Ok, Please talk about drugs here. Should pot be legal? What about other recreational drugs?41 responses total.
Do I have to copy-paste my response?
No, you dont *have* to. :)
But what if people miss it??
Well, then you had better cut and paste it here. That way no one will miss it :) Personally, I dont really care a whole lot about this issue. All the drugs I do are either legal or so easy to get, they might as well be. The status quo is fine with me. However, I have to say that in principle, I support the end of most drug prohibition. There are some recreational drugs that are dangerous enough that I think they should only be made available with supervision. Not a prescription necessarily since I dont imagine many doctors would feel good about prescribing recreational drugs. There have been programs like this for heroin in England that seemed to have some success. I certainly believe that marijuana should be legal or at the very least, decriminalized.
My post up in the other was in essence that I think people should strt focussing on the effects of pot-addiction and prolonged pot use rather that "judgement impairing" and "accident causing" issues that a lot of people are harping about. These are caused by other factors also, like alcohol, and harping on these isn't going to change anyone's minds about these drugs. My opinion is that as recreational drugs that are used once in way, I see very little harm done, but people need to be made aware that becoming dependant on these as pick-me-ups and as a means to escape reality is harmful. And I see very little being focussed on this issue. I don't think pot should be illegal. If pot is illegal, then alcohol should be made illegal too. And I've not heard of people high on pot breaking into bar fights.
Sorry, equating MJ with alcohol is erroneous, and is not an arugument for legalizing / decriminalizaing MJ. Doing so has to stand on its own merits.
I don't buy that. The argument equating marijuana with alcohol works like this: In a free country, doing something should be illegal if and only if there are strong reasons for it to be illegal. If a given argument for outlawing marijuana also applies to alcohol, then either a) alcohol should also be outlawed, or b) the reason in question is not a strong enough reason to justify outlawing marijuana either. Personally, I am not familiar with any reasons that smoking pot should be illegal that aren't pretty weak.
it will make the fistfighting drunks more mellow and there will be less work for the ER doctors to do as a result. there will be massive doctor lay offs, less people in prison so lots of guards will have to work at hardee's for less money and all of the above will create an economic collapse which will result in more unhappy americans who can no longer afford cable so they will turn to radical taliban-like islam and start bombing places like comcast hq, and the local hardee's. UNLESS THEY MELLOW OUT AND SMOKE MORE POT! so, as you can see, pot is really pretty bad.
Heh. It's true that while I've been accosted by drunks on multiple occasions, I've never met a belligerant stoner.
"dude, smoke pot with me or i'll beat you up...uh, what was i saying?"
As one kid is about to enter his teenage years (he's 12, I mean) and the other is only a few years away from that, I think about drugs as something I hope doesn't affect their lives. I regard myself as beyond my drug-abusing years. If I were going to get into drugs, or become an alcoholic, it would have happened over the last two years, I expect. For the boys, I'd rather not have them smoke either marijuana or tobacco. I'm about equally against them both; tobacco because of my own background, marijuana because of the law and because I regard it as an entry-level "drug". I probably won't have much to do with how my stepson lives his life, but my son will know -- he knows now -- I am firmly against him using these two things. As he gets older, I'll talk with him more about my views, and the rules in our home, and consequences for not following the rules. I expect ther boys will drink alcohol. I hope if they do, they do it the way I do, an occasional beer and not much more than that. My son has a sip of my beer occasionally. I hope it's not bad for him. I hope I'm showing him how I treat alcohol and that he'll adopt my view for himself. I don't really know anything about the other drugs besides alcohol. I wouldn't want the kids to be the way I usually think of habitual drug users. I think of a drug user as a guy sitting in the middle of the floor with his mind fogged to the point of not being able to care about his life, other than the need to get high again. Robbing houses to steal anything worth $50 so he can get his fix. I don't know if it's an accurate portrayal of any drug users, but it's what I think of. I don't want anything like that for my kids. I am against experimentation with drugs. As with marijuana and tobacco, he knows now I am against him using such things. When he gets older, I'll go into more depth and establish rules and all that. I don't think I'll close the boys out of my life, no matter what they do. I don't think I'll run a "my way or the highway" home. I'll always be here to do what I can for them, the best I can do, whatever that is. If they need a ride because they can't drive, they can call me, even if it's 2:00 a.m. Even if they did something I don't approve of. But then, I think, they'll owe me some time the next day or so in order to explain what happened and for me to lecture a bit. (I'm a dad. Dads lecture, a bit.) If I could make all the recreational drugs, marijuana and tobacco disappear by waving my hand, anyone opposed had better jump fast to sit on my hand, because it'll be positioning itself in "wave" formation. If alcohol were to disappear, too, I'd probably be a little sorry, but I'd be waving almost as quickly and nearly as vigorously. I don't get to make that decision for everyone, everywhere, so I'll just have to do what my parents did. Do my best, and hope it works out for my children.
I would like to outlaw the use of any drug that gets into the air in public spaces including sidewalks - if people want to poison themselves in private just charge them more health insurance.
what do people think about the new anti-pot commercials? Just for the discussions sake. I haven't formed a firm decision yet. I am for hemp-- mostly as an alternative pulp source for paper and whatnot. Perhaps decriminalizing marijuana would make it so much easier for farmers to grow hemp because I can't imagine enforcement trying to tell the difference between a hemp plant and a marijuana plant. One has the bud, the other doesn't. Of course, germane to this discussion are the questions: "How does legalization of certain drugs, such as pot, work elsewhere? What case examples do we see there?"
Living in an area where lots of people smoke pot quite openly (yeah, Bruce, people smoke pot in Berkeley...), I've never observed it to cause any problems for people other than the smokers themselves, and even then it's generally appeared to be loss of motivation more than anything else. I've also noticed passive smoke to not be nearly the problem from pot smokers that it is from tobacco smokers. I think this is because smoking pot just doesn't produce as much smoke.
There are all kinds of problems with pot. There is a second hand smoke issue for sure. I cant imagine that it is good for one's health to smoke it. I dont smoke pot too often because I have noticed that it makes me think more slowly for a day or so after I use it. Making pot legal doesnt necessarily mean that society has to allow smoking in public. One can still prohibit the use of marijuana while driving. resp:13 - I am not sure what marijuana commercials you mean. can you describe them?
You probably have to be high to appreciate them.
YOu have to be stupid to appreciate them?
As for the commercials, and I mentioned this in the other item, the first two commercials irritated me rather than got me thinking (one was a pregnant teen whose judgement had been impaired, the other was an accident cause by delayed reflexes due to pot). All I thought when I saw these was "Hey, alcohol does the same thing. Stop being hypocrites, if you're really concerned about these issues, you should be working on making alcohol illegal) The latest commercial, and it seems to be the most successful, it seems to have been running for a long long time) hit the message home more effectively. It's aboput a boy describing his brother who smoked pot and how he never got into trouble or did anything, and ends with how he never did anything at all. And I think that's the message that they should be working on sending. Instead of making pot illegal, people should be made aware of the effects of prolonged usage, or relying on these drugs to get away from their problems
The one I remember best involves some kids smoking pot in a dad's study. They laugh and joke around, then one of them says, "Hey, you want to see something cool?" He pulls a gun out of one of the drawers and shoots the other kid with it. The message is supposed to be that pot affects your judgement. I guess I have two problems with that commercial. One is that it logically works just as well as a gun control commercial. The other is that it would apply equally well to alcohol. Overall I don't think these commercials will be effective. They're too over the top, too "reefer madness." I think they do more damage than good. Kids have a way of finding out when they're being fed a line, and if they find out that a lot of what they've been told by adults about drugs is exaggerated, they're not going to believe genuine information they're given, either. Re #18 (which slipped in): Yeah, I agree. The problem is that message doesn't mesh well with the absolutist "Just Say No" message the government has been trying to push for years. They've staked a lot of their credibility on the message that while alcohol can be used responsibly in moderation, it's impossible for pot and other drugs to be used that way.
There's a billboard up in Briarwood mall now which says something along the lines of: "Lungs: not available in stores. [fine print] What are you willing to give up to smoke marijuana?" I wanted to take a marker and cross out the last word.
Exactly. If they are passing on message like that, they should be targetting the tobacco and alcohol market first. They're just coming across as hypocrites IMO
It's not like there's been any shortage of anti-tobacco ads; they're just not funded by the government, most of the time.
There should be more of them, and there need to be a lot more anti-alcohol ads besides just the "don't drink and drive" sponsored by MADD
the anti pot commercial fave of mine is:
there's a burger joint and in the car at the
ordering station are some young african american
(you know, irresponsible negro stereotype gangbangers)
getting silly and horfing on a *dooby*.
the scene replays over a number of times before
shazaam! they hit a girl on her bike
(AN INNOCENT WHITE GIRL!) as they're pulling away in a
beefy burger pot haze.
i cracked some people up (my wife included) when i yelled
at the screen "There wouldn't have been a problem if she'd
been in the car getting stoned!" when the commercial was showing
before whatever hollywood crap was about to come on.
the drug war is largely about race, it always has been.
love
happy "rev. al motherfuckin sharpton" boy-ee
Al Sharpton. The name alone is a comedy routine.
When I moved to California a bit more than three years ago, there were lots of radio commercials attacking tobacco smoking on the grounds that the tobacco companies were evil (marketing to children, and all sorts of other things), and that when you smoke you're supporting to tobacco companies. The commercials all ended with the tagline, "this message brought to you by the tobacco tax."
The government has less incentive to stop the use of tobacco and alcohol than the illegal drugs because it can tax the former.
Just legalise them all and have fun as far as I could care what a care.
It will be interesting to see what happens if Canada decriminalizes marijuana. If they do, and chaos doesn't ensue, it'll become harder to argue against it here. I think that's a major reason the U.S. government has been leaning so hard on them not to do it.
Regardless of whether it is tobacco or pot, I think *smoking* is a health hazard - inhaling smoke from burning vegetation is still toxic. I think that even if pot were legalized, there should still be a "anti smoking" campaign and laws.
re 30: Fine by me. Seems like anti-pot commercials are keying on the "it makes you stupid" belief. I'd accept pot being illegal if they made being stupid illegal too.
re#30 - YES! There are lots of truthful bad things to say about pot. There is not need to lie in advertising. One of my favorites is a young couple in a doctors office being told they cant have children. Then, the ad says that smoking marijuana decreases sperm count. What they dont say is that the sperm count effect is temporary and that it doesnt really lower it enough to keep people from having kids. In the back of my head, I always wondered if any babies were conceived because some dumbass saw that commercial and thought pot would make good birth control.
"we're running this campaign to prevent stupidity caused by marihuana. people so afflicted are our target market." "you sure know your market, don't you?" AHAHAHAHA
Old NatLamp news item: "Disproving the myth that LSD causes genetic damage, Grace Slick has given birth to a healthy seven-pound wirehaired terrier."
/passes md a mello phat doobie.
darwin lives ... and this is a surprise?
From alcoholism to international crime, recreational drugs sure do cause a huge load of problems. Spending $Billions$ per year for decades trying to fight the problem hasn't done much good, either. (Being a knee-jerk issue for politicians to posture on doesn't count as "doing good" any more than enriching drug lords does.) If it's legal and big business is behind it, we get loads of advertising aimed at getting more people hooked on it. Let's start by making alcohol, tobacco, and similar (quite popular and not notably nastier than booze or smokes) drugs a goverment monopoly. Set prices to discourage use somewhat, but too low to make illicit stuff very profitable. Minimal "this stuff isn't very healthy" non-advertising and quality/packaging/spin to make the stuff about as convenient & cool as generic Preparation H. This will outrage the upscale/premium/luxury market of course. So let them make & sell their fancy beers/wines/smokes/etc. if they're 1) very small scale, 2) substantially pricier than government-standard stuff, 3) living within a tight set of regulations on quality, advertising, local control, buyer age, etc., and 4) paying a substantial tax. Not sure what to do about the nastier stuff. Given all the problems the users & their supply chain cause, it's tempting to say "all the stuff you can do is *free*...inside a sex-segregated government facility that you aren't ever allowed to leave".
things work so well in amsterdam not simply because pot, hash, and mushrooms are legal. people generally have a more tolerant view on the issues and do not marginalize or look down upon drug users or drug/alcohol addicts. heroine addicts are treated for their addiction as a health issue. people don't walk around preaching or feeling guilt about their actions. everyone's responsible for their own decisions, and help is there if needed. i actually smoke way less pot here than i ever did in the states. the tourists smoke more than anyone, arriving here and diving heaed first into this taboo that has been kept from them in thier own country. it's sad, really. in my life i have known maybe 1 or 2 people who i consider to be over-doing it with pot. they've built up such a tolerance that they continually smoke all day and are still productive. but they eventually end up getting all hyper and paranoid, but quitting for a few days/weeks can stop this - as when they smoke again it will hit them pretty hard. also pot used to be the only thing that remedied my migranes after trying all sorts of medications etc. alcohol is a much bigger problem, but i don't think it should be illegal. people should be free without the state telling them how to live their lives. it's much easier to make clear decisions if you don't have the fear of punishment or guilt, or rebellion (in the case of younger people).
did anyone hear how the vote on the "pot initiative" went out here in seattle?
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
You have several choices: