Bravo.
8
I swear I read alot of these against legalization comments and it's like I am watching the 'Refer Madness' movie.... Here's the rebuttal to almost every argument here ... People are doing it anyway. Prohibition does not work. It didn't work with alcohol. And it has never worked with drugs, gambling or the sex industry. Wake up ... Why not benefit from it? Regulate it. And get the criminal element out of it. The industry of pot. cocaine and heroin is probably in the trillion dollar range. And it's all underground. When I saw the Ken Burns multiple part documentary about Prohibition, one thing stayed with me over all. The taxes collected from ending prohibition helped in a big way to get us out of the Great Depression.
33
Ah, America, the Exceptional Country. Exceptionally stupid that is. So many hundreds of thousands of Ivy League grads roaming the land - running government departments, "think" tanks, non-profits and universities. Yet, collectively, accomplishing almost nothing practical the last 30 years! How many billions have we spent on educating and subsidizing these "elites?" Yet today, the vast bulk of Americans are literally *worse off* than before "A Nation at Risk" was written, put on a shelf, and ignored decades ago. How can this be?
7
The legalization of drugs should be expanded to ALL drugs, cocaine and heroin included. There should be centers where the government gives addicts what they need in exchange for them promising to get treatment, also paid for by the government. By eliminating the black market for drugs, many geopolitical problems could be solved in one swoop - defunding of the Taliban, ISIS, and FARC, all of which rely on the drug trade to varying degrees, would be defanged, and peace and democracy would likely follow suit. Imagine that!
26
I voted for Obama twice and hold him in high regard. However, his lack of action on cannabis is extremely disappointing. He is willing to use executive action to declare many million illegal immigrants to be suddenly legal, so why not do the same for tens of millions of harmless pot smokers?
42
On November 8th, Prop 205 is on the ballot in Arizona, for legalizing recreational marijuana. Arizona looks forward to joining the States of Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Colorado (and possibly CA and NV too, on Nov 8th!)..... in reasonable public policy!
13
I refer readers to a previous NYT article, "This is Your Brain On Drugs," http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/education/edlife/this-is-your-brain-on...®ion=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article
Even "light" marijuana smokers experience structural changes in their brains, especially in younger users (up to the mid-20's) when the brain is more plastic. Moreover, the potency of marijuana is vastly increased over that of just a few years ago when many studies on marijuana were done. The THC content of marijuana has risen from 3.75% in 1995 to a mean of 13% in 2013. High potency marijuana can cause symptoms of paranoia and psychosis and makes addiction more likely.
The spike in emergency room visits Egan refers to as "no big deal" really is a big deal--129,000 ER visits in 2011 which is double that of 2004.
States lust for the tax revenue to be gained from legalized pot. But there will be some expensive consequences.
Even "light" marijuana smokers experience structural changes in their brains, especially in younger users (up to the mid-20's) when the brain is more plastic. Moreover, the potency of marijuana is vastly increased over that of just a few years ago when many studies on marijuana were done. The THC content of marijuana has risen from 3.75% in 1995 to a mean of 13% in 2013. High potency marijuana can cause symptoms of paranoia and psychosis and makes addiction more likely.
The spike in emergency room visits Egan refers to as "no big deal" really is a big deal--129,000 ER visits in 2011 which is double that of 2004.
States lust for the tax revenue to be gained from legalized pot. But there will be some expensive consequences.
8
And don't forget that Prime Minister Trudeau has committed to legalize pot Canada-wide come 2017.
29
There is one presidential candidate who together with his running mate, Gov Wm Weld, stated when he was two term governor of New Mexico that drugs ( including alcohol) are a medical and not a criminal issue.
Gov Gary Johnson is rising in the polls that count, the state polls, the polls that will determine who carries the all important key states.
We are in the high double digits in several such states.
We are first with Independents and enlisted and retired military, and tied with HRC with millennarians.
And our people will vote. That you can be guaranteed of.
We are solidly behind total legalisation of marijuana which the majority of Americans support.
The end of the duopoly and their Establishment shill, HRC, and their demagogue, Donny baby, is nigh.
2016 is the year of the Libertarians.
Coming to a polling booth near you on Nov 8.
Gov Gary Johnson is rising in the polls that count, the state polls, the polls that will determine who carries the all important key states.
We are in the high double digits in several such states.
We are first with Independents and enlisted and retired military, and tied with HRC with millennarians.
And our people will vote. That you can be guaranteed of.
We are solidly behind total legalisation of marijuana which the majority of Americans support.
The end of the duopoly and their Establishment shill, HRC, and their demagogue, Donny baby, is nigh.
2016 is the year of the Libertarians.
Coming to a polling booth near you on Nov 8.
3
"It all works, for the most part."
Not in NY. What a stupid law NY passed, which goes right along with the stupid estate tax law they passed a couple of years ago, and the sad "NY State of Health" (which should be called State of Confusion), a program which for years has enabled Connecticut residents with state health care plans to get services from top NY medical centers when NY residents cannot access them with their own state's plans.
Not in NY. What a stupid law NY passed, which goes right along with the stupid estate tax law they passed a couple of years ago, and the sad "NY State of Health" (which should be called State of Confusion), a program which for years has enabled Connecticut residents with state health care plans to get services from top NY medical centers when NY residents cannot access them with their own state's plans.
2
"That country is ruled by Rodrigo Duterte, a crude and brutal strongman known as the Donald Trump of the Philippines."
Really? The only person in this election who has murdered anyone is Hillary Clinton.
You folks just can't resist, can you?
Really? The only person in this election who has murdered anyone is Hillary Clinton.
You folks just can't resist, can you?
3
If pot "were" legal.
4
In the meanwhile, the DEA and other law enforcement agencies descended SWAT-like upon an 81 year old woman, just yesterday, in Western Massachusetts, for having a SINGLE marijuana plant growing in her raspberry patch.
She grew it for relief of her glaucoma medical condition.
A tale of two coasts. The United States of Hypocrites.
She grew it for relief of her glaucoma medical condition.
A tale of two coasts. The United States of Hypocrites.
23
I used pot when I was in college--which was back in the 60s. Got bored with it, quit, and have never used it again. I have no interest at all. Wasn't all that thrilled when Washington State legalized it, because I expected it to be more of a change than it has been. In fact, nothing seems different. As far as I've seen, it's no big deal.
16
I haven't heard the term reefer used by the myriad dope fiends of my acquaintance, ganja, dope,weed etc., and the many names that allude to the origin of this satanic
product.It is necessary to keep the holier than thou group
quiescent.
product.It is necessary to keep the holier than thou group
quiescent.
1
So should federal laws be ignored? Are you of the opinion that if the will of the people in state believe something should be legal, their will should supercede federal law? Are you consistent in this belief? Does it apply to firearms? Or is that "different"?
1
It's complicated. Since it stays in the system longer, the users often cannot pass their unannounced workplace drug tests. It costs a lot of jobs in that regard.
8
This doesn't have much to with drugs, after all. The american penal system is a huge profit making empire that includes every level of government and, with privatization, hedge funds.
Making money on the backs of black poor people (beginning with putting them in prison) is a core american value.
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Andrew Jackson. How more american can you get?
Making money on the backs of black poor people (beginning with putting them in prison) is a core american value.
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Andrew Jackson. How more american can you get?
12
I believe certain states have laws that are on the books criminalizing oral sex, is anyone prosecuted? Laws are written by mostly men who are fallible and hypocritical. It's time to reschedule canabis to schedule five.
10
Thank you, Mr. Egan, for this very sane assessment of the American Psychodrama, our War against Addicition.
Nixon's henchman Erlichman volunteered, in response to a reporter's question about Nixon's inauguration of that War, that it was the only way he could effectively suppress his opposition among blacks and hippies--to prosecute them for drug "crimes."
What has played out, ever since, has been drug PERSECUTIONS (prosecution is a euphemism for the truth). The hippies, and the Black Power movement, made the mistake of pointing out the Emperor's New Clothes, and we've never forgiven them this act of truth-telling.
Ray Stevens' song, "Mr. Businessman," a powerful indictment of our moral decay, captures it:
"Itemize the things you covet
As you squander through your life
Bigger cars, bigger houses
Term insurance for your wife
Tuesday evenings with your harlot
And on Wednesdays it's your charlatan
Analyst, he's high upon your list
"Youve got air conditioned sinuses
And dark disturbing doubt about religion
And you keep those cards and letters going out
While your secretarys tempting you
Your morals are exempting you from guilt and shame
Heaven knows you're not to blame
"You better, Take care of business Mr. Businessman
What's your plan?
Get down to business Mr. Businessman if you can
Before it's too late
And you throw your life away."
It is these same Businessmen who are running--and ruining--the Country today; who nearly bankrupted us all in 2008. The truth is powerful.
Nixon's henchman Erlichman volunteered, in response to a reporter's question about Nixon's inauguration of that War, that it was the only way he could effectively suppress his opposition among blacks and hippies--to prosecute them for drug "crimes."
What has played out, ever since, has been drug PERSECUTIONS (prosecution is a euphemism for the truth). The hippies, and the Black Power movement, made the mistake of pointing out the Emperor's New Clothes, and we've never forgiven them this act of truth-telling.
Ray Stevens' song, "Mr. Businessman," a powerful indictment of our moral decay, captures it:
"Itemize the things you covet
As you squander through your life
Bigger cars, bigger houses
Term insurance for your wife
Tuesday evenings with your harlot
And on Wednesdays it's your charlatan
Analyst, he's high upon your list
"Youve got air conditioned sinuses
And dark disturbing doubt about religion
And you keep those cards and letters going out
While your secretarys tempting you
Your morals are exempting you from guilt and shame
Heaven knows you're not to blame
"You better, Take care of business Mr. Businessman
What's your plan?
Get down to business Mr. Businessman if you can
Before it's too late
And you throw your life away."
It is these same Businessmen who are running--and ruining--the Country today; who nearly bankrupted us all in 2008. The truth is powerful.
7
1. Legalize it.
2. Don't let anybody tell you its anything like good for you.
3. Treatment is an expensive scam. Shrinks ought to be jailed for lying when the say they can "cure" people from pot addiction.
2. Don't let anybody tell you its anything like good for you.
3. Treatment is an expensive scam. Shrinks ought to be jailed for lying when the say they can "cure" people from pot addiction.
It honestly never made sense to me that pot could be legal in some states while still being illegal federally. I was more understanding of this when it first became legal in a state, and I thought, "Well, this will be the trial period, and once everyone sees that all Hell has not broken loose, it will be legalized federally." Still, no such luck, and meanwhile, countless youth are being locked up for a "crime" that would not be a crime if they just happened to live in another part of the country. This hypocrisy must stop. Time to legalize nationwide!
12
I have often wondered how state legalization during federal prohibition works with respect to medical marijuana users (by which I mean those who actually *need* it, not just those who complain about back or neck pain in order to get a prescription). Perhaps someone here can answer this question: What happens when someone who received medical marijuana in California has to go to New York on a business trip for two weeks? Are they still allowed to smoke it there? If so, can they bring it from California or are there places in New York and other it's-still-illegal states that accommodate the needs of this population?
5
WA and OR are trying to take over the Mexican cartels, and are using the monopoly pricing formula straight out of Econ 101 to do it: Suppress supply to raise price. It won't work, but there'll be plenty of victims along the way.
Anyone who thinks that either state has actually "legalized" marijuana is kidding themselves. If marijuana was as legal as, say, tomatoes, it would cost 10 cents a gram to grow (not my number, but RAND's estimate), and the army of amateur gardeners would defeat any attempts at price gouging.
In both states, the state governments have severely restricted cultivation, both commercial and personal, in an attempt to protect prices and tax revenues. This will fail, because unlike alcohol and tobacco, marijuana is very easy to grow, and very easy to turn into related products.
The genie is out of the bottle, and it ain't going back inside.
Anyone who thinks that either state has actually "legalized" marijuana is kidding themselves. If marijuana was as legal as, say, tomatoes, it would cost 10 cents a gram to grow (not my number, but RAND's estimate), and the army of amateur gardeners would defeat any attempts at price gouging.
In both states, the state governments have severely restricted cultivation, both commercial and personal, in an attempt to protect prices and tax revenues. This will fail, because unlike alcohol and tobacco, marijuana is very easy to grow, and very easy to turn into related products.
The genie is out of the bottle, and it ain't going back inside.
8
Simply not true. Oregon allows individuals to grow two plants. That can produce more than plenty of pot for all but the heaviest users.
11
Since marijuana has been legalized in Oregon, the main noticable change is that pot shops have popped up here and there. Our law wisely allowed municipalities to ban pot shops. Research in Washington has show that marijuana use has not increased among teenagers since it was legalized. Marijuana is now being produced by state-sanctioned growers rather than Mexican drug cartels, it is being tested and labelled, and it is being taxed. It is just no big deal and such an improvement over it being available (readily) only on the black market.
16
The CA proposition does include some "sleeper" provisions, namely the state licensing requirement (VERY expensive and vague), if a person wanted to grow their own cannabis. It's totally unclear how that might be enforced. Add to that any local taxes, and this may turn away citizens because of potentially exorbitant costs. Then we'd be right back where we are now, with the exception that LEOs (and they should be out of the loop here) would essentially by "revenuers".
It will be interesting to see how the taxation/licensing/enforcement component evolves, but the way the proposition is written seems to open the door to commercialization (not wise, as Big Tobacco wants to grab market share). The LAST thing that should be allowed is Big Tobacco to have any part of this market. However, it would seem their bribery bucks have been at work. To be continued.
It will be interesting to see how the taxation/licensing/enforcement component evolves, but the way the proposition is written seems to open the door to commercialization (not wise, as Big Tobacco wants to grab market share). The LAST thing that should be allowed is Big Tobacco to have any part of this market. However, it would seem their bribery bucks have been at work. To be continued.
3
craig geary redlands fl 12 hours ago
You Sir have hit the nail squarely on the head. Never have so many profited so handsomely to perform functions that are an absolute detriment to the taxpayer, society, and the sorry citizens adult and juvenile who have been incarcerated, treated like dirt, and had their lives ruined by drug law enforcement policies that are far more harmful to us than the marijuana bogeyman that has been used by the legions of Agencies, bureaucrats, and businesses as a shameless pretext to support their ongoing revenue streams, funding and livelihood.
-------------
"The reason 600,00 people are arrested for pot, each year, is jobs.
There are judges, prosecutors, defence lawyers, police, jail guards, court bailiff's, court reporters, prison guards, prison wardens, parole and probation officers, urine testers, bail bondsmen whose livelihood depends on the nonsensical prosecution of pot smokers.
Then we have the obscenity of for profit jails and prisons, for profit prisoner transporters, for profit prison medical providers, for profit parole and probation services, for profit drug testers, for profit hallway houses.
Does anyone think any of the above want to get real jobs?"
------------
We can see who are the real parasites feeding on the taxpaying public. The "Law and Order" cartel.
You Sir have hit the nail squarely on the head. Never have so many profited so handsomely to perform functions that are an absolute detriment to the taxpayer, society, and the sorry citizens adult and juvenile who have been incarcerated, treated like dirt, and had their lives ruined by drug law enforcement policies that are far more harmful to us than the marijuana bogeyman that has been used by the legions of Agencies, bureaucrats, and businesses as a shameless pretext to support their ongoing revenue streams, funding and livelihood.
-------------
"The reason 600,00 people are arrested for pot, each year, is jobs.
There are judges, prosecutors, defence lawyers, police, jail guards, court bailiff's, court reporters, prison guards, prison wardens, parole and probation officers, urine testers, bail bondsmen whose livelihood depends on the nonsensical prosecution of pot smokers.
Then we have the obscenity of for profit jails and prisons, for profit prisoner transporters, for profit prison medical providers, for profit parole and probation services, for profit drug testers, for profit hallway houses.
Does anyone think any of the above want to get real jobs?"
------------
We can see who are the real parasites feeding on the taxpaying public. The "Law and Order" cartel.
17
At last a sensible article on this issue. The Declaration of Independence declares the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Unless there is some overriding concern on the part of the federal government, they should not be criminalizing people who want to use marijuana. Having marijuana on Schedule 1 is ridiculous, and the idea proposed by Clinton of "rescheduling" marijuana as Schedule II makes no sense if you know how Schedule II works - it requires a doctor's prescription for a specific dosage and then the amount dispensed is tracked on a Board of Pharmacy report that is used to keep track of drugs like Oxycodone and Adderall. This is a plant and unless there is a pill form with a specific dose how is that going to even work? Plus should people be on a list showing how much marijuana has been dispensed as if it needs to be medically supervised? Unlike opiates and even OTC meds like tylenol or aspirin, no one has ever died from an overdose of marijuana. It is Big Pharma who wants this because they want to control it as a drug and they are afraid because opiate overdoses and opiate prescriptions are DOWN in states that have legalized marijuana. But the basic issue is that adults should have the right to use a substance that anyone can grow in their backyard so long as they don't hurt anyone else or drive or work while impaired. Just let the states regulate it.
9
I do concur with your pov, and would like to add this idea/speculation/hypothesis, perhaps an over-simplification:
The opioid overdose epidemic in my humble opinion is to an extent seemingly a product of schedule one/felony marijuana.
Pot's odor causes it to be easier for the cops/prosecutors (and particularly with their canines) to make their chicken feces busts.
Meanwhile, natural marijuana is seemingly relatively harmless: heck fire, sugar/corn syrup is seemingly much worse for one's health, and I perceive many/most folks probably today silently agree--note the horrendous diabetes II projection and don't forget the ordinary cavity is supplying much of dentistry's nice livelihood.
A reporter tells me the opioid overdose death rate is lower in Colorado. though I often doubt his own good newspaper editor would dare to breach such an establishment embarrassing obvious.
Furthermore: The absurdity of outlawing medical marijuana ought to be considered immoral if not criminal.
I'd never deny weed is perfectly harmless.
The opioid overdose epidemic in my humble opinion is to an extent seemingly a product of schedule one/felony marijuana.
Pot's odor causes it to be easier for the cops/prosecutors (and particularly with their canines) to make their chicken feces busts.
Meanwhile, natural marijuana is seemingly relatively harmless: heck fire, sugar/corn syrup is seemingly much worse for one's health, and I perceive many/most folks probably today silently agree--note the horrendous diabetes II projection and don't forget the ordinary cavity is supplying much of dentistry's nice livelihood.
A reporter tells me the opioid overdose death rate is lower in Colorado. though I often doubt his own good newspaper editor would dare to breach such an establishment embarrassing obvious.
Furthermore: The absurdity of outlawing medical marijuana ought to be considered immoral if not criminal.
I'd never deny weed is perfectly harmless.
6
Oops: I'd never claim that weed is completely harmless.
For instance: Current fairly credible research claims it's bad for "immature brains."
For instance: Current fairly credible research claims it's bad for "immature brains."
2
As a person with chronic pain from an auto-immune disorder, I strongly support marijuana legalization as an alternative to the opiods and prescription painkillers that have proven so dangerous for so many people. Here in NYC, marijuana laws are so strict that my condition does not qualify me for a prescription. However, it is the only thing that alleviates my symptoms without damaging my internal organs or causing a full-blown addiction. It's time the U.S. got over its stigma about marijuana and started making it easier for people with chronic pain to get it. Chances are that people who can't get it will take risks to obtain it illegally, or else move to more dangerous and habit-forming drugs.
7
I stopped smoking when I realized I was reducing my cognitive abilities. I was 22 years old. I had a friend who fried himself to such an extent he was at least 2-3 seconds to respond to something as simple as "Hi this is Joe." Seconds would pass and he'd go "Oh, yeah, Joe, how are you?" He has now passed, all of us who where his friends were shocked by his downward spiral. While I realize an example doesn't make a rule, but also look at Gary "Aleppo" Johnson. He'd be pothead in chief if elected.
I don't know, I just don't see a good way to deal with society and work if we have legal pot across the country. Seeing it totally decriminalized and available for medicinal use is great, but legal for play...I don't know, I see its abuse being way too easy.
Ironically I'm really liberal, but I worry for the outcome.
I don't know, I just don't see a good way to deal with society and work if we have legal pot across the country. Seeing it totally decriminalized and available for medicinal use is great, but legal for play...I don't know, I see its abuse being way too easy.
Ironically I'm really liberal, but I worry for the outcome.
7
Well I think you are just misinformed. Carl Sagan is one example of a pretty smart pothead. Gary Johnson doesn't need pot to be an idiot. If you do a PubMed search I think you will find that there really isn't a correlation between cognitive decline and marijuana. Of course if someone is really high they probably aren't remembering things very well. And who knows what else your friend was taking. Lots of drugs and conditions can permanently impair cognition and increase risk of dementia - for example type 2 diabetes and use of drugs like xanax and valium. In fact there is evidence that one of the components of marijuana - cannabidiol or CBD - which is the non-psychoactive part that they use for seizures - is neuroprotective meaning it protects brain function.
7
That's the big question, why does the federal government drag it's feet with this? They are forcing all these businesses to deal in cash and it's very dangerous and wasteful. My answer is the obvious one. Because the seats of power not only belong to the energy companies ( oil - gas ), the insurance companies, the defense industry. But right there beside them are the big time drug barons. The drug lords, mafia, cartels who benefit from keeping it all illegal.
Legalize it and put half the taxes towards medicare for all.
Orange, NJ
Legalize it and put half the taxes towards medicare for all.
Orange, NJ
10
Injected heroin, smoked crack, and snorted cocaine probably would not exist if the drugs were legal. As the mind-opening book Chasing the Scream points out, when morphine and cocaine were legal a century and more ago, they were taken in a less potent, liquid form. Before and after Prohibition, as the book also points out, beer was Americans favorite drink. But during Prohibition, it was gin, much of it with especially high alcohol content, because, as with illegal drugs today, the risk of transporting contraband favored highly concentrated forms that took up less space.
8
The cat is out of the bag. If you police state drones think you can control pot at the federal level in a country where it is legal in some states and not others, you must be smoking something. Want to ban something? Ban stupidity...
14
In Colorado we have seen some remarkable returns since cannabis has become legal. Violent crime is down, as is pot smoking among teens. Opioid use is also down. There is extra revenue to help rebuild schools among other uses for extra money.
When the feds finally ease up the schedule 1 debacle we will see the plants get researched and we will finally know the truth, instead of the myth.
It's a win, win, win.
If T rump and republicans keep the government tied up in knots for the next four years we will probably see more restrictions come back in place.
When the feds finally ease up the schedule 1 debacle we will see the plants get researched and we will finally know the truth, instead of the myth.
It's a win, win, win.
If T rump and republicans keep the government tied up in knots for the next four years we will probably see more restrictions come back in place.
14
Why is it that so many are compelled to mention hard drugs like heroin, cocaine, and other hard drugs when discussing the issue of marijuana legalization? Other than the fact that they are all illegal (at least in the eyes of the federal government), they have nothing to do with one another. As for marijuana's legal status, why do so many insist that it remain prohibited until some medical benefit is empirically established, especially in light of the fact that a dearth of such is due primarily to its legal status? The fact of the matter is that no one has ever died from a marijuana overdose; in fact, such is medically impossible. That's not to say that using it doesn't carry some risk, as all recreational drugs are dangerous if used excessively or otherwise abused. However, if those who remain against the legalization of marijuana were truly interested in public health, they would have to start by advocating a return to the prohibition of alcohol, the dangers of which have long been known and scientifically proven.
16
If the Native Americans had been smoking weed instead of tobacco when the English colonists first arrived, would weed be legal and tobacco an illegal Schedule 1 drug?????
4
Funny you should mention that; apparently some NA tribes and possibly other indigenous people in other parts of the world (but I only know specifically about some US tribes) used tobacco in a similar way to how some view psychedelic drugs: As a spiritual tool, to be consumed in small doses, on an irregular basis, to experience some sort of spiritual "high." To these folks, the notion of smoking a pack of cigarettes per day would be abhorrent.
3
I don't understand how people equate marijuana and alcohol use. I can enjoy a glass of wine or beer and stay sober, but if I smoke pot, I will become impaired. The only reason to smoke marijuana is to alter one's consciousness. Alcohol CAN be used in that way, but doesn't have to be. I fear legalizing marijuana just gives people greater latitude to be stoned whenever they feel like it - at work, at school, when driving ...
Maybe someone can explain to me how the two are actually similar? Until then, I will continue to vote against legalizing marijuana.
Maybe someone can explain to me how the two are actually similar? Until then, I will continue to vote against legalizing marijuana.
6
Laura,
I always found it the other way around: I could smoke pot and do almost anything just as well as I could when perfectly sober, but a glass of wine or a beer is enough to noticeably reduce my motor coordination and my mental sharpness. I would not recommend driving under the influence of any drug, including pot, but it's pretty clear that alcohol impairs driving very dangerously and the evidence I see is that pot is less disruptive to attention and coordination.
I always found it the other way around: I could smoke pot and do almost anything just as well as I could when perfectly sober, but a glass of wine or a beer is enough to noticeably reduce my motor coordination and my mental sharpness. I would not recommend driving under the influence of any drug, including pot, but it's pretty clear that alcohol impairs driving very dangerously and the evidence I see is that pot is less disruptive to attention and coordination.
6
If someone drinks for the taste, there are plenty of non-alcoholic options out there. Otherwise, they are drinking for an altered consciousness just like a marijuana user, albeit at an arguably lower and more easily scaled level. There's a reason that just a single drink inflates your driving risk substantially: alcohol is psychoactive regardless of the dose.
As far as work, school, driving is concerned... we have alcoholics ruining their lives with public intoxication and DWIs every day, but instead of banning alcohol for everyone, we just made things like driving impaired into crimes. Doing the exact same thing for marijuana seems like a better way to go, especially since 1930s prohibition pretty much proved that human beings will get their fix one way or another.
As far as work, school, driving is concerned... we have alcoholics ruining their lives with public intoxication and DWIs every day, but instead of banning alcohol for everyone, we just made things like driving impaired into crimes. Doing the exact same thing for marijuana seems like a better way to go, especially since 1930s prohibition pretty much proved that human beings will get their fix one way or another.
13
Laura, your reaction is surprising. Your being (apparently) unaffected by alcohol is definitely not the norm. My reaction to alcohol isn't either. I don't drink at all because (a) to me wine tastes like spoiled grape juice mixed with a nasty chemical, and (b) I've never experienced an alcohol 'high'; instead, the subjective experience is headache and the sensation that I've ingested a strong allergen. But I don't begrudge the other people at dinner the chance to enjoy their wine... I have my own gustatory pleasures, as long as there's chocolate in the world.
But regarding your vote, I would like to ask you to consider that cancer patients whose pain is treated with cannabis, experience both relief from pain and alleviation of nausea. A dear old friend who lives in California wrote to me earlier this year when she was being treated for breast cancer that, like the other people in her treatment group, it was the cannabis made it possible for them to endure certain phases of the treatment.
But regarding your vote, I would like to ask you to consider that cancer patients whose pain is treated with cannabis, experience both relief from pain and alleviation of nausea. A dear old friend who lives in California wrote to me earlier this year when she was being treated for breast cancer that, like the other people in her treatment group, it was the cannabis made it possible for them to endure certain phases of the treatment.
8
Mr. Egan:
your summary of the current regional and national status of marijuana use is informative.
you might next-consider sharing with NYT readers the unique,
and so-far mostly successful,
efforts by the city of Seattle to address the opioid over-use issues.
the more open-discussions that we can foster and encourage,
the more-likely that lasting solutions will be found and established.
thank you.
4
Very interesting in this debate: pot always referred to as a drug, which it isn't (it's an herb); alcohol almost never referred to as a drug, which it is. (As in the phrase "drugs and alcohol....")
11
Big pharmaceutical companies make billions on opiates(which destroy many lives )every year.They just need to figure out a way to make billions on marijuana(which doesn't destroy lives) then it will be legal.
10
Why is the federal government still gung-ho on marijuana enforcement? Do you really need to ask? OK, I'll tell you. Large police bureaucracies and their budgets depend on it. Simple enough for you?
17
The recreational and medical marijuana legalization laws and referendums should be a boon in the coming years to municipalities and states.
My concern right now is: in getting your "card" you are asked for a lot of personal information, as if you are applying for health care; medical reasons why you need pot; your drivers license; social security number; phone; address, etc. However as the patient, you have no idea how this information is stored, shared, or protected. Is this information safe guarded by any state or federal regulatory agencies? How can one know if your pot supplier's database is safe and won't get hacked by sophisticated criminals or US intelligence?
Next, what do we know about the "product" you buy from these dispensaries? Is there anything to regulate and control quality of how the products are grown? The water and soil they use? Insecticides or additives; can chemicals, ground up pharmaceuticals or "spice" be used. How can patients be assured what they smoke and eat is safe...?
Lastly is the classification of pot as a schedule 1 narcotic. This needs to be addressed right now because if you work in certain sectors, a positive pee test will cost you your JOB. I use a dispensary, and these are my concerns...!
My concern right now is: in getting your "card" you are asked for a lot of personal information, as if you are applying for health care; medical reasons why you need pot; your drivers license; social security number; phone; address, etc. However as the patient, you have no idea how this information is stored, shared, or protected. Is this information safe guarded by any state or federal regulatory agencies? How can one know if your pot supplier's database is safe and won't get hacked by sophisticated criminals or US intelligence?
Next, what do we know about the "product" you buy from these dispensaries? Is there anything to regulate and control quality of how the products are grown? The water and soil they use? Insecticides or additives; can chemicals, ground up pharmaceuticals or "spice" be used. How can patients be assured what they smoke and eat is safe...?
Lastly is the classification of pot as a schedule 1 narcotic. This needs to be addressed right now because if you work in certain sectors, a positive pee test will cost you your JOB. I use a dispensary, and these are my concerns...!
5
All solid reasons to legalize for recreational use and regulate like any other product consumed by humans. Washington State regulates growers pretty closely, tests for pesticides and THC/CBD content, and doesn't require anything other than an ID (for age) when buying.
5
Some people are not cut out for the service sector.
1
Overlooked perhaps is the effect evangelical Christianity affects the attitudes of voters. I ran into a friend recently, a fervent evangelical. He mentioned his wife's body aches and pains. I told him that a salve containing just a bit of cannabis is very effective. No high whatsoever. "Oh no," he replied. "Thats dark."
5
This opinion piece completely overlooks the reality that @ 2% of the population is vulnerable to a psychotic reaction to marijuana. Furthermore, it has been often documented by psychiatrists and acute treatment facilities that individuals with pre-existing latent mental health illnesses have triggered full blown psychotic breaks after using marijuana.
Obviously this is a very small percentage of the population. But shame on Mr. Egan for not even mentioning what must be an 'inconvenient truth' for those gung-ho to legalize marijuana.
On a separate issue, there is probably not a single medical condition out there which cannot be BETTER treated with a medication other than marijuana. Marijuana's appeal is that it is so easily available that people don't have to bother with doctors.
Obviously this is a very small percentage of the population. But shame on Mr. Egan for not even mentioning what must be an 'inconvenient truth' for those gung-ho to legalize marijuana.
On a separate issue, there is probably not a single medical condition out there which cannot be BETTER treated with a medication other than marijuana. Marijuana's appeal is that it is so easily available that people don't have to bother with doctors.
3
your comment is misinformed. I practiced emergency medicine for over 30 years and saw thousands of patients suffering both acute and chronic effects of alcohol. I saw innumreable behavioral emegencies ; many due to the effects of psychoactive drugs. I am unaware of ever having seen a single patient whose problem stemmed from acute or chronic Marijuana use. Undoubtedly some psychological problems can arise from excessive or abusive use of Marijuana but these do not result in behavioral emergencies .
13
Tucker **Even if this is true, which I doubt. Your point is 98% of us adults who smoke and enjoy it, and can make decisions about our lives. We have to bow down to the 2% that may have a problem. Boy that's some logic. Real democracy at work.
2
So, Randy, you would suggest penalizing 98% of the population for the inability of 2% of the population to use the substance responsibly? I'm assuming there is an empirical basis for the statistic you cite, but, then again, 75% of all statistics are just made up anyway ;)
1
Why would you legalize something that required a caveat that a portion of the tax on that item had to be mandated for the treatment of people using that item? It seems that Egan is admitting that pot has a big down side, but since he and the Editorial Board feel they can function while high (which explains a lot of the content of the Times), let's pass the joint around.
4
I believe you read into Mr. Egan's article something which is not there. Tax revenues would be used to fund drug addiction treatment, but it does not follow that those in treatment are there as a result of using marijuana. Such cases are extraordinarily rare and are in fact dwarfed by the number of people in treatment for alcoholism, yet alcohol use is legal .....
3
Thank you for your well reasoned view. But did you mean to say that Franklin abused laudanum? Or did he use it as an effective treatment for his condition? Opponents of reasonable drug policy seem to equate any use of any drug, regardless of its intent or effect, as abuse. Since the National Institute on Drug Abuse admits that abusive use of most drugs occurs in fewer than 10% of users, it seems that the rest of us self manage effectively. So, why not get the criminal justice system out of the drug business altogether, treat drug abuse as a relatively minor health issue, and leave the rest of us alone?
11
How dare you imply that marijuana is anything other than a deadly narcotic that kills millions of Americans each year? Please stick with the lie.
3
Joe -
There is no evidence supporting your claim. No one has ever died of intoxication from marijuana. Ever.
There is no evidence supporting your claim. No one has ever died of intoxication from marijuana. Ever.
2
I hope your tongue was firmly in check Joe, as we both know that, in over four thousand years of recorded cannabis use, there has never been a single documented fatal overdose from ingesting cannabis. Not one. Zilch. Nada.
3
I don't want to sound like a refugee from the Nixon administration, but...are we 100% certain that there's no correlation between marijuana use and heroin addiction?
I ask this because I have known two people who died from a heroin overdose, and they both smoked pot for years before they ever even considered trying heroin. And - more worryingly - a close relative of mine who has always been something of a cheerful pothead has recently become addicted to heroin.
I know three people is a pathetically small sample size. Perhaps it's a coincidence. But then again...
I ask this because I have known two people who died from a heroin overdose, and they both smoked pot for years before they ever even considered trying heroin. And - more worryingly - a close relative of mine who has always been something of a cheerful pothead has recently become addicted to heroin.
I know three people is a pathetically small sample size. Perhaps it's a coincidence. But then again...
4
I think this is coincidence. I, too, know two people who became hardcore heroin addicts, and one of them was a huge pothead before that; but before he turned to heroin he also became addicted to prescription drugs (which he was not prescribed), and cocaine-- and those are just the drugs I happen to know about his having used. Who knows what else he used?
An addictive personality is an addictive personality. There are some ways you can anticipate this, some measures you can look at from childhood onwards, but sadly, it is still not an exact science. But for every individual like your associate and mine, there are countless others who smoke pot regularly and never try heroin, and others who try heroin but do not become addicted.
An addictive personality is an addictive personality. There are some ways you can anticipate this, some measures you can look at from childhood onwards, but sadly, it is still not an exact science. But for every individual like your associate and mine, there are countless others who smoke pot regularly and never try heroin, and others who try heroin but do not become addicted.
3
Here in Florida the major reason for busting African-Americans for what are really minor drug infractions is voter suppression.
Put the black person in jail on a drug felony and you've ensured that they'll never be able to vote Democratic in their entire lifetimes.
In Florida, and much of the South, Jim Crow is still alive and well.
Put the black person in jail on a drug felony and you've ensured that they'll never be able to vote Democratic in their entire lifetimes.
In Florida, and much of the South, Jim Crow is still alive and well.
23
Interesting point of view that I believe is credible.
5
The DEA has taken some steps that are likely to increase opioid addiciton if they are implemented. Some people are able to avoid opioid addiction using Kratom as an alternative, while others use kratom to end their opiord addiciton. Banning kratom helps to justify the DEA's existence in two ways. First they will be able to persecute people who use kratom. Second there will be more opioid addicts for the DEA to pursue.
7
I am one of the 25 Americans of Mexican ancestry.
Mr. Egan misses in my opinion the #1 reason that the sale of marijuana should be legal and carried out by companies like Phillip Morris or smaller boutique retail shops, etc.:
Legalizing marijuana across the US as has been done in Colorado, WA state, etc. will go a long way to bringing peace to Mexico. Note that while Mr Egan get worked up about 3,500 drug war deaths in the Philippines, Mexico officially has had 250,000 killed or missing although outside experts believe the Mexican government reports less that 10% of actual drug war deaths.
And peace in Mexico is important to Americans because:
1. Reduces the need by Mexicans to "escape" the violent of hell that Mexico has been in for the last 10 year Drug War
2. ~1,000 American citizens have murdered in Mexico in the past 5 years. In the past 5 years, only 1 American has been murdered in Canada.
3. We are neighbors and neighbors look out for each other.
Mr. Egan misses in my opinion the #1 reason that the sale of marijuana should be legal and carried out by companies like Phillip Morris or smaller boutique retail shops, etc.:
Legalizing marijuana across the US as has been done in Colorado, WA state, etc. will go a long way to bringing peace to Mexico. Note that while Mr Egan get worked up about 3,500 drug war deaths in the Philippines, Mexico officially has had 250,000 killed or missing although outside experts believe the Mexican government reports less that 10% of actual drug war deaths.
And peace in Mexico is important to Americans because:
1. Reduces the need by Mexicans to "escape" the violent of hell that Mexico has been in for the last 10 year Drug War
2. ~1,000 American citizens have murdered in Mexico in the past 5 years. In the past 5 years, only 1 American has been murdered in Canada.
3. We are neighbors and neighbors look out for each other.
9
As you likely understood above, I am one of the 25 "MILLION" Americans of Mexican ancestry
Legalize the sale of marijuana in the USA and bring peace to Mexico!
Legalize the sale of marijuana in the USA and bring peace to Mexico!
2
I agree pot should be legal but know this: Pot is not as harmless as its proponents would have you think. It destroys people in much subtler ways than alcohol. With alcohol, hangovers are severe and others defintely know when you are drunk. Addcition to alcohol, in later stages, is so savage, it can at least offer some incentives to get well.
Pot, not so much. People remain pseudo functional. As a friend once said, the risk is not so much that you are going to go out, get stone and wreak havoc. The risk is that you wake up at 42 years of age, living in your parents' basement, covered in Cheetos and half-heartedly working to finish of your undergrad bachelor's degree in sociology. You end up with a life half-lived and filled with vague regrets and missed opportunities. There is vague sense that you might have lived a fuller life if you had not been checked out for so much of it. Again, I think it is subtle and so the addiction can creep through the years of your life without drawing much attention. Without awareness, people are hard pressed to come up with the real solutions.
Now, there is a credible argument that people deserve to ruin their lives if they want to and that the government should not stand in their way. Fair enough. Just realize that society, may be more free when pot is legal, but I am not convinced it will be better off. Enjoy your cheetos.
Pot, not so much. People remain pseudo functional. As a friend once said, the risk is not so much that you are going to go out, get stone and wreak havoc. The risk is that you wake up at 42 years of age, living in your parents' basement, covered in Cheetos and half-heartedly working to finish of your undergrad bachelor's degree in sociology. You end up with a life half-lived and filled with vague regrets and missed opportunities. There is vague sense that you might have lived a fuller life if you had not been checked out for so much of it. Again, I think it is subtle and so the addiction can creep through the years of your life without drawing much attention. Without awareness, people are hard pressed to come up with the real solutions.
Now, there is a credible argument that people deserve to ruin their lives if they want to and that the government should not stand in their way. Fair enough. Just realize that society, may be more free when pot is legal, but I am not convinced it will be better off. Enjoy your cheetos.
10
Yes, the life you describe is possible, but it is the exception, not the rule.
Most of the pot smokers I know have stable existences, with steady income, a nice place to live, and loyal and loving family and friends. Very few allow what you described to happen to themselves. At worst, they experience a "slump" during which they live similarly to your description for a few months, then snap out of it, look around and realize they want more-- and they'll have to get off of the sofa in order to get it.
Most of the pot smokers I know have stable existences, with steady income, a nice place to live, and loyal and loving family and friends. Very few allow what you described to happen to themselves. At worst, they experience a "slump" during which they live similarly to your description for a few months, then snap out of it, look around and realize they want more-- and they'll have to get off of the sofa in order to get it.
1
Miller ** what utter garbage ...
I'll give you that smoking pot isn't physically harmless, but I remember back in high school in 1975 some of the brightest kids turned into stoners and were voted "most changed" - and not for the better. Many went to party colleges to continue their non-engagement. We'll see if the same happens to the West Coast. I do expect that non-tokers are going to succeed in life at a far greater rate than the rest.
4
Way to sneak in that Trump/Hitler reference! Did you know that ALL of Donald Trump's adult children married Jews? They're Hitler too! And me too, even though I'm Jewish. I'm Hitler!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2G9MR1n7Es
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2G9MR1n7Es
"Perhaps because so many addicts are white and suburban, or white and rural, there is now a rare bipartisan consensus emerging for wholesale reform of the drug laws."
Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E-S?
"Though legalization is not without its problems — a spike in emergency room visits attributed to edible pot, persistent black market dealers — it’s mostly been no big deal "
Uh-huh. Sure, no big deal. I'm a person who has never touched marijuana or nicotine, though I did love brandishing my candy cigarettes from the convenience stores. (I assume I got contact highs in college or at any The Black Crowes concert attended because everybody there was high and sweetly offering you their cigarettes - why do some white people often go to concerts to get high and many black people often go for, you know, the music?)
I find this POV of Mr. Egan disingenuous. There are many whose minds are muddled by too much marijuana because - and this is important - the strains of marijuana/THC are growing ever more pure and powerful. Many people don't seem to know what they are consuming and think it is the marijuana of old, so they can be forgiven for believing in shiny, happy people and such.
Other people may think they are intelligent and are still effective in their jobs and lives, but if they use marijuana - it is a drug - regularly and during the work week, it's my observation (working in tech) that that's not the case.
Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E-S?
"Though legalization is not without its problems — a spike in emergency room visits attributed to edible pot, persistent black market dealers — it’s mostly been no big deal "
Uh-huh. Sure, no big deal. I'm a person who has never touched marijuana or nicotine, though I did love brandishing my candy cigarettes from the convenience stores. (I assume I got contact highs in college or at any The Black Crowes concert attended because everybody there was high and sweetly offering you their cigarettes - why do some white people often go to concerts to get high and many black people often go for, you know, the music?)
I find this POV of Mr. Egan disingenuous. There are many whose minds are muddled by too much marijuana because - and this is important - the strains of marijuana/THC are growing ever more pure and powerful. Many people don't seem to know what they are consuming and think it is the marijuana of old, so they can be forgiven for believing in shiny, happy people and such.
Other people may think they are intelligent and are still effective in their jobs and lives, but if they use marijuana - it is a drug - regularly and during the work week, it's my observation (working in tech) that that's not the case.
5
Certainly any drug can be misused or abused...and no doubt legal marijuana will be as well. But i would contend that NO amount of misuse or abuse could possibly equal the damage we've inflected on two generations via our punitive "war" on drugs.
In reality, its been a war on drug-users, not drugs (which make their way even to the most closely guarded populations on earth--prisoners!) This war has enriched criminals and corrupted law-enforcement officers all around the world, created the prison-industrial complex, and cost us trillions of dollars utterly wasted in this wrong-headed moralistic approach to what is fundamentally a mental health issue.
Lets declare victory and get out--like we did in Vietnam--and do our best to regulate, to educate, to heal and treat drug-abusers, and start getting something for our money.
In reality, its been a war on drug-users, not drugs (which make their way even to the most closely guarded populations on earth--prisoners!) This war has enriched criminals and corrupted law-enforcement officers all around the world, created the prison-industrial complex, and cost us trillions of dollars utterly wasted in this wrong-headed moralistic approach to what is fundamentally a mental health issue.
Lets declare victory and get out--like we did in Vietnam--and do our best to regulate, to educate, to heal and treat drug-abusers, and start getting something for our money.
5
"In reality, its been a war on drug-users, not drugs (which make their way even to the most closely guarded populations on earth--prisoners!)"
This is a noble thought and in an ideal world, I would certainly agree with it. But I live in a world where a white person can smoke marijuana on the public streets or be high on heroin or painkillers in a library and the former is seen as people relaxing on a night out and the latter is seen as a medical problem. If a black person does either one, he or she will likely end up in the back of a police car or dead.
It's the same with gun control. Everybody wants legal guns but watch when black and brown people start buying lots of legal guns. They'll snap those laws back quite briskly.
This is a noble thought and in an ideal world, I would certainly agree with it. But I live in a world where a white person can smoke marijuana on the public streets or be high on heroin or painkillers in a library and the former is seen as people relaxing on a night out and the latter is seen as a medical problem. If a black person does either one, he or she will likely end up in the back of a police car or dead.
It's the same with gun control. Everybody wants legal guns but watch when black and brown people start buying lots of legal guns. They'll snap those laws back quite briskly.
6
I share the writer's conclusion, but it is simply wrong -- and a disservice -- to speak of pot and heroin in the same breath, to equate Portland and Manila. And why is there no mention of alcohol, arguably more harmful than marijuana?
6
While heroin is dangerous, LSD is not. It actually can be used to cure PTSD, as Dutch psychiatrists have established in journal-published studies.
Millions of rape victims and traumatized soldiers could be helped if this powerful drug were available for Rx delivery,
Millions of rape victims and traumatized soldiers could be helped if this powerful drug were available for Rx delivery,
7
Yes, one of the great tragedies of the "reefer madness" hysteria is that we've thrown some babies out with the bathwater. Indigenous cultures have known for centuries that psychedelics have healing properties--if handled like medicines, or sacraments. By making them illegal, we've insured they will only be used as party drugs--the context most likely to lead to abuse, in the hands of the unskilled, the uninformed, the unprepared.
6
Not only is the party-drug use of it likely to lead to abuse, but it's also dangerous and wasteful:
Dangerous, because if you don't put yourself in the right environment beforehand you can freak out, or someone can freak you out; and
Wasteful, because if you don't treat it like a sacrament you are less likely to receive the spiritual and perspective-related benefits and more likely instead to just "watch the show," so to speak, without really growing as a person.
Dangerous, because if you don't put yourself in the right environment beforehand you can freak out, or someone can freak you out; and
Wasteful, because if you don't treat it like a sacrament you are less likely to receive the spiritual and perspective-related benefits and more likely instead to just "watch the show," so to speak, without really growing as a person.
3
Legalizing recreational marijuana with regulation and taxation is on the ballot in Massachusetts as well as Maine this November.
3
Hi, Timothy.
Twice you mention "crack epidemic", perpetuating a false stereotype that's partly why so many non-whites are spending far more time in prison for selling cocaine than their white counterparts do.
It was a "cocaine epidemic" regardless of the form being sold, and it was being sold from the top of corporate America to the poorest streets.
You correctly note that the addicts you encountered were people with a problem, and with a problem getting treatment. So please if you refer again to the cocaine crisis of decades ago, remember that the bulk of the consumer market driving the import, driving the dealers and the resulting crime were not the stereotyped inner-city crack users. They were "normal" white people.
Twice you mention "crack epidemic", perpetuating a false stereotype that's partly why so many non-whites are spending far more time in prison for selling cocaine than their white counterparts do.
It was a "cocaine epidemic" regardless of the form being sold, and it was being sold from the top of corporate America to the poorest streets.
You correctly note that the addicts you encountered were people with a problem, and with a problem getting treatment. So please if you refer again to the cocaine crisis of decades ago, remember that the bulk of the consumer market driving the import, driving the dealers and the resulting crime were not the stereotyped inner-city crack users. They were "normal" white people.
9
Marijuana came out of black communities. By making it illegal it allowed more blacks to be locked up. When you are locked up you can't vote.
7
Marijuana has been around since the dawn of time. Hemp was and can be used for all kinds of things, rope, clothes, paper, etc. Pot as well as all illegal drugs were brought in to the poorer communities, usually Black, by the people that control the trade. One more recent example ( 80's ) is the CIA bringing and introducing Crack cocaine into the Los Angeles ghettos to help fund the Contras.
4
In a land where cocktail hour is unusual, cannabis has filled the void for many Westerners.
Living half my life in the East and half in the West, I can tell you there is an inherent cultural difference when it comes to cannabis, especially in former Mormon communities where drinking was not culturally ingrained. That is, much of the West from CO to CA.
In the West, this is not so much a political revolution as emergence of the culture that has always been here.
By the way, referring to cannabis as "marijuana" perpetuates the despicable Mexican stereotype opponents set in place last century.
Living half my life in the East and half in the West, I can tell you there is an inherent cultural difference when it comes to cannabis, especially in former Mormon communities where drinking was not culturally ingrained. That is, much of the West from CO to CA.
In the West, this is not so much a political revolution as emergence of the culture that has always been here.
By the way, referring to cannabis as "marijuana" perpetuates the despicable Mexican stereotype opponents set in place last century.
2
Any voice of reason including that of Mr Egan's will be discounted or simply ignored by a people who have little or no use for reality.
Basically the fact a majority of our elected and appointed leaders agree with the sentiment that a supernatural being of some sort controls the universe and us as inhabitants of it should give a clear picture to the absolute impossibility of reason as a guide to the decisions they make.
This thought is rarely raised in columns of any news outlet which have no trouble reporting and commenting on social issues demanding reason as the point of departure.
Until the truth of existence is accepted no actual problems based on and found in provable reality will ever be addressed in anyway requiring reason as the standard. This denial causes a circular thought process which cannot advance beyond the limits imposed by ignorance. Fear of life, which is peculiar to those who will not accept and deal with mortality, is an infectious mental disease that has the acceptance of truth as the only cure.
Doubtless this"atheistic" thought may be considered as having no relation to the question raised, but the substitution of belief for reality as an actual mental disease which affects all judgement.
People who will not accept this reality have little chance to accept any other which is the reason so many political decisions lack reason.
Basically the fact a majority of our elected and appointed leaders agree with the sentiment that a supernatural being of some sort controls the universe and us as inhabitants of it should give a clear picture to the absolute impossibility of reason as a guide to the decisions they make.
This thought is rarely raised in columns of any news outlet which have no trouble reporting and commenting on social issues demanding reason as the point of departure.
Until the truth of existence is accepted no actual problems based on and found in provable reality will ever be addressed in anyway requiring reason as the standard. This denial causes a circular thought process which cannot advance beyond the limits imposed by ignorance. Fear of life, which is peculiar to those who will not accept and deal with mortality, is an infectious mental disease that has the acceptance of truth as the only cure.
Doubtless this"atheistic" thought may be considered as having no relation to the question raised, but the substitution of belief for reality as an actual mental disease which affects all judgement.
People who will not accept this reality have little chance to accept any other which is the reason so many political decisions lack reason.
7
"As with most social reforms, it only seems impossible until it’s obvious."
People love to have someone to wag their finger at, though. As a nation we've always been able to pretend that addiction was an inner city based and minority issue. I read that the opiod craze has improved the availability of donor organs from victims of overdose. Perhaps, in bringing home to white, suburban and rural America the realization that addiction is a disease and not a moral failing or an ethnic predilection, our painkiller epidemic will have yet another silver lining.
People love to have someone to wag their finger at, though. As a nation we've always been able to pretend that addiction was an inner city based and minority issue. I read that the opiod craze has improved the availability of donor organs from victims of overdose. Perhaps, in bringing home to white, suburban and rural America the realization that addiction is a disease and not a moral failing or an ethnic predilection, our painkiller epidemic will have yet another silver lining.
2
How about a system that earmarks marijuana taxes for drug treatment, alcohol taxes for alcohol treatment and tobacco taxes for smoking addiction treatment. If we did that the treatment programs may be able to get the funding they need.
2
The solution to America's drug problem has been obvious for decades. The mystery is why the greatest capitalist engine in history never adopted it. The solution is as easy as a, b, c: (a) legalize, (b) regulate, and (c) tax. We could take a big chunk out of the national debt by doing so with little downside risk. And we could reduce the number of crimes associated with drug sales and use including drug wars against international cartels, and also crimes of personal violence such as muggings, murders, robberies, burglaries. I suspect we could reduce drug-related crimes to the level of current alcohol-related crimes. DWI will still be against the law. Committing an assault under the influence will still be an assault. But eliminating possession as a crime will relieve bloated prison numbers all by itself.
There is always some risk, but I think it is mostly manageable. A line -- not necessarily easy to fix -- will need to be drawn between drugs that are inherently dangerous (meaning, for present purposes, those which create significant medical and social costs) and those which aren't. A good, constant, education program should prevent any more addiction than alcohol currently creates.
There is always some risk, but I think it is mostly manageable. A line -- not necessarily easy to fix -- will need to be drawn between drugs that are inherently dangerous (meaning, for present purposes, those which create significant medical and social costs) and those which aren't. A good, constant, education program should prevent any more addiction than alcohol currently creates.
6
No worries, Dude. The Hedge-funders are on it already. What could possibly go wrong?
2
Anything that holds the promise of substantially increased net tax revenue will eventually be approved somewhere. See pot. A corollary to this is that anything already generating significant tax revenue will remain, no matter how damaging or costly. See alcohol and tobacco.
5
I'm hopeful that, as societal acceptance of marijuana progresses, scrutiny of the tremendous damage done by alcohol and tobacco will also intensify. Actions to reduce use of alcohol and tobacco, such as aggressive sin taxing, increased penalties and stricter limits on driving under the influence, stronger risk awareness messaging and greater prohibition on advertising...like much of the World has now...have long been needed here.
5
The legal prohibition against marijuana use in America, particularly pot's inclusion as a schedule 1 drug, has allowed it to become a gateway drug. For the kid who tries readily available cannabis discovers the next morning that everything was as it had been, except now understands that schedule 1 drugs must not be dangerous. Moreover, the day after, the kid realizes that some laws are wrong and can rightly be ignored. Heroin addiction has risen in direct proportion to the enforcement of restrictive laws against cannabis, which has a long history of human use.
4
Some of the parties involved in selling pot are also involved in other drugs. It is not the pot that is the gateway, it is the people involved in selling it and other drugs. no one would have any reason to deal with people who could supply various other drugs when it is legal to walk into a dispensary and purchase over the counter.
It is now legal to grow your own in Oregon, although I have been growing my own for thirty five years or so, thus dealing with none of the "dealers". Because I did not have to go to others to purchase pot, I have no idea of where to get any type of another drug, nor do I even know any of the people who deal with the dealing. Definitely not what I would consider a gateway drug. Legalizing marijuana is a great start to really efficiently controlling and shutting down this drug war we created.
It is now legal to grow your own in Oregon, although I have been growing my own for thirty five years or so, thus dealing with none of the "dealers". Because I did not have to go to others to purchase pot, I have no idea of where to get any type of another drug, nor do I even know any of the people who deal with the dealing. Definitely not what I would consider a gateway drug. Legalizing marijuana is a great start to really efficiently controlling and shutting down this drug war we created.
2
We agree pot should be nationally legalized. When the use of other illegal drugs, and probably opioid use as well, decline with legalization of pot, then we'll see that pot fills the need for most people's use. Disrespect for schedule 1 listings, and disrespect for public law by youth is a heavy price to pay by sustaining the so-called "war" on drugs.
Here's evidence that in states where cannabis has been legalized, painkiller deaths have dropped by 25%: http://www.newsweek.com/states-medical-marijuana-painkiller-deaths-drop-...
Here's evidence that in states where cannabis has been legalized, painkiller deaths have dropped by 25%: http://www.newsweek.com/states-medical-marijuana-painkiller-deaths-drop-...
3
The problem with drugs (legal and illegal) is that there are way too many people who use them irresponsibly. Looking back at college I recall some students who stayed stoned all day. Can't imagine it did them any good and was a great way to avoid dealing with their problems. Ufortunately drug use can affect the rest of us. This is not much different than people who speed, run lights and take other risks. if they get wrapped around a tree, I suppose you could call that Darwinian selection. But way too often innocent parties are badly affected by others' irresponsibility. Since I don't make any money in the pot business, I don't see legalizing it as some major societal break thru. There will be benefits by legalizing it as well as detriments. Alcohol abuse is a major problem in this country and yet it is legalized. So if people want to waste themselves with pot, go for it, just don't take it out on the rest of us.
9
Even the Delta-Delta-Deltas at Faber College were flunking out.
1
Mr Pragmatic *** your not too pragmatic. People are using it anyway, whether it's legal or not. So your argument makes no sense. Or maybe should we outlaw driving because people run red lights.
1
One direct result of 'War on Drugs' is that legal marijuana now costs at least 5-10 times the price that is reasonable for a relatively simple to cultivate home grown product. Hopefully legal and widespread cultivation will bring the price to a sensible level.
Recent reports show that pot prices have dropped from $2500 a lb to $1500 per lb in Colorado in the last year. Another $1000 per lb drop and the cost will still be 'high' but acceptable.
Recent reports show that pot prices have dropped from $2500 a lb to $1500 per lb in Colorado in the last year. Another $1000 per lb drop and the cost will still be 'high' but acceptable.
6
for a commercial product the prices are pretty reasonable in Colorado. 1500 a pound is just under 100 dollars per ounce which is not bad. seen it a lot higher when illegal. Remember if you grow your own tomatoes they are free or at least very cheap, while store bought carries a price.
1
As long as marijuana remains illegal under federal law, residents of the states that voted or will vote to legalize marijuana are at the mercy of the federal government or, more specifically, who is elected president. A president Trump - or someone of his ilk - would be free to ignore state laws legalizing pot and prosecute (and persecute) all buyers, sellers and users. What this country needs is an end to reefer madness era drug laws, along with increased treatment funding for all addictions, whether pot, booze or heroin. How would we pay for more treatment options? Well, I'd start with redirecting some of the funds that currently go to the prison-industrial complex to house all the addicts, including many non-violent ones. As for violent addicts, we already have plenty of criminal statutes to deal with them in the criminal justice system, without the need for anti-drug laws.
4
Trump would legalize drugs in general if he thought he could make some money or go bankrupt, either way he wins.
1
We bought two pot plants in 4 inch pots at a dispensary last spring, planted them in the vegetable garden, and watched them grow to 8 feet tall. Last week we harvested the plants, putting up to dry about ten times more marijuana than we can possibly ever use ourselves. To be honest we never smoke it, but bake into brownies, and eat a tiny sliver maybe once or twice a month. But it's legal here, the double onus of illegality and outsized value is completely gone from our lives. We have traded some for sauce tomatoes, some for future home made beer and hard cider. About half the crop will be composted , only because we don't know have any more use for it. Because we are children of the 1960s, it's taken us a few years to stop looking over our shoulders, or to strange circling airplanes. I conclude that our new relationship with cannabis is sane, trivial, fun, and correct. Come on You folks living anywhere besides the west coast, try it, you'll like it.
16
As a marijuana consultant, I am poised to take advantage of this opportunity. I am excited, marijuana is the future medicine for the masses.
Big Pharma has been pushing to keep marijuana outlawed because they know they can't patent this medicine and make billions off of it. Instead, in Colorado, we have almost 1000 small businesses that pulled in almost a Billion dollars last year. That's a billion dollars for local small buisiness in Colorado.
Marijuana legalization will happen nationwide in 10 years. After 80 years of prohibition, we are finally starting to make sense with out marijuana law.
Big Pharma has been pushing to keep marijuana outlawed because they know they can't patent this medicine and make billions off of it. Instead, in Colorado, we have almost 1000 small businesses that pulled in almost a Billion dollars last year. That's a billion dollars for local small buisiness in Colorado.
Marijuana legalization will happen nationwide in 10 years. After 80 years of prohibition, we are finally starting to make sense with out marijuana law.
12
It is not possible to educate or help people to grow into an appreciation of their commonality with others and the freedom of personal responsibility by forcing them to pray for their rotten sins and feel guilty for for being what they are. Religion is a "no you can't do that training system". It is obvious for most that it has failed. Morality or common sense cannot be forced on people. People who follow the law because they do not want to get caught breaking it are void, unconscious. Intelligent and awake people stop at red lights because it makes sense to have stop lights. The function of Law is to layout guide lines for the purpose of maintaining the welfare of the Common Good. Laws that prohibit people form hurting or interfering with another's free will are necessary. People obey them because they make sense.
Laws that prohibit individuals from eating certain foods on certain days or smoking dope or drinking alcohol or shooting meth or taking acid or what ever they want to are stupid for two reasons. 1
They do not work. 2. They prevent people form learning self control and self responsibility from experience and they turn people into guilt and fear ridden individuals.
Laws that prohibit individuals from eating certain foods on certain days or smoking dope or drinking alcohol or shooting meth or taking acid or what ever they want to are stupid for two reasons. 1
They do not work. 2. They prevent people form learning self control and self responsibility from experience and they turn people into guilt and fear ridden individuals.
5
There is no direct comparison between California and the Philippines, since Cannabis is a plant not a drug. The lie of the "drug war" has always been to equate Cannabis with heroin etc., and it has always been a political war, waged first against black people in the 30s, elements of the political left in the 60s, and more recently against anyone who may provide fodder for our incarceration machine.
18
Why does any discussion of drug use always have to center on addiction? The truth is, the vast majority of drug users aren't addicts, and pursue happy (some might even say happier), productive lives while also enjoying drugs. As Marilyn Manson, of all people, once said, "It's the drug abusers that make drug users look bad."
You can drink and be successful; you can take drugs and be successful. You can do whatever you want and be successful, as long as you don't overdo it.
You can drink and be successful; you can take drugs and be successful. You can do whatever you want and be successful, as long as you don't overdo it.
21
its about time
i wonder how th millions whose lives were ruined and spent time in prison for possession of pot feel about this
a little bitter, perhaps
18
Better late than never! We need to break the chain of imprisoning people for their addictions.
2
Nicely put. So much waste in money and jail on a drug addiction problem that will never disappear completely, hence, in need of being open for scrutiny so the 'sufferers' can be helped...instead of filling up the prisons by private companies deviously enriching themselves at our cost. Let's wise up.
8
"A clear majority of Americans now favor pot legalization."
Not me, not really. When young people pass me on the street at 7AM, they blow a real stink into my face. Or if I'm sitting at an open window, the smoke wafts into my house. Tobacco is smelly enough, but marijuana really takes the cake.
And then, although I am sure successful people can regulate their pot smoking, just as people can have a cocktail before dinner, or wine with dinner, and function very successfully, the young men who stand on street corners smoking pot now with impunity, it seems, and urinating in people's gardens and against apartment house walls, are not going anywhere. Just add one more reason for the atrophying of their brains and the general worsening of any area they're in.
That goes equally for urban blacks and rural whites. No drug sharpens your brain, at least not for long.
Not me, not really. When young people pass me on the street at 7AM, they blow a real stink into my face. Or if I'm sitting at an open window, the smoke wafts into my house. Tobacco is smelly enough, but marijuana really takes the cake.
And then, although I am sure successful people can regulate their pot smoking, just as people can have a cocktail before dinner, or wine with dinner, and function very successfully, the young men who stand on street corners smoking pot now with impunity, it seems, and urinating in people's gardens and against apartment house walls, are not going anywhere. Just add one more reason for the atrophying of their brains and the general worsening of any area they're in.
That goes equally for urban blacks and rural whites. No drug sharpens your brain, at least not for long.
8
How many people are you talking about who urinate in people's garden's and against apartment walls, and how many young people are up at 7 am smoking as they pass you by walking? I think you are generalizing and making stuff up.
3
We have freedom to smoke in our homes now, because the police do not care. Smoking weed should be allowed where smoking tobacco is allowed, and only there. We can decide about smoking on city streets through the usual processes.
1
Let's see I have been smoking Pot since 1968. Since then, I have started several successful companies, have multiple patents in renewable energy. Late in the evening - after a long day at work - yes at 69 I still work - a good bowl of Pot is a great way to relax and finish the day and sleep like a baby.
Pot should be legal and wasting the resources to arrest 600,000 people a year is a waste of police resources and in the process affects these people lives in some cases for the rest of the lives
Pot should be legal and wasting the resources to arrest 600,000 people a year is a waste of police resources and in the process affects these people lives in some cases for the rest of the lives
51
The problem with legalizing Marijuana is that the people who use it insist on DRIVING. We have all seen, smelled and experienced some one driving while toking on a reffer. Recently, I stopped at a rest stop to do a conference call and was shocked as individuals drove up; smoked a joint and went back into their cars and in a couple of cases large delivery trucks.
Washington State has seen a spike in traffic fatalities which coincides with legalization and users who use marijuana.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news/stoned-driving-fatal-accidents
Marijuana like Alcohol use does impair people. While marijuana may raise tax revenues and reduce "unnecessary" incarceration, the unintended cost of loss of life, destruction of property and consequences need to be considered.
Most of us are motorists, pedestrians and in my case a cyclist. We need to develop policing, procedures or technologies to prevent marijuana impaired (stoner) driving.
http://www.leafscience.com/2016/05/22/5-facts-marijuana-driving-high
I am open to suggestions.
Washington State has seen a spike in traffic fatalities which coincides with legalization and users who use marijuana.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news/stoned-driving-fatal-accidents
Marijuana like Alcohol use does impair people. While marijuana may raise tax revenues and reduce "unnecessary" incarceration, the unintended cost of loss of life, destruction of property and consequences need to be considered.
Most of us are motorists, pedestrians and in my case a cyclist. We need to develop policing, procedures or technologies to prevent marijuana impaired (stoner) driving.
http://www.leafscience.com/2016/05/22/5-facts-marijuana-driving-high
I am open to suggestions.
10
then you should be for banning booze
coz that causes thousands of crashes and deaths
oh, wait ...
Treat driving while stoned the same as driving while drunk. And while at it, treat driving while texting the same too. Considering how many texting fools I see on my daily commute, I bet the toll from that is worse than from marijuana use.
3
The mortality spike you noted coincided with the sharp drop in gas prices, and also occurred in "non-legalization" states as well as the nation as a whole. Colorado did not have the same experience: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/08/05/since-mariju...
1
If drugs were as bad as prohibitionists say, the entire scenario would be self limiting. Prohibitionists need to keep it illegal to introduce CRIME; murder, corruption, overdose (Purchase your prescriptions from a stranger on the corner, see how long you last), gangs, the Secret police hired thugs (narcs), prison building, prisons overflowing, prohibitionist cronies privately owning prisons for profit!,
Prohibitionists siphon a Billion dollars a year from our taxes (Trump excluded) to placate their addiction to punish folks and feed their prohibitionist industrial complex.
Any responsible substance use should be beyond the moralizers reach.
If a person cannot handle it, then it is a circumstance for their doctor to be involved. Leave me out of it !
I want my taxes to go for things to improve our country, not harm it.
Prohibitionists siphon a Billion dollars a year from our taxes (Trump excluded) to placate their addiction to punish folks and feed their prohibitionist industrial complex.
Any responsible substance use should be beyond the moralizers reach.
If a person cannot handle it, then it is a circumstance for their doctor to be involved. Leave me out of it !
I want my taxes to go for things to improve our country, not harm it.
21
I'm a Woodstock veteran. Spent all three days there - with tickets. I went to college in the late 60s and early 70s. I did more than my fair share of recreational drugs. I have serious misgivings about certain usage patterns of legal weed.
My partner and I are full-time RVers, and we summer up on Washington's Olympic Peninsula where there are cannabis stores everywhere. I wandered into one and chatted with a salesperson. I got the rundown on the different varieties and delivery mechanisms available over the counter. It sounded like a lecture on organic chemistry - all very clinical. I left without purchasing anything.
I can clearly recall my usage days and the haze that marijuana cast over my life. I was in engineering school at an Ivy League university. Pot and school did not mix well. I wound up on academic probation at the end of sophomore year. I think it's fair to say that drug use contributed to that.
The following year, I cut recreational drug use way back and concentrated on academics. Grades went up. I wound up on the Dean's List. I graduated and went to grad school. Many of my fellow students did not, and I suspect that drug use was a factor. After graduating, I pretty much left drugs behind.
I'm in favor of legalized weed, but we need to be careful. Just as with alcohol - my current intoxicant of choice - we need to discipline ourselves toward moderation and situational usage. It's not all a party.
My partner and I are full-time RVers, and we summer up on Washington's Olympic Peninsula where there are cannabis stores everywhere. I wandered into one and chatted with a salesperson. I got the rundown on the different varieties and delivery mechanisms available over the counter. It sounded like a lecture on organic chemistry - all very clinical. I left without purchasing anything.
I can clearly recall my usage days and the haze that marijuana cast over my life. I was in engineering school at an Ivy League university. Pot and school did not mix well. I wound up on academic probation at the end of sophomore year. I think it's fair to say that drug use contributed to that.
The following year, I cut recreational drug use way back and concentrated on academics. Grades went up. I wound up on the Dean's List. I graduated and went to grad school. Many of my fellow students did not, and I suspect that drug use was a factor. After graduating, I pretty much left drugs behind.
I'm in favor of legalized weed, but we need to be careful. Just as with alcohol - my current intoxicant of choice - we need to discipline ourselves toward moderation and situational usage. It's not all a party.
25
ALL DRUGS Should be decriminalized and distributed by government clinics. That would shut down the drug cartels for the most part and help people get treatment for what is a medical condition. We've already seen the horrors generated by treating substance use as a crime. It's great for the bottom lines of owners of privatized prisons. But destructive for the rest of us. Marijuana is sedating, meaning that people who use it are likely to become relaxed, drowsy or sleepy. Moderate use is probably not more risky than using coffee or tea, which, both being stimulants, tend to have an activating effect on users. If we were really serious about substance control, we'd make refined white sugar a Schedule 1 narcotic. It's addictive and causing an epidemic of obesity along with diabetes, high blood pressure and heart problems. Refined sugar has no nutritional value at all. But nobody would ever control one of the most dangerous substances regularly ingested by so many people. Meanwhile, it is just a matter of time before marijuana is decriminalized and legalized for medicinal use. Holland has not become a medical disaster by selling marijuana and using it legally. The US won't either.
14
holland has defacto legalisation of pot and hash
heroin and cocaine are big problems, and th cops use resources saved from busting pot smokers to use on rehab for th hard drug users
Egan's heart is in the right place, and he's usually dead on, but this is a disjointed and ultimately zero impact column.
Does he want to discuss cannabis legalization or does he want to talk about the heroin scourge? What's the point of citing Duterte's murderous reign and mentioning DT's name?
And what's up with the phrase "chemical diversion"? It's meaningless, since from runners and cyclists to kids twisting on swings, that's part of being human.
If he's in favor of recasting our drug laws, then focus on that. I believe the point is that Americans have bigger fish to fry than dealing with 20th century, no-brainer issues like cannabis legalization and gay marriage. Let's talk bias in policing, let's talk crumbling infrastructure, let's talk molasses in Congress, let's talk homegrown terrorism, let's talk immigration reform.
Pick a topic and address it. But don't put your early morning thoughts into a blender and publish them.
Does he want to discuss cannabis legalization or does he want to talk about the heroin scourge? What's the point of citing Duterte's murderous reign and mentioning DT's name?
And what's up with the phrase "chemical diversion"? It's meaningless, since from runners and cyclists to kids twisting on swings, that's part of being human.
If he's in favor of recasting our drug laws, then focus on that. I believe the point is that Americans have bigger fish to fry than dealing with 20th century, no-brainer issues like cannabis legalization and gay marriage. Let's talk bias in policing, let's talk crumbling infrastructure, let's talk molasses in Congress, let's talk homegrown terrorism, let's talk immigration reform.
Pick a topic and address it. But don't put your early morning thoughts into a blender and publish them.
2
Legalization is a good topic for debate -- but smoking is not. Smoking is hazardous to individuals and the public and should not be promoted in any way.
5
The illegal drugs targeted in our foolish losing war should be made legal and treated as a potentially medical abuse health problem like alcohol and tobacco. Regulate and control them for quality, educate people about the dangers of use and misuse, tax them and keep them away from kids. Take drugs out of the criminal justice realm.
Choom Gang reefer smoking member Barry Obama was really lucky that he was half-white and living with his white grandparents in Honolulu. Barry got a white legal "pass" that he would not have been entitled to were he born and bred black on the South Side Chicago.
Choom Gang reefer smoking member Barry Obama was really lucky that he was half-white and living with his white grandparents in Honolulu. Barry got a white legal "pass" that he would not have been entitled to were he born and bred black on the South Side Chicago.
10
Its scary, good thing Halloween fast approaches, how the policies of Richard Nixon linger to undermine the general happiness of the population.
On the subject of race relations, to this day Nixon's southern strategy controls the republican party. As to drug use Nixon's "War on Drugs", of 1971 continues to waste our resources and try to control our morals just like the 1920's alcohol Prohibition.
Time to dump "tricky-Dick". (I feel like a kid of the 60's again!).
On the subject of race relations, to this day Nixon's southern strategy controls the republican party. As to drug use Nixon's "War on Drugs", of 1971 continues to waste our resources and try to control our morals just like the 1920's alcohol Prohibition.
Time to dump "tricky-Dick". (I feel like a kid of the 60's again!).
17
The analogy that many people make between alcohol and marijuana is completely bogus. Marijuana *should* be compared to caffeine--both are safe in normal use, harmful for a small number of people, and potentially a problem when natural sources are concentrated (as in energy drinks). And I'd bet that a higher percentage of heroin or LSD users use coffee and Coke than use pot.
19
Listen up, people. I grew up in the haze of cannabis and LSD that was the '60s, and I did inhale. A lot. Like most of us now of a certain age, I welcomed legalization as a return to sanity. Summer of love. Grateful Dead. Woodstock. All that.
But there is a part of the equation most of us haven't given much thought. I now not only give it thought, I'm livin' the dream, and I don't mean that in a good way.
With legal pot 'boutiques' everywhere, selling designer weed that is orders of magnitude more potent and more expensive than the stuff we used to buy in ten buck bags when Joplin and Hendrix ruled the airwaves, and all was peace love and granola, what about our kids? Do you suppose they haven't noticed and laid their hands on readily available ganja?
It isn't legal for them, and the law is still enforced against minors. And the drug isn't benign either.
I'll tell you what. More and more of these kids, from middle school on up, are spacing out on insanely powerful weed and a panoply of cannabis preparations that have derailed their productive lives. An increasing number branch out from there to try all sorts of highs. More and more of them are going away to inpatient treatment and 'therapeutic boarding schools' that cost more than Stanford, to try to break the habit and get back on track.
It ain't all peace signs and rainbow colored microbuses, my fellow recycled hippies and acolytes of Timothy Leary. It has become a minefield for kids and parents.
But there is a part of the equation most of us haven't given much thought. I now not only give it thought, I'm livin' the dream, and I don't mean that in a good way.
With legal pot 'boutiques' everywhere, selling designer weed that is orders of magnitude more potent and more expensive than the stuff we used to buy in ten buck bags when Joplin and Hendrix ruled the airwaves, and all was peace love and granola, what about our kids? Do you suppose they haven't noticed and laid their hands on readily available ganja?
It isn't legal for them, and the law is still enforced against minors. And the drug isn't benign either.
I'll tell you what. More and more of these kids, from middle school on up, are spacing out on insanely powerful weed and a panoply of cannabis preparations that have derailed their productive lives. An increasing number branch out from there to try all sorts of highs. More and more of them are going away to inpatient treatment and 'therapeutic boarding schools' that cost more than Stanford, to try to break the habit and get back on track.
It ain't all peace signs and rainbow colored microbuses, my fellow recycled hippies and acolytes of Timothy Leary. It has become a minefield for kids and parents.
14
Goods points and well worth consideration. However, even in states where it is illegal kids still manage to get their hands on it. I sure did when I was a teenager. What is the answer then? I don't know, but legalization still makes much more sense than prohibition.
2
"More and more of these kids, from middle school on up, are spacing out on insanely powerful weed and a panoply of cannabis preparations "
I don't know where you got that information. Mine is that middle school up ignoring pot far more than my generation; it's all video games, all looking at their phones -- frankly, kids talking to each other, relating to each other, goofing around with each other on pot far more positive than a bunch of kids going into a diner, taking a seat, hitting their phones, and never looking at each other.
I don't know where you got that information. Mine is that middle school up ignoring pot far more than my generation; it's all video games, all looking at their phones -- frankly, kids talking to each other, relating to each other, goofing around with each other on pot far more positive than a bunch of kids going into a diner, taking a seat, hitting their phones, and never looking at each other.
3
Your cautionary tale is duly noted. However, the picture you painted of swarms of underage users swamped by high-potency marijuana omits one important bit of information. In Colorado, since legalization, the rate of marijuana smoking among teenagers has actually fallen slightly.
It's curiously ironic that you wistfully recall the pleasures of your own drug usage while denying your grandchildren the same experience.
It's curiously ironic that you wistfully recall the pleasures of your own drug usage while denying your grandchildren the same experience.
3
Now that the entire west coast of our country is poised to make cannabis legal, the game is up for the liars and prevaricators that have inflicted this ridiculous 'Drug War" on us.
As in most wrongdoing, the question is "Why", and the answer, as always, is "Follow the money".
The Booze Lords, the crooked cops and prosecutors that want to steal your home, the prison profiteers, all the folks who stand to gain from the prohibition of anything will fight decriminalization to the bitter end. Because their jobs depend on the fact that they can never acknowledge the truth. And the truth is that Cannabis, in all it's forms, is a benign and mostly beneficial herb. Anyone who reads the clinical studies knows that already. But for eighty years the lies and self serving propaganda from the "Drug Warriors" has prevailed.
I certainly hope that as sanity starts to prevail, in our rush to change course on this issue, we simply decriminalize this natural herb and not turn it into a profit source for the greedheads that kept it illegal for these many years.
As in most wrongdoing, the question is "Why", and the answer, as always, is "Follow the money".
The Booze Lords, the crooked cops and prosecutors that want to steal your home, the prison profiteers, all the folks who stand to gain from the prohibition of anything will fight decriminalization to the bitter end. Because their jobs depend on the fact that they can never acknowledge the truth. And the truth is that Cannabis, in all it's forms, is a benign and mostly beneficial herb. Anyone who reads the clinical studies knows that already. But for eighty years the lies and self serving propaganda from the "Drug Warriors" has prevailed.
I certainly hope that as sanity starts to prevail, in our rush to change course on this issue, we simply decriminalize this natural herb and not turn it into a profit source for the greedheads that kept it illegal for these many years.
40
The Donald Trump of the Philippines? I think the Philippine people should rise up and eliminate this murderous dictator, but is it really fair to Duterte to compare him to Trump? Duterte is only killing his OWN people--he's the Assad or Hussein of the Phillippines. The Donald wants to expand the killing, around the world, using "boots on the ground," and nuclear weapons.
4
Legalized marijuana is social justice. Legalized marijuana is medical justice. Legalized marijuana is economic justice. Millennials get it. Bernie gets it. C'mon Hillary...show us you get it as well.
11
Why, exactly is LSD a schedule 1 drug?
2
Beer & Hard Liquor are legal in most, if not all states.
So what exactly is the question?
So what exactly is the question?
3
I have no problems with adults using marijuana.
The problems that concern me regarding marijuana are:
1. I have seen adults who are careless with their pot, dropping it in public (e.g. at a daycare), having it sitting out where their kids play, etc. Since it is generally stored in small packages, rather than large glass bottles like alcohol, it seems that there is less active management of it.
2. When it was legalized in Colorado, stores carried a lot of items like marijuana “candies." Obviously a kid might want to eat something that looks like candy. Same thing for baked goods that include pot.
Marijuana legalization does make sense, but users need to make concerted efforts to avoid allowing children to find and ingest it accidentally. I don't know if most legalization legislation includes provisions for this, but I hope that it would.
The problems that concern me regarding marijuana are:
1. I have seen adults who are careless with their pot, dropping it in public (e.g. at a daycare), having it sitting out where their kids play, etc. Since it is generally stored in small packages, rather than large glass bottles like alcohol, it seems that there is less active management of it.
2. When it was legalized in Colorado, stores carried a lot of items like marijuana “candies." Obviously a kid might want to eat something that looks like candy. Same thing for baked goods that include pot.
Marijuana legalization does make sense, but users need to make concerted efforts to avoid allowing children to find and ingest it accidentally. I don't know if most legalization legislation includes provisions for this, but I hope that it would.
4
As if booze isn't left out on the bar in the cellar or in cabinets in the living room never locked? Booze maybe stored in larger glass bottles but as a teacher it came into school with that AM OJ and morning cola.
America has always gotten high. Booze, weed. The latest drug is DRUMPF. You can mainline him on cable.
It seems to appeal to people that are vulnerable to smooth talking grifters. For the rest of us,we need to smoke. Better to watch this sad chapter in Amurica medicated.
It seems to appeal to people that are vulnerable to smooth talking grifters. For the rest of us,we need to smoke. Better to watch this sad chapter in Amurica medicated.
6
They are doing meth in the Philippines. Tweakers suck.
This is dumb, dumb. Legalizing a drug that makes people stupid is not a good idea. This is like the early days of cigarettes, when they were touted as a health aid. That turned out to be tragically wrong. The health effects are not known. For all the talk about legal pot shops, the fields were the pot is grown are the wild west, there is no regulation. The use of banned pesticides is common and testing of what is actually in or on the pot is not done. The kick from your pot could just as well come from DDT.
Instead of helping people be successful, we are opening another freeway to the bottom, dumb, dumb. Maybe we deserve Trump after all.
Instead of helping people be successful, we are opening another freeway to the bottom, dumb, dumb. Maybe we deserve Trump after all.
3
Trump/ The guy who claims neve rto have drank never mind smoke weed? That is enough to do both. Legalize and overseeing growing industry would answer your issues. our food industry including growing and dining is basically safe and is monitored fairly well though there are some well known exceptions, but few and not regularly happening. Nothing is 100%. Cars are safer now than ever. obviously making weed illegal certainly didn't stop its usage. Ever hear of prohibition? how did that work out? It only brought Capone and the mafia and gave them in in, like drugs has brought gangs and cartels. America the home of the marketplace. And the marketplace has decided it likes weed. Making it illegal hardly changes the desire for it.
3
Why can't people do better things with their time than get "wasted?" Is it, in part, that many get introduced to such false panaceas at a young and vulnerable age? If so, they should be protected from such substances. Allowing yet more drugs to become readily available is a tragedy in the making, just like alcohol and prescription drug abuse.
2
Has there ever been a major culture that hasn't had its outlets? why us ethe term "wasted" when it is not necessarily so? Every person having that one Manhattan coming home from work is getting "trashed' "wasted' or "drunk" are they? That small bowl of weed is not getting wasted. Perhaps "relaxed" is a better word for most for both circumstances? Something illegal makes a better market for those wanting that something sometimes. As a teacher of high school my students tell me getting weed is easier than getting a 6pk of Bud. How many smoking weed in college are now our doctors, politicos CEOs? Few have long term issues as to weed or even immediate issues. They obviously weren't that wasted to not not get their education. How people spend their time is their choice. Some see going to church as time being wasted. Others see NFL Sunday as wasted time. Let the individual choose. Most alcohol is NOT abuse. That nice bottle of Chianti with pasta or the Saturday night porterhouse is pure enjoyment. Prescription abuse? Does that include those using them for that yearly flu or as an answer to diabetes, high blood pressure? Yeah bar those those opiates and deny those in the last stages of cancer suffer.
6
Cannabis doesn't get you wasted. If that's your goal, the undisputed champion, all the way back to the beginning of civilization, is good old, legal, regulated, alcohol.
Also, prohibiting drugs does nothing to limit access to them. It just puts their production and distribution into the hands of criminals, destroys communities, and drains public resources. Put your energy into giving people other things to do instead of trying to get them to stop doing things they like but you don't understand.
Also, prohibiting drugs does nothing to limit access to them. It just puts their production and distribution into the hands of criminals, destroys communities, and drains public resources. Put your energy into giving people other things to do instead of trying to get them to stop doing things they like but you don't understand.
1
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Jim. I do appreciate your perspective, though I've heard it many times before. In fact, I teach, too, though philosophy in college, including Ethics and the debate over drug use and legalization. Part of your argument rests on the claims that, well, it's easy to get and many adult professionals use or have used it, too. Do you really believe that is sufficient grounds to justify its legalization? Lot's of people lie, cheat and steal, too. Does that make it OK? The flaw here is the classic confusion between descriptive ethics (i.e., how people do behave or tend to act) and normative ethics (how people should behave). Like most forms of ethics teaches, shouldn't we strive to improve ourselves, and perhaps the human condition along with it, rather than excuse our behavior, however self-indulgent, dubious or even degrading, by appeal to personal "choice?" Some choices are harmful and shouldn't be encouraged. Sucking smoke into one's lungs doesn't seem particularly natural, healthy or wise to me!
2
We could have used a non pot-addled third party candidate this year. But thanks to the cavalier attitude espoused by the author of this article, we were treated to the jaw-dropping question: And what is Aleppo?
4
We could have used a non drug-war-addled major party candidate.
Bernie would make pot legal. DWS Clinton crony put an end to that. I have little faith that once Hillary wins that she will have the goodness and conscience that Sander would but hope springs eternal.
6
I think the "what's the big deal?" reaction is tinged with a certain amount of privilege. Try living as a non-smoker in a crowded multifamily home where the other tenants smoke throughout their waking hours. In your lovely brownstone or detached single-family, you might not smell it and breathe it if your neighbors smoke, but in a three-decker, you will. And so will your kids.
7
If only there was a way to keep it away from those most likely to be harmed by its use but prohibition hasn't stopped kids from smoking pot and many a fortune has been made selling it to them. Prohibition also hasn't stopped kids from using tobacco or alcohol but regulating and taxing the hell out of it does have some beneficial effects. For one thing it helps pay for the effort to convince you why you shouldn't be using it. Better to do something similar with marijuana than having the pot industry in control, making claims that pot is harmless and can cure everything from ingrown toenails to epilepsy.
From the United Nations Office on Drug Control, the global coordinator of the drug war – only 10% of drug users have a problem with their substance. Some 90% of the people who use a drug – the overwhelming majority – are not harmed by it. Even William Bennett, the most aggressive drug czar in U.S. history, admits: ‘ Non-addicted users still comprise the vast bulk of out drug-involved population.” The result is that the harmed 10 percent make up 100 percent of the DISTORTED official picture. In 1995, the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted a massive scientific study of cocaine and its effects. They discovered that “ experimental and occasional use are by far the most common types of use, and compulsive/dysfunctional use is far less common.” The U.S. government threatened to cut off funding to WHO unless they suppressed the report. It has never been published but was leaked.
In the United States alone, legalizing drugs would have saved $41 BILLION a year currently spent on arresting, trying, and jailing users and sellers, according to a detailed study by the Cato Institute. If the drugs were then taxed at a similar rate to alcohol and tobacco, they would raise an additional $46.7 BILLION a year, according to calculations by Professor Jeffrey Miron of the Department of Economics at Harvard University. That’s $87.8 BILLION next year, and every year. With that money you could provide treatment and social reconnection for every drug addict in America.
In the United States alone, legalizing drugs would have saved $41 BILLION a year currently spent on arresting, trying, and jailing users and sellers, according to a detailed study by the Cato Institute. If the drugs were then taxed at a similar rate to alcohol and tobacco, they would raise an additional $46.7 BILLION a year, according to calculations by Professor Jeffrey Miron of the Department of Economics at Harvard University. That’s $87.8 BILLION next year, and every year. With that money you could provide treatment and social reconnection for every drug addict in America.
7
Hallelujah! An op-ed in the Times I agree with.
I just heard some story on NPR, bastion of misinformation, that said 9 percent of Americans smoke pot. I'd put thaon a par with Ahmadinejad saying there are no gays in Iran.
From my testing, the clear majority of people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's smoke pot. I am assuming that 9 percent doesn't include people under 15. Or maybe 18. So that would mean that virtually no one in their 20's and 30's smokes pot. I have no doubt people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's smoke significantly more pot that teens and people in their 20's do ... but the numbers don't add up.
I just heard some story on NPR, bastion of misinformation, that said 9 percent of Americans smoke pot. I'd put thaon a par with Ahmadinejad saying there are no gays in Iran.
From my testing, the clear majority of people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's smoke pot. I am assuming that 9 percent doesn't include people under 15. Or maybe 18. So that would mean that virtually no one in their 20's and 30's smokes pot. I have no doubt people in their 40's, 50's, and 60's smoke significantly more pot that teens and people in their 20's do ... but the numbers don't add up.
9
It's possible you misheard it. Last statistic I heard was that 80% of adults have smoked pot. And NPR has an excellent record for fact-checking before they publish.
Sadly, Tim, common sense rarely afflicts the elected in Washington. Brain chemistry is not amenable to political mandate, and as long as the Republican Party in particular is in the driver's seat in Congress, there will be no sudden onset of the affliction just mentioned. I'm not praising Democrats here, either, though a Democratic majority in the House and Senate might do some nibbling along the edges like reducing funding for the DEA. I'm afraid Hilllary, if pressed, would not favor blanket legalization. She is not alone.
Decriminalization of drugs, all drugs, even those as vile as meth, is the ideal. A disease is not cured by physical and mental punishment. If punishment worked, we would be jailing people for having diabetes, sickle cell anemia and cancer. Cardiac Arrest!! Call the cops, quick! Get this man to prison, now!
Decriminalization. Treatment. Common sense.
Decriminalization of drugs, all drugs, even those as vile as meth, is the ideal. A disease is not cured by physical and mental punishment. If punishment worked, we would be jailing people for having diabetes, sickle cell anemia and cancer. Cardiac Arrest!! Call the cops, quick! Get this man to prison, now!
Decriminalization. Treatment. Common sense.
23
I must disagree with you, Glenn. Highly addictive drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin should remain illegal. It would be a shame for a casual first time or second time user to end up with a lifelong addiction, at great person and societal cost. However such is not the same with marijuana. That has been stifled by big business, governments etc. Heroin and the like, no thank you.
4
Then I guess we'll have agree to disagree, Bob.
First, ceding all sales of dangerous drugs to the criminal element will perpetuate the problem of zero control of the quality, dose and the ever worrisome probability of poisonously tainted drugs. Remember, 50 years of drug war has accomplished less than nothing in stemming the flow of "recreational" drugs, narcotic and otherwise, into the US. Decriminalization is not legalization nor is it even tacit approval. It is a common sense step to save lives.
Treatment rather than jail also saves lives in the sense that a person's ability to lead a productive life is not buried beneath a history of convictions (for a disease process, remember) and incarcerations. Your medical background is no one's business in a job interview. Your prison record is, even though it should not be if one has completed their "payment of debt" to society.
Apart from allowing taxation, this is not advocating for government control of distribution and sale. Guidelines controlling who may sell without threat of prison would include strictly enforced regulations regarding the responsibility of the seller has to the buyer, a tougher corollary to the law in most states that a seller of alcoholic beverages is legally liable for the consequence serving an obviously drunk patron another drink. I will grant you this step may well be the most problematic, but that is hardly a reason to not even try.
Legalize pot. Decriminalize the rest.
First, ceding all sales of dangerous drugs to the criminal element will perpetuate the problem of zero control of the quality, dose and the ever worrisome probability of poisonously tainted drugs. Remember, 50 years of drug war has accomplished less than nothing in stemming the flow of "recreational" drugs, narcotic and otherwise, into the US. Decriminalization is not legalization nor is it even tacit approval. It is a common sense step to save lives.
Treatment rather than jail also saves lives in the sense that a person's ability to lead a productive life is not buried beneath a history of convictions (for a disease process, remember) and incarcerations. Your medical background is no one's business in a job interview. Your prison record is, even though it should not be if one has completed their "payment of debt" to society.
Apart from allowing taxation, this is not advocating for government control of distribution and sale. Guidelines controlling who may sell without threat of prison would include strictly enforced regulations regarding the responsibility of the seller has to the buyer, a tougher corollary to the law in most states that a seller of alcoholic beverages is legally liable for the consequence serving an obviously drunk patron another drink. I will grant you this step may well be the most problematic, but that is hardly a reason to not even try.
Legalize pot. Decriminalize the rest.
1
I am open to free markets. I just worry about the kids- This stuff is terrible for early brain development and legalization would legitimize more youth to get high. As parents we have enough trouble regulating our kids computer and cell phone use- How can you curtail pot activities outside the home? Remember pot isn't just smoked anymore- it can be eaten and vaped without detection and the effects are much longer lasting- Oh well just another line item on THE TALK list.
7
Add it to the list. Or, really, leave it on the list. Legalization isn't the beginning of kids using cannabis - that came 5000 years ago, give or take. In fact, looking at the stats, it seems to be reducing those numbers, not increasing them.
Well, you know, Mr Timothy, way back in the day, when the surprising 16th century (New World and all) forged ahead into the 17th, the not-quite combined efforts of precursor Copernicus with those of Brahe/Kepler, Galileo and later, Newton, told the world something new:
A religiously-upsetting idea about the vainly believed superiority of the human mind ("nous") could be considered maybe true, despite its denial of "sacred" texts.
Since empirical evidence showed that, were the planets imagined orbiting (elliptically! Not circularly) the Sun, it would be easier to prove, and less uselessly preoccupying, than describing (and inscribing) ever more complex epicycles.
Epicycles were not paid. It cost little (except to the Church, of course) to abandon them.
How shall we lay off the DEA, ATFE, FBI, Secret Service epicycles? How many people does that mean?
Were there a plausible answer to that, policy could change fast.
Also, how do you reintegrate all these colorful people who have been "criminalised"?
Because they would have to be let go, no?
Don't get me wrong! I agree with your point of view since 1970, when you probably did not have it yet.
The "War on Drugs" was always a jealousy/mockery of Johnson's "War on Poverty", right?
With significant creative language contributions from that criminal VP, Spiro Agnew. I was in my first year of high school, had never seen a marijuana leaf and still thought: joke!
"Don't panic, it's organic!"
Never changed my mind.
A religiously-upsetting idea about the vainly believed superiority of the human mind ("nous") could be considered maybe true, despite its denial of "sacred" texts.
Since empirical evidence showed that, were the planets imagined orbiting (elliptically! Not circularly) the Sun, it would be easier to prove, and less uselessly preoccupying, than describing (and inscribing) ever more complex epicycles.
Epicycles were not paid. It cost little (except to the Church, of course) to abandon them.
How shall we lay off the DEA, ATFE, FBI, Secret Service epicycles? How many people does that mean?
Were there a plausible answer to that, policy could change fast.
Also, how do you reintegrate all these colorful people who have been "criminalised"?
Because they would have to be let go, no?
Don't get me wrong! I agree with your point of view since 1970, when you probably did not have it yet.
The "War on Drugs" was always a jealousy/mockery of Johnson's "War on Poverty", right?
With significant creative language contributions from that criminal VP, Spiro Agnew. I was in my first year of high school, had never seen a marijuana leaf and still thought: joke!
"Don't panic, it's organic!"
Never changed my mind.
I wish we had Referendum here in NY. I'm told by friends in MA that it is very likely that MA will go legal this cycle.
I've dealt with a lot of Heroin addicts, professionally. I disagree that weed leads to the needle. Pills lead to the needle, for a small but important percentage of uses.
Most weed busts are opportune, as the police find a "likely suspect" and can pop them for cannabis in the pocket.
The best reason to go legal with weed is that a weed dealer won't have "other lines" of business, cutting the supply line for a lot of white powder when regular people go to a legal store to buy like any other product. It will be harder to find the bad stuff.
I've dealt with a lot of Heroin addicts, professionally. I disagree that weed leads to the needle. Pills lead to the needle, for a small but important percentage of uses.
Most weed busts are opportune, as the police find a "likely suspect" and can pop them for cannabis in the pocket.
The best reason to go legal with weed is that a weed dealer won't have "other lines" of business, cutting the supply line for a lot of white powder when regular people go to a legal store to buy like any other product. It will be harder to find the bad stuff.
2
Let us count the ways in which a majority of Americans believe something that Congress is against: marijuana, gun control, immigration reform, allowing President Obama to appoint a Supreme Court Justice during his elected term... How can this happen in a democracy? How do we stop it?
1
As with many prohibition efforts, race has played, and continues to play, a large role of our national legal restrictions against marijuana. Far from being illegal in the early days of our nation, societal pressure formed around the marijuana prohibition movement largely as a response to the risks that the use of the drug among minorities, especially African-Americans, presented to white people and white women.
Harry Anslinger, the first commissioner of the Federal Burueau of Narcotics (a predecessor to the DEA), has these famous and hideously racist quotes:
“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”
and
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
The story of the outlawing of Cocaine was fairly similar, with a grass roots movement starting in response to news media stories of 'drug-crazed negroes' violating white women while using cocaine, which was at the time a popular additive and medical product.
Sadly, the rhetoric did not change very much over the ensuing century - one need look no further than the fever-pitch and race-based paranoid rhetoric around the crack cocaine epidemic, and how the legal system has responded by seeking to control and punish minority groups rather than solve addiction.
Harry Anslinger, the first commissioner of the Federal Burueau of Narcotics (a predecessor to the DEA), has these famous and hideously racist quotes:
“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”
and
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
The story of the outlawing of Cocaine was fairly similar, with a grass roots movement starting in response to news media stories of 'drug-crazed negroes' violating white women while using cocaine, which was at the time a popular additive and medical product.
Sadly, the rhetoric did not change very much over the ensuing century - one need look no further than the fever-pitch and race-based paranoid rhetoric around the crack cocaine epidemic, and how the legal system has responded by seeking to control and punish minority groups rather than solve addiction.
4
Right on, man!!!
4
True, but this is insufficient reason to vote Libertarian this year. The candidate gives the impression that his brain has suffered the effects of over-indulgence.
3
Blah, blah, blah...let's try.
We can always go back.
We can always go back.
3
Mr. Obama has the power to order DEA CBP and TSA to ignore all marijuana under two ounces due to lack of enforcement resources, just like he does with immigration, and to stand down the drug dogs. Why is he silent?
3
Same reason Bush did little as to immigration or pot?
Since public opinion has moved in favor of pot legalization, I think it's time for the Supreme Court to declare laws against marijuana unconstitutional.
4
Couldn't agree more with the thesis of this article . . . except for the last paragraph, which argues that marijuana should not be classified as a Schedule 1 drug, "alongside heroin and L.S.D." Egan implies that L.S.D. does deserve to be classified with heroin. While a much more powerful drug than marijuana, the two share more similarities than either shares with heroin. Unlike heroin, L.S.D. has significant potential to treat anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and other disorders, not to mention improving the lives of people who do not suffer from these disorders. (It is strange that in our cramped view of "medicine" we only include substances that work on the negative, rather than accentuating the positive by enhancing empathy, awareness, and creativity.) Ironically, Egan's implied argument with regard to L.S.D. is a throw back to the L.S.D. hysteria, which mirrored the "reefer madness" he criticized in his article. For the record, L.S.D. is: nearly impossible to overdose on, completely non-addictive, and there is no evidence it has any long-term negative psychological consequences (to the contrary, effects seem overwhelmingly positive). Though research is difficult because of the Schedule 1 classification, studies suggest that L.S.D. is much, much safer than heroin, safer than alcohol, and yes, safer even than marijuana.
3
LSD is awesome for the reasons you stated. In addition, it's incredibly fun.
I am in agreement with Mr. Egan's conclusion. When we compare pot with other vices of American society that are legal, it becomes obvious that pot needs to be legal. Alcohol, for one, is the biggest example. We need to regulate pot, not outlaw it. We need to stop putting people in prison for minor drug offenses. The culture of many areas of the US are based on pot, yet the police have to follow laws that are not based on these local cultures. This is where we get many bad situations involving police.
3
The omnipotent alcohol lobby will spare no expense nor effort to keep pot from becoming nationally legal. Yet drinking alcohol can lead to intoxication (toxic means poisonous) and death, while smoking pot, anything but lethal, lands people in jail. What hypocrisy. We instructed our college-bound kids to choose pot over binge drinking. They are all adults, all smoke pot, all avoid alcohol, and are happy and healthy. Bottom line: Indulging regularly in alcohol can have devastating consequences. Indulging regularly in pot makes you hungry.
13
The reason pot isn't legal yet is due to the opposition of hidebound law enforcement officials coupled with the usual brigade of moralist aghast at the thought that someone somewhere may be having a good time. Add to this well heeled and politically connected interests: big pharma, the alcohol industry and probably illegal growers and smugglers all of whom are willing and eager to spread the wealth around to our elected officials.
12
I think the booze lobby still has a lot of sway. That aside, the social and political cost of keeping marijuana use and sale criminal far outweighs its benefits. Once we legalize MJ, maybe we should release every prisoner in jail for simple possession.
6
The initiative isn't just about legalization. It is all about regulation and taxes. There are constraints. I have my reservations about legal pot even tho I used it in my youth. However, I would like to be able to go hiking in Humboldt without fear of running into a protected pot farm. Back country pot farmers are detrimental to the environment since chemicals get dumped in the water system from illegalmake a buck horticulture. If the price of weed drops then the incentive for criminals might stop. Think prohibition.
California can also benefit by researching the pharm benefits of weed. Arcana may become the Silicon Valley of Ghanga.
California can also benefit by researching the pharm benefits of weed. Arcana may become the Silicon Valley of Ghanga.
12
America has a deep, dark, destructive, racist, Caucasian puritanical streak running through its collective Bible-concussed brain that makes many people stoned on ignorance, unable to appreciate the simple facts of peaceful marijuana.
Harry Anslinger - the nation's first drug czar from 1930 - 1962 who was a rabid supporter of the criminalization of drugs and played a key role in demonizing and criminalizing marijuana - was one of America's most destructive citizens.
Quotes from Harry Anslinger:
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
"How many murders, suicides, robberies, criminal assaults, holdups, burglaries and deeds of maniacal insanity it causes each year, especially among the young, can only be conjectured...No one knows, when he places a marijuana cigarette to his lips, whether he will become a joyous reveler in a musical heaven, a mad insensate, a calm philosopher, or a murderer..."
"The primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
http://www.azquotes.com/author/23159-Harry_J_Anslinger
It's time America moved away from Harry Anslinger's right-wing, racist and puritanical demonization of marijuana, a peaceful natural compound which kills and harms tens of thousands less than beer and alcohol.
Harry Anslinger - the nation's first drug czar from 1930 - 1962 who was a rabid supporter of the criminalization of drugs and played a key role in demonizing and criminalizing marijuana - was one of America's most destructive citizens.
Quotes from Harry Anslinger:
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
"How many murders, suicides, robberies, criminal assaults, holdups, burglaries and deeds of maniacal insanity it causes each year, especially among the young, can only be conjectured...No one knows, when he places a marijuana cigarette to his lips, whether he will become a joyous reveler in a musical heaven, a mad insensate, a calm philosopher, or a murderer..."
"The primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
http://www.azquotes.com/author/23159-Harry_J_Anslinger
It's time America moved away from Harry Anslinger's right-wing, racist and puritanical demonization of marijuana, a peaceful natural compound which kills and harms tens of thousands less than beer and alcohol.
123
As I posted elsewhere on this thread, the racist history of prohibition and enforcement of multiple substances, including marijuana and cocaine, have roots that trace back to white anxiety and fear of 'out of control' minority communities, and those roots extend to our current tangled mess of sentencing guidelines, police profiling and enforcement.
The fruit this is now bearing, some 80 to 100 years later, is disproportionate and mass criminalization and incarceration among minority communities. The societal consequences for the impacted communities have been devastating, and one need look no further than your nearest Trump Rally or Talk Radio broadcast to get a sense of how much safer all of this enforcement has made 'white america' feel, irrespective of the actual crime statistics.
The fruit this is now bearing, some 80 to 100 years later, is disproportionate and mass criminalization and incarceration among minority communities. The societal consequences for the impacted communities have been devastating, and one need look no further than your nearest Trump Rally or Talk Radio broadcast to get a sense of how much safer all of this enforcement has made 'white america' feel, irrespective of the actual crime statistics.
3
Can we start referring to it as cannabis; there is a certain ironic bias in the word marijuana.
If we're gonna do away with the memory of Anslinger, lets do away with the whole thing.
If we're gonna do away with the memory of Anslinger, lets do away with the whole thing.
1
Like many I have mixed opinions about the advisability of a de facto legalization of cannabis, but there is one factor, a very similar factor to the reason alcohol prohibition ended, that is the tipping issue in my mind: ending the profits of the drug cartels and criminal growers.
A large fraction of the income of the narcotraficantes still comes from pot. That income sustains the murder in central america. Legalization and price reduction in the US would shut that off.
At present the "legalized" pot growers in most states aren't able to be price competitive with illegal pot. And we are already beginning to see what amount to oligopolies in pot -- collusions of the big players with politicians who write the rules to maintain an effective monopoly for those big players.
Some states allow restricted home cultivation (the Dutch model), and I strongly support this for any state that will make cannabis legal in any way. Otherwise there's a strong risk of simultaneously failing to reduce criminal activity associated with the drug, and building a new pernicious state/business oligopoly.
A large fraction of the income of the narcotraficantes still comes from pot. That income sustains the murder in central america. Legalization and price reduction in the US would shut that off.
At present the "legalized" pot growers in most states aren't able to be price competitive with illegal pot. And we are already beginning to see what amount to oligopolies in pot -- collusions of the big players with politicians who write the rules to maintain an effective monopoly for those big players.
Some states allow restricted home cultivation (the Dutch model), and I strongly support this for any state that will make cannabis legal in any way. Otherwise there's a strong risk of simultaneously failing to reduce criminal activity associated with the drug, and building a new pernicious state/business oligopoly.
16
Why is it compulsory fare to accuse Freud of cocaine use? Nobody scolds Madame Curie for abusing radiation. Freud discovered the use of cocaine as an ocular anesthetic, an outstanding achievement; and in that process of discovery, found that it provided euphoria. He thought it might be a medicine that would substitute for other addictive drugs, only until cocaine's addictive properties and dangers became apparent. Then he stopped using it and stopped recommending it. His serious regret in having played a part in it led him to move to a different field of study, and ultimately to Psychoanalysis. Stop the jingoistic and anti-intellectual, anti-hero simple-mindedness! He was a genius and a humanitarian. His multiple discoveries have led to enormous benefit for millions.
6
Freud dosed his wife with it, with consequences he recognized clearly, and felt remorse for.
Costs are associated both with legalization and with the criminalization of Marijuana. Legalization is not without drawbacks.
Determining, for example, how to determine when stoned drivers are impaired, and whether or not extremely powerful new strains of the plant prove physically addictive to certain portions of the population, are still questions yet to be answered. This social experiment will show which costs are higher--we hope less, not more.
Determining, for example, how to determine when stoned drivers are impaired, and whether or not extremely powerful new strains of the plant prove physically addictive to certain portions of the population, are still questions yet to be answered. This social experiment will show which costs are higher--we hope less, not more.
6
Legalization doesn't actually have anything to do with these two costs. You're still doing the thing of blaming the lack of prohibition with the use of the drug. People have been and will continue to consume pot either way. With legal weed, we actually make some tax dollars to pay for policing against DUI. And the "powerful new strains" of pot that are commonly grown now are largely a product of prohibition. For indoor growers space is a premium so selectively breeding strains to maximize the amount of TCH was a natural result of forcing cultivation into small hidden spaces. The "new strains" being developed in the world of legal weed are trend more towards connoisseurship, rather than just strength.
Most of the problems associated with weed have always been due to prohibition.
Most of the problems associated with weed have always been due to prohibition.
Voters seem to grasp the enlightenment of legalizing marijuana but not the insanity of turning the entire federal government over to the Republican Party and a lunatic con man. It's really beyond comprehension. On can only hope that millennials finally wake up and save us.
17
From a societal perspective, this makes sense. Marijuana is a drug which is commonly accepted as on parity with alcohol in terms of harm toward its user. For adults.
In those with still-developing neurological symptoms, however, marijuana has some clearly demonstrated permanently degenerative effects, perhaps lowering IQ by several points with significant use. I worry that this is a problem which could potentially cause widescale harm to our youth if the supply and ease of acquisition of marijuana are increased in a sort of trickle-down from legal buyers (those over 21? 25?).
I would like to see something in the way of laws or policies that children and young adults would be somehow shielded from obtaining marijuana. Until then, I remain skeptical about going all-in on legalization.
In those with still-developing neurological symptoms, however, marijuana has some clearly demonstrated permanently degenerative effects, perhaps lowering IQ by several points with significant use. I worry that this is a problem which could potentially cause widescale harm to our youth if the supply and ease of acquisition of marijuana are increased in a sort of trickle-down from legal buyers (those over 21? 25?).
I would like to see something in the way of laws or policies that children and young adults would be somehow shielded from obtaining marijuana. Until then, I remain skeptical about going all-in on legalization.
8
Legalization doesn't mean legalizing weed for children. And it is definitely NOT appropriate to accept marijuana as on par with alcohol in terms of danger and damage. Alcohol is many times more dangerous and harmful.
Weed has been readily available to most American teenagers for generations now. They already deal with this choice and if you grew up almost anywhere in America and try to remember your high school years, you would know this. Could you really not have been a pot smoker in your teen years due to prohibition? Prohibition has had little or nothing to do with people making healthy choices. Often, it has had a very negative impact in this regard.
Weed has been readily available to most American teenagers for generations now. They already deal with this choice and if you grew up almost anywhere in America and try to remember your high school years, you would know this. Could you really not have been a pot smoker in your teen years due to prohibition? Prohibition has had little or nothing to do with people making healthy choices. Often, it has had a very negative impact in this regard.
This article manages to support the legalization of marijuana while at the same time perpetuating the myths that help to keep it illegal.
That myth is that illegal drugs are all essentially in the same category; that it is just a matter of degree; that one substance is a gateway to another on some imagined path to destruction. By mentioning marijuana in the same breath as heroin and cocaine and LSD, this piece links them together in a way that mere logic cannot overcome.
That myth is that illegal drugs are all essentially in the same category; that it is just a matter of degree; that one substance is a gateway to another on some imagined path to destruction. By mentioning marijuana in the same breath as heroin and cocaine and LSD, this piece links them together in a way that mere logic cannot overcome.
14
Stop mentioning LSD in the same breath as cocaine and heroin. It is not addictive.
The West Coast has always led the country in such trends. The East Coast can be expected to follow, as usual, and then flyover country ten years later.
It has already started in flyover country. The City of Ann Arbor legalized pot as near as it could in the 1970's. The State of Colorado has done that now. The middle is not even waiting for the East Coast.
Duterte in the Philippines is a very different problem. The underlying problem is corruption, not drugs. The police are corrupt, as are the courts and the politicians supervising them. There is no judicial remedy possible in a totally corrupt place. That is what has led to vigilante attacks anywhere, as when Montana killed the Sheriff and his deputies, who as the Plummer Gang attacking their own community.
The problem in the Philippines goes far past drugs. Drugs have funded the problem and made it worse, but the problem affects far more than just drugs. The whole economy is corrupt, including the legal and political systems that can not check that.
We are seeing the same thing in Mexico. There too drug money funds a larger problem of corruption. We can expect Mexico to unravel too, and to more directly spill over here as it does.
We need to find ways to deal with extremes of corruption. So far, we've failed consistently. See too Colombia defeating its own peace. That is not just drug policy, but drug money does make it worse.
It has already started in flyover country. The City of Ann Arbor legalized pot as near as it could in the 1970's. The State of Colorado has done that now. The middle is not even waiting for the East Coast.
Duterte in the Philippines is a very different problem. The underlying problem is corruption, not drugs. The police are corrupt, as are the courts and the politicians supervising them. There is no judicial remedy possible in a totally corrupt place. That is what has led to vigilante attacks anywhere, as when Montana killed the Sheriff and his deputies, who as the Plummer Gang attacking their own community.
The problem in the Philippines goes far past drugs. Drugs have funded the problem and made it worse, but the problem affects far more than just drugs. The whole economy is corrupt, including the legal and political systems that can not check that.
We are seeing the same thing in Mexico. There too drug money funds a larger problem of corruption. We can expect Mexico to unravel too, and to more directly spill over here as it does.
We need to find ways to deal with extremes of corruption. So far, we've failed consistently. See too Colombia defeating its own peace. That is not just drug policy, but drug money does make it worse.
13
You seem to miss the whole point. "Drug money" is really prohibition money. If the drugs were sold legally and taxed it would change the whole equation. Yes, the problem is corruption. Prohibition fuels the economy of corruption.
1
Randy -- I agree that drug money adds tremendous extra weight to corruption. I agree that legalizing drugs would be a good idea just for that, although it has many other reasons too.
However, corruption exists sucking other money out of communities, and countries, some more than others. Around here, we have for decades had one small town that everyone knows is completely corrupt. The police from other towns will have nothing to do with them.
Drugs makes that worse. Much worse. But it was a problem before drugs. In the Philippines, Marcos built corruption to a system. Mexico was famously corrupt before the first drugs grew out of our WW2 poppy fields there we'd started for our medical needs. The little town I mentioned was just as corrupt in the 1950's.
The poison of corruption makes it difficult to fix the drug problem. After it gets to a certain point, the drugs can't be fixed without attacking the corruption itself. That is why the murderous rampage of Duterte in the PI is actually growing in popularity, according to polls. He's been taking down corrupt police and judges, not just street thugs.
We need better ways to help against corruption, and more focus on that. Getting rid of the drug money is just one step in that.
However, corruption exists sucking other money out of communities, and countries, some more than others. Around here, we have for decades had one small town that everyone knows is completely corrupt. The police from other towns will have nothing to do with them.
Drugs makes that worse. Much worse. But it was a problem before drugs. In the Philippines, Marcos built corruption to a system. Mexico was famously corrupt before the first drugs grew out of our WW2 poppy fields there we'd started for our medical needs. The little town I mentioned was just as corrupt in the 1950's.
The poison of corruption makes it difficult to fix the drug problem. After it gets to a certain point, the drugs can't be fixed without attacking the corruption itself. That is why the murderous rampage of Duterte in the PI is actually growing in popularity, according to polls. He's been taking down corrupt police and judges, not just street thugs.
We need better ways to help against corruption, and more focus on that. Getting rid of the drug money is just one step in that.
The Vietnam war didn't end until rich white people's children joined the legions of the maimed and dead. Now that opioids (heroin) are ravishing white suburbia, maybe treatment will become a priority. As for the drug war, it has always been about money and confiscated assets supporting our brave police forces content with harassing pot possessors rather than chasing down real criminals. There would be no drug war without marijuana and police departments nationwide will have to find some other victimless crime to compensate for revenue shortfalls. Marijuana may become legal but the militarized police state will endure.
10
Not yet sure how I'm voting in our upcoming referendum on legalization. Never been interested in the stuff myself, but I did grow up with an alcoholic parent, and have a visceral hatred for the attitude that substances that allow people to "check out" are just groovy. One thing that gives me pause is the opioid epidemic which has hit our state hard. Especially its effect on children. Perhaps if pot was legal, not as many would turn to other drugs? I don't know, but am leaning against legalization for non-medical purposes.
5
Perhaps, then, alcohol should be prohibited? After all, it's responsible for close to 10,000 drunk driving deaths a year. And alcoholics need treatment for a variety of medical ailments, including liver disease and heart disease.
Oh, wait, the country tried to ban alcohol. Back in the day, I think that was something called "Prohibition." How well did that work out for us?
It sure would be nice to see some statistics on annual marijuana deaths, including "high driving" deaths, and the costs of treatment for illnesses that marijuana causes. But isn't marijuana used medically? Is booze used medically?
I suspect that there are few equivalences between marijuana and booze if one is used to treat health problems and one is a health problem that causes diseases that marijuana can help treat.
Oh, wait, the country tried to ban alcohol. Back in the day, I think that was something called "Prohibition." How well did that work out for us?
It sure would be nice to see some statistics on annual marijuana deaths, including "high driving" deaths, and the costs of treatment for illnesses that marijuana causes. But isn't marijuana used medically? Is booze used medically?
I suspect that there are few equivalences between marijuana and booze if one is used to treat health problems and one is a health problem that causes diseases that marijuana can help treat.
5
But there is no comparison between the ill effects of alcohol and cannabis. Alcohol has a connection to violence, including violence to the user's body and to a fetus, that cannabis just doesn't have. Banning cannabis leaves killer alcohol as the only legal way to get a buzz. How does that make the community safer?
Totally agree - same for alcohol.
The single most important thing I have learned about drug addiction is that such a large portion of our population tends to depression and uses drugs to self-medicate. In an ideal world they do this under the supervision of a doctor, but we do not live in an ideal world, so people self-medicate with alcohol and illegal drugs.
Given that reality, legalization of marijuana makes even more sense. If people are going to self-medicate, as a society we should be encouraging the availability of a drug that gives them some pain relief, won't kill them with overdoses and won't physically hook them.
Heroin users risk their lives daily. Heavy alcohol users are slowly committing suicide. But even heavy, chronic marijuana users live to fight another day -- at some point in the future they can choose -- and many do -- to work through their problems and enjoy life sober instead of anesthetizing themselves.
The other benefit of legalization, for non-addicted people, is that a well grown marijuana bud is one of life's pleasures -- just like a good bottle of wine. Some will have a taste for it, some won't, but it was wrong for Washington to involve police and prisons over this. A bit of weed should absolutely fall under the constitutional language referring to "pursuit of happiness" -- the government should have no more right to ban marijuana than it has to ban wine and cheese and poetry and music.
Given that reality, legalization of marijuana makes even more sense. If people are going to self-medicate, as a society we should be encouraging the availability of a drug that gives them some pain relief, won't kill them with overdoses and won't physically hook them.
Heroin users risk their lives daily. Heavy alcohol users are slowly committing suicide. But even heavy, chronic marijuana users live to fight another day -- at some point in the future they can choose -- and many do -- to work through their problems and enjoy life sober instead of anesthetizing themselves.
The other benefit of legalization, for non-addicted people, is that a well grown marijuana bud is one of life's pleasures -- just like a good bottle of wine. Some will have a taste for it, some won't, but it was wrong for Washington to involve police and prisons over this. A bit of weed should absolutely fall under the constitutional language referring to "pursuit of happiness" -- the government should have no more right to ban marijuana than it has to ban wine and cheese and poetry and music.
185
There has never been an adequate explanation of the distinction between cannabis and alcohol that required a constitutional amendment to federally prohibit alcohol but not cannabis.
The federal government was much more powerful in the 70s and 80s when the War on Drugs was conceived than it was 50 years earlier. At the time of Prohibition, the commerce clause hadn't been expanded by the Supreme Court.
Congress would have been able to ban interstate trade in alcohol but would have been hard pressed to shut down local breweries that were operating entirely within state boundaries.
What the prohibitionists wanted was an absolute ban on alcohol consumption in all 50 states, and -- backed by millions of enfranchised women -- they had enough political momentum to get a constitutional amendment passed.
Congress would have been able to ban interstate trade in alcohol but would have been hard pressed to shut down local breweries that were operating entirely within state boundaries.
What the prohibitionists wanted was an absolute ban on alcohol consumption in all 50 states, and -- backed by millions of enfranchised women -- they had enough political momentum to get a constitutional amendment passed.
Everyone needs to understand that the UNITED STATES STARTED THE WORLDWIDE WAR ON DRUGS well over 50+ years ago. We convinced/strong-armed most countries into following our lead and look where it has gotten us. It is so bad in some countries like Singapore and the Philippines that people are being executed for using drugs and dealing drugs!!
The Drug War has FAILED. Back before the Harrison Narcotics Act went into effect prior to 1920, heroin, pot, cocaine, and opiates were ALL legal and unregulated. Just like how prohibition of alcohol caused the immediate rise of violence, death, gangs, bootleggers, and underground alcohol operations, so too has the failed war on drugs. By making drugs illegal we have created the illicit underground international drug trade, street gangs, and increased violence and drug-related deaths tenfold. We have made drug king pins billionaires, created a mass incarceration nightmare (that we are just now trying to reverse), and destroyed families.
The Drug War has FAILED. Back before the Harrison Narcotics Act went into effect prior to 1920, heroin, pot, cocaine, and opiates were ALL legal and unregulated. Just like how prohibition of alcohol caused the immediate rise of violence, death, gangs, bootleggers, and underground alcohol operations, so too has the failed war on drugs. By making drugs illegal we have created the illicit underground international drug trade, street gangs, and increased violence and drug-related deaths tenfold. We have made drug king pins billionaires, created a mass incarceration nightmare (that we are just now trying to reverse), and destroyed families.
17
How about a blanket pardon for those convicted of possession of the weed?
49
Yes, and have it wiped from everyone's record.
1
State police and SWAT recently invaded an elderly woman's home because she was growing a pot plant for medicinal purposes. One plant. Luckily they didn't shoot her. This just happened in liberal Massachusetts. This will probably all be solved once Trump builds that Wall and further law and order is implemented and enforced.
10
Great column! Tim Egan, you are truly a voice of reason.
4
Finally "common sense" in regard to marijuana use is taking over the West Coast and hopefully the nation. It seemed wrong for Mr Egan to compare the current murderous leader of the Philippines to Donald Trump.....I do not see the similarity at all and I think the writer owes Mr Trump a sincere apology. I am not a Trump fan but I must object to this comparison as it is wrong and a totally unjustified comparison.
Filipinos see Duterte as their Trump.
1
Egan is quoting several of Duterte's critics, and the comparison is apt. Duterte is putting into action the policies advocated by Trump.
2
Unfortunately the comparison is anything but unjustified.
1
If you want to use recreational hallucinogens to explore your personal hallucinations, your government should not prevent you from doing so. And you should suffer, and be required to pay for, the consequences of doing so. Because you chose to use drugs that can destroy your body and your mind, and no one else is responsible for your free choice.
The number of people who are forced to use these drugs is small, and a rational law enforcement policy can handle that; charitable donations can assist with the effects. The vast number of people who do drugs choose to do them, unforced.
No one else should be forced to pay for the consequences of your using these drugs. No bailouts, no free rehab. If you commit a crime under the influence of these drugs you should still be held responsible for the crime just as if you were not under the influence. That would be rational justice. Unfortunately, that's not what we have in this country.
The number of people who are forced to use these drugs is small, and a rational law enforcement policy can handle that; charitable donations can assist with the effects. The vast number of people who do drugs choose to do them, unforced.
No one else should be forced to pay for the consequences of your using these drugs. No bailouts, no free rehab. If you commit a crime under the influence of these drugs you should still be held responsible for the crime just as if you were not under the influence. That would be rational justice. Unfortunately, that's not what we have in this country.
5
Presumably you would have the same 'you're on the own' approach to people with alcohol problems?
1
Do you realize that drug addiction is recognized as an actual disease?
1
What a thoughtless and contradictory analysis by Mr. Egan. First he says that black and brown people are using and selling drugs at the same rate of whites (which you just know is not true), but then he claims that "so many addicts" are now white and so the consensus on legalization is changing. Well which is it? Are you saying that black and brown people are more the victims of the drug culture, or the whites? And if they're all victimized at the same rate, why are you bringing up the racial issue at all? This is the problem with looking at every issue through a nonsensical racial lens. And of course, Mr. Egan can't discuss the politically incorrect fact of where the heroin is coming from - the porous Southern border.
1
It means that whites have caught up with minorities in the incidence of drug use.
2
I think Mr. Egan is pointing out that while White and non-whites use and sell drugs at the same rate, non-whites, especially Blacks and Latinos, who make up a significantly smaller portion of the population continue to make up more than half the arrests for drugs offenses. Even as the face of serious addiction has changed from black crack addicts to white heroin addicts overdosing in ever growing numbers, drug use and drug dealing is still seen as being mostly a problem for minorities.
But the reality is that the heroin epidemic is growing and mostly afflicts whites, especially since the addiction more often than not starts with prescriptions opioids. And that distinction is racial as doctors have always been hesitant to prescribe narcotics to minorities because we are supposedly so prone to addiction. Now we see that race has nothing to do with a predilection to drug abuse.
And now that more whites are being consumed by heroin addiction the movement from punishment to treatment is most certainly a racial response because minorities have been jailed for years for drug possession, not selling, rather than sent to rehab. But Nicole Richie get's arrested with heroin and goes to rehab, not jail. White kids use to come to Bronx and Harlem all the time back in the day for cocaine, the few arrested usually got probation, community service, and/or rehab.
But the reality is that the heroin epidemic is growing and mostly afflicts whites, especially since the addiction more often than not starts with prescriptions opioids. And that distinction is racial as doctors have always been hesitant to prescribe narcotics to minorities because we are supposedly so prone to addiction. Now we see that race has nothing to do with a predilection to drug abuse.
And now that more whites are being consumed by heroin addiction the movement from punishment to treatment is most certainly a racial response because minorities have been jailed for years for drug possession, not selling, rather than sent to rehab. But Nicole Richie get's arrested with heroin and goes to rehab, not jail. White kids use to come to Bronx and Harlem all the time back in the day for cocaine, the few arrested usually got probation, community service, and/or rehab.
3
You should read it again. Minorities have long suffered more from prohibition because they're thrown in jail for doing things that white people get away with. You completely misunderstood the entire article and your response is a perfect illustration of how we've made so many horrible choices in this regard over the years.
3
I am not supportive of ANY drug, marijuana, alcohol, or anything else. However, having recently moved to North Carolina, I am appalled at the pedestal upon which tobacco is placed here - and the rank hypocrisy shown toward marijuana by comparison. This morning i found myself comparing the farming of and profiteering from tobacco with the farming of and profiteering from opium poppies in a Central Asia - both promoting deadly drugs with no other purpose than death. Tobacco companies here tout medicinal uses of tobacco while still profiting from death and destruction. The hypocrisy makes me want to go back to bed. I even heard of young people bragging about getting back to the land - to farm deadly tobacco - even ORGANIC tobacco, for crying out loud. Am I in lalaland?
5
Follow the money. Look more closely; you will find more dangers evident in the hog industry.
We're coming up on the 50th anniversary of the "Summer of Love." Has it really taken this long to climb this mountain? How many lives were damaged or ruined by this nonsense?
5
It is human nature to get bent. Pot seems to be the most harmless of drugs legal or not. Obama needs to declassify it before he leaves office.
11
Speaking of declassifying -- and perhaps nowhere has word usage done more hard -- marijuana isn't a drug. It's an herb.
(Did you know: Bolshevik means majority in Russian. The Bolsheviks weren't the majority party, but they grabbed the name before the Mensheviks did, or minority. Who were the majority.)
(Did you know: Bolshevik means majority in Russian. The Bolsheviks weren't the majority party, but they grabbed the name before the Mensheviks did, or minority. Who were the majority.)
"It is human nature to get bent."
Really?
Thank goodness, then, some humans still have the idealism and drive to put their brains to use inventing treatments for cancer, AIDS, MS and other diseases.
Some people are too busy to "get bent."
Really?
Thank goodness, then, some humans still have the idealism and drive to put their brains to use inventing treatments for cancer, AIDS, MS and other diseases.
Some people are too busy to "get bent."
2
Mr. Egan, legal pot is no big deal to you, but it was to my son, who got into drugs via marijuana (technically illegal in Georgia but practically allowed in the fashionably left circles that he hung around). He later died of a meth overdose at 19. I repeatedly got that "no big deal line" from many presumably-well-meaning folks when I saw what was going on and raised as much stink as I could. Count me skeptical as to your apologia.
20
"who got into drugs via marijuana..."
Dave: did your son drink beer?
Not to be insensitive, but the whole gateway-drug theory has been disproven, for years -- my health teacher in high school -- 40 years ago -- openly dismissed it in class.
(I'll never forget it, actually: "What's to say drinking milk" isn't the gateway, he said.)
Dave: did your son drink beer?
Not to be insensitive, but the whole gateway-drug theory has been disproven, for years -- my health teacher in high school -- 40 years ago -- openly dismissed it in class.
(I'll never forget it, actually: "What's to say drinking milk" isn't the gateway, he said.)
1
I am sorry you lost your son. The effects of meth are so different from pot. Use of pot does not predict use of meth. The fact that both are illegal didn't prevent this tragedy. Maybe we need to consider other possibilities.
The gateway drug argument. Yawn. Because marijuana is illegal, the consumer enters an illegal infrastructure that tends to lead in more sinister directions. It was not marijuana itself that brought your son into this world, it was the illegality of marijuana.
1
There are a fair number of folks who simply want to be able to put a few pot plants between the tomatoes and beans without committing multiple felonies.
7
Cannabis criminalization has been a key element in the drive to purge people of a liberal nature from government, academia, and industry. That is why legalization has been so difficult and contentious in the US.
Curiously, in Massachusetts, many of the people now lining up to produce legalized cannabis are police or politicians.
Curiously, in Massachusetts, many of the people now lining up to produce legalized cannabis are police or politicians.
2
20 years ago, a discussion with my probation officer:
ME: Why is pot illegal?
HIM: Police like to bust into people's houses and pot brings them the pretext to do that.
ME: Why do they want to bust into people's houses?
HIM: They find all kinds of interesting stuff--weapons, stolen goods, political weirdness, prisoners in the basement...
ME: Why is pot illegal?
HIM: Police like to bust into people's houses and pot brings them the pretext to do that.
ME: Why do they want to bust into people's houses?
HIM: They find all kinds of interesting stuff--weapons, stolen goods, political weirdness, prisoners in the basement...
5
Whoa. I thought this was about Gary Johnson getting elected president.
5
We forget, the most deadly, toxic drugs of all are nicotine and alcohol.
2
I hate pot. It stinks. I haven't used it since I tried it in college in 1974.
But I absolutely support its legalization as it has been here in Colorado for several years. It frees up the cops to go after real criminals, not pot smokers.
And the biggest benefit is not the tax revenue, it is the fact that young people don't get busted and end up in jail with a felony that would follow them for life.
But I absolutely support its legalization as it has been here in Colorado for several years. It frees up the cops to go after real criminals, not pot smokers.
And the biggest benefit is not the tax revenue, it is the fact that young people don't get busted and end up in jail with a felony that would follow them for life.
4
Possibly. But in that case, just as you're not allowed to drink alcohol in the street, it would be very good if marijuana smoking too would be restricted to indoors, in one's own home.
With closed windows.
Of course, apartment dwellers will get the stink through radiator risers and floorboards.
With closed windows.
Of course, apartment dwellers will get the stink through radiator risers and floorboards.
2
My understanding is that, in at least several states where pot is totally legal. employers still screen and do not hire prospective employees, or fire existing employees, who have THC in their system. Thus it is effectively NOT "legal". And if you have THC in your system, even though it may be an old remnant and not affecting your driving at all, it can be a serious traffic violation and create liabilities in accidents, also making it effectively illegal.
2
Of course, local laws certainly need to be changed to reflect the new reality of MJ legalization.
The drug war is the opposite of government of, for and by the people.
1
Go West, young man! Go West! But it will be a wild time, not because society will have trouble managing this "new" hallucinogenic for the publicly accessible formulary but because it will (it is, now) destabilize the drug trade. Like any industry sector, drugs understand disruption (from innovation, competition, or regulation) and legalizing pot is a disruption. They will find new avenues for profit making, and those new innovations will not be kind. The new drugs will be much worse and many people will suffer. This is not to say marijuana should not be legalized, but because of the sudden, nation-wide changes that are coming, there will be turmoil in the illegal drug sector, turmoil that will harm many, many people.
3
~~~~~~~
"Drug use is a tacit admission of a forbidden truth. For most people happiness is beyond reach. Fulfilment is found not in daily life but in escaping from it. Since happiness is unavailable, the mass of mankind seeks pleasure. Societies founded on a faith in progress cannot admit the normal unhappiness of human life. As result, they are bound to wage war on those who seek an artificial happiness in drugs".
John N Gray
"Drug use is a tacit admission of a forbidden truth. For most people happiness is beyond reach. Fulfilment is found not in daily life but in escaping from it. Since happiness is unavailable, the mass of mankind seeks pleasure. Societies founded on a faith in progress cannot admit the normal unhappiness of human life. As result, they are bound to wage war on those who seek an artificial happiness in drugs".
John N Gray
3
Even William F. Buckley, ideological clown, agreed with Egan.
A greater problem is legal alcoholism.
A greater problem is legal alcoholism.
2
Legalizing marijuana is really the least we can do for our neighbors to the south. I'm not sure if we could do the same for cocaine because it's actually a dangerous drug, but every little bit helps.
1
I'd still rather not sit next to anyone smoking anything in a restaurant.
4
>>>
But if we legalize drugs what will about all the high paying DEA jobs and the big fat pensions, some of the best in the fed gov't (work 20 and get a 30-yr pension); these people have big college bills to pay for their children......come on have a heart, you meanies. We have to keep the war going on if for no other reason their sake.
I've often pointed out before to no end, that the DEA is the ONLY winner in the drug war: the drug king-pins all die or are in prison; the users go to jail or sometimes become addicted, or have their lives ruin by a criminal record, and the taxpayer is stuck with a significant negative cash flow rather than a potential positive one.
But if we legalize drugs what will about all the high paying DEA jobs and the big fat pensions, some of the best in the fed gov't (work 20 and get a 30-yr pension); these people have big college bills to pay for their children......come on have a heart, you meanies. We have to keep the war going on if for no other reason their sake.
I've often pointed out before to no end, that the DEA is the ONLY winner in the drug war: the drug king-pins all die or are in prison; the users go to jail or sometimes become addicted, or have their lives ruin by a criminal record, and the taxpayer is stuck with a significant negative cash flow rather than a potential positive one.
3
In contrast to the western states, here in my rural, small town environs, the weekly paper repeatedly reports that the jail is over-crowded, under state mandate, lacking funds, etc.
Yet the 'crime news' in that paper shows that about a third of the jailings are for 'possesion of marijuana'.
Pence is no doubt against it, but decriminalization of marijuana would be a boon for many reasons, and a problem for none.
Yet the 'crime news' in that paper shows that about a third of the jailings are for 'possesion of marijuana'.
Pence is no doubt against it, but decriminalization of marijuana would be a boon for many reasons, and a problem for none.
6
With a third of the country using marijuana, it's high (sorry) time to end prohibition. A law that is viewed as foolish and is regularly disobeyed weakens respect for other laws. Enforcement is costly and a complete waste of time.
Increased availability of cannabis will require education and better parenting... so let's get working on those fronts and stop the petty and useless quibbling about legality which is both inexorable and appropriate.
Increased availability of cannabis will require education and better parenting... so let's get working on those fronts and stop the petty and useless quibbling about legality which is both inexorable and appropriate.
3
The legalization of marijuana is going to come about. Soon. What matters more is how we do it. A federal plan would be the most reasonable way, as it would provide legal restrictions and make it a taxable substance. While it is harder to measure/control the potency of marijuana than alcohol or chemically produced drugs, it can be classified into relative strengths.
What surprises me most is that Hillary Clinton has not adopted a policy of moving toward legalization. I know she's usually behind the curve on most social issues. Let's face it, even Dick Cheney was years ahead of HRC on gay rights and gay marriage. But Clinton wants the millennials, and some of the millennials who wanted Bernie Sanders have flocked to Gary Johnson because of his stance on legalizing marijuana (certainly not because of his knowledge of current events or geography).
Hillary could get ahead of this issue. Who's she going to alienate? People who have already decided to vote for Trump? People who have already declared "anyone but Hillary"? Swing voters who can't see any difference between her and Trump, so they consider Gary Johnson or Jill Stein? She doesn't even need to support it or have a plan to legalize it. She just needs to say that she wants to decriminalize it and stop ruining people's lives by sending them to prison for it.
What surprises me most is that Hillary Clinton has not adopted a policy of moving toward legalization. I know she's usually behind the curve on most social issues. Let's face it, even Dick Cheney was years ahead of HRC on gay rights and gay marriage. But Clinton wants the millennials, and some of the millennials who wanted Bernie Sanders have flocked to Gary Johnson because of his stance on legalizing marijuana (certainly not because of his knowledge of current events or geography).
Hillary could get ahead of this issue. Who's she going to alienate? People who have already decided to vote for Trump? People who have already declared "anyone but Hillary"? Swing voters who can't see any difference between her and Trump, so they consider Gary Johnson or Jill Stein? She doesn't even need to support it or have a plan to legalize it. She just needs to say that she wants to decriminalize it and stop ruining people's lives by sending them to prison for it.
7
Too late. She already sent her kid out to "misspeak" about the dangers of weed. Way to turn those millennials against Johnson and get them to vote for you instead.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/28/chelsea-clinton-m...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/28/chelsea-clinton-m...
The Green and Libertarian candidates both favor legalization. Clinton and Trump don't. It's yet another issue where both major parties are firm believers in inertia and the status quo.
40
Clinton favors legalization.
4
This is false. I researched it. She would reschedule it Schedule 2 if elected.
2
This is a good point, however, I would suggest that the Democratic party generally comes around to the pragmatic position (once all others have been exhausted and usually after even more exhaust-ing triangulation and hemming and hawing).
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's 'conversion' on gay marriage and the rapid progress that has come in recent years on LGBT rights comes to mind. The GOP on the other hand, generally clings to policy position with the fervor of the pious believer regardless of contravening evidence, reason, and the needs of the people.
Neither major party is revolutionary, but they are not equal in their opposition to reason or in their ability to adjust policy platforms based on facts and new information.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's 'conversion' on gay marriage and the rapid progress that has come in recent years on LGBT rights comes to mind. The GOP on the other hand, generally clings to policy position with the fervor of the pious believer regardless of contravening evidence, reason, and the needs of the people.
Neither major party is revolutionary, but they are not equal in their opposition to reason or in their ability to adjust policy platforms based on facts and new information.
2
Good article Mr. Egan but I doubt you can provide many references as to where Duterte has been called the "Donald Trump of the Philippines" as much as you might wish it so. It would seem there are plenty of other thugs, actually having exercised power, to whom Duterte could be more accurately compared, but of course, no piece in the Times is free from the obligatory Trump heckle. Only the food section remains ripe for exploitation.
1
Marijuana is not a "gateway" drug. Period. As some have commented the incarceration and arrest of pot users is a job creator with police, judges, jail workers benefiting. And of course the community of people of color is most affected, and quite unjustly. Thousands of people of color have been arrested for selling and using weed and this is racism.
6
There are never any meaningful solutions to any problems until those problems begin to meaningful affect White people.
18
Agree. Same as there is never a solution to any problem unless it affects males.
3
What keeps all these drugs illegal is the profit made from the so-called "drug war". Think of all the jobs related to the war on drugs and all the people employed by this war. We could save the 60 billion we use fighting this war by legalizing pot and "medicalizing" the heavier drugs. To save lives and money dispense heroin FREE, in a medical setting, to addicts. At the medical setting there could be counselors for those addicts who wished to end their addiction. Addicts would get clean needles and appropriate doses...and remain in the clinic for a while to make sure there were no overdose situations. The free drugs would ruin the illegal trade in drugs. Addicts would not be forced to steal and lie in order to feed their habits. Those involved and profiting from the drug war (on both sides) would need to find new jobs. Those jobs and other profiteers of the drug war are exactly what keeps the situation as it is. Follow the money.
16
In twenty years,most Californians will be very sorry that recreational pot was legalized in 2016 as is anticipated. Kids will be using more of it,neglecting their school work and looking for a bigger kick through harder drugs. Impaired driving will be greatly increased. A few giant corporations will control the production and distribution of it,and will have politicians in their pocket. Overall IQ levels for the population will be reduced. Pot shops will litter the suburban landscape.Children will be overdosing on pot candy. Addicted adults will be withdrawn,zombie like and,in some cases,paranoid. Smoking of tobacco products will be up along with smoking of pot since the two go hand in hand. And having lived in a college dorm in the late 1960s,my worst horror will return: people and places everywhere will stink from the stench of the stuff.
6
Another doom-and-gloom scenario, that, as with most conservative talking points, is based on anecdotal evidence and absent any facts. Was this also your opinion when medical marijuana was legalized in CA back in 1996? And I can't help but wonder, are you equally worried about gun proliferation and climate change, and do you pontificate about how those existential threats will affect the entire nation in 20 years? I further wonder, how many times do you discuss government encroachment on liberty and freedom? Should a free people not be able to decide which recreational drugs, if any, to use?
1
Actually Eric,I'm far from a conservative. I'm a Democrat who is a civil rights attorney,and one of my specialities is representing clients against "government encroachment on liberty and freedom." The reason for my post is that I'm a realist, and I understand California culture and politics,having lived here for 60 years.
4
It is amazing that in your 60 years of living in CA how little you truly know.
When the Parma-conglomerates put their muscle into removing federal marijuana prohibitions criminalization will end. Law enforcement and the courts will have more time and money to monitor and authenticate opiates dispensed by licensed practitioners. An addict can obtain a fentanyl patch today with less risk than a bag of weed. On second thought, why would Big-Pharma want to change that?
3
It's sad to say, but it maybe because today so many drug users and addicts are white that this is the only way that Congress can see their humanity and begin to change our drug laws.
We know their response to addiction in African American communities was extreme punishment while cutting back addiction treatment 'social services' both in our communities and in prisons. It was visceral, void of humanity, clearly driven by subconscious bias and failed to solve the crisis.
Maybe this will change since the face they see on an addict today looks like their own son or daughter. I hope they do. People who use drugs and become addicted need a medical not a criminal justice response. The Portuguese model, while not without problems is clearly superior to our draconian approach.
But what is unlikely to happen is a serious and honest look at why African American drug use produced a response void of empathy or compassion, while the current crisis in our suburbs and rural areas has at least so far generated a more caring debate? I don't say this to point fingers. But we have created an institution of systemic racism and seem incapable of even recognizing this truth, much less responding to it with reason and a heartfelt sense that we need to change.
We know their response to addiction in African American communities was extreme punishment while cutting back addiction treatment 'social services' both in our communities and in prisons. It was visceral, void of humanity, clearly driven by subconscious bias and failed to solve the crisis.
Maybe this will change since the face they see on an addict today looks like their own son or daughter. I hope they do. People who use drugs and become addicted need a medical not a criminal justice response. The Portuguese model, while not without problems is clearly superior to our draconian approach.
But what is unlikely to happen is a serious and honest look at why African American drug use produced a response void of empathy or compassion, while the current crisis in our suburbs and rural areas has at least so far generated a more caring debate? I don't say this to point fingers. But we have created an institution of systemic racism and seem incapable of even recognizing this truth, much less responding to it with reason and a heartfelt sense that we need to change.
14
The response to the crack cocaine drug problem in African American communities had very little to do with drug use. Mostly it was a response to the high rates of murder and other violent crime that the crack epidemic spawned.
Conversely, today's reaction to the opioid crisis has less to do with addiction and more to do with the high death rate from opioid overdoses.
Just as the high gun death rate related to crack cocaine caused authorities to take action, the high overdose death rate from opioids has caused authorities to take action. Race has little or nothing to do with it.
Conversely, today's reaction to the opioid crisis has less to do with addiction and more to do with the high death rate from opioid overdoses.
Just as the high gun death rate related to crack cocaine caused authorities to take action, the high overdose death rate from opioids has caused authorities to take action. Race has little or nothing to do with it.
3
I believe that the point drspock was making is that the policy response to drug-use and addiction looks very different when different communities are experiencing addiction epidemics.
So far, we have not tripled police forces or imposed draconian sentencing guidelines in an attempt to mass-incarcerate drug users in the suburban white areas where opiate addiction is most prevalent.
The actions that the authorities take are a reflection of the systemic racism drspock is talking about.
So far, we have not tripled police forces or imposed draconian sentencing guidelines in an attempt to mass-incarcerate drug users in the suburban white areas where opiate addiction is most prevalent.
The actions that the authorities take are a reflection of the systemic racism drspock is talking about.
4
Sorry Jim, race had a lot to do with it. One of the myths of the crack epidemic was that it was closely associated with homicides and the two were closely related. In fact, nearly all arrests during at that time were for drug possession, not related offenses, as was nearly two thirds of the increase in our prison population during that period.
Congress made sure that trend would continue when they mandated a lower threshold and higher sentence for amounts of crack possession than similar amounts of powdered cocaine, even though the only difference between the two was the method of administration. One was generally associated with black drug users and the other generally associated with white users. There was never any medical reason for this legal differentiation and subsequent studies have proven this. Yet legislatures at both the state and federal level followed this pattern that created a vastly disproportionate racial result. even the article points out the racial difference between arrests for marijuana possession.
I agree today law makers are "taking action" against opioid use and addiction. But that action is more humane, as it should be, and more oriented toward addictive services rather than excessive punishment. Many of us urged a similar reponse thirty years ago, but those pleas feel on deaf ears.
Congress made sure that trend would continue when they mandated a lower threshold and higher sentence for amounts of crack possession than similar amounts of powdered cocaine, even though the only difference between the two was the method of administration. One was generally associated with black drug users and the other generally associated with white users. There was never any medical reason for this legal differentiation and subsequent studies have proven this. Yet legislatures at both the state and federal level followed this pattern that created a vastly disproportionate racial result. even the article points out the racial difference between arrests for marijuana possession.
I agree today law makers are "taking action" against opioid use and addiction. But that action is more humane, as it should be, and more oriented toward addictive services rather than excessive punishment. Many of us urged a similar reponse thirty years ago, but those pleas feel on deaf ears.
4
I live in Massachusetts. Recreational use of marijuana is on the ballot here as a referendum, and at this point, polling seems to be very tight. Voting in favor of legalization is about the only reason i have to get out and vote this year. My vote for president is irrelevant here (last poll i saw, Clinton was +18.), i may well go for a write in or none of the above. I have no Senators up for reelection this year. My House rep and state legislature incumbents are all running unopposed. It's not good to not have choices. That weed referendum may be the only thing that gets my heavily millennial town (which Sanders very handily won in the primary) out to vote.
22
Well you better get your buddies out to vote too! Make it a reality. The sky didn't fall here in Washington State when MJ was legalized four years ago and the state coffers are indeed getting filled! Check out http://www.502data.com for the real hard data.
2
The key to the change in drug attitudes and maybe drug laws is that white druggies are now very _visible_.
As with evidence of police killings of non-whites, the change is driven, in large part, by the widespread use of cellphone cameras and social media.
There always was glaring a hypocrisy to the drug war and its racist judicial
and penal effects.
Now its just harder to deny the horror of the reality of the situation.
As with evidence of police killings of non-whites, the change is driven, in large part, by the widespread use of cellphone cameras and social media.
There always was glaring a hypocrisy to the drug war and its racist judicial
and penal effects.
Now its just harder to deny the horror of the reality of the situation.
7
I’ve always thought that commenting in the New York Times was a gateway addiction to more pernicious addictions, such as compulsive tree-hugging and condemning all social strictures because they were “inappropriate” and “unnecessary” – instead of merely maintenance of the anchors most people (as opposed to liberal elites) require to keep from spinning off into the void of total license.
And bylines from Portland, OR, bring back memories – of an Oregon fifty years ago that was the most racist state that a kid knew who hadn’t yet visited Alabama in the 1960s; and how today such folks can still be found, but you have to drive quite a ways from Portland and beat the rocks to find them.
The reason that pot is still illegal at the federal level and that people are still arrested for simple possession is that we have problems in this country built on federalism with determining what must be legislated federally to define who we all are as Americans, and what is best left to states to determine. If all strictures on pot were removed at the federal level, I imagine they’d disappear at the state level in all states within ten years or less – the economic disadvantages to remaining “dry” alone would force states to open up. But we still have “dry” counties, don’t we? I imagine our poorest counties still would prohibit pot, forcing people across county lines for their buzz.
I give pot prohibition in America 5-7 more years.
And bylines from Portland, OR, bring back memories – of an Oregon fifty years ago that was the most racist state that a kid knew who hadn’t yet visited Alabama in the 1960s; and how today such folks can still be found, but you have to drive quite a ways from Portland and beat the rocks to find them.
The reason that pot is still illegal at the federal level and that people are still arrested for simple possession is that we have problems in this country built on federalism with determining what must be legislated federally to define who we all are as Americans, and what is best left to states to determine. If all strictures on pot were removed at the federal level, I imagine they’d disappear at the state level in all states within ten years or less – the economic disadvantages to remaining “dry” alone would force states to open up. But we still have “dry” counties, don’t we? I imagine our poorest counties still would prohibit pot, forcing people across county lines for their buzz.
I give pot prohibition in America 5-7 more years.
6
You had me up until the line "we have problems ... built on federalism ... to define who we all are as Americans."
You would favor leaving it all up to the states and the localities to define who we all are as Americans.
I seem to remember from my reading of the history of this country especially during the 19th century that one of the primary forces dividing our people was the determination of southerners to enforce the primacy of states' rights over federalism. Why? To ensure that slavery and its economic and social structure would prevail. That the 3/5 rule ensured electoral advantage to those same southern locales merely ensured not only their regional oligarchies, but their disproportionate influence over the nation. I'm not preaching, but just read up on the Jackson presidency, his appointment of Roger Taney, not to mention some guys named Davis, Lee and so on.
The reality is that we cannot have an American culture and an American way of life if that determination is left to the states. We'd have exactly what the secessionists wanted. We'd have the Bundys writ large. Different issues, same divisiveness.
Yes, there's a risk of federal over-reach. In our lifetimes, we've seen the imposition of the Civil Rights legislation and the ACA. In the 19th century, we saw the emancipation of enslaved human beings.
I'll risk the extra tax dollars for such outcomes rather than the political behavioural perfidy of politicians playing to the mob.
You would favor leaving it all up to the states and the localities to define who we all are as Americans.
I seem to remember from my reading of the history of this country especially during the 19th century that one of the primary forces dividing our people was the determination of southerners to enforce the primacy of states' rights over federalism. Why? To ensure that slavery and its economic and social structure would prevail. That the 3/5 rule ensured electoral advantage to those same southern locales merely ensured not only their regional oligarchies, but their disproportionate influence over the nation. I'm not preaching, but just read up on the Jackson presidency, his appointment of Roger Taney, not to mention some guys named Davis, Lee and so on.
The reality is that we cannot have an American culture and an American way of life if that determination is left to the states. We'd have exactly what the secessionists wanted. We'd have the Bundys writ large. Different issues, same divisiveness.
Yes, there's a risk of federal over-reach. In our lifetimes, we've seen the imposition of the Civil Rights legislation and the ACA. In the 19th century, we saw the emancipation of enslaved human beings.
I'll risk the extra tax dollars for such outcomes rather than the political behavioural perfidy of politicians playing to the mob.
1
TDurk:
No, I would leave it to Congress to intelligently determine what it must legislate on behalf of all Americans, and leave alone those things that don't need to define us all as one thing. When Democratic majorities rule, we tend to see a lot more things that they believe should define us all as Americans; and when Republican majorities rule, we tend to have a lot more freedom.
No, I would leave it to Congress to intelligently determine what it must legislate on behalf of all Americans, and leave alone those things that don't need to define us all as one thing. When Democratic majorities rule, we tend to see a lot more things that they believe should define us all as Americans; and when Republican majorities rule, we tend to have a lot more freedom.
Richard, I was silent until you claimed: "Congress to intelligently determine."
Wow. The current congress is dominated by right-wing morons, an inordinate number of them from Texas.
Wow. The current congress is dominated by right-wing morons, an inordinate number of them from Texas.
It's too early to declare the impact of legalization in Colorado "no big deal." Colorado amendment 64 passed in November 2012. The publicly available data on child neglect and abuse in Colorado is for 2013, so let's wait and see how 2014 and 2015 data look before calling legalization harmless. Likewise, it's too early to tell whether tax revenues in Colorado are "flowing" to schools. Take a look at the national map (April 2016 story): http://www.cpr.org/news/newsbeat/map-how-much-do-colorados-school-distri.... This too is 2013 data. At that point, most of Colorado was behind the national average in school spending per pupil. The 2014 and 2015 data will tell us if the money has since started flowing or not.
8
We already have thousands of years of experience demonstrating the harmlessness of cannabis use. We hardly need to wait for "2014 and 2015" data to confirm what everyone already knows -- that cannabis use is minimally dangerous and compared to alcohol and prescription painkillers entirely safe.
2
Many long-time undeground pot smokers will continue to seek out their local underground pot dealers because they absolutely detest the corporatization of their favored pharmaceutical.
They don't mind paying excise taxes, but the idea that large corporate combines, such as those now trying to push out small growers in California, should pay a major role in a new regulated regime just sickens them. And many don't like the inevitable standardization of the product that regulation will assuredly bring.
Many localities recognize these forces, and that's why places as different as Alaska and the District of Columbia have provisions in their laws that permit pot smokers to grow a few plants and produce their own weed at home. We permit households to produce wine and beer at home -- the same exemption should apply to cannabis.
They don't mind paying excise taxes, but the idea that large corporate combines, such as those now trying to push out small growers in California, should pay a major role in a new regulated regime just sickens them. And many don't like the inevitable standardization of the product that regulation will assuredly bring.
Many localities recognize these forces, and that's why places as different as Alaska and the District of Columbia have provisions in their laws that permit pot smokers to grow a few plants and produce their own weed at home. We permit households to produce wine and beer at home -- the same exemption should apply to cannabis.
95
AS another resident of the Blue Ridge region I say just legalize all drugs. Empty the jails and let police deter real crimes. Use the savings for voluntary free treatment, if the user desires!
1
Weed is available in the District of Columbia via Craigslist. That ship has sailed.
2
"Many long-time underground pot smokers will continue to seek out their local underground pot dealers because they absolutely detest the corporatization of their favored pharmaceutical."
One of the fears of standardization is corporate interests placing an addictive substance such as nicotine into their products.
One of the fears of standardization is corporate interests placing an addictive substance such as nicotine into their products.
1
To my knowledge, no one has developed a reliable technique, which would be admissible in court, for measuring impairment while driving. This is not an insignificant issue since marijuana use affects judgment and reaction time. The thought of drivers impaired by marijuana (and prehaps texting at the same time) is freightening as it is with drunk drivers. But the situation with alcohol is different because several such measures exist; for example, if a driver's BAC, which can be measured at roadside, is .08 or above in most states, the driver is considered over the limit and can be prosecuted. We should be cautious about rushing headlong into legalization until similar techniques are developed for driving under the influence of marijuana. Or until it is determined empirically that persons impaired by marijuana, unlike persons impaired by alchhol, are just too blissed out to get behind the wheel, an unlikely scenario. The proponents of legalization may poo-poo this issue, but to me it is a significant one.
13
I think impairment is fairly easy to evaluate, especially if it correlates with driving infractions. The cause would thereby be irrelevant. DUI, regardless of substance, alcohol, prescriptions drugs or recreational ones should be illegal. But the prosecution more often is directed toward the possession of the illegal substances than the behavior while under the influence.
19
Your argument, like so many involving the use of marijuana, assumes that driving under the influence is not happening to a great extent already, or that legalization will greatly increase this problem. To believe the first is simply naive. And there is no proof yet of the second.
1
As a scientist and a certified flight instructor the issue of reaction times and potential impairment is one I contemplate every time I do a Biennial Flight Review (BFR -- every pilot must take a flight check every 2 years with a flight instructor or an FAA examiner) ... and this has nothing to do with pot. I've never seen a pilot smoke dope even when off-duty, even in Alaska (the "wild west" of American aviation, getting less so). No pilot wants any lingering "brain fuzz," ... no scientist does either.
There are very simple ways to measure relevant reaction times -- think about video games and flight simulators. These are easy to make quantitative too. There's a reality that will hit immediately if these are instituted: what is the acceptable performance "baseline?" How many drivers cannot meet it cold sober?
The reality is that a large fraction of the drivers on the road are more dangerous, particularly at night, than a young competent driver who has smoked a joint, is pretty buzzed ... but is trying to drive carefully.
There are very simple ways to measure relevant reaction times -- think about video games and flight simulators. These are easy to make quantitative too. There's a reality that will hit immediately if these are instituted: what is the acceptable performance "baseline?" How many drivers cannot meet it cold sober?
The reality is that a large fraction of the drivers on the road are more dangerous, particularly at night, than a young competent driver who has smoked a joint, is pretty buzzed ... but is trying to drive carefully.
1
Prohibition of alchoholic beverages in the US from ~1920 to the early 1930s spawned massive organized crime, made criminals out of ordinary people and basically made cynics out of the population with regard to at least some concepts of justice.
Prohibition today of drugs is accomplishing the same result. Legalize pot for sure, consider every other one, coke, acid, and on up. Beer wasn't legalized and whiskey prohibited for a logical reason. The form factors are too small, too fluid, so to speak, too profitable and demand too great to be ignored.
There will be millions of people who will fall by the wayside with the legalization of such drugs as pot. Just as with alcohol. Sorry, but that's a small price to pay in order to dig out one of the root causes of gang violence, police tactics abuse, incoherent justice and the negative impacts all of this creates for poor families in particular.
Legalization is long overdue.
Prohibition today of drugs is accomplishing the same result. Legalize pot for sure, consider every other one, coke, acid, and on up. Beer wasn't legalized and whiskey prohibited for a logical reason. The form factors are too small, too fluid, so to speak, too profitable and demand too great to be ignored.
There will be millions of people who will fall by the wayside with the legalization of such drugs as pot. Just as with alcohol. Sorry, but that's a small price to pay in order to dig out one of the root causes of gang violence, police tactics abuse, incoherent justice and the negative impacts all of this creates for poor families in particular.
Legalization is long overdue.
65
Watch as the pendulum swings. With state legalization and corporate greed far ahead of common sense Federal reform, tax revenues and corporate profits will be well entrenched before hard scientific research can inform us of the benefits and perils of pot use. We need to allow researchers free access to all drugs and fund unbiased research yesterday.
12
The police union leaders can not come to their union brethren and ask them to support the removal by legalization of one of their reasons to hire more officers each fiscal year. But ask a group of officers to raise their hands if they've had to fight with a drunk in the previous month, most hands go up. Ask how many had to fight with a red-eyed pot user and most hands do not go up. The federal government chooses to keep pot at schedule 1 with the deadly drugs. All societies celebrate one or two mind altering substances and demonize all others. But people know the truth. Therefore the black market in pot is a necessity and a natural outcome. There are very few minorities at the dispensary in my State where I get my cannabis products. Does that mean blacks have fewer cancers, like mine? No. The pot products my State sells are priced through the roof. So I am tired of saying, "Tax it and legalize it." As an alcoholic who doesn't drink because he has the reefer alternative, the only place I know worth living is California where I also have a script. Pot is cheap there. Minorities are represented at the dispensaries. Who can trust the 50 separate, unequal State Assemblies to do the right thing? An outgoing lame duck president could do something with a pen stroke. But he won't.
51
One of the big sources of resistance from Law Enforcement is that police can seize property in a drug bust that can be sold at auction and in many communities is used to fund Police overtime for drug patrols. Does anyone have a doubt that the opposition to legalized Marijuana is driven by a conflict of interest?
252
Thanks, common sense is often in short supply when trying to discuss the pointless, failed, and make-work-for-slow-witted-white-guys nature of the war on weed.
No other public policy that is such a sustained failure would still be on the dole at this point. It's a jobs program for reactionaries, pure and simple. It accomplishes nothing except the cruel interference in the life of otherwise law-abiding citizens and further brutalizes those who think they are doing the first group a favor by entangling them in the "justice" system. It is a shameful exercise in a nation that claims to regard freedom as all important.
The state level legalization initiatives are still good at undermining the remaining stupid in states where this is available. Many other states don't, and why should we suffer under the inequitable application of the law before the US constitution.
Yes, the time has come to call the feds to account on this, since the DEA refuses to consider anything but Schedule One status for cannabis. We have majorities that reject prohibition. This should mean that no one who supports prohibition should be reelected or elected in November. Clinton is a close call on this, she should heed which way the wind is blowing.
No other public policy that is such a sustained failure would still be on the dole at this point. It's a jobs program for reactionaries, pure and simple. It accomplishes nothing except the cruel interference in the life of otherwise law-abiding citizens and further brutalizes those who think they are doing the first group a favor by entangling them in the "justice" system. It is a shameful exercise in a nation that claims to regard freedom as all important.
The state level legalization initiatives are still good at undermining the remaining stupid in states where this is available. Many other states don't, and why should we suffer under the inequitable application of the law before the US constitution.
Yes, the time has come to call the feds to account on this, since the DEA refuses to consider anything but Schedule One status for cannabis. We have majorities that reject prohibition. This should mean that no one who supports prohibition should be reelected or elected in November. Clinton is a close call on this, she should heed which way the wind is blowing.
44
I wish I could view the steady move toward legalized pot with much joy but I can't. I have a family member who gatewayed to heroin via pot and who's fragile recovery is now endangered by a relapse into pot. Moreover, I am inclined to see the legal commercialization of pot as the last great frontier open for exploitation by the tobacco industry. That seems to be happening in Colorado. I know that legalization is coming but I hope that there is consideration paid to the inevitable toll that will be paid by those prone to addiction rather than the more likely outcome of treating them like social outcasts.
8
John, as a drug and alcohol counselor I occasionally meet a person whose sobriety is severely threatened by marijuana, but the vast majority of clients report that drinking alcohol is a serious relapse issue. Most people who are in recovery from addiction to heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, etc are aware that they need to avoid using drugs that trigger their cravings, including legally prescribed opioid medications. That is not a reason to ban these substances.
17
John, if your family member had started with alcohol and then went to heroin, would you call for the re-establishment of Prohibition? Pot did not cause them to do heroin. We have to stop thinking that wanting to alter our consciousness is a moral failure. It is a natural desire that comes from being alive. Other species also like to get high. We can also say that spinning our kids around, making them dizzy, is a gateway to heroin.
10
Why should pot be banned for me because John's friend can't stay sober?
2
Timothy, the stats show whiskey consumption in the U.S. peaked around 1975 and fell for 20 years, and has been pretty flat since then. I like to think that legalization of drugs would work the same way, we hope. It;s worth a try, cause our War On Drugs was lost long ago.
27
The overall consumption of alcohol in terms of pure liters of alcohol per capita per year has remained pretty steady at 9.
1
If heroin were legalized users would know what they were getting and there wouldn't be many overdoses. If cocaine were also legalized we would remove the plague of drug gangs from Mexico and Columbia.
If our economy provided more opportunity addiction wouldn't be nearly as widespread. Unless people are in severe physical or mental pain they are unlikely to want drugs that much. Real life is better, if one has a life.
If our economy provided more opportunity addiction wouldn't be nearly as widespread. Unless people are in severe physical or mental pain they are unlikely to want drugs that much. Real life is better, if one has a life.
83
The recent advent of Fentanyl and carfentanil have had a horrific result, but it points up an interesting and salient point. These drugs are extremely cheap and easy to produce and could destroy the black market in opioids if properly developed and managed. They will not go away. To me it seems the best thing society could do now is develop and distribute a cheap, accurate means to test drugs for potency. It would save lots of lives, and put a huge number of drug users on a much more equal footing in society. This is just too much common sense of course, and goes against the interests of both the black market and law enforcement.
7
Fentanyl and particularly carfentanyl will "destroy the drug market" by killing off those who use it. They are extremely potent, and even though the therapeutic index (ratio of effective dose to lethal dose) is good, addicts are very likely to overdose. Fentanyl is associated with strong respiratory depression (the usual mechanism of opioid death) in some users/patients -- I don't think this is completely understood. This is why fentanyl is largely restricted to hospital-use and for patients with terminal/otherwise-intractable pain.
Fentanyl is also associated with increased suicide in teenagers and young adults; even those who have received only therapeutic doses in hospital settings -- this is also poorly understood, but is a reason that physicians usually prescribe other opiates for them, if needed.
The cost of an opiate is not an issue for its cost in a legal or illegal drug market -- all of these opiates are dirt-cheap to make.
Fentanyl is also associated with increased suicide in teenagers and young adults; even those who have received only therapeutic doses in hospital settings -- this is also poorly understood, but is a reason that physicians usually prescribe other opiates for them, if needed.
The cost of an opiate is not an issue for its cost in a legal or illegal drug market -- all of these opiates are dirt-cheap to make.
4
Misguided moralism by two Republican Presidents, Nixon and Reagan, gave us the drug war which ruined many lives with incarceration and stigma.
It took two Democratic Presidents, Clinton who tried it but 'didn't inhale' (really Bill?), and Obama who admitted to inhaling, to get us to where we are now: a sane sensible place which mirrors public sentiment on the subject.
Republicans have wasted so much time and energy for so many decades waging 'culture wars' on so many fronts, one has to wonder whether that strategy still has legs.
Let's hope not. Maybe then we can attend to the things that really matter.
It took two Democratic Presidents, Clinton who tried it but 'didn't inhale' (really Bill?), and Obama who admitted to inhaling, to get us to where we are now: a sane sensible place which mirrors public sentiment on the subject.
Republicans have wasted so much time and energy for so many decades waging 'culture wars' on so many fronts, one has to wonder whether that strategy still has legs.
Let's hope not. Maybe then we can attend to the things that really matter.
78
If Trump gets elected due to Millenial apathy or Bernie snobbishness, you can bet the vigilantes will reappear here - Federal control could likely wipe out this activity on the West coast in a phone call to enforce the laws.
2
Where we are right now, under President Obama, is that cannabis remains a Schedule 1 drug -- along with heroin and LSD. Dispense with the political spin.
Under the "sane sensible place" Mr. Obama has placed the country, Black Americans continue to be arrested much more frequently than White Americans despite comparable cannabis use. Let's remember that the Black American killed in Charlotte was spotted with cannabis by the police.
Under the "sane sensible place" Mr. Obama has placed the country, Black Americans continue to be arrested much more frequently than White Americans despite comparable cannabis use. Let's remember that the Black American killed in Charlotte was spotted with cannabis by the police.
2
I think presidents of both parties supported it. Nixon signed the legislation, yes, but it was passed by a Democratic Congress. You know this, please don't use public health for political points.
As a police officer in a major metropolitan department in California over 25 years, I witnessed a group think among most but not all law enforcement personnel. And that is that weed is bad because its a, "gateway," drug which will lead to harder drugs. They view people that smoke marijuana as weak, and stupid. There is no analyses necessary among these, "experts." Just their experience in the field and fixed beliefs. The officers that rise in the ranks hold onto these beliefs and as top commanders they wield a huge influence over legislators. It doesn't matter to them that there are no, and I mean Zero cases of anyone anywhere overdosing, dying from marijuana. In cases where its been contaminated with a poison thats a different case.
Hundreds of people die from alcohol poisoning each year, Tens of thousands die each year from alcohol related illnesses. Tens of thousands are admitted to emergency rooms with alcohol related problems. Tens of thousands are injured in alcohol related crashes. I'm not saying marijuana is completely harmless and we won't have impaired drivers on the road. But we tried outlawing alcohol and saw it was pointless.
Hundreds of people die from alcohol poisoning each year, Tens of thousands die each year from alcohol related illnesses. Tens of thousands are admitted to emergency rooms with alcohol related problems. Tens of thousands are injured in alcohol related crashes. I'm not saying marijuana is completely harmless and we won't have impaired drivers on the road. But we tried outlawing alcohol and saw it was pointless.
307
As a police officer in California, we should have noticed that traffic is getting much worse due to the massive increase in cell phone distracted drivers. This is going to get a lot worse and accidents will get much more common when they these drivers are stoned.
And may I add that I have met many many law officers who are out and out drunks.
When myth, reality, and demand clash, logic get confused. The "problems" of states with legalized marijuana is not the black market--it existed long before! Similar to modern bootlegging, it is another example of choice and availability without the taxes, which cuts the price! Edibles can be made in strengths of weak, mild, and strong (instead of one bite fits all!). An education program, including at the point-of-sale to avoid the Dowd syndrome will help consumers not blatantly disregard packaging instructions.
Driving arrests have not risen and no increase in public use has been noted. What is at risk is the enormous sequestering of hordes of cash that banks refuse to accept because of the feds. The cash is a corollary inviting greater risk and disruption than recreational use!
Some groups will push back against every sensible, sane advance. Dire warnings of mangled brain chemistry, poor job performance, security risks, and general anomie still resound. Relax! Society survived decades of underground use, marijuana legalization has been be no worse.
Opiate use spun off from prescription drugs pushed by a few doctors and big pharm reps; pain clinics sprung up to treat the "pain" of addiction; street heroin was cheaper and needed no script. It's ethnic profile is unique. Once common in northeast inner cities, those "living in hell" broke the choke hold, but no one knows how or why. That knowledge might help stop the epidemic of youth violence.
Driving arrests have not risen and no increase in public use has been noted. What is at risk is the enormous sequestering of hordes of cash that banks refuse to accept because of the feds. The cash is a corollary inviting greater risk and disruption than recreational use!
Some groups will push back against every sensible, sane advance. Dire warnings of mangled brain chemistry, poor job performance, security risks, and general anomie still resound. Relax! Society survived decades of underground use, marijuana legalization has been be no worse.
Opiate use spun off from prescription drugs pushed by a few doctors and big pharm reps; pain clinics sprung up to treat the "pain" of addiction; street heroin was cheaper and needed no script. It's ethnic profile is unique. Once common in northeast inner cities, those "living in hell" broke the choke hold, but no one knows how or why. That knowledge might help stop the epidemic of youth violence.
20
Mr. Rhett, you make an excellent point about the destructive effects --- specifically, the banks' understandable reluctance to accept deposits that flow from illegal drug sales --- of allowing a federal prohibition to continue to exist alongside a growing but still quite small number of states where pot's legal.
In addition to eliminating an unnecessary and unenforceable prohibition that deflects time, energy and focus from local law enforcement, a liberalization of federal marijuana regs could include the establishment of broad, nationwide policy goals and practices that could bring order to a process that seems as inevitable as the one that made same-sex marriage legal.
In addition to eliminating an unnecessary and unenforceable prohibition that deflects time, energy and focus from local law enforcement, a liberalization of federal marijuana regs could include the establishment of broad, nationwide policy goals and practices that could bring order to a process that seems as inevitable as the one that made same-sex marriage legal.
6
"Dowd syndrome"
Good one!
Good one!
While I am inclined to agree with these sentiments, I recently read that in Colorado where pot has been legal for over a year, the police were NOT finding they now had more time to pursue more serious crimes. Instead, legal pot was creating a lot of nuisance calls that was tying up their time. So this makes me a little skeptical of idea that the police will be able to reorient their focus to more serious issues. On the other hand, treating pot smoking as some kind of moral and legal horror is, as Timothy points out, pretty stupid and unproductive. Like many things, legalization will probably be both more and less than people expect. Like Colorado, things will probably stay much the way they were before.
20
@ Entropic: After 90 years of prohibition, you think a one-year social experiment in CO tells us anything? Legal pot creates nuisance calls? That will fade away in another year. Please, perspective is everything.
2
Rodrigo Duterte is a right wing extremist with an evil program to fight drug addiction. Mr. Egan is a pundit who wants to legalize marijuana, which is a gateway drug to heroin for thousands of Americans.
"Under [Duterte's] watch, more than 3,500 suspected drug users and dealers have been killed" in the Philippines. In the United States, 47,055 people died from drug overdoses just in 2014.
The practice of *balancing dopamine* via drugs has terrible consequences.
The logic of illustrating the *acceptable* drug habits of great figures from the past is pathetic. Just as showcasing high-income states such as California and Oregon in the movement to legalize marijuana.
Imagine if we had spent extra $Trillions on education and infrastructure instead of *nation building* in the Middle East. That would have been safe and effective aid for our dopamine-challenged cohort.
Bottom line: do not encourage or enable people to use marijuana or any other stupid drugs. Instead, change our national priorities and fight economic and educational inequality.
"Under [Duterte's] watch, more than 3,500 suspected drug users and dealers have been killed" in the Philippines. In the United States, 47,055 people died from drug overdoses just in 2014.
The practice of *balancing dopamine* via drugs has terrible consequences.
The logic of illustrating the *acceptable* drug habits of great figures from the past is pathetic. Just as showcasing high-income states such as California and Oregon in the movement to legalize marijuana.
Imagine if we had spent extra $Trillions on education and infrastructure instead of *nation building* in the Middle East. That would have been safe and effective aid for our dopamine-challenged cohort.
Bottom line: do not encourage or enable people to use marijuana or any other stupid drugs. Instead, change our national priorities and fight economic and educational inequality.
1
What is "pathetic" here is Mr. Bal's use of the tired old scare tactic that weed is a gateway drug, the implication being that it in and of itself draws users into a need for ever more powerful narcotics. This is utter nonsense. Proponents of this notion point to the percentage of addicts who first began with marijuana. They fail to note that those persons began - say - eating candy bars at an even earlier age. Sugar creates a high so should we blame candy? A portion of the population is inclined toward addiction by factors not yet fully understood but including genetics. Members of that portion who are unable to resist addiction will become addicts to something - alcohol, prescription meds, whatever. This nation's catastrophic experiment with alcohol prohibition showed the futility of banning a substance for everyone because it is abused by some. This lesson is especially relevant regarding a substance such as marijuana, which has been repeatedly shown to be itself non-addictive. The appalling cost of marijuana prohibition, from horrible Mexican drug gangs to mass incarceration FAR outweighs any conceivable benefit and should be obvious even to those still clinging to worn-out slogans of a discredited "war on drugs."
188
Marijuana might be a gateway to Cheetos and sweatpants. Nothing more pernicious than that.
Pot that doesn't cause munchies is already being developed.
Pot that doesn't cause munchies is already being developed.
24
Correlation is not causation. Policies need to be evidence based, not regurgitated endlessly from the past.
22
"So why are nearly 600,000 people arrested in the United States for simple possession of marijuana every year? And why is pot still illegal on the federal level?"
It's because government absolutely hates to admit and correct its errors.
It's because government absolutely hates to admit and correct its errors.
178
Unfortunately, the federal government is not an individual with a rational mind and conscience, it's a political plant that leans left in the sun is left and right if the sun is right. When there is enough voting power at the voter level, or a majority of states with significant populations legalize marijuana use, the federal government will lean that way.
Another reason why: follow the money. When so many jobs, especially in rural areas, and some private companies profits depend on keeping prisons at full occupancy levels, it's not surprising that this happens.
1
Why are 600,000 are arrested every year for simple possession?
A lot of money is made incarcerating people by government at every level - bail, lawyers, court costs, probation monitoring, jail and prison expense. But that's only if someone avoids getting shot during the arrest. The entrenched federal bureaucracy is adamantly opposed to a legal, regulated market. Alcohol and pharmaceutical companies don't want a safer herbal alternative for recreation or medicine for pain relief and many other terrible maladies.
The Democratic party is slowly following public opinion toward a regulated market. The hide-bound Republican party adamantly supports prohibition, despite about one-third support for a legal approach from their own voters. Duterte's approach is not different, in terms of savagery, from the brutal war U.S. cannabis policy has inflicted on Mexico and South America for decades. The Drug War should be scrapped and replaced with an educational, medical-based policy.
An end to cannabis prohibition will have one negative effect, in my opinion. For people of means, young and old, getting arrested can be an exercise in empathy building with minorities and poor people. That opportunity will go away to a large degree. There is nothing quite like being arrested and hauled into jail, strip-searched, processed and worse, a lot worse, if the cards fall right, to give someone a taste of what the poor endure every day.
A lot of money is made incarcerating people by government at every level - bail, lawyers, court costs, probation monitoring, jail and prison expense. But that's only if someone avoids getting shot during the arrest. The entrenched federal bureaucracy is adamantly opposed to a legal, regulated market. Alcohol and pharmaceutical companies don't want a safer herbal alternative for recreation or medicine for pain relief and many other terrible maladies.
The Democratic party is slowly following public opinion toward a regulated market. The hide-bound Republican party adamantly supports prohibition, despite about one-third support for a legal approach from their own voters. Duterte's approach is not different, in terms of savagery, from the brutal war U.S. cannabis policy has inflicted on Mexico and South America for decades. The Drug War should be scrapped and replaced with an educational, medical-based policy.
An end to cannabis prohibition will have one negative effect, in my opinion. For people of means, young and old, getting arrested can be an exercise in empathy building with minorities and poor people. That opportunity will go away to a large degree. There is nothing quite like being arrested and hauled into jail, strip-searched, processed and worse, a lot worse, if the cards fall right, to give someone a taste of what the poor endure every day.
127
The war on drugs is, among other things, a jobs program. And it will be defended in the same way as all the other government actions and regulations that amount to jobs programs -- by any means and any argument that smart lawyers and PR types can come up with. If we did something about our addiction to jobs programs and the lies that justify them, our drug problems would be much easier to deal with effectively.
37
It will be one less thing for the poor to endure, too.
I support full legalization of pot in the USA. I haven't used it for years but it was much safer than the alcohol I also used. I used LSD in my youth; it was very dangerous because it interfered greatly with my perception and judgment, but no more than being seriously drunk, which I also was at times. Man I'm glad those times are long behind me. Later I got a law degree, passed the bar and was a lawyer; much later I got a Masters in Public Health degree. The prohibition of pot is totally insane. We have so many worse problems. And it is racist to the core: young black men are crushed with criminal records, damaging them and their whole communities; whites are much less likely to be arrested, or to suffer penalties.
That said I also support the draconian crackdown, Mao style in the Philippines. Why? Because the leader was democratically elected, clearly expressed his draconian policy, stated a compelling public safety rationale, which the crime ridden public applauded. And there is no such thing as "universal human rights". This is a western construct. Read the "Cairo declaration on human rights in Islam" for the Islamic rebuke of the western, UN accepted, construct. Listen to Russian and Chinese opinion. Again, in opposition to such "universal rights". Respect diversity, respect the sovereignty of foreign countries and their peoples.
That said I also support the draconian crackdown, Mao style in the Philippines. Why? Because the leader was democratically elected, clearly expressed his draconian policy, stated a compelling public safety rationale, which the crime ridden public applauded. And there is no such thing as "universal human rights". This is a western construct. Read the "Cairo declaration on human rights in Islam" for the Islamic rebuke of the western, UN accepted, construct. Listen to Russian and Chinese opinion. Again, in opposition to such "universal rights". Respect diversity, respect the sovereignty of foreign countries and their peoples.
3
"Human Rights" may be a construct but morality is not. Your rationale would also apply to Hitler. Thr general trend in the US to moral relativism is terrifying. We won't have Nazism but are likely to come up with something just as bad.
3
That said I also support the draconian crackdown, Mao style in the Philippines. Why? Because the leader was democratically elected, clearly expressed his draconian policy, stated a compelling public safety rationale, which the crime ridden public applauded. And there is no such thing as "universal human rights".
You could use similar arguments to justify Hitlers' treatment of the jews. This one time, I think Godwin's law is justified.
You could use similar arguments to justify Hitlers' treatment of the jews. This one time, I think Godwin's law is justified.
1
In your comments on the bloodthirsty Duterte regime of the Philippines, you're condoning socially sanctioned murder, pure and simple, and dignifying it by characterizing it as the cultural/political choice of a sovereign nation, a choice we must respect.
Happily, that choice is now rejected by the majority of Americans, according to recent reports, who oppose the death penalty and who, I hope, will back global sanctions against Duterte that erode popular support for his regime and its barbaric practices.
Happily, that choice is now rejected by the majority of Americans, according to recent reports, who oppose the death penalty and who, I hope, will back global sanctions against Duterte that erode popular support for his regime and its barbaric practices.
2
In his book on ADHD, Alan Schwarz writes: "Dexedrine had become perhaps the most widely abused drug in the United States—more than hippies' marijuana, more than Timothy Leary's LSD, more than the heroin that would soon kill Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin. In the 1960s, doctors prescribed amphetamines so willingly—for weight loss, depression, all but hangnails—that an estimated four billion tablets were dispensed by American pharmacies per year, or enough for every man, woman and child in the United States to have twenty apiece."
It doesn't give me any confidence that there will be any kind of moderation here. AFAIK, the terrible toll of alcohol in the US is hidden by the dis-aggregating alcohol caused deaths into numerous different buckets. One has to look at the aggregated statistics from the World Health Organization to see this.
It seems that capitalism cannot be endured without chemical help.
It doesn't give me any confidence that there will be any kind of moderation here. AFAIK, the terrible toll of alcohol in the US is hidden by the dis-aggregating alcohol caused deaths into numerous different buckets. One has to look at the aggregated statistics from the World Health Organization to see this.
It seems that capitalism cannot be endured without chemical help.
59
Comrad Gupta, I recall that the now defunct Soviet Union had a bit of a problem with vodka.
4
If capitalism is so bad, why are you living in NJ instead of back in socialist India? Exactly which socialist paradise should us capitalist alcoholic Americans choose - N. Korea, Cuba, India, Venezuela, China?
1
Mr. Schwarz was wrong. Not even close. About 15 times as many people use marijuana than use amphetamines non-medically. Even when medical use is included, it is not close.
Addiction is escape from reality and increases during economic stress. Unfortunately, for many escapists, drugs are a one way track to permanent
personal economic failure and tragedy. Society at present can ill afford the loss of productivity from potentially millions of citizens who are lost, at least part time, in their own worlds. This is an excellent reason to block easy access to these drugs, but capitalism and vote pandering take precedence over the common good.
personal economic failure and tragedy. Society at present can ill afford the loss of productivity from potentially millions of citizens who are lost, at least part time, in their own worlds. This is an excellent reason to block easy access to these drugs, but capitalism and vote pandering take precedence over the common good.
2
Au contraire. Society has failed to provide those millions of people with meaningful work and sustainable wages due to the concentration of wealth and lack of participation (and empathy) by a very few. For many there is no path to "productivity', or other meaningful participation in our society. Their socio-economic status has plummeted and society has failed to offer them much help at all. The availability of extremely cheap, easily produced or home grown diversions puts a dent in the overlord's model and affects their bottom line. That includes folks like Matt, above, who brews his own beer.
Weed was demonized and made illegal largely because the repeal of prohibition left the government with a surplus of agents with nothing to do. In so doing they've wildly succeeded in growing their numbers, broadening their scope and augmenting the industrial prison complex.
Weed was demonized and made illegal largely because the repeal of prohibition left the government with a surplus of agents with nothing to do. In so doing they've wildly succeeded in growing their numbers, broadening their scope and augmenting the industrial prison complex.
29
Is pot the approximate realization of Aldous Huxley's soma? " "All the advantages of Christianity and alcohol; none of their defects."
EricR wrote: "Weed was demonized and made illegal largely because the repeal of prohibition left the government with a surplus of agents with nothing to do"
An interesting theory, but false. Cannabis was originally made illegal primarily due to the lobbying efforts in 1937 of Randolf Hearst and his contemporaries who felt that industrial hemp would cut into the profits of the wood pulp (paper) industry.
This led to the 'Marijuana Tax Act' (which the American Medical Association objected to at the time). Other misguided justifications for keeping cannabis illegal followed, but originally the primary justification was economic.
An interesting theory, but false. Cannabis was originally made illegal primarily due to the lobbying efforts in 1937 of Randolf Hearst and his contemporaries who felt that industrial hemp would cut into the profits of the wood pulp (paper) industry.
This led to the 'Marijuana Tax Act' (which the American Medical Association objected to at the time). Other misguided justifications for keeping cannabis illegal followed, but originally the primary justification was economic.
It would also begin to depress sales for BigPharma and BigAlcohol. Legal access to pot would cause many people to substitute it or incredibly expensive drugs and the ubiquitous use of alcohol. So, the answer to why there is still a concerted effort to prevent the widespread use of pot is because it would depress earnings for the two aforementioned industries. With their massive lobbying budgets they drive government policy. That's why they are driving up drug prices so that they can make as much money as possible before the jig is up. It is also why there has been massive consolidation of the alcohol industry.
119
This is a bit of a conspiracy theory. While pot may have medicinal benefits, right now it's all anecdotal. There's no shortage of "herbal remedies" and supplements that people swear by, and those are not regulated.
As for alcohol, it's easier to brew beer than make soup. I spend two to three hours a month to keep us supplied with beer in our home via home brewing. That's less than the time it would take me going to and from the liquor store. A bottle of beer costs me 25 cents for supplies. Hard apple cider costs 20 cents.
Big alcohol is not coming down on me or others.
As for alcohol, it's easier to brew beer than make soup. I spend two to three hours a month to keep us supplied with beer in our home via home brewing. That's less than the time it would take me going to and from the liquor store. A bottle of beer costs me 25 cents for supplies. Hard apple cider costs 20 cents.
Big alcohol is not coming down on me or others.
2
Matt, tell that to the parents of children whose seizures have been controlled or greatly decreased with cannabis that it has no medicinal value. Your body has an endocannabinoid system that responds to the same various cannabinoids found in cannabis, these substances contain much promise for treating everything from PTSD to cancer. Cannabis has been used as medicine and as a sacrament for thousands of years before our brief and irrational prohibition of this benign and natural plant.
4
PPP, your examples are still anecdotal but you completely missed my point. Big Pharma isn't lobbying against herbal remedies and they won't do that for pot either. Neither directly compete with their business models.
I agree there's promise, but that's not the same as an FDA approved drug. So pot will likely fall into the less regulated arena of experimental drugs / herbal suppliments. Unlike big pharm, people can't sue the grower if there are nasty side effects, so it will be cheaper and less precise, whatever the benefits.
I agree there's promise, but that's not the same as an FDA approved drug. So pot will likely fall into the less regulated arena of experimental drugs / herbal suppliments. Unlike big pharm, people can't sue the grower if there are nasty side effects, so it will be cheaper and less precise, whatever the benefits.
The reason 600,00 people are arrested for pot, each year, is jobs.
There are judges, prosecutors, defence lawyers, police, jail guards, court bailiff's, court reporters, prison guards, prison wardens, parole and probation officers, urine testers, bail bondsmen whose livelihood depends on the nonsensical prosecution of pot smokers.
Then we have the obscenity of for profit jails and prisons, for profit prisoner transporters, for profit prison medical providers, for profit parole and probation services, for profit drug testers, for profit hallway houses.
Does anyone think any of the above want to get real jobs?
There are judges, prosecutors, defence lawyers, police, jail guards, court bailiff's, court reporters, prison guards, prison wardens, parole and probation officers, urine testers, bail bondsmen whose livelihood depends on the nonsensical prosecution of pot smokers.
Then we have the obscenity of for profit jails and prisons, for profit prisoner transporters, for profit prison medical providers, for profit parole and probation services, for profit drug testers, for profit hallway houses.
Does anyone think any of the above want to get real jobs?
328
I work for a county probation department as a data analyst. I can say with 100% certainty that upwards of 95% of our clients have medical marijuana cards! Yet our county enacts a jumble of rules and regulations regarding the growing, harvesting and selling of it, resulting in lots of arrests and much anger and bickering between the old ranching/farm families and the newcomers who wish to become such.
24
I think most of them (with the exception of the ludicrously paid fat-cat executives) would be thrilled to find jobs more beneficial to the country and to humanity. However those jobs were shipped off to China, India, and the like, in the interest of "efficiency".
Craig, run for President. We are in desperate need of a straight talker who doesn't mention 'sex tapes' nor his manhood.
1
It would seem that after a century of abuse, prohibition, and stupidity we are finally getting sane. At the same time we are getting high.
Who'd a thunk it.
Who'd a thunk it.
37
we shall see if california steps in or not. just yesterday the san jose mercury ran an article explaining how the fees with getting permits are going to be really expensive. expensive like shutting out all but large moneyed interests. we shall see. what ever happens it is time for the madness with this to end.
17
the other glaring wrong about the prohibition of weed or drugs in general is that starting this behavior didn't even come up for the first 5000 years of our being here
2
Mr. Egan, you left out one glaring benefit from the legalizing of marijuana: the importation of the drug from across our borders. By de-criminalizing this mild form of chemical diversion, the drug lords in other countries will be forced to lessen the severity of the brutalization of their own citizens. Another benefit might also mean a drastic reduction in the corruption of law enforcement officers who look the other way when innocents are killed or bribes handed down the line. I'm naive? Perhaps.
As many have pointed out for so long, alcoholism is no less a problem today than it was when it was legally prohibited. Human nature being what it is, people who want something will find a way to get it and they won't be constrained by the cost of the product nor the consequences of disclosure.
If there's a societal benefit--taxation, regulations for the sale of "healthy" products, etc., then by all means make it available to those who want it. And you're correct in writing that opioid addiction--as well as the growing number of whites who succumb to the lure of heroin, e.g.--is only now a concern because those who previously trafficked in the substance were already relegated to the ranks of criminals; you know, those with obvious "congenital defects" whose culture begged the use and distribution of drugs as a community way of life. Staten Island cops gone to opioids? Of those addicted, were any jailed for possession or distribution?
Marijuana is a societal scourge? Trump isn't?
As many have pointed out for so long, alcoholism is no less a problem today than it was when it was legally prohibited. Human nature being what it is, people who want something will find a way to get it and they won't be constrained by the cost of the product nor the consequences of disclosure.
If there's a societal benefit--taxation, regulations for the sale of "healthy" products, etc., then by all means make it available to those who want it. And you're correct in writing that opioid addiction--as well as the growing number of whites who succumb to the lure of heroin, e.g.--is only now a concern because those who previously trafficked in the substance were already relegated to the ranks of criminals; you know, those with obvious "congenital defects" whose culture begged the use and distribution of drugs as a community way of life. Staten Island cops gone to opioids? Of those addicted, were any jailed for possession or distribution?
Marijuana is a societal scourge? Trump isn't?
44
" The problem is the federal government, which still classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, alongside heroin and L.S.D." the fundamental problem is the President who, hypocritically, is unwilling to take steps which would lead to allowing other americans to engage in an activity that he was once an active participant in. as with his foreign policy, Obama leads from behind.
11
Yes, it's Obama's fault! Just like Putin, the weather, bad grammar, racism, the economy, and my uncle's boils. Some can never pass up an opportunity, real or imagined, no matter the topic, to indulge their hatred of Obama.
17
He's right about Obama's hypocrisy on marijuana. Why can't you accept that? Just face it, Trump apologists are just as bad as Obama enablers. Hypocrisy cuts both ways.
And the hits keep on coming.
3
That means, first do no harm -- or at least do no *more* harm than is already being done by the users to themselves. Every time a user meets his supplier in the public health model, he gets this message: if you ever think this is a problem, we've got help for you to take a look or to quit. Just let us know. In the prohibition model, that user never gets that message from his supplier.
All the people I know who used needles to inject drugs (in the 1980s) are dead. They died of hepatitis and liver cancer, every one of them. This is because they shared non-sterile needles, something that could also be easily remedied in the public health model of drug abuse: first do no (more) harm. All of these dead drug users were extremely talented, soft-hearted, caring people who didn't deserve to die simply because the psychic space they were occupying was unbearable.
I did everything they did without the needles: smoked it, sniffed it, ate it. I've been clean and sober for 28 years; I know how it feels.