Would you vote to legalize marijuana?

[GracieMMABarra]

dope is far better than alcohol, which should be banned.

No, it shouldn't.

 

[Seano]

People ruin their lives over alcohol. Tens of thousands of people die because of alcohol annually but I think people should have the right to drink.

Obviously alcohol isn't as bad as heroine but I still think people should have the right to ingest whatever they want. Plus, its possible they do society more harm than good as illegal substances since the drug trade funds violent gangs instead of reputable businesses. Its possible that we're better off with harder drugs illegal but I don't think its clear one way or the other and the Drug war has been going on for over 40 years with little to show for it, I think we should at least consider ending it and looking at other alternatives.

Besides, I don't think decriminalization means you just ignore drugs, The funding that goes towards policing could just as easily go to clinics that help rehabilitate addicts and towards education that helps stop people from ever taking drugs. Cigarette use has dropped a lot through the years despite the fact that it is legal. Even alcohol consumption has declined in the last few decades

You can still tackle the drug problem even if you don't approach it as a criminal issue. Its a public health concern and should be dealt with as such.

I don't really buy the "What about alcohol!?!?!" argument.

Alcohol has its own problems.


Opiates and coke destroy people. What alcohol does to others is sort of irrelevant, its an issue of its own.

 

[soggyfist]

Absolutely.

 

[InternetHero]

Today, tomorrow, anytime.

 

[MortalWombat]

I've seen firsthand what opiates and coke can do to people. I can't support it.

I can understand that. My tentative support doesn't come from "ah, drugs aren't so bad" or from "let people do what they want", but more from the view that what we are doing now is less effective at stopping people from using those drugs than what we could do if we decriminalised them. So the idea would certainly be to reduce the effects and reduce the numbers of people affected. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find the interview, but someone like an ex-chief of the Australian Federal Police recently said as much - I only heard a radio interview grab.

But I can certainly understand that even if we were to somehow prove that we can reduce use, effects on the users, crime in general etc, etc, people could still legitimately say "no".

 

[Panky Rang]

Hell yea, its straigh up bs that its illegal in the first place

 

[smellmyfarts]

I did vote for it's legalization in my state. I don't smoke weed because it gives me anxiety these days, but if I'm allowed to drink, than why shouldn't you be allowed to smoke?

I will say that all these people that think it's harmless or that it has all these magical medical properties are fucking retarded, but if that's what it takes to convince the squares to legalize it than so be it. A little bullshit here and there never hurt anyone LOL

 

[Hawkman3111]

I say yes. Everyone does it anyway, rather the money go to the gov (roads, schools, prostitutes, etc) then the gangs (aka the guys who kill like 30-40 people a year in my city).

Nobody was killing people over marijuana here, every 3rd house had a grow lab in it and you didnt buy from a cartel, you bought from a neighbor.

Im sure its different in other parts of the country where there is more law enforcement, think about that for a second. More law enforcement = more gangs and cartels.

And here in WA the tax money from weed is already being dumped into law enforcement. Think about that for a second too, legalization = more law enforcement.

 

[Rusk]

ALL drugs should be legal imo. Public mutilation for all politicians who says otherwise. :icon_twis

 

[marcus_kane]

It's wild to me that people will actually defend their right to not have rights.

 

[MMAgirlie]

Nobody was killing people over marijuana here, every 3rd house had a grow lab in it and you didnt buy from a cartel, you bought from a neighbor.

Im sure its different in other parts of the country where there is more law enforcement, think about that for a second. More law enforcement = more gangs and cartels.

And here in WA the tax money from weed is already being dumped into law enforcement. Think about that for a second too, legalization = more law enforcement.

This man has it right. I can hardly walk down the street without being accosted by the evil Mexican tequila cartels, or see a bust going down for someone's tobacco grow op.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I don't really buy the "What about alcohol!?!?!" argument.

Alcohol has its own problems.


Opiates and coke destroy people. What alcohol does to others is sort of irrelevant, its an issue of its own.

Its not irrelevant because its also a drug that causes public health and safety concerns and the way we've dealt with it seems to be better than the way we've dealt with harder drugs. Treating drugs as a criminal issue and not a public health and safety issue is not only ineffective I think its also an overreach of government. People should have the right to ingest whatever they want without fear of incarceration. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be initiatives to deal with the effects of and prevent drug use but I don't think imprisoning users is right.

 

[Seano]

It's wild to me that people will actually defend their right to not have rights.

Thats an oversimplification.
Narcotics have an obvious negative effect on society. Some people see that as more important than the hippy "fight the power" bullshit.

 

[Islam Imamate]

But I can certainly understand that even if we were to somehow prove that we can reduce use, effects on the users, crime in general etc, etc, people could still legitimately say "no".

How? If you can prove that you can reduce the impact of drugs and reduce the crime it causes via a certain method then that method is clearly the right one.

 

[JonesBones]

Obviously. Then I wouldn't have so much trouble finding decent weed at a decent price this weekend. Starting to get annoying.

 

[Seano]

Its not irrelevant because its also a drug that causes public health and safety concerns and the way we've dealt with it seems to be better than the way we've dealt with harder drugs. Treating drugs as a criminal issue and not a public health and safety issue is not only ineffective I think its also an overreach of government. People should have the right to ingest whatever they want without fear of incarceration. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be initiatives to deal with the effects of and prevent drug use but I don't think imprisoning users is right.

I don't agree with that. Some people are destructive, especially when under the influence.

I don't really see legalizing something that has obvious dire consequences to anyone who uses it.

Personally, I'm not really big on alcohol but we've nurtured a country of drunks over the past 100 years.There are so many alcoholics who have no idea that they are alcoholics because its promoted the way it is. Its big business and not going anywhere. I don't necessarily agree with making money off of people's addictions.

 

[marcus_kane]

Thats an oversimplification.
Narcotics have an obvious negative effect on society. Some people see that as more important than the hippy "fight the power" bullshit.

Many, MANY things have an obvious negative effect on society, like a lack of rights.

Poverty and lack of education are the real problems.

There are laws in place to deal with criminal behavior. Telling someone what they can and cannot do with themselves as long as they're not hurting others is not the solution, and only exacerbates societal problems.

You'll won't see educated, healthy, people decide to try meth because it's legal. You will much more often see destitute, hopeless, people gravitate towards unhealthy behavior. We need education and treatment.

I'm pretty sure they cut people's hands off in certain parts of the world for theft yet there's still criminals.

The drug war like prohibition before it has been a colossal failure, but it has been a boon to the prison system.

 

[MortalWombat]

How? If you can prove that you can reduce the impact of drugs and reduce the crime it causes via a certain method then that method is clearly the right one.

People may not want to accept a more "direct" complicity. Today, we can say, "These people know it's against the law, but they do it anyway - it's their own personal responsibility and their own fault." If things are legal, it can be seen as society condoning the use, and thus accepting some responsibility.

 

[Seano]

Many, MANY things have an obvious negative effect on society, like a lack of rights.

Poverty and lack of education are the real problems.

There are laws in place to deal with criminal behavior. Telling someone what they can and cannot do with themselves as long as they're not hurting others is not the solution, and only exacerbates societal problems.

You'll won't see educated, healthy, people decide to try meth because it's legal. You will much more often see destitute, hopeless, people gravitate towards unhealthy behavior.

I'm pretty sure they cut people's hands off in certain parts of the world for theft yet there's still criminals.

The drug war like prohibition before it has been a colossal failure, but it has been a boon to the prison system.

I really don't agree with any of that.

I mean, yes poverty and lack of education are problems but I don't really see what that has to do with drug prohibition.

Also, there are addictive personalities in all facets of society. Not just poor people. Coke was a drug for the rich and trendy for decades.

 

[GracieMMABarra]

Drugs are already here. I don't understand this notion of blind, deaf, dumb as this isn't an American issue already.

Arresting and sentencing people for non violent crimes is doing nothing but overcrowding, costing the public, funding private prisons, and using a simple solution to a complex problem.

If you think sentencing and prison placement is reasonable than well.....okie dokie.