[Newsbot]

Title: Pot: Why not legalize it?
Category: Political
Posted By: ridenrain
Date: 2008-07-24 07:00:31
Canadian

[Demian_164]

Legalize it. To say use and addiction will go up is pure speculation. I just turned 19 last year, and I can tell you that it is about 90394024920 times easier to buy weed on the street than it is to get alcohol when you are underage. Thats why so many young people smoke so muhc, because of how easy it is to get it, as opposed to the alternatives. The article goes further to speak about how most activists think all drugs should be legal...they should instead stick to the issue at hand. A lot of gang activity is supported by the drug trade, with marijuana making up the largest portion of that. It's been well documented now that high quality marijuana goes to the states in return for cocaine and guns. Putting marijuana in the hands of citizens legally would help to evade the need for illegal drug traffickers and seriously hurt their profits. not only that, but economically it could provide huge opportunities for business and commerce.

[Benoit]

Wake up ridenrain!

canadian-politics-f17/legalize-pot-like-cigarrettes-t63904.html

[SprCForr]

Let's try and keep this one on the rails.

Thanks.

[Benoit]

SprCForr SprCForr:

Let's try and keep this one on the rails.

Thanks.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Mustang1]

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

[G-prime]

Im so tired of this. i wish potheads would just think for two seconds about their ridiculous arguments. Pothead logic is over-simplified and annoying. It’s NOT going to happen cause its just TOO MUCH WORK, and cost TOO MUCH MONEY for little to no pay-off. Why don't we stop complaining about this and start putting energy toward something actually worthwhile

[robmik43]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

For all the court penalties currently levied, pot
is pretty well already 'decriminalized"......but...
decriminalizing something and legalizing it aren't
the same thing.

If I was to get caught not wearing a seat belt, it's not a
criminal act, but it would cost me $110 and two demerit points
each time I did. Is that ok with you and pot possession ?

I don't particularly care about the pot thing as long as
it continues to be a criminal offense to drive under its' influence.
Oh, and I'm neither a Puritan nor a neo-temperance type person,
I'd just prefer that my family and I aren't on the same road
as a driver who is wa-a-a-a-a-ay too relaxed.

[Wally_Sconce]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

big deal. the country has already gone smoke free in public places.

[Mustang1]

Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

big deal. the country has already gone smoke free in public places.

And this has what do with decriminalization? It's coming...neo-teetotaler need to get used to it.

[Mustang1]

robmik43 robmik43:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It's going to be decriminalized, whether the neo-temperance Puritans like it or not.

For all the court penalties currently levied, pot
is pretty well already 'decriminalized"......but...
decriminalizing something and legalizing it aren't
the same thing.

If I was to get caught not wearing a seat belt, it's not a
criminal act, but it would cost me $110 and two demerit points
each time I did. Is that ok with you and pot possession ?

I don't particularly care about the pot thing as long as
it continues to be a criminal offense to drive under its' influence.
Oh, and I'm neither a Puritan nor a neo-temperance type person,
I'd just prefer that my family and I aren't on the same road
as a driver who is wa-a-a-a-a-ay too relaxed.

Firstly, i'm well aware of the differences between "legalization" and "decriminalization" hence my use of the specific term. And why can't pot laws simply mirror alcohol laws - these same silly antics were pressed by prohibitionists and how'd that work out again? The only issue that needs ironing out is procurement.

Secondly, why do these neo-teetotalers always resort to argumentative fallacies? Who's supporting driving "high"? Why is this somehow linked? No one is advocating leniency on intoxicated drivers anymore than they'd support drunk drivers, drivers high on prescription drugs, overtired drivers, overstimulated drivers, etc.

[Pseudonym]

It's a drug and hippies use drugs and I hate hippies so therefore I hate people using marijuana and want to make it illegal forever.

[Zipperfish]

I don't think it is coming. Not in the near future anyways. The most opprtune time to have done it would have been in the 70s or the 90s. As alluded to by Aging Redneck, there is a strong move towards tobacco prohibition, which isn't the same as pot, but speaks to a general trend in the population.

I don't think it's the issue of the potential harm, or lack thereof, that pot presents to individuals and society that's at issue. The issue, I think, is that there is just no votes in it. Plus the Excited States of America would have a shit hemmorhage and cause no end of trouble at the borders.

Regretful, I'd say, since for me it's an issue of the freedom of individuals to live their lives how they please if they are not harming others. On the other hand, pot is probably more easily available now and cheaper than it would be if legalized. At least in BC!

[Zipperfish]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

It's a drug and hippies use drugs and I hate hippies so therefore I hate people using marijuana and want to make it illegal forever.

Staunch defender of freedom, aren't you?

[Public_Domain]