Then ask why they call it chronic?

They smile.

“A Failed Presidency: Explaining Americans to a Clueless Obama.”

http://www.drsheilaherenow.net/sorting-through-the-ashes-of-obamas-failed-presidency-what-should-obama-have-learned/

If you live in NY or California you might have some kind of drug-related ballot initiative just like the lottery or casinos you could vote for it. I know that even tho I am taking the more ‘libertarian’ view in this thread I would definitely vote against this sort of thing in my state. And I am confident these measures wouldn’t pass. But that’s fine. We need to stop making decisions for 300 million people in this 1-size-fits-all way. I have 1 congressman for my district and 2 senators for the whole state. Which is basically the way it works for everyone. Our 1 advocate at the federal level is more or less a handful of people. Let’s get back to federalism!

I don’t really see how marijuana is that much different from a night of drinking + smoking which are already legal. I would never smoke anything but I think the over-enforcement is a waste of money and I am more on the libertarian side of letting ppl do what they want to do.

If ppl want to smoke and gamble and other things that I don’t care much for but don’t impede my freedom I don’t much care. I would say let the states decide. I don’t think the govt needs to be enforcing their views of morality. I would err on the side of freedom there and like I said you can choose where you live.

If I was for anything it would be a) decriminalizing marijuana and b) letting the states figure out what they want to legalize within reason. I would not at all be for some sort of full-on federal legalization of drugs, that won’t happen anyway.

This works well bc California will be the first to jump on this sort of thing (obviously it’s already more/less legal anyway) and we can see how well it works.

In my state I know we wouldn’t be legalizing anything. In other states like California, NY maybe they legalize some things. I think it should be like gambling, etc. – let the states decide.

It’s not hypocritical bc smoking and drinking are already legal. I think weed is worse but I would never smoke anything. It is a straw-man’s argument to say you have to legalize or decriminalize everything to decriminalize weed. I think we waste a lot of resources cracking down on what is a pretty normalized drug in our society. I don’t think we have to normalize it necessarily by legalizing it, but decriminalization would save a lot of resources.

Mew

Add a little alcohol and the whole effect is changed, add a lot of alcohol and you have people blacking out.

I have known people who were everyday MJ users that finally admitted they wasted 10 years of their life, stalled by using MJ. Once they quit the whole world opened up for them. A few recovered addicts I have talked to definitely do not think MJ should be legalized, they say it was their gateway drug,

I hate to tell you folks but our youth are using MJ in alarming numbers. Just ask your high school aged kids. I know for a fact that a local chain fast food place had an undercover video surveillance installed. The manager 30 yrs old and 11 high school workers were caught using their walk in cooler to smoke MJ. As it turns out they had problems at all their branches in the area.

The offenders just moved to other fast food places. They were not prosecuted and no records of their actions are tracked or recorded to keep them from being passed on to other unsuspecting employers.

Maybe it is just becoming an acceptable practice for some.

If you are a small business owner and you do not drug test upon hiring and have random testing you really need to think about it. Especially if you hire teenagers and 20 something?s.

I can say this with some authority. Marijuana does not affect everyone the same. Some people get buzzed, some get nothing. Some people get addicted, some don’t. Some people get all paranoid and ‘so freakin man’ and some do not.

This is a very complex drug, chemically speaking, to which we do not know all the effects.

There are people who get addicted for life (my biological father was for 20+ years), there are people who use who want only to try a bigger and better high, and there are people why die under the influence.

I support the war on drugs, I just wish we could unite strongly behind that war.

What I’ve come to believe is that it’s very much an issue of cultural attitudes and education. Youth in other countries (as a generalization) are sat down, educated of the consequences, given some free reign and thus lean more towards the attitude that “Sure it’s fun, but you have to have some moderation.”

Whereas American culture still has the puritan attitudes, which is very good, but conflicts with our human nature. When we’re told “No, absolutely not!” – we do it anyway and have as much fun as possible doing it to just to spite ‘em ! Which results in binge drinking (re:Wisconsin), drunk driving and dead teenagers. We fail to establish ‘responsibility’ and ‘moderation’ as virtues and end up in a vicious cycle of negative consequences that reinforces the intolerant attitudes that reinforces the uneducated and unsafe behavior that cause the negative consequences.

What’s more you see the behavior in both liberals and conservatives too. Can’t smoke because the liberals passed a smoking ban in bars and restaurants? “We’ll smoke ourselves to death and be darn proud of it! (But you’re killing yourself!) We don’t care! Conservatives defend an anti-pot law? Barry Obama will smoke pot and be darn proud of it! He’ll even giggle and sneer about it. Long live the Choom gang. >:(

Who would you rather try to arrest, a pot smoker or a crack whacked psycho? So do the police. It’s just human nature. I would guess there’s more pot users than crack users in jail in some states. It’s the law of averages and pot has a giveaway smell and is bulkier so more easy to detect.

Keep em? coming acat? /Salute

First, there’s the law of supply and demand. The demand remains fairly stable. It’s the supply, WHICH IS INFLATED BY GOV ACTION, that regulates the price. (this is oversimplifying for the basis of argument. the real demand and supply fluctuate for various reasons and thus the price does also).

You’re solution would only lead to the gov spending money on drugs and then spending money to fight the importation of what wasn’t sold to them. Not really a workable solution.

Also criminals being criminals, they won’t trust the gov very much (sensibly so) so there will be many that don’t sell to the gov. They will sell on the street and reap the increased price. Plus the gov may reduce it’s enforcement arms thinking they’ve got the problem solved and thus allow more to infiltrate to the street.

Better to tax either the user or the seller or both. This regulates and controls, increases revenues, decreases outlays. The down side is that drugs would be more available to those underage and those who imbibe to excess will be more able to do so.

Anytime an act that some find pleasurable is outlawed, a vice is born and the price goes up and someone will step in to take advantage of that. Human nature. It’s why raising taxes too far doesn’t work (people leave or stop producing LEGALLY).

I largely feel that the wide availability + low harm of using weed (like alcohol) in moderation has led to a mini-Prohibition type atmosphere. It promotes criminal behavior such as trafficking, violence, gangs, theft, etc. and it’s costing government millions of dollars in enforcement and in the court to persecute.

Weed is way too harmless for the amount of resources that we devote to it.

Full disclosure: I’ve smoked legally (one time) in Amsterdam. Nothing beyond that. The amount of people that I know who smoke though is absolutely staggering: from hippie artists to police officers.

Shouldn’t that be at least a little disconcerting to the House/Senate?

PS: Grateful for the clips. Now I must go “tell my children” (ages 10 and 11) their having fried brains for breakfast tomorrow.