ) for having a single marijuana cigarette in his ashtray?  That is wrong.
> ...



That is a problem with the GOP.  They need to think for themselves and break free of the influence of corrupt liberals who have managed to infiltrate their ranks. 

  I'm telling you if this were a conservative agenda it would have lost by now.  It isn't.

  It is being driven by the liberals who want to keep it illegal because of the huge profits they are making off of it "being illegal".  This is big business. 

  I have met some of these rinos ( republican in name only ) and the only time they mention the bible is when they want to remind the republican of their duty to vote against legalizing pot or some other agenda they have going.    The GOP will never move forward until they drive out the RINOS starting with people such as Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, etc.  These type of people are poison to the republican party.  Until they clean house nothing is going to go right.


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 9, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Jeremiah said:
> ...



Not entirely true IMHO.

It is not a liberal position that is stopping legalization.  That is a misunderstanding of liberal, democrat, conservative and republican.  As you state there are RINOS, but there are also Blue Dogs as well and it is not the democrats that have invaded the GOP (of the Dems for that matter) but rather the big government statists.  They are in both parties.  It is one of the major problems we face today, the reality that the left thinks the democrats and republicans are moving right and the right thinks that the republicans and democrats are moving left.  They cant BOTH be correct so what is really happening?  They are both moving away from the beliefs of their base but they are not moving to the other side, they are moving away from everyone.  Right into the state.


As far as left/right, legalization really is not a position on any side.  As you see, Billy is a liberal and defending the illegal drugs (though he supports legalized pot I think) and then Kats is a republican doing the same.  It is a varied issue.  For the right, it is simply a matter of clashing core values  smaller government and morality.  No matter what position some republicans take, they are violating one of their values, it is just a matter of which one they believe in more  government legislated morality or smaller government.


----------



## Pop23 (May 9, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> KevinWestern said:
> 
> 
> > Jeremiah said:
> ...



I've argued this point many times. I drink, but do not, nor would not smoke pot. That being said, I know drinking is far worse than smoking pot. The economic impact on society from legal drinking is far worse that it would be from legal pot.

The Pols win both ways.

Criminal pot equals a jobs program and profits.

Legal drinking equals a jobs program and profits.

Neither party wants the above to change.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 10, 2013)

What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users including potheads.  They vote.   The controversy is being resolved, even in California, by allowing cities to pass their own anti pot laws keeping it out of at least, their own locality.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 10, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users *including potheads*.  They vote.



I assume you're anti-drinking too, right (alcohol)? Would you be for a prohibition round #2? 



.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 10, 2013)

Pop23 said:


> Jeremiah said:
> 
> 
> > KevinWestern said:
> ...



 To me it is a matter of the government making money off the misery of others.  It isn't my business what other people do in their own private lives.   I don't believe pot smokers are endangering anyone.  I cannot say the same for a drunk person because if they get behind the wheel of a car to drive they could kill someone.  They don't legalize it because this is a big business to them.

  It reminds me of the time I heard about a young person who was arrested for pot and was told by the police officer who arrested him he had better call a certain attorney to help him out.  The attorney, the judge, all involved were crooked and cost the parents of the young man a fortune to get him out of the trouble.  In the end, the boy was given probation and had to pay almost 5,000 dollars in fines.  Society may look upon these liberal judges and lawyers as the heroes but I see them as greater criminals then the boy who was caught with the pot!  I expect they will have to answer for it one day.  I certainly hope they do.  - Jeri


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 10, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users *including potheads*.  They vote.
> ...



I'm against drinking for myself - smoking too - but I don't believe in prohibiting others from doing either.  It is their own choice and should be left up to the individual.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 10, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> To me it is a matter of the government making money off the misery of others.  It isn't my business what other people do in their own private lives.   I don't believe pot smokers are endangering anyone.  I cannot say the same for a drunk person because if they get behind the wheel of a car to drive they could kill someone.  They don't legalize it because this is a big business to them.
> 
> It reminds me of the time I heard about a young person who was arrested for pot and was told by the police officer who arrested him he had better call a certain attorney to help him out.  The attorney, the judge, all involved were crooked and cost the parents of the young man a fortune to get him out of the trouble.  In the end, the boy was given probation and had to pay almost 5,000 dollars in fines.  Society may look upon these liberal judges and lawyers as the heroes but I see them as greater criminals then the boy who was caught with the pot!  I expect they will have to answer for it one day.  I certainly hope they do.  - Jeri




Very true. 

Throwing an individual in jail results in a _far greater_ cost to society than that individual enjoying some cannabis in his/her free time.

Costs are both in tax dollars (literally supporting someone 24/7) and other less-tangible/measurable factors such as kids growing up without dads, and dads getting out of prison and having difficulty finding a job because they were in prison, ect...

Anyways, I wish I could get this across to Katz...

For murderers, these costs are OK. We need to have those individuals off our streets. But for pot? Doesn't seem worth it.

.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 10, 2013)

Kevin, let me correct myself in saying all liberals are against the legalization of marijuana.  I must agree with you in hindsight it is according to the individual as there are people on both sides for and against.  It is a contraversial issue.  

Still I'm not flying blind here.  I spent several years doing prison ministry and bible study by mail for an international ministry and can tell you that some of the young people I was ministering to didn't belong there.  At all. 

 The emotional harm that was done to these young people by their time in prison was quite profound.  There is one story I remember - I was grading bible study of a Texas inmate who had recently told me he had a new cell mate.  He was in there for murder and was the size of a refrigorator.  A real tough guy.  Anyhow......his new cell mate ......  A young fellow - busted for pot in Texas - in fear for his physical safety.  I told him you belong to Christ now - it is your duty to defend this young man!  I put the fear of God into that guy so bad he finally did protect him.  He actually thought he was supposed to stay clear of the matter and allow the young man to be raped!  Oh!  I was in rare form that day!  I find it disgusting that these very same judges, lawyers, politicians make sure their own children will never see the inside of a prison cell.  They buy their way out.   It is despicable.   - Jeri


----------



## Katzndogz (May 10, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > What has stopped legalization is the experiences of millions of people who have suffered through their association with drug users *including potheads*.  They vote.
> ...




Have you ever read about the history of the prohibition movement?  Obviously not or you would know why there was such a movement in the first place.  You would also know that every wild claim made by the prohibitionists actually came to pass.  Right down to child alcoholics.  In fact the reality is much worse than anything those early prohibitionists dreamed up.   They never forsaw the highway carnage.  So why knowing all that would we want to make things even worse with not only marijuana use but using marijuana and alcohol together.  It doesn't make sense.  

The majority of people who drink alcohol do not get drunk.  Everyone who uses pot uses it to get high.  It has no other purpose.  For every person who gets drunk there will be another who gets high and another who gets both drunk and high.  Whatever problems alcohol caused will be tripled.  Only drug addicts will call that an improvement.


----------



## hipaware (May 13, 2013)

Imagine all the tax dollars the US would get if weed was legal. We are missing out on a lot of money


----------



## Katzndogz (May 14, 2013)

hipaware said:


> Imagine all the tax dollars the US would get if weed was legal. We are missing out on a lot of money



Colorado is trying that experiment right now with a 25% tax.  Thereby ensuring that the cartels will still be able to make their millions selling illegal and tax free pot.


----------



## ELITEofWarman8 (May 14, 2013)

Exactly. Stop tossing people in jail for simple offenses and maybe we can save a lot of money prison wise. Anyone ever think of that?


----------



## Katzndogz (May 14, 2013)

ELITEofWarman8 said:


> Exactly. Stop tossing people in jail for simple offenses and maybe we can save a lot of money prison wise. Anyone ever think of that?



Probably because most of them, if not all, today, aren't in prison for simple drug offenses but other offenses and drugs were just part of that.   Then there are the "suspects".  These are individuals who have committed a string of crimes and everyone knows it.   They just can't get the evidence.   Maybe witnesses have been intimidated.   They get them on a drug offense and get them off the streets for at least a little while.

For the largest majority of simple drug offenses there's diversion, alternative sentencing, community service, rehab and counseling.


----------



## FA_Q2 (May 14, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> hipaware said:
> 
> 
> > Imagine all the tax dollars the US would get if weed was legal. We are missing out on a lot of money
> ...



Since we see cigarettes (with a tax FAR in excess of 25%) having a massive black market and cigarette cartels smuggling billions of dollars of cigarettes across the border and killing Americans every day
Wait..

That actually is not happening.  Go figure.


----------



## MikeK (May 14, 2013)

ELITEofWarman8 said:


> Exactly. Stop tossing people in jail for simple offenses and maybe we can save a lot of money prison wise. Anyone ever think of that?


You've asked a good question, one which shows you're thinking.  But consider the following:

Marijuana prohibition is beneficial to a significant segment of the Nation, mainly the prison business which happens to be the only remaining growth industry in America.  Prison is big business today.

Next is the legal profession.  Consider how many lawyers will go begging if marijuana is legalized.  

Don't forget how many police officers at the federal, state, and local levels are engaged in marijuana prohibition

Another substantially developed new industry is the piss-testing business.

Tranquilizers are one of the most commonly prescribed drugs, which means their sales contribute significantly to the pharmaceutical industry's bottom line.  But marijuana is Nature's tranquilizer -- and there is none better.  If marijuana is made legal it won't be long before the drug industry will realize a major loss.

The booze industry contributes heavily to anti-marijuana organizations.  Because if marijuana is legalized a substantial number of Americans who presently use alcohol to alter their consciousness will discover that marijuana is superior to booze in every way -- and it is comparatively harmless.  

So there is a lot of pressure (and money) being applied to Congress to keep marijuana illegal.  And the only hope we have of countering that pressure is public education, which eventually will influence voting.


----------



## Swagger (May 14, 2013)

Let's be honest here. Most of the right-wing objection to the smoking of marijuana doesn't stem from the threat of psychosis after prolongued use or the threat of tax-free pot (which is ridiculous, as the majority of dope smokers will plump for convenience over cost). It threatens their traditional values/world view, and is the kind of thing they imagine black people do.

I'm a hard-right Conservative, but even I agree that the current marijuana laws in the West are ludicrous and are only in place to serve the interests of the alcohol and pharmaceutical industries.


----------



## MikeK (May 14, 2013)

Swagger said:


> Let's be honest here. Most of the right-wing objection to the smoking of marijuana doesn't stem from the threat of psychosis after prolongued use or the threat of tax-free pot (which is ridiculous, as the majority of dope smokers will plump for convenience over cost). It threatens their traditional values/world view, and is the kind of thing they imagine black people do.
> 
> I'm a hard-right Conservative, but even I agree that the current marijuana laws in the West are ludicrous and are only in place to serve the interests of the alcohol and pharmaceutical industries.


Of course you're right about a percentage of more conservative Americans harboring what is colloquially referred to as the _Reefer Madness_ mindset.  But fortunately that mentality has substantially diminished and presently represents the lesser anti-marijuana disposition.  In fact current polls reveal a 52 percent majority of Americans favor legalization.  Survey: 52 percent of Americans in favor of legalizing marijuana - U.S. News

That level of public approval leaves one to conclude another factor is responsible for government's resistance to legalization.  And if that factor isn't money, what else can it be?


----------



## Katzndogz (May 15, 2013)

FA_Q2 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > hipaware said:
> ...



There really is a black market in cigarettes.  But there is a black market in almost everything.  The difference with pot is the drug dealers are established.  It will be nothing for a pothead to go back to the old reliable dealer when taxes get too high.  Users think of dealers as friends as it is.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 15, 2013)

MikeK said:


> Swagger said:
> 
> 
> > Let's be honest here. Most of the right-wing objection to the smoking of marijuana doesn't stem from the threat of psychosis after prolongued use or the threat of tax-free pot (which is ridiculous, as the majority of dope smokers will plump for convenience over cost). It threatens their traditional values/world view, and is the kind of thing they imagine black people do.
> ...



It isn't at all surprising that a substantial part of the public are dysfunctional drug addicts.  That's how obama got reelected.   It will last until non users get tired of putting up with addicts.  The same way they got tired of putting up with drunks.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 16, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> There really is a black market in cigarettes.  But there is a black market in almost everything.  The difference with pot is the drug dealers are established.  It will be nothing for a pothead to go back to the old reliable dealer when taxes get too high.  Users think of dealers as friends as it is.



There will be no dealers to go back to, as the cartel's revenue streams will be destroyed and the entire system - the infrastructure - will be disbanded. 

Again, this will be just like when prohibition of Alcohol was repealed. 

QUESTION: How many people do you know buy alcohol from a black market dealer, illegally? Taxes are sky high here in the city for beer and wine, yet I know not a SINGLE person who gets their alcohol from an illegal source.

Why is that? 


.


----------



## KevinWestern (May 16, 2013)

Katzndogz said:


> hipaware said:
> 
> 
> > Imagine all the tax dollars the US would get if weed was legal. We are missing out on a lot of money
> ...



Food for thought Katz...

"True legalization ought to drive the price way down by bringing modern cultivation and production methods to bear. In Canada, industrial hemp is grown for about $500 per acre. But thats done on large farms, not small grow houses. With the application of modern efficient agribusiness methods, marijuana prices should be more like tea pricescloser to $3 an ounce of usable product than the current $300"

Colorado and Washington pot prices: What are the economics of partial marijuana legalization? - Slate Magazine




.


----------



## Mom (May 16, 2013)

The people against pot are always the ones who've never tried it.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 16, 2013)

KevinWestern said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > There really is a black market in cigarettes.  But there is a black market in almost everything.  The difference with pot is the drug dealers are established.  It will be nothing for a pothead to go back to the old reliable dealer when taxes get too high.  Users think of dealers as friends as it is.
> ...



Oh please of course the dealers will still be in business.  They'll be selling other drugs that are still illegal.  

If you honestly think that the entire infrastructure of the drug cartels will be disbanded just because pot is made legal, then why didn't the end of prohibition end the organized crime networks of that day?   Not only do we still have them, but there are more of them and they are all much stronger today than they were.

You aren't asking the right questions.   There are certainly more people who drink today, there are also more methods to get that buzz.   They don't need alcohol, they can take Sudafed, cough syrup.   They can smoke pot.  They can sniff glue, or paint thinner.   Someone who wants to get drunk, rather than have a glass of wine with dinner, just finds other means.    If there is a need for low cost and untaxed pot, that need will be met by the same people meeting it today.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 16, 2013)

If the example of prohibition is really followed, that closet grow you have now will be as illegal as homemade brew. The difference will be, instead of being in alternative sentencing, the offender will be in federal prison for tax evasion.

If you get right down to it, the end of prohibition didn't work out all that well either as laws against alcohol are close to being as stringent as they were when prohibition was in effect.   The examples are, alcohol after prohibition ended and cigarettes, both technically legal, but so many laws against them, they may as well be illegal.

So, you might say that the best way to keep pot illegal is to legalize it and then start passing laws restricting its use to the point where it may as well have stayed illegal.


----------



## MaryL (May 19, 2013)

Why not legalize pot? America is going that way. Don&#8217;t get your panties in a wad, as they say. Actually, I see this the other way, Why re-legalize marijuana.  Years ago, it was legal. It was hemp, loco weed. And it was just as acceptable to sell Thompson sub machine guns in the mail. Do we really need to rationalize the abuse of either? Guns and drugs, ya know.   Why not legalize meth? Why not?  Why not legalize fully automatic AK 47&#8217;s? All the rationalizations posted here, they can apply to just about anything.


----------



## MikeK (May 19, 2013)

MaryL said:


> Why not legalize pot? America is going that way. Dont get your panties in a wad, as they say. Actually, I see this the other way, Why re-legalize marijuana.  Years ago, it was legal. It was hemp, loco weed. And it was just as acceptable to sell Thompson sub machine guns in the mail. Do we really need to rationalize the abuse of either? Guns and drugs, ya know.   Why not legalize meth? Why not?  Why not legalize fully automatic AK 47s? All the rationalizations posted here, they can apply to just about anything.


Your comparison of marijuana with Thompson submachine guns, AK-47s and methamphetamine reveals an archaic _Reefer Madness_ mindset.  You need to understand that unadulterated marijuana has never harmed anyone.  It is a benign natural substance which has been subjected to generations of malicious lies and misinformation.  

Please learn the truth about marijuana and apply your obvious intelligence to propagating it.


----------



## Katzndogz (May 19, 2013)

Spoken like a true pothead under the influence.


----------

