Why Marijuana Should Not Be Decriminalized Right Now

Of course people want to get high! Aside from medicinal uses, what else are you going to do with weed? Oh, people also get high on alcohol which kills hundreds of thousands every year. Why aren't you getting on your moral high horse over that, rather than marijuana which hasn't, to my knowledge, killed anyone? http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_weed_related_deaths_are_there_each_year

 

There is the possibility of addiction resulting from prolonged marijuana use. However, addiction rates are low. Only 9 percent of users typically become addicted. Nevertheless, with greater use resulting from unbridled decriminalization/legalization, this number would certainly increase.

Source: http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

With this in mind, I favor decriminalization, but would like to see regulations imposed for quality control, dealer/supplier standards, an appropriate criminalization threshold for possession based upon negative externalities posed to individual adults, etc.

 

Which in itself isn't really a problem. Pathologically marijuana smoke in non-carcinogenic, and addiction to it is no more physiologically damaging than an addiction to video games.

 

Perhaps, but that does not mean we should not ensure that addiction rates decrease while the freedom to smoke marijuana is liberalized. Regulation can guarantee that this happens.

 

This is from your article:

Long-term marijuana abuse can lead to addiction; that is, compulsive drug seeking and abuse despite the known harmful effects upon functioning in the context of family, school, work, and recreational activities. Estimates from research suggest that about 9 percent of users become addicted to marijuana; this number increases among those who start young (to about 17 percent) and among daily users (25-50 percent).

Long-term marijuana abusers trying to quit report withdrawal symptoms including: irritability, sleeplessness, decreased appetite, anxiety, and drug craving, all of which can make it difficult to remain abstinent. These symptoms begin within about 1 day following abstinence, peak at 2-3 days, and subside within 1 or 2 weeks following drug cessation.3

What the NHI refers to as 'addiction' for marijuana is called 'abuse' by the CDC when it comes to alcohol

What is the difference between alcoholism and alcohol abuse?
Alcohol abuse4 is a pattern of drinking that results in harm to one’s health, interpersonal relationships, or ability to work. Manifestations of alcohol abuse include the following:

•Failure to fulfill major responsibilities at work, school, or home.
•Drinking in dangerous situations, such as drinking while driving or operating machinery.
•Legal problems related to alcohol, such as being arrested for drinking while driving or for physically hurting someone while drunk.
•Continued drinking despite ongoing relationship problems that are caused or worsened by drinking.
•Long-term alcohol abuse can turn into alcohol dependence.
Dependency on alcohol, also known as alcohol addiction and alcoholism4, is a chronic disease. The signs and symptoms of alcohol dependence include—

•A strong craving for alcohol.
•Continued use despite repeated physical, psychological, or interpersonal problems.
•The inability to limit drinking.

And what are the withdrawel symptoms for alcohol addicts?
Share on twitterBookmark & SharePrinter-friendly versionAlcohol withdrawal refers to symptoms that may occur when a person who has been drinking too much alcohol every day suddenly stops drinking alcohol.

CausesAlcohol withdrawal occurs most often in adults, but it may occur in teenagers or children.

The more you drink every day, the more likely you are to develop alcohol withdrawal symptoms when you stop drinking.

You may have more severe withdrawal symptoms if you have certain other medical problems.

SymptomsAlcohol withdrawal symptoms usually occur within 5 - 10 hours after the last drink, but can occur days later. Symptoms get worse in 48 - 72 hours, and may persist for weeks.

Common symptoms include:

•Anxiety or nervousness
•Depression
•Not thinking clearly
•Fatigue
•Irritability
•Jumpiness or shakiness
•Mood swings
•Nightmares
Other symptoms may include:

•Clammy skin
•Enlarged (dilated) pupils
•Headache
•Insomnia (sleeping difficulty)
•Loss of appetite
•Nausea and vomiting
•Pallor
•Rapid heart rate
•Sweating
•Tremor of the hands or other body parts
A severe form of alcohol withdrawal called delirium tremens can cause:

•Agitation
•Severe confusion
•Seeing or feeling things that aren't there (hallucinations)
•Fever
•Seizures

 

Fail your (*)(*)(*)(*)ing self. You say I know nothing about economics and yet you cite quarterly growth rates as if to obfuscate the bigger picture. Our growth rate is around 1.5% and won't change for 4 more years because our economy has a monkey on it's back (yes I said monkey). But our normal 5.5%-6% annual growth has been the powerhouse of GDP's around the world. Having an unacceptably high unemployment rate (because of the monkey) is roughly comparable to other nations with similar abysmal growth rates because of stupid labor laws, lower retirment age, and lower workforce participation. (I'm thinking of France) One thing for sure that can be said is that our GDP will never recover to former glory if we become a pothead nation. Potheads are inherently lazy, want to get off work as soon as possible so they can get high, and prioritize the weed above productivity. In adaptation to the well used cliche, they live to smoke weed, they don't smoke weed to live.

 

I don't see how legalizing or decriminalizing pot would lead to higher pot usage. It was decriminalized in Portugal with virtually no change in usage.

In short, legal or illegal, some people will use it, while others won't.

Another thing to consider is that many people (including myself) wouldn't use it even if it's legalized, because we can still be drug tested for it. Legalization has no bearing on whether employers will choose to continue testing for it or not.

 

I showed 2012 2nd GDP growth and you countered with 2006 GDP. Apples and oranges. Most importantly of all- you were the one who made the claim that GDP growth would be stifled by pot use- and the GDP numbers don't show that at all.

If by Pothead you mean the equivelent of alcoholics- sure- if our nation became a nation of people who were all alcoholics or all 'potheads' then you might have a point.

Your Puritan upbringing just can't handle the idea of allowing people to make choices and choose to use an intoxicant- just like you cannot envision 'those people' being able to use marijuana responsibly.

When I was in college- oh so many years ago- about 50% of the people I went to school with smoked weed. There is simply no relationship between who smoked weed then- and who is 'successful' now.

Your claims are just Puritan morality run awry and not born out by the facts.

 

That's not even remotely true. Legalizing anything increases its usage because the majority of people who hold themselves constrained to the law (law abiding citizens) won't even consider smoking weed simply because it's illegal. This same thing occurred during Prohibition, in spite of the unfounded and illogical claims of the Pothead Left. Alcohol consumption dropped dramatically simply because it was against the law and more people than not are repelled by anything that even hints of the illicit. When you make something legal, readily available, and bearing upon the mainstream norm, you increase its usage, particularly among those who hold as a high priority fidelity to law and order.

 

That's not even remotely true. Legalizing anything increases its usage because the majority of people who hold themselves constrained to the law (law abiding citizens) won't even consider smoking weed simply because it's illegal. This same thing occurred during Prohibition, in spite of the unfounded and illogical claims of the Pothead Left. Alcohol consumption dropped dramatically simply because it was against the law and more people than not are repelled by anything that even hints of the illicit. When you make something legal, readily available, and bearing upon the mainstream norm, you increase its usage, particularly among those who hold as a high priority fidelity to law and order.

 

Puritan roots? You don't even know me or my roots. If anything my "roots" are savagery. Being American Indian save 1/16th white from my maternal great grandmother, I hardly qualify as being a descendent of the pure white Puritans who landed on Virginia Beach. And my father is fully Blackfoot Indian. Oh, yes, and I'm not Protestant, I'm Catholic, since you don't seem to know about these things. Puritans come from the Protestant tradition.

 

Lets go over this again:
Lifetime usage of marijuana- the U.S.- 40.6% (ages 12 and up)
Lifetime usage of marijuana- the Netherlands- 22.6% (ages 15-64)

Marijuana is decriminalized to the point it is openly sold- and largely unregulated in Netherlands.

If legalizing something leads to higher usage- why is the Netherlands lifetime usage lower than the U.S.?

If 40% of the U.S. have smoked pot....the laws aren't exactly a huge deterrant.

But where your argument fails is to show that even if there were to be an increase in usage- that there would be an increase in harm.

Given our example of the Prohibition- repeal would reduce the cost and harm overall to society.

 

Whether your historical and genetic roots are Puritan- your arguments are direct descendents of the Puritan mindthink. Whether you realize it or not, your arguments are the same irrational arguments of Puritans who eschew data for an irrational plea to save people from themselves.

The facts show that 'saving' people from themselves hurts more people than it helps.

 

People can cite all the statistics and examples they want. Bottom line: The war on drugs is a war on liberty. Think you live in a free country? Think again. America is a myth...

 

I've bookmarked your post. Someday it will come in handy when you and I have a discussion.

 

Heh- I am sure it will come back to haunt me.....

Hey- I will admit inconsistancies- motorcycle helmets and seat belt laws.

 

Let's keep the conversation simple. I don't know what the conditions are in the Netherlands and I care even less. I'm talking about this country. I ran across somebody here in this forum who said that he might try pot if it was legal, but it isn't. I told him that according to the Pothead Left, he doesn't exist, nor the millions like him who have the same story. The myth of the Pothead Left is that everyone who wants to smoke dope will smoke dope, legal or not; that there isn't a significant part of the population that doesn't do drugs of any sort simply because it's illegal. You people live in a pipe dream and you think your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) statistics about foreign countries can change reality and logic. If pot was legalized, millions more would use because the last constraint to doing so had been removed. That's invincible Vulcan logic, the kind we all here in Realville use everyday.

 

What constraints, anybody can buy it at any time. In fact if you're looking the first place I would go is your nearest public highschool. Shouldn't take long to find the pot heads skipping school and smoking in the park.

As for invincible Vulcan logic, how is it logical to ignore relevant statistics? Spock didn't come to logical conclusions by ignoring information that didn't fit his conclusion.

 

Really I'd say this post, like every post I've seen on this subject, shows once again that the only reason marijuana is illegal is because it is illegal. It was started on lies (like it will make you a violent killer) and racism (ban it because it will make minorities rape white girls). The fight against legalization continues along the same lines of lies and deliberate ignorance. The fact that 2/5ths of the citizens of the worlds superpower have smoked and we're still the dominate nation should be an indication that it's not a big deal, well that and all the other facts out there indicating that weed is really not an issue. It's just going to take more time for the prohibition to end, and sadly that prohibition will continue to cost lives, money, and time.

 

It's even simpler than that. I'll type this real slow so you authoritarians can understand. Every individual has a perfect right to smoke dope. Every individual has a perfect right to not smoke dope. No individual has a right to force any other individual to smoke or not smoke dope. Get it? (hint, it's called Natural Rights, remember the the Declaration of Independence?)

BTW, I'm a republican. A law and order republican. The constitution is the law, and order will be established when the government finally obeys it. Where in the law does it say the federal government can outlaw or restrict drugs?

 

This is where enumerated powers doesn't mean much to the people that usually are hammering that perspective. Our increasingly intrusive govt only seems to bother the small govt folks in those areas they have cherry picked as their favorites.

 

The use of marijuana becomes an addiction based upon the characteristic 'compulsive drug seeking'. Alcohol addiction has similar characteristics, but is not the same, and to contrast such with complications from marijuana use is a false equivalency.

 

Why do you do this?

Seriously why?

I say that yes there probably would be more users, but the overall harm to society to would go down.

You say that I and anyone who supports ending Marijuana Prohibition doesn't believe anyone else would try marijuana.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or do you just decide to misrepresent what I say?

For the dozenth time- I will say it again- the example of Prohibition shows that even if more individuals try and use marijuana, that the cost to society will be reduced- that Prohibition causes more harm than it prevents.

Individuals may chose to use marijuana- but that would be their choice. Society as a whole would pay less, and fewer individuals would be harmed.

 

Or to put it another way- marijuana use can become compulsive- like gambling or sex- but it isnt' physically addictive like cigarettes or alcohol.

 

Of course marijuana is not physiologically addictive. However, it may be psychologically addictive.