Should Marijuana Be Legal?

[sharkman]

All these new businesses will open claiming 'Try our stuff, we have over 20 years experience with the finest herbs'. But you just opened yesterday!?!??

Yeah, there's so many flaws in the logic here it's funny.

They compare it to the legalization of liquor, but ignore the many results of that move, and then assume that the legalization of pot will not have one single down side. What else can you call devotion like that but fanboy devotion?

In fact, I dare any of you to name some possible outcomes that would be considered negatives.

Edited September 16, 2013 by sharkman

[jacee]

Yeah, there's so many flaws in the logic here it's funny.

They compare it to the legalization of liquor, but ignore the many results of that move, and then assume that the legalization of pot will not have one single down side.

Enlighten us: What are the downsides to legal alcohol vs illegal manufacture, distribution and consumption?

What else can you call devotion like that but fanboy devotion?

It's called common sense.

Edited September 16, 2013 by jacee

[On Guard for Thee]

Yeah, there's so many flaws in the logic here it's funny.

They compare it to the legalization of liquor, but ignore the many results of that move, and then assume that the legalization of pot will not have one single down side. What else can you call devotion like that but fanboy devotion?

In fact, I dare any of you to name some possible outcomes that would be considered negatives.

DRE summed it very well. Let me just add a comment from the "ground" level. I don't smoke a lot of pot, but if I wanted a joint right now, I'd have one in about 5 minutes. And I wouldn't need to go to Mexican drug cartels, I'd phone one or the other of a number of friends that could range from a tradesman, a lawyer, a doctor or a commercial pilot. I'm not sure where they get it but I'd venture a guess if it was legal they'd just grow their own or quite happily buy it from the government. No matter what the rednecks think, or try to do, it's still going to take me about 5 minutes. When you add up what we would make in tax from legal sales. and save in not locking up people who are no more criminals than I am when I open a beer, we may be able to address problems like having a native guy sitting in a hospital waiting room in WPG for 34 hours before he dies.

[dre]

Yeah, there's so many flaws in the logic here it's funny.

They compare it to the legalization of liquor, but ignore the many results of that move, and then assume that the legalization of pot will not have one single down side. What else can you call devotion like that but fanboy devotion?

In fact, I dare any of you to name some possible outcomes that would be considered negatives.

Theres a lot of negative consequences to drug use. Its not that legalization doesnt have a single downside, its that criminalization has not had a single upside for anyone except for criminals and trial lawyers. Its cost a lot but achieved absolutely nothing... the stuff is easier to get and cheaper than ever before.

Basically I think with legalization you will see about the same usage rates, but much less of a black market, and way less wasted money.

Theres a number of different alternatives to criminalization as well... I dont know which one would work best...

Thats is why I propose THIS... The federal government should just stop enforcing it and allow provinces or even cities and municipalities to have their own policies... Then a bunch of different approaches will get tried and we can collect meaningful metrics on which ones work best, from medical, social AND economic standpoints.

Some jurrisdictions would keep it illegal.

Some might just stop enforcing posession laws.

Some might partially legalize it (government controlled distribution).

Some might completely normally the industry and tax it.

Some might be take the money wasted on criminalization and divert it to drug treatment programs.

And so on...

Reasonable minds can disagree on what the best approach is, but theres no rational argument to be made for the status quo. It is an obective failure by every possible measure.

Since you asked though... Heres my best shot at coming up with some negative effects.

1. A huge industry has sprung up around prohibition. Everything from prison guards, to judges, to police, to trial lawyers. I have a close friend thats a trial lawyer and he estimates pot litigation accounts for almost a third of his workload. A lot of these people will have to find other work, and this may cause short term damage to the economy.

2. While the US is definately ahead of us on this issue now - especially some states - the federal government has not been willing to let it go... Its possible that the US might tighten up things at the border if we were to do this, causing damage to both our economies, and its even possible they might retaliate, or make a bunch of threats etc. At the very least there could be some wrinkles in our relationship with their Federal Government.

Edited September 16, 2013 by dre

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't care if people want to smoke it but I do care about the increase in health care that would probably happen in the future by more people getting hooked on it and getting the same lung diseases as tobacco. There also, the fact that when one compares it to booze and having too many, get behind a wheel and kill yourself or others. Perhaps if it did become legal, all smokers of it, would give up their healthcare or pay for your own treatments when cancer takes over.

You don't care if people want to smoke it. you just want to throw them in jail if they do.

If it's costs you want to discuss. rather than equal application of the law, then go do some research and you will see that argument gets completely blown away as well.

[sharkman]

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof. Unemployment will shrink, divorce, suicide and murder rates will go down, as well as car accidents. More kids will graduate high school and go to college, and the Grizzly bear population will come back from the brink.

You people should listen to yourselves, you're so gung-ho about it you can't see anything but roses and can't be reasoned with. It's a good thing a government has to weigh the costs to society as well, and since Harper has some integrity he doesn't make decisions according to how many votes it might cost him.

Except for Dre, at least you can look at the thing critically.

Edited September 16, 2013 by sharkman

[Black Dog]

You are a fanboy for pot, I get that, but if you can't reason with objective thinking then your opinions are not worth considering. Let's say you make, after expenses, 1 million a year growing and selling pot illegally of course. You have a network of people under you growing, processing and selling your product for you. You have contacts in the States whom you deal with as well selling your pot. Alberta too, you're doing quite well.

So with the stroke of a pen, pot is made legal overnight. Now it's legal for you to sell the stuff. But you, with your network under you and contacts across the Northwest are going to suddenly abandon all that and sell only to government approved suppliers, whatever the hell that is. All of the present growers of pot are simply going to either sell only to the government or go out of business. Not one single operation will continue to sell on the black market where the profits are higher and they have established customers who wouldn't have to pay taxes. The leap of logic there is stunning.

The thing about selling stuff on the black market is you need people who want to buy on the black market. Why would anyone want to buy black market weed when they can just buy it openly? Maybe if there's a significant price difference, but then, the black market sellers would have to cut prices to compete and thus cut into their profits.

[On Guard for Thee]

As I pointed out above, no matter what Harper does, pot smokers will get pot. As someone else said here earlier, there are of course downsides to smoking anything, or drinking. But in order to be fair, you can't allow people to get drunk with governments good blessing, and then throw the pot smokers in jail. Legalize one, or criminalize the other.

And by the way I heard Harper answer a question from Peter Mansbridge to the tune of "when you buy that marijuana cigarette you aren't buying it from your neighbor, you are buying it from the Mexican drug cartels," That's correct Stevie boy, and under your guidance that's the way it will stay. He does nothing that isn't intended to get votes. Take a look at his history.

[Black Dog]

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof. Unemployment will shrink, divorce, suicide and murder rates will go down, as well as car accidents. More kids will graduate high school and go to college, and the Grizzly bear population will come back from the brink.

You people should listen to yourselves, you're so gung-ho about it you can't see anything but roses and can't be reasoned with. It's a good thing a government has to weigh the costs to society as well, and since Harper has some integrity he doesn't make decisions according to how many votes it might cost him.

Except for Dre, at least you can look at the thing critically.

Good grief.

i don't see anyone saying any of those things, so layoff the strawman. As far as I'm concerned, the positives will outweigh the negatives simply because the negatives already exist. In terms of availability, marijuana is as close to being a de facto legal substance in this country as it's possible to get. Strip away the problems the illegality of the substance creates, you're left with a lot more upsides. Let me repeat that: most of the social problems of marijuana are consequences of prohibition, not the drug itself.

[BubberMiley]

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof. Unemployment will shrink, divorce, suicide and murder rates will go down, as well as car accidents. More kids will graduate high school and go to college, and the Grizzly bear population will come back from the brink.

You people should listen to yourselves, you're so gung-ho about it you can't see anything but roses and can't be reasoned with.

That's the best argument that you could come up with against legalization---that it won't solve all our problems? You keep saying proponents of legalization can't be reasoned with and you could never change our minds, but you're never going to change anyone's mind when don't even bother coming up with a reasonable argument.

[guyser]

Sharkman, I and others get that you are no fan of legalizing pot. Its your opinion and you are welcome to it.

However, I am assuming you are being flippant in the quoted post below. But funny enough, you actually do hit the nail on the head, although in a reverse fashion.

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof. Unemployment will shrink, divorce, suicide and murder rates will go down, as well as car accidents. More kids will graduate high school and go to college, and the Grizzly bear population will come back from the brink.

Murder rates did drop, significantly when prohibition was repealed. The homicide rate during prohibition steadily increased but when repealed, it dropped off the very next year.

Alcohol expenditures went up 50% once booze was illegal. Once repealed, it dropped down to pre Pro levels. Ask yourself why?

THe Govt of the USA lost $11Billion in revenue, and had to pony up $300Million to police the new law.Income tax was found to be the only continuous source of funding....sometheing that has never reverted back.It used to be booze provided most of the tax they needed.

Tainted liquor killed thousands previously not a concern with legal booze.

Jails swelled, black market profits swelled, Al Capone made a fortune.

You people should listen to yourselves, you're so gung-ho about it you can't see anything but roses and can't be reasoned with. It's a good thing a government has to weigh the costs to society as well, and since Harper has some integrity he doesn't make decisions according to how many votes it might cost him.

Some of us have not only l;istened, but taken the time to read up and find out the truth of prohibition and its cost both societal and governmental.

No one thought the idea of prohibition was any good once repealed.

Perhaps it is you that should listen, rather should read and investigate .

THere are always thorns with roses , but they pale in comparison to the rose itslef.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Guyser2

[jacee]

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof. Unemployment will shrink, divorce, suicide and murder rates will go down, as well as car accidents. More kids will graduate high school and go to college, and the Grizzly bear population will come back from the brink.

You people should listen to yourselves, you're so gung-ho about it you can't see anything but roses and can't be reasoned with.

Your post doesn't contain any reasoning.

It's a good thing a government has to weigh the costs to society as well, and since Harper has some integrity he doesn't make decisions according to how many votes it might cost him.

I guess you didn't hear that Harper's seriously considering making pot possession a ticket - misdemeanour - instead of a criminal charge as it is now. He was really quick to make that announcement to try to gain back votes he was losing to Justin.

http://o.canada.com/2013/08/29/justin-trudeaus-focus-on-pot-over-economy-proof-of-poor-judgment-prime-minister/

However, at the same time the prime minister was chastising the Liberal leader for his recent comments on marijuana, he said the government would look at a proposal by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to issue tickets for pot possession in small quantities, instead of pressing criminal charges a suggestion previously shot down by Justice Minister Peter MacKay.

Harper said he didnt believe the chiefs made their proposal because they dont believe in the current marijuana laws.

On the contrary, they believe this option is a better approach in terms of enforcement of the law, the prime minister said.

"The government is certainly looking at their proposal very carefully.

[sharkman]

Sharkman, I and others get that you are no fan of legalizing pot. Its your opinion and you are welcome to it.

However, I am assuming you are being flippant in the quoted post below. But funny enough, you actually do hit the nail on the head, although in a reverse fashion.

Murder rates did drop, significantly when prohibition was repealed. The homicide rate during prohibition steadily increased but when repealed, it dropped off the very next year.

Alcohol expenditures went up 50% once booze was illegal. Once repealed, it dropped down to pre Pro levels. Ask yourself why?

THe Govt of the USA lost $11Billion in revenue, and had to pony up $300Million to police the new law.Income tax was found to be the only continuous source of funding....sometheing that has never reverted back.It used to be booze provided most of the tax they needed.

Tainted liquor killed thousands previously not a concern with legal booze.

Jails swelled, black market profits swelled, Al Capone made a fortune.

Some of us have not only l;istened, but taken the time to read up and find out the truth of prohibition and its cost both societal and governmental.

No one thought the idea of prohibition was any good once repealed.

Perhaps it is you that should listen, rather should read and investigate .

THere are always thorns with roses , but they pale in comparison to the rose itslef.

That was beautiful Guyser, and it proves my point. You pro people can't see a single thing wrong with legalizing pot, and can't see the addiction, health and mental issues, which are some of the reasons its been kept illegal. Legalizing pot, making it easier to buy(which is what it did to liquor eventually) is only going to make these problems worse. And underage smoking of pot will grow. This is aside of all of the industry/black market problems that will happen.

[sharkman]

With due respect I think you need to do some research. Your comments above are subjective opinions not based on scientific fact and misrepresent what actual research has been done.

For example:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/5A648B4BA51D4891CA25703400033ED6/%24File/mono44.pdf

http://www.camh.ca/en/hospital/health_information/a_z_mental_health_and_addiction_information/marijuana/Pages/cannabis_dyk.aspx

Now I doubt anything I say will change your opinion-the one thing surveys do show is that pot smokers are surprisingly uninterested in any opinion but their own. That is no different than people who smoke tobacco or drink alcohol. People who want to smoke could care less what anyone thinks.

The fact is t o portray it as a harmless drug is nonsensical. We do not know the long term effects. More to the point it effects each person differently.

For people who self medicate because they have psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia, depression, adhd, bi-polar disorder, ocd, it can or can not help depending on the individual.

What we do know is that with some people who use it all the time, they do become dependent on it and when they withdraw suddenly they have acute psychotic manifestations including hallucinations, passing out, seizures, convulsions, overwhelming feelings of suicide and depression, anxiety, and anger.

It slows down reflexes no different then alcohol and so it is a lethal mix when driving a car or operating any machinery.

Long term it can damage the retina and night vision no different than tobacco.

Like tobacco cannabis smoke does in fact contain carcinogens. Anything that burns will leave a black tar substance on the lungs that may lead to lung cancer or throat cancer.

Of course it can cause lung and respiratory illnesses.

Some studies indicate it leads to sterility in men, increases in miscarriages in women and it most definitely would have adverse effects when women are pregnant and smoke it.

Studies also show that if men smoke it long term their hormones change and they can look forward to large breasts. So be my guest.

Do not get me wrong. My generation smoked it as did I so we are in no position to be two faced about it but pretending its harmless is bull. Its not. No smoke you inhale is harmless. No drug we take is absent of negative side effects.

That said, of course it is valuable as a medicine to treat certain kinds of epilepsy, glaucoma, nausea from chemotherapy, drug resistant depression, certain kinds of ocd or some studies show some mild tics associated with Tourette's syndrome and it is an alternative as chronic back pain medication for those who can not tolerate drugs so of course using it as a medicine is important.

All I am saying is if it is legalized there are consequences. The rate of car accidents will go up.

No one here cares about the many consequences of pot use. Now I don't agree with Rue on every point he made, but at the end of the day, it's harmful, addictive and slows one's reflexes for driving or working in dangerous situations.

[guyser]

That was beautiful Guyser, and it proves my point.

For you to say it proves my point means you are not being honest nor open minded about this.

Of course there is always a downside, but if said downside is minimal, then dont spend time on it.

You pro people can't see a single thing wrong with legalizing pot, and can't see the addiction, health and mental issues, which are some of the reasons its been kept illegal. Legalizing pot, making it easier to buy(which is what it did to liquor eventually) is only going to make these problems worse. And underage smoking of pot will grow. This is aside of all of the industry/black market problems that will happen.

Addiction ? Pot is not addictive , although some studies show a mental addiction can occur.

Health and mental issues will remain of course, but less severe than anything booze and smokes costs us. That aside, the money gleaned from enforcement will more than offset any costs. It would wind up a net gain for society

Legalizing pot should have the reverse effect than you espouse. Afterall, alcohol soared in both price and consumption once prohibited, and reversed itself down once repealed. I would be interested to see your reply to that !

As for young smokers, a better way to control that is to control the sale and distribution. We do it for alcohol and it works relatively well, why not with pot?

As for the black market problems, I am afraid you have no leg to stand on with that comment. The black market disappears once the illegal raketeering part of it dries up. There will be no disearnable profit to be made, no money, no market.

The market exists today due to the illegality of the product, not the product itself.

[Black Dog]

That was beautiful Guyser, and it proves my point. You pro people can't see a single thing wrong with legalizing pot, and can't see the addiction, health and mental issues, which are some of the reasons its been kept illegal. Legalizing pot, making it easier to buy(which is what it did to liquor eventually) is only going to make these problems worse. And underage smoking of pot will grow. This is aside of all of the industry/black market problems that will happen.

Yeah, you're gonna need to back those statements up. I'm not convinced a significant number of people who don't already smoke pot will take it up as a result of it becoming legal. And gutting the black market for the product and regulating its sale and distribution will make it more, not less, difficult for kids to get.

No one here cares about the many consequences of pot use. Now I don't agree with Rue on every point he made, but at the end of the day, it's harmful, addictive and slows one's reflexes for driving or working in dangerous situations.

I trust you are also in favour of re-instituting alcohol prohibition? If not, why not? it is a far more harmful and more widely available than marijuana or most hard drugs.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Black Dog

[BubberMiley]

I know very well someone who has consumed weed every day for 30 years. He is in peak health, has no negative side effects, and is a productive member of society. He is "mentally" addicted in that it gives pleasure and he seeks that pleasure because he enjoys it. But when he has abstained for an extended period of time (usually because of the inability to access it while out of country), he has experienced absolutely no withdrawal symptoms or negative physical or emotional effects.

So you don't know of what you speak and no amount of reasoning will ever change your mind.

[sharkman]

I know very well someone who has consumed weed every day for 30 years. He is in peak health, has no negative side effects, and is a productive member of society. He is "mentally" addicted in that it gives pleasure and he seeks that pleasure because he enjoys it. But when he has abstained for an extended period of time (usually because of the inability to access it while out of country), he has experienced absolutely no withdrawal symptoms or negative physical or emotional effects.

So you don't know of what you speak and no amount of reasoning will ever change your mind.

And this is the kind of science that the pot fans rely on.

[jacee]

You pro people can't see a single thing wrong with legalizing pot, and can't see the addiction, health and mental issues, which are some of the reasons its been kept illegal.

Criminalizing pot doesn't prevent those problems. It just criminalizes harmless people.

Legalizing pot, making it easier to buy(which is what it did to liquor eventually) is only going to make these problems worse.

And underage smoking of pot will grow. This is aside of all of the industry/black market problems that will happen.

Please clarify, and provide links to support your claims.

I get that you oppose legalizing pot, and you are entitled to that personal opinion.

However, you are attempting to support your opinion with claims for which you provide no evidence, claims that have been refuted by dre and others with reference to evidence.

Edited September 16, 2013 by jacee

[jacee]

And this is the kind of science that the pot fans rely on.

And what is the science that supports your opinion?

[cybercoma]

since Harper has some integrity he doesn't make decisions according to how many votes it might cost him.

The only good thing about Stephen Harper is that you're completely wrong about this. He's one of the most pragmatic politicians this country has ever had. His decisions and actions are almost exclusively based on how many votes he can get.

[jacee]

... at the end of the day, it's harmful,

addictive and slows one's reflexes for driving or working in dangerous situations.

Just like booze, but less addictive.

Most people don't drink or smoke pot in dangerous circumstances, on the job or while driving.

Nobody's saying people should smoke or drink all the time. That is harmful.

Driving under the influence is illegal.

You have no valid claims here.

[sharkman]

Just like booze, but less addictive.

Most people don't drink or smoke pot in dangerous circumstances, on the job or while driving.

Nobody's saying people should smoke or drink all the time. That is harmful.

Driving under the influence is illegal.

You have no valid claims here.

Nothing but more non-science factoids when there is so much junk science within easy reach?

[jacee]

Yeah, as soon as they legalize it, our GDP will skyrocket as production and efficiency go through the roof.

Pot industry ranks second in GDP contribution

I guess you're right!

[BubberMiley]

For every one "scientific" study you can cherry-pick that indicates weed might be as harmful as transport-fats or city drinking water, I can find 10 that say the opposite. Even the u.s. Surgeon General has conceded that the dangers are overblown and deliberately misleading. But of course, reason isn't going to change your mind.