California’s Govinator is for debating it. A majority in a US poll favor legalizing it. And then there’s Oaksterdam.
While there might be additional costs for dealing with those who can’t handle responsible toking — just as we now have with alcoholics, etc — they are vastly outweighed by the savings in then unneeded prisons, law enforcement, and so on, plus there’s the potential windfall in tax money for ailing local, state and fed governments.
If there should be changes, how far should we go? Simple decriminalization or full legalization? Should it be taxed like cigarettes and booze, both of which are far more dangerous, but legal? You know where Crackpot and Buzzkill stand. Where do you?
Are Americans really ready to consider legalizing marijuana? This week, California’s governor said it was time to debate the issue, and a new nationwide poll suggests a majority of voters favor decriminalizing the drug.
While legalization advocates say they’ve never seen such widespread public support for reforming marijuana laws, they still don’t expect drug policy to change overnight. But, they say, the country appears to be at tipping point in how it views recreational use of marijuana, which is now legal in 13 states for medically-approved use.
“We are actually talking about historic highs when it comes to public support of taxing and regulating marijuana for adult consumption,” says Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). But, he adds, “the most difficult task is how you convert public sentiment into public policy.”
In Washington, Mr. Armentano says, politicians are still not ready to rethink US drug policy.
#5 methinks you are being a wee bit disingenuous…
prohibition? ring a bell?
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
George Santayana, The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905
US (Spanish-born) philosopher (1863 – 1952)
65,
Ah. I see. So you’ll only “Think of the children” so long as they don’t ban the things you like / consume.
Gotcha!
65. Named. Wrong again. If “they” ban something, it’s probably for a good reason. Your idea that if they can ban drugs or alcohol then they can ban pencils, etc. is pedantic nonsense.
RBG
#69 RGB
Usually when ‘they’ ban something or not, it’s because some corporate or religious interest wants it banned (or not). Rarely is it a sane or altruistic reason.
#64 Uncle Dave
“#59: You know who would be complaining the loudest if there were a reduction in police — donut shops.”
This will be (partially?) offset by the increased number of customers with the munchies. 🙂
69,
“Wrong again. If “they” ban something, it’s probably for a good reason.”
Really? Did alcohol prohibition have a “good reason” too?
Alcohol abuse, alcohol addiction, alcohol-induced traffic deaths, fetal alcohol syndrome for starters. They were ahead of their time. Or is it they can only work within the priorities of their time?
Btw, I guess when decriminalization of alcohol was brought in, that did away with underworld dealers. Or not. Oh, but I’m sure that would be the case with decrim of marijuana. Or not.
RBG
It’s a gateway drug to jazz. And seriously, do want 24 hour jazz stations? Well, actually, I do – but most people don’t. Well anyway, it’s a gateway drug to something and that means it must be bad, right? Wow, have you ever looked at your hand man? I mean, woahhhhh, Like reallllly looked at your hand. It’s like, you know. Um, that thing. You know, that jazz thing we were talking about……
73,
Wow. You’re a real work of art. You must have a very large list of things that should be banned for “good reason”. ANd I think all of the ones I mentioned previously are on it.
Personal freedom and responsibility mean nothing to you I guess…
75 Named. I guess that’s why I believe in seat belt laws, though such laws end up being irrelevant to most people.
Speaking of responsibility, I suppose it is also a complete mystery to you how we relegate responsibility for our safety to men and women who make life & death decisions every day. All without your ok.
RBG
76,
“I suppose it is also a complete mystery to you how we relegate responsibility for our safety to men and women who make life & death decisions every day. All without your ok.”
Awesome straw-man!
If you drink a bottle of wine, I expect you to be responsible enough to know that driving is not a good idea. I also can expect to have no clue that you’ve drunk a bottle of wine since it’s your own damn business. Similar to pot. You’re not loading rifles with marijuana joints and shoot people in the mouth with them. You’re stuffing your own face with pot and then munchies. Again, your business.
Anyhoo, no point in continuing. Everyone has an opinion, and regarding drug laws, yours are wrong.
Oh the government will eventually legalize marijuana sales. When either the drug makers or tobacco industry can be put in charge of its growth. And the states can taxes it’s sales. Only when it’s out of private hands, will they approve of it. Just like distilling booze or brewing beer. You can’t do it privately, and sell it, without strict licensing and government approval. And of course, pay taxes on every drop you make. So you can bet that they’re looking at how to approve of marijuana, along the same lines as tobacco manufacture and sales. And the current monopoly holders aren’t about to go quietly into the night, losing sales to upstart MJ growers.
Straw man? No. Awesome example of people who make the kind of important judgements and decisions you seem to think is an impossible task.
RBG
79,
No. It’s a straw man because drugs, alcohol, chocolate, pornography and the like are personal choices made by adults.
Law enforcment is for fining, aprehending etc of people that have broken the law. They do not pro-actively monitor your every move and say “RBG, are you sure you want to have a third glass of wine? Think of your liver.” I’m sure you’d like it, since you have no capability of monitoring yourself.
Good try though. You’re obviously in law enforcement, or are the boyfriend of some guy who is…
# 62 Hugh Ripper said, “Your pathetic attempt to link marijuana ‘addiction’…”
I never said anything about addiction. Fail.
you know..aside from the usual politics
blocking decriminalization,i bet more than anything 2 prime reasons keeping it illegal are:
1) cannabis almost completly blocks any mind
control techniques, and..
2) it was found in the 70’s that the THC in smoke can shrink/inhibit and/or stop many forms of brain tumors (cancer)
the medical industry would lose billions a year
in toxic cancer therapies and surgeries, if it was known all you needed was some smoke that you could grow yourself if you wanted to, to inhibit/stop tumors.
-and well, government and consumer marketing industries would have a cow if people knew there was a relatively simple way to inhibit
the common place mind control/brainwashing of the masses that advertising and political campaigns engage in.
this might explain why my liberal, pot-smoking, non-tv watching friends are immune to the hypnotic trance of the obama
campaign.
my “straight” liberal buddies are only now
starting to complain of being mislead by his
campaign. -and only slightly.
imagine the repubs having with a new campaign
sogan:
“a toke a day keeps the lying liberal scum
away” -ha!
-s
/afterthought
-lol… could explain why Adam so clearly
see’s the conspiracy and corruption in government and many other things, while John C. is only now begrudgingly starting to agree
with him on many fronts.
-s