Should marijuana be legal?

[Scott_Lafrance]

You are 100% correct, back during the days I used I would prefer to get the “weaker” kind because I could buy more quantity for the same amount of money as the “stronger” stuff. Of course it’s possible to take just 1 or 2 hits, and if you have a high tolerance built up from smoking the stuff you probably wouldn’t feel as much. Possible yes, normally people smoke the stuff to feel the effects of it; I know thats why I did it.

Exactly my point; just because something is criminalized and the government pursues those people who might still be involved, it doesn’t get rid of the problem. It just drives the problem underground just like during Prohibition; in this case it drives people to drug dealers who in many cases deal with more than just Marijuana. Adding on top of that point; the DEA and government officials are aware how easy it is to grow a Marijuana plant within the confines of ones home. I personally believe they would be quite afraid of legalizing something and having a majority of the users not paying taxes on it.

Like I said earlier, its all about money.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I have some questions:

How would legalization of marijuana end and/or significantly impact the drug cartels?

The various branches of Italian organized crime control the heroin trade, for example. But they also are into various other illegal activities. Removing the heroin trade from their control would cause them to look for some other illegal trade to control. Are the drug cartels soley into marijuana?

Also, if the libertarian goal is for minimum government oversite and control, how would legalization of marijuana arrive at that goal? If it were to be taxed and regulated, would the governmnt not be involved to the same extent that it is now?

Finally, what about other drugs, cocaine, heroin etc. What would be the reasoning to keep those illegal…or should they also be legal and regulated?

How has criminalizing it solved the problem of abuse?

 

[Kc906]

I have some questions:

How would legalization of marijuana end and/or significantly impact the drug cartels?

The various branches of Italian organized crime control the heroin trade, for example. But they also are into various other illegal activities. Removing the heroin trade from their control would cause them to look for some other illegal trade to control. Are the drug cartels soley into marijuana?

Also, if the libertarian goal is for minimum government oversite and control, how would legalization of marijuana arrive at that goal? If it were to be taxed and regulated, would the governmnt not be involved to the same extent that it is now?

Finally, what about other drugs, cocaine, heroin etc. What would be the reasoning to keep those illegal…or should they also be legal and regulated?

Statistics change of course, the last time I looked somewhere around 60% of the illegal drugs that come from Mexico into the US is Marijuana. Cartels would still bring the stuff in the country, but the only way they could sell it would be to undercut the pricing that it would be sold for in stores in the states. Either way, an overwhelming majority of users would not have to go to drug dealers anymore, so you would see a fall in the use of other drugs as well.

With my Libertarian leanings, I would say the focus should be on defending our Southern border of this country which no President has successfully done. If you find a way to defend the border, you limit the traffic of illegal immigrants and drugs into this country. All industries are regulated in this country (some over-regulated,) so a legal Marijuana industry would be regulated from the get go, which is fine.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to overdose on Marijuana, it just can’t be done. However, with Alcohol, Cocaine, Heroine, among other drugs including Pharmaceutical Pills, you CAN overdose. I don’t see a valid reason why substances people put in their body that we KNOW kill people as a result of use (Alcohol, Tobacco, Heroine, Cocaine) would be legal to use while Marijuana would be illegal to use and it is by far the safest out of all of them to use.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

How has criminalizing it solved the problem of abuse?

How does your question answer mine? They were not meant to be rhetorical…

As for abuse, don’t some jurisdictions sentence convicted users to drug treatment instead of jail time?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

How does your question answer mine? They were not meant to be rhetorical…

As for abuse, don’t some jurisdictions sentence convicted users to drug treatment instead of jail time?

The recidivism rate of people who undergo “mandatory” (i.e., court-ordered) treatment either stays the same or goes up.

cad.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/01/22/0011128709348447.abstract

However, models relying on matched samples of offenders generated via propensity scores showed that SB 123 did not have a significant impact on recidivism rates relative to community corrections and actually increased recidivism rates relative to court services.

In other words, court ordered treatment resulted in an increased rate of recivism, whereas community-sponsored treatments were slightly lower recidivism rates.

 

[Publisher]

The recidivism rate of people who undergo “mandatory” (i.e., court-ordered) treatment either stays the same or goes up.

cad.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/01/22/0011128709348447.abstract

However, models relying on matched samples of offenders generated via propensity scores showed that SB 123 did not have a significant impact on recidivism rates relative to community corrections and actually increased recidivism rates relative to court services.

In other words, court ordered treatment resulted in an increased rate of recivism, whereas community-sponsored treatments were slightly lower recidivism rates.

My sister is owner/operator of a “counseling business”. Her clients are those mandated by the courts to undergo drug counseling or domestic violence counseling…it’s a “side buisness” for her…she has about 6-7 counselors working for her…she herself is a probation officer for one of the ajacent counties she operates her business in.

Part of the “court mandated” counseling is that the client has to pay for his or her counseling. If they cannot pay for the court mandated counseling they return to jail…for example, if a man is arrested for DUII or possession, he may or may not be terminated from his place of employment…depends on how long he stays in jail should he not be able to post bond…if terminated from his employment…he now has no income…yet he still must pay for the court mandated counseling…repeat offenders is very high among this group…they usually end up back in jail with harsher sentence facing them because they “refused” to get counseling, as mandated by the courts.

Domestic violence counseling is similar…if the man loses his source of income because of his arrest, the chance he will again resort to dometic violence because of his anger management issues as he faces returning to jail and the breakdown of his dometic situation…very few who go thru her counseling office stay out of jail after treatment is completed…statistics aren’t favorable.

Those arrested for marijuana possession and or use are usually of a different “class” of offenders than say meth, heroin and or alcohol abusers. It’s a vicious cycle and if marijuana was decriminalized perhaps the sucess rate would also improve…especially among those who “self medicate” with “street drugs” because they have no health benefits to seek better or longer lasting treatment options.

 

[ahs]

I have some questions:

How would legalization of marijuana end and/or significantly impact the drug cartels?

The thought is that, once it’s legal, the cartels will be out of business because no one will need suppliers or growers anymore. Weed is, well, a weed…anyone can grow it.

The various branches of Italian organized crime control the heroin trade, for example. But they also are into various other illegal activities. Removing the heroin trade from their control would cause them to look for some other illegal trade to control. Are the drug cartels soley into marijuana?

Good point. No doubt they are involved in more than one business. But which ones? And if they are involved in other illegal drugs, I think that would still damage busineess for them enough to throw them under. If a person has a choice between a now-legal “joint”, and an illegal preferred-alternative, it would make some sense that they’d opt for the now-legal option. When I was in college (not my best years ) and looking for a buzz, part of what made me decide to stick to beer rather than weed was the legality issue.

Also, if the libertarian goal is for minimum government oversite and control, how would legalization of marijuana arrive at that goal? If it were to be taxed and regulated, would the governmnt not be involved to the same extent that it is now?

Another good point. The GOV isn’t likely to make weed legal and then completely let it go…they’ll want to dip their greedy little hands into the kitty, no doubt. This would probably only be a big issue though for libertarians. I’d like to hear more discussion on this question for sure.

Finally, what about other drugs, cocaine, heroin etc. What would be the reasoning to keep those illegal…or should they also be legal and regulated?

Cocaine and meth are actually both legal for hospital-use only, still illegal on the streets. My wife use to administer both to patients in the E.R. The point in keeping them illegal on the streets with legal pot? Good question.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

The thought is that, once it’s legal, the cartels will be out of business because no one will need suppliers or growers anymore. Weed is, well, a weed…anyone can grow it.

Good point. No doubt they are involved in more than one business. But which ones? And if they are involved in other illegal drugs, I think that would still damage busineess for them enough to throw them under. If a person has a choice between a now-legal “joint”, and an illegal preferred-alternative, it would make some sense that they’d opt for the now-legal option. When I was in college (not my best years ) and looking for a buzz, part of what made me decide to stick to beer rather than weed was the legality issue.

Another good point. The GOV isn’t likely to make weed legal and then completely let it go…they’ll want to dip their greedy little hands into the kitty, no doubt. This would probably only be a big issue though for libertarians. I’d like to hear more discussion on this question for sure.

Cocaine and meth are actually both legal for hospital-use only, still illegal on the streets. My wife use to administer both to patients in the E.R. The point in keeping them illegal on the streets with legal pot? Good question.

Yes, cocaine makes a fantastic topical anaesthetic that has proven practical use in pre-suture numbing of facial lacerations, particularly in children.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

So, your answer to a woman who has an abortion is to throw her in prison?

Ok, is abortion murder, or is it not, Scott? We send murderers to prison.

This is what the Church teaches…how do you explain thinking that this would be a bad idea? This is yet another example of holding ideas that are at variance with the social teaching of the Church. Honestly, it baffles me. I don’t want to question your faith, but you know full well that the Church smiles on attempts to criminalize the murder of the unborn.

Secondly, I think that the most important component of anti-abortion laws is that they clamp down on access to the procedures, period. The main goal in mind is to discourage abortion as much as possible.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

The thought is that, once it’s legal, the cartels will be out of business because no one will need suppliers or growers anymore. Weed is, well, a weed…anyone can grow it.

Good point. No doubt they are involved in more than one business. But which ones? And if they are involved in other illegal drugs, I think that would still damage busineess for them enough to throw them under. If a person has a choice between a now-legal “joint”, and an illegal preferred-alternative, it would make some sense that they’d opt for the now-legal option. When I was in college (not my best years ) and looking for a buzz, part of what made me decide to stick to beer rather than weed was the legality issue.

Another good point. The GOV isn’t likely to make weed legal and then completely let it go…they’ll want to dip their greedy little hands into the kitty, no doubt. This would probably only be a big issue though for libertarians. I’d like to hear more discussion on this question for sure.

Cocaine and meth are actually both legal for hospital-use only, still illegal on the streets. My wife use to administer both to patients in the E.R. The point in keeping them illegal on the streets with legal pot? Good question.

I’m not sure that these ruthless drug cartels will just accept defeat, and say “oh well, pot is legal, so we’ll just grow coffee instead”

They most likely switch to other drugs, poppies i imagine grow well there, as would coca plants.

In Sicily the mafia is often referred to as 'la piovra" a multi tentacled hydra. Legalizing one tentacle (drugs) is not going to kill the hydra. You’d be amazed at the activities involved, drugs, prostitution, smuggling, money laundering, human traficking etc. etc.

So I don’t think legalizing drugs would have the effect of debilitating the cartels.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

I’m not sure that these ruthless drug cartels will just accept defeat, and say “oh well, pot is legal, so we’ll just grow coffee instead”

They most likely switch to other drugs, poppies i imagine grow well there, as would coca plants.

In Sicily the mafia is often referred to as 'la piovra" a multi tentacled hydra. Legalizing one tentacle (drugs) is not going to kill the hydra. You’d be amazed at the activities involved, drugs, prostitution, smuggling, money laundering, human traficking etc. etc.

So I don’t think legalizing drugs would have the effect of debilitating the cartels.

Honestly, the cartel leaders have shown us who they really are. They have shown us that they are willing to kill their enemies in the most unimaginably gruesome way…I honestly can’t imagine they’ll turn into angels and set up legitimate businesses once drugs are legalized.

I mean people want to throw bankers and Wall Street tycoons in prison…but they want to slap a badge of legitimacy over the business dealings of brutal, cut throat murderers. I’ll never understand it.

 

[ahs]

Ok, is abortion murder, or is it not, Scott? We send murderers to prison.

This is what the Church teaches…how do you explain thinking that this would be a bad idea? This is yet another example of holding ideas that are at variance with the social teaching of the Church. Honestly, it baffles me. I don’t want to question your faith, but you know full well that the Church smiles on attempts to criminalize the murder of the unborn.

Secondly, I think that the most important component of anti-abortion laws is that they clamp down on access to the procedures, period. The main goal in mind is to discourage abortion as much as possible.

Definitely, abortion is murder. I’m not sure what context it got brought into this topic was though. I don’t see how you can compare abortion with drug-use. I also don’t see where the Church has spoken on this issue (marijuana).

I’m not sure that these ruthless drug cartels will just accept defeat, and say “oh well, pot is legal, so we’ll just grow coffee instead”

They most likely switch to other drugs, poppies i imagine grow well there, as would coca plants.

In Sicily the mafia is often referred to as 'la piovra" a multi tentacled hydra. Legalizing one tentacle (drugs) is not going to kill the hydra. You’d be amazed at the activities involved, drugs, prostitution, smuggling, money laundering, human traficking etc. etc.

So I don’t think legalizing drugs would have the effect of debilitating the cartels.

That’s a really good point MaryGail. This would also lead to one to consider that the subsequent funding loss of the police stations (no longer able to justify a need for the drug-fighting funds) would have a negative impact on the availability of funds to fight the other crimes you noted. hmm…

 

[LaSainte]

We had a six year window (2001 - 1007) when Republicans controlled the White House and both halls of Congress. What happened with Roe v Wade? Nothing.

Yeah because our President didn’t have the balls to take it out of the hands of the courts and write a personhood amendment.

 

[yogicat]

I’m completely for it!

I personally believe they would be quite afraid of legalizing something and having a majority of the users not paying taxes on it.

I think that quite a few users would happily go down to their local store and purchase some. I live in a medical state and we have a few weed stores around here, completely legit and located in strip malls, that do decent business. All of their clients could grow if they wanted to, and might, but there will always be those people who don’t want to grow anything, don’t have room to grow plants, own cats and thus can’t grow without a heck of a lot of hassle, or just aren’t savy enough to get into it.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Yeah because our President didn’t have the balls to take it out of the hands of the courts and write a personhood amendment.

A constitutional amendment is not done by executive fiat.

It must pass the congress and then be ratified by the states. I believe the last constituional ammendment to get sent to the states for ratification was the ERA. It was defeated…about 30 years ago.

 

[LaSainte]

A constitutional amendment is not done by executive fiat.

It must pass the congress and then be ratified by the states. I believe the last constituional ammendment to get sent to the states for ratification was the ERA. It was defeated…about 30 years ago.

Of course, but I think there is a better chance of getting a constitutional amendment to pass than to try and stack the supreme court, considering that it’s a lifetime job and most judges wait to retire until a president of their liking is in office. Besides, that’s really only the secOnd step to the plan. The first is to take it out of the hands of the court altogether.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Ok, is abortion murder, or is it not, Scott? We send murderers to prison.

This is what the Church teaches…how do you explain thinking that this would be a bad idea? This is yet another example of holding ideas that are at variance with the social teaching of the Church. Honestly, it baffles me. I don’t want to question your faith, but you know full well that the Church smiles on attempts to criminalize the murder of the unborn.

Secondly, I think that the most important component of anti-abortion laws is that they clamp down on access to the procedures, period. The main goal in mind is to discourage abortion as much as possible.

Yes, abortion is murder. Where does the Church teach that a woman who has directly procured an abortion should be convicted of murder and thrown in prison?

Here is what Pope John Paul II had to say on the matter:

“I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.”

It doesn’t sound like he was ready to throw them into the dungeon.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

Yes, abortion is murder. Where does the Church teach that a woman who has directly procured an abortion should be convicted of murder and thrown in prison?

Here is what Pope John Paul II had to say on the matter:

“I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.”

It doesn’t sound like he was ready to throw them into the dungeon.

Reconciliation with the Church doesn’t abrogate temporal punishment, you know that. Every Catholic knows that. That’s why murderers in prison may be absolved of their sins through the same Sacrament, but they aren’t set free after receiving absolution.

 

[iloveangels]

Reconciliation with the Church doesn’t abrogate temporal punishment, you know that. Every Catholic knows that. That’s why murderers in prison may be absolved of their sins through the same Sacrament, but they aren’t set free after receiving absolution.

Oh, do we have another cradle Catholic here who thinks that just because he’s Catholic, he can’t go to hell no matter what he does??? And further, who thinks that there’s no temporal price to be paid for these deeds? They’re a dime a dozen… and they’re WRONG.

 

[Deus_lo_vult]

Oh, do we have another cradle Catholic here who thinks that just because he’s Catholic, he can’t go to hell no matter what he does??? And further, who thinks that there’s no temporal price to be paid for these deeds? They’re a dime a dozen… and they’re WRONG.

I’m sorry, I misunderstand you: are you agreeing with Scott, or agreeing with me?