Smoking Pot.

[Wirey]

Exactly!



It did not work for tobacco, nor for alcohol. Why would it be any different for hemp?

Actually, it worked for both tobacco and alcohol. Once Prohibition ended, the whole gangster-Chicago lifestyle went in the toilet until the US outlawed weed and gave them a new commodity to sell. Tobacco regulation has been a financial windfall for governments, and illegal tobacco sales are almost non-existent and rarely end with murdered people. There's just no money in it.

 

[Wirey]

Exactly!



It did not work for tobacco, nor for alcohol. Why would it be any different for hemp?

Actually, it worked for both tobacco and alcohol. Once Prohibition ended, the whole gangster-Chicago lifestyle went in the toilet until the US outlawed weed and gave them a new commodity to sell. Tobacco regulation has been a financial windfall for governments, and illegal tobacco sales are almost non-existent and rarely end with murdered people. There's just no money in it.

 

[Wirey]

Ooops. Don't know how I did that.

 

[LuisDantas]

Actually, it worked for both tobacco and alcohol. Once Prohibition ended, the whole gangster-Chicago lifestyle went in the toilet until the US outlawed weed and gave them a new commodity to sell. Tobacco regulation has been a financial windfall for governments, and illegal tobacco sales are almost non-existent and rarely end with murdered people. There's just no money in it.

We will have to agree to disagree on what constitutes success when it comes to recreational drug policy, apparently.

 

[Marisa]

I don't find the differences noteworthy, personally. Alcohol, even when undeniably abused, is very much socially accepted and just barely restricted by law. It might as well be fully unrestricted for all the practical difference it makes.

You would only be correct if speaking of moderation of use. Another word for this might be recreational. There is a HUGE social stigma against being an alcoholic, and there exist a plethora of programs designed to help people deal with an addiction once developed. So no, it's not socially acceptable to be an alcoholic.

Which is still such a poor prospect when compared to boycott and social rejection...

And there's the crux of the matter. Unilateral eradication is an unrealistic expectation and probably actively inhibits the creation of solutions to much of the problems created by drug use/abuse. Not every drug user is a drug abuser, just as not every drinker is an alcoholic. We understand with the latter, and have historical record to back it up, that attempting to legislatively eradicate a point of morality has disastrous effects on society. Expecting that a state of perfection (which does not exist in nature) is the only acceptable outcome has the effect of denying the opportunity to create efforts that will actually impact the problem components of the issue (i.e. addiction). The US spends millions of dollars annually attempting to eliminate drug users. Those monies would arguably be far better spent in creating rehab programs for the percentage of drug abusers, rather than targeting all users.

 

[Marisa]

It did not work for tobacco, nor for alcohol. Why would it be any different for hemp?

Did you read the article I posted above, which examines the impact that legalization in the US is already having on cartels?

 

[Marisa]

We will have to agree to disagree on what constitutes success when it comes to recreational drug policy, apparently.

As with most points of morality, it's probably best if you decide what's right for you and allow other people the same choice.

 

[philbo]

Tobacco regulation has been a financial windfall for governments, and illegal tobacco sales are almost non-existent and rarely end with murdered people. There's just no money in it.

To be fair, there is a fairly significant contraband tobacco/alcohol trade, especially across borders where tariffs vary significantly. However, when compared to the illegal activity associated with banned drugs, it's almost wholesome and very small-scale.

I'm not a recreational drug user myself - yes, I tried pot when I was younger, and quite enjoyed it but not enough to make the effort when it wasn't convenient (hold on a sec, wasn't it supposed to be a gateway drug so by now I should be hooked on crack or heroin? Yeah, right), but there are so many things which cause more death and harm than many illegal drugs do (see Prof. Nutt's essay on Equasy) it seems arbitrary and somewhat bizarre to ban some things and not others. Notwithstanding which, the simple fact of a ban causes far more harm than the drugs themselves.

 

[Marisa]

Focusing on eradicating all drugs from society rather than the percentage that actually presents a problem (abusers) is futile. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. In that perspective, the US war on drugs has been, and will continue to be, an abysmal failure. Decriminalization legalization will free up resources to focus on the harmful element.

 

[Wirey]

We will have to agree to disagree on what constitutes success when it comes to recreational drug policy, apparently.

I think we're discussing two different things. You seem to be discussing making drugs socially unacceptable, while I'm talking about the effects drugs have on society from a legal/illegal perspective.

 

[Marisa]

I think we're discussing two different things. You seem to be discussing making drugs socially unacceptable, while I'm talking about the effects drugs have on society form a legal/illegal perspective.

I don't think that's possible. Different people have different senses of morality. But we can all agree that drub abuse is harmful to society, and that should be our goal.

 

[Wirey]

I don't think that's possible. Different people have different senses of morality. But we can all agree that drub abuse is harmful to society, and that should be our goal.

I'd agree with that. There will always be people who just want to escape.

 

[jonathan180iq]

There's really no argument at all against marijuana being legal if we allow cigarettes and alcohol to be commonplace. There's just no two ways about it...

Weed's the best thing ever for detoxing after a stressful week. A few hits of a Friday evening and the preparation for Monday is already basically done.

Someone mentioned earlier that excess is a bad thing. That's absolutely true. And I don't see how it would be so rampant if it were legalized. There will always be potheads, just like there will always be alcoholics and chain smokers. But it simply won't be as bad once the decriminalization begins.

 

[Marisa]

I'd agree with that. There will always be people who just want to escape.

It's not even that. In the first of the video documentary I posted in a previous comment, there was an artist who smokes pot because it seems to stimulate his creativity. I wouldn't call that escapism.

There will be lots of reasons why recreational pot use should be regulated. It seems to have detrimental effects on an under developed prefrontal cortex, and thus would be considered harmful for children to consume.

 

[Aquitaine]

Exactly!

That is such a colossal order though, basically this would entail elevating all of humanity to the point where their lives are no longer crap, and ergo require no need for escapism. I'm curious - how exactly would you go about undertaking such a massive challenge?

It did not work for tobacco, nor for alcohol. Why would it be any different for hemp?

At the same time, Alcohol prohibition did not work in the United States, and it lead to the rise of powerful Mafias.

 

[jonathan180iq]

You guys are referring to escapism like it's a bad word...

Anyone here drink soda? Enjoy a cup of coffee? Prefer their tea black? Have a favorite chewing gum? Enjoy sports? Tinker on their cars in the garage? Play video games? Go to Trivia Night at the local pub? Dive headlong into academia? Jog? Read books? Blog? Watch movies? Have a favorite television show? Cook for fun? Write endless lines of dialog on the internet?

If you do, you're an escapist. What's the big deal?

 

[Levite]

So, today is International Worship a Plant Day.

Personally, I'm against the use and legalisation of Marijuana beyond regulated medical applications.

What are the thoughts of others?

I strongly favor complete legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana for both medical and recreational purposes. Pot prohibition has been a dismal and extremely expensive failure.

 

[oldbadger]

I support legalisation of all class B and C drugs...... (Marijuana etc...... but long lists of drugs)
..... and support availability of all class A drugs by prescription.

The government would gain significant tax returns.
The government would save £zillions in Police time.
The Police could do something more useful.
The Public would be subjected to less intrusion and interference by Police.

The resulting 'mass' of funds could easily buttress our National Health Service, or whatever.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I support legalisation of all class B and C drugs...... (Marijuana etc...... but long lists of drugs)
..... and support availability of all class A drugs by prescription.
The government would gain significant tax returns.
The government would save £zillions in Police time.
The Police could do something more useful.
The Public would be subjected to less intrusion and interference by Police.
The resulting 'mass' of funds could easily buttress our National Health Service, or whatever.

I agree. It puzzles me when people rant about the evil of "drugs", conveniently forgetting the terrible harm done by alcohol and tobacco. Particularly because the health and social problems caused by alcohol abuse massively outweigh the harm done by currently illegal drugs.

Is this in this UKIP manifesto?

 

[Mycroft]

conveniently forgetting the terrible harm done by alcohol and tobacco.

I haven't forgotten about those, which is why I don't drink alcohol or smoke.