When recreational drugs are legal...

[K-man]

We have just flown into an isolated Western Australian city called Geralton and I picked up the local paper at the airport. I can't get a copy on the Internet unfortunately and the article is too long for me to copy in full. Suffice to say, it is quoting a local doctor in a nearby town called Meekatharra. She is most concerned about the effect of drugs and alcohol in the local population.

The front page article begins:

A 'fly in fly out' general practitioner in Meekatharra says the town is in danger of 'complete social demise' due to alcohol and drug abuse. Teresa Tierney has written to the shire council saying the situation has deteriorated over the four years she has been working in the town. "The situation reached a crisis point a long time ago, but people are either afraid to speak out or have become so complacent that they do not see the problem any more", she said.

The article goes on:

She said people presented at the hospital every day with injuries related to domestic and sexual violence, sexually transmitted diseases and the 'disease burdon' of alcohol and drug abuse.

I can just imagine the situation if it were even easier to obtain the drugs.

 

[Tez3]

We have just flown into an isolated Western Australian city called Geralton and I picked up the local paper at the airport. I can't get a copy on the Internet unfortunately and the article is too long for me to copy in full. Suffice to say, it is quoting a local doctor in a nearby town called Meekatharra. She is most concerned about the effect of drugs and alcohol in the local population.

The front page article begins:


The article goes on:
I can just imagine the situation if it were even easier to obtain the drugs.

That's my fear which is why I posted up about our drinking culture. I've been watching Portugal's policies for a while now and I think it could be the compromise we need, the decriminalisation of personal drug use instead sending addicts to rehab but still retaining the laws and sentencing for the drug pushers and dealers.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization

I think however those who are pro legalisaiton will still deem it against their principles. The other thing of course is that the USA is a far bigger place than Portugal to try and make this work on such a huge scale.

 

[Steve]

Steve, I post things I know about because the exchange of information especially on this type of thing is important. We have deregulated alcohol just about as much as you can plus taxed it so it's expensive yet we still have the most horrendous binge drinking and the effect on people is terrible, you can't walk down our streets at night. If that's the way you guys want to go or if it's a warning to you then that exchange of information has helped. As for the drugs that aren't illegal here you also get them over there and they are killing people in the States too, when people in both countries are taking legal drugs and are still destroying themselves and others and I post that up how is that dismissing anyone? If I post up only that these drugs are killing people in the States I will be accused of pointing out something that happens in your country and someone will say 'well look at your own country, it's not perfect'. I've been on here too long and I know that will happen. If I post up about drinking or drug taking in your country or if I post up about your laws of which I know nothing btw, I will be told I'm 'attacking' your country. I get told and I even know who by and how vitiolic they can be, that it's none of my business and I should stick to what I know. I do stick to what I know and now you are saying all I post about is the UK, so is this a form of censorship on here, you can only talk about something that hhappens in your country? Drugs one way or another, are a problem in all countries, there isn't a country in this world that doesn't have a drug problem, there are people who want to legalise drugs and those that don't in every country.
As a footnote it's interesting that zDom say what I was writing in a completely different way from you, he just thought I was stuck on marijuana which I'm not actually. Nor am I fixated on prohibition in the UK as you seem to think. I don't know, quite honestly, whether legalising drugs would be good or not, I tend to think not but am open to argument unlike some.

Okay. I'll try one more time.

But I'll ask you the same question I asked you earlier (and I don't think ever got answered). Alcohol is creating problems for you guys. Do you believe that a prohibition on alcohol would help?

For the record, telling me again that you'll never ban alcohol is beside the point. I get that the UK won't ban alcohol. It's the same here. We will also not ban alcohol. We tried it and it didn't work. The logical train I'm trying to take you down is to get away from the emotional reaction, "Drugs are bad, M'kay?"

There is a fixation in this thread, but it's on the idea that the only possible, rational response to something dangerous is to ban it completely. The kneejerk reaction to ban some substances has amply demonstrated that it's not an effective way to control use, manage addiction and mitigate social problems.

Now, it's also possible that your approach to dangerous substances, in the case of alcohol, is ALSO not working well.

The point is that it's not either wide open use OR complete prohibition. There are other possibilities.

ALSO, it is possible that your problems, like ours, are centered less around the actual substance and more around a culture that encourages and promotes the behavior. I've noticed that the use of illicit drugs in the UK is pretty damned high. Alcohol is not your only problem. You have like 10% of your population regularly using illegal drugs, and between 3 and 5% are actively using class A drugs, like heroin, cocaine or meth.

Like the USA, it's pretty clear that prohibiting use of a substance doesn't keep anyone who wants to use it from getting it.

 

[zDom]

Zdom, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I'm asking how we deal with people who cannot handle taking drugs and become a problem and/or endanger others. I'm not 'stuck on' any idea you are seeing things that aren't there besides that this thread can't decide what drugs should be legalised and what shouldn't. ... I don't care about drugs or druggies tbh, each to their own with the proviso that they do no harm.

Sorry I misunderstood, Tez.

That is indeed a good question to look into -- regardless of whether drugs are legal or illegal.

Thats all fine and good but you seem to forget the DEA didnt make Marijuana Illegal. Its not the DEAs job to tell others why it shoudl stay that way. They are not law makers. The people decided to make Marijuana illegal and as of now the people still want it illegal. They show this by voting for people that keep it illegal.

Well, yeah, kind of. Law makers made it illegal based on misinformation and, like many laws are made, to receive money from lobbyist who represented interests that would profit from it being illegal.

And as far as "the people" still wanting it to be illegal, that is the result misinformation pumped out by gov't propaganda since the 1930s. A lot of those people REALLY BELIEVE pot is like heroin.

And its down to about half of "the people" wanting to keep it illegal. (I won't go into the cautions our forefathers issued regarding the tyranny of the majority )

But even in states where "the people" have decided they no longer want it to be illegal, there is still federal action against them and a federal bias toward enforcement regardless of state and local laws.

2ndly I could careless what the DEA director says I dont work for them. When I worded NArcotics out drug tip line had several calls a day on it about Marijuana smell coming from this apartment or that apartment. Stoned people Pissing in stairwells, Stoned drivers, ect. So just because you think it does not bother others Im here to tell you it does. You can blame the police or the DEA or the Govt but in reality its your very neighbors that are still against it.

Stoned people pissing in stairwells are *******s who would be *******s even without being stoned.


I blame the DEA and gov't for continuing to spread lies that keep my neighbors against it. And those neighbors who ARE against it are mostly old people who are dying off. There is too much information readily available for younger people to swallow the ********.

Missouri's last vote on pot was pretty close.

And look at this: http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/ind..._Legalization_and_Regulation_Initiative_(2012)

Turns out there are quite a few good ol' boys in Missouri who are closet smoke.

It may fail again...but every year, a few more of the old, misinformed die off. Watch the feds launch a massive campaign to help put this down.

 

[Makalakumu]

You can blame the police or the DEA or the Govt but in reality its your very neighbors that are still against it.

In Hawaii, you cam grow up to 7 plants for medical purposes. Oops, I hurt my back. In CO and CA its even easier to get a card and you have pot shops that sell product legally. Not everyone's neighbors are against it. The fed is still driving policy.

They also drive policy through the withholding of funds, so other states are reluctant to jump on the band wagon. Why cant individual communities decide?

 

[Steve]

I've been trying to say the same thing but nobody seems to hear it....

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

20 years ago, my neighbors were staunchly against homosexuality. in the rural neighborhood I live in, there was a huge amount of gay bashing, hazing, bullying, as well as just brutal, cruel bigotry. That is no longer the case, and it's because people are becoming more educated.

Knowing is half the battle, right, GI Joe? Most people have zero understanding that the reason weed is illegal has nothing to do with whether it is dangerous. It's 100% about money and politics. It's about dupont and weyerhauser. It's about the big pharmaceutical companies that could lose billions if their anti-anxiety, antidepressants and opium based painkillers were replaced with a cheap, easily renewed product that literally grows out of the ground. It's about synthetics like nylon or textiles like cotton which would suffer when people realize that hemp creates stronger rope than nylon, and fabric that is softer, more durable and naturally anti-microbial than cotton.

I said this way back in the first few pages of this thread. This is political.

 

[Tgace]

And those neighbors who ARE against it are mostly old people who are dying off.

I'm calling BS on this man...what are you basing that data on? I actually take and record these calls...you? Y'all are quick to call "anecdotal" on LEO experience around here, but then pass out dittys like this without being called on it.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Tez3]

Okay. I'll try one more time.

But I'll ask you the same question I asked you earlier (and I don't think ever got answered). Alcohol is creating problems for you guys. Do you believe that a prohibition on alcohol would help?

For the record, telling me again that you'll never ban alcohol is beside the point. I get that the UK won't ban alcohol. It's the same here. We will also not ban alcohol. We tried it and it didn't work. The logical train I'm trying to take you down is to get away from the emotional reaction, "Drugs are bad, M'kay?"

There is a fixation in this thread, but it's on the idea that the only possible, rational response to something dangerous is to ban it completely. The kneejerk reaction to ban some substances has amply demonstrated that it's not an effective way to control use, manage addiction and mitigate social problems.

Now, it's also possible that your approach to dangerous substances, in the case of alcohol, is ALSO not working well.

The point is that it's not either wide open use OR complete prohibition. There are other possibilities.

ALSO, it is possible that your problems, like ours, are centered less around the actual substance and more around a culture that encourages and promotes the behavior. I've noticed that the use of illicit drugs in the UK is pretty damned high. Alcohol is not your only problem. You have like 10% of your population regularly using illegal drugs, and between 3 and 5% are actively using class A drugs, like heroin, cocaine or meth.

Like the USA, it's pretty clear that prohibiting use of a substance doesn't keep anyone who wants to use it from getting it.

I did answer actually I told you that we have cultural problem with alcohol that is decades if not centuries old, prohibition wouldn't help nor will it happen. However our problem was managable if not ideal before the government allowed pubs and clubs to sell alcohol 24/7 since they did that the problem has become nightmarish. One can control without banning, I don't know why you guys are for an all or nothing solution, as I've said I like Portugal's solution which seems to be bringing in good results. It would work with alcohol too along with education, shorter drinking hours, the banning of happy hours and two for one offers in the clubs. I'd like to see the arrests for anti social behaviour having proper sentencing too not just a slap on the wrist. In fact I'd like to see it stop being called 'anti social behaviour' and it being called what it is criminal damage, endangering the public, outraging public decency etc. Whatever fits what the drunks are doing. If people want to get drunk fine but if they can't control themselves when drunk they can't use that as an excuse and should pay the consquences when they fight, vandalise etc. If drug taking is legalised I'd like to see the same clause put on them, if when stoned they break the law they are done for it, if they don't break the law then no one bothers them, fair?

I've said several times I'm not about banning things I'm about ensuring the safety of the general public, if you take drugs and aren't a threat to society fine, I've actually said that a few times now.

 

[Tez3]

I'm calling BS on this man...what are you basing that data on? I actually take and record these calls...you? Y'all are quick to call "anecdotal" on LEO experience around here, but then pass out dittys like this without being called on it.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

I'd imagine a great many are parents of young children concerned about those childrens safety? Whether the drug users are a danger or not may be moot but the concerns of people aren't. Often neighbours see behaviour from those taking drugs that concerns them sometimes even for the drug taker themselves. You don't have to be old to worry about things.

I'd also take issue that only young people know about drugs, those 'old people' would have been around in the sixties! I think zDom thinks his generation invented sex drugs and rock and roll! don't forget the Rolling Stones are in their sixties now! Jagger is 69!

 

[Steve]

I did answer actually I told you that we have cultural problem with alcohol that is decades if not centuries old, prohibition wouldn't help nor will it happen. However our problem was managable if not ideal before the government allowed pubs and clubs to sell alcohol 24/7 since they did that the problem has become nightmarish. One can control without banning, I don't know why you guys are for an all or nothing solution, as I've said I like Portugal's solution which seems to be bringing in good results. It would work with alcohol too along with education, shorter drinking hours, the banning of happy hours and two for one offers in the clubs. I'd like to see the arrests for anti social behaviour having proper sentencing too not just a slap on the wrist. In fact I'd like to see it stop being called 'anti social behaviour' and it being called what it is criminal damage, endangering the public, outraging public decency etc. Whatever fits what the drunks are doing. If people want to get drunk fine but if they can't control themselves when drunk they can't use that as an excuse and should pay the consquences when they fight, vandalise etc. If drug taking is legalised I'd like to see the same clause put on them, if when stoned they break the law they are done for it, if they don't break the law then no one bothers them, fair?

I've said several times I'm not about banning things I'm about ensuring the safety of the general public, if you take drugs and aren't a threat to society fine, I've actually said that a few times now.

So, then, you actually agree with me and believe that lifting the prohibition on weed is sensible? Well, if you would just say so.

 

[Steve]

I'd imagine a great many are parents of young children concerned about those childrens safety? Whether the drug users are a danger or not may be moot but the concerns of people aren't. Often neighbours see behaviour from those taking drugs that concerns them sometimes even for the drug taker themselves. You don't have to be old to worry about things.

I'd also take issue that only young people know about drugs, those 'old people' would have been around in the sixties! I think zDom thinks his generation invented sex drugs and rock and roll! don't forget the Rolling Stones are in their sixties now! Jagger is 69!

Interestingly enough, as a parent of three kids, two who are in high school, I can tell you that I am as worried about alcohol, which is legal, as I am about weed or anything else, which are technically illegal. Kids shouldn't be doing any of it, IMO. The two biggest threats to teenagers in my area are alcohol and prescription opiates. There is use of weed on a somewhat large scale, but the two categories of substances that lead to kids being killed or having their entire lives derailed in my area are alcohol and illicit use of painkillers.

And to address your points about the anti-social behavior, we have to do a better job of changing the culture that glorifies the abuse. Girls Gone Wild videos and the promotion of drunken revelry isn't a good thing. We have kids who get off to college and die from alcohol poisoning because they were convinced that in order to get into the sorority, fraternity or whatever other club, they had to drink insane amounts of alcohol. It's not good.

But, and this is the point that I and others have been making all along, banning the substance doesn't work. It's tilting with windmills.

 

[Tez3]

So, then, you actually agree with me and believe that lifting the prohibition on weed is sensible? Well, if you would just say so.

No, what I've actually said several times is I simply don't know. Many people who have more facts and experience than I say that we shouldn't, nothing said on here has persuaded me that we should legalise it, there's convincing arguments from the police officers here that we should keep it as illegal. However we aren't just talking about weed on this thread are we? If the thread was just about that we could discuss it but others want all drugs legalised and are lambasting those of us with strong reservations, one person left the thread chuntering that we are all stupid or words to that effect. I do have very strong reservations about legalising all drugs.
Sort out what this thread is about and we can have a proper discussion about specifics. Others have said this before me, are we discussing the probably fairly harmless (or at least harmful only to users?) weed or are we talking all drugs?

 

[Steve]

No, what I've actually said several times is I simply don't know. Many people who have more facts and experience than I say that we shouldn't, nothing said on here has persuaded me that we should legalise it, there's convincing arguments from the police officers here that we should keep it as illegal. However we aren't just talking about weed on this thread are we? If the thread was just about that we could discuss it but others want all drugs legalised and are lambasting those of us with strong reservations, one person left the thread chuntering that we are all stupid or words to that effect. I do have very strong reservations about legalising all drugs.
Sort out what this thread is about and we can have a proper discussion about specifics. Others have said this before me, are we discussing the probably fairly harmless (or at least harmful only to users?) weed or are we talking all drugs?

But you just... didn't you just outline a laundry list of things you believed would help with the alcohol problems you have in the UK?

You said, "we have cultural problem with alcohol that is decades if not centuries old, prohibition wouldn't help nor will it happen. "
Then you said, "One can control without banning, I don't know why you guys are for an all or nothing solution."
Then you said, "education, shorter drinking hours, the banning of happy hours and two for one offers in the clubs. I'd like to see the arrests for anti social behaviour having proper sentencing too not just a slap on the wrist. In fact I'd like to see it stop being called 'anti social behaviour' and it being called what it is criminal damage, endangering the public, outraging public decency etc. Whatever fits what the drunks are doing. If people want to get drunk fine but if they can't control themselves when drunk they can't use that as an excuse and should pay the consquences when they fight, vandalise etc."

 

[Tez3]

But you just... didn't you just outline a laundry list of things you believed would help with the alcohol problems you have in the UK?

You said, "we have cultural problem with alcohol that is decades if not centuries old, prohibition wouldn't help nor will it happen. "
Then you said, "One can control without banning, I don't know why you guys are for an all or nothing solution."
Then you said, "education, shorter drinking hours, the banning of happy hours and two for one offers in the clubs. I'd like to see the arrests for anti social behaviour having proper sentencing too not just a slap on the wrist. In fact I'd like to see it stop being called 'anti social behaviour' and it being called what it is criminal damage, endangering the public, outraging public decency etc. Whatever fits what the drunks are doing. If people want to get drunk fine but if they can't control themselves when drunk they can't use that as an excuse and should pay the consquences when they fight, vandalise etc."

You've totally lost me now, I have no idea what you are talking about. I said I don't know whether weed should be legalised, that was the question you asked me so I answered. I don't have any answers about weed.
The part you put up quoting me is about alcohol not weed. Are you messing me around?

The drugs you should be worried about with your children are the things like miouw miouw and the other stuff kids are taking these days, they can buy this stuff off the internet or even in shops.

 

[Steve]

You've totally lost me now, I have no idea what you are talking about. I said I don't know whether weed should be legalised, that was the question you asked me so I answered.

That's actually not the question I asked you. I asked you this: "Alcohol is creating problems for you guys. Do you believe that a prohibition on alcohol would help?"

I don't have any answers about weed.

You've made that clear. I didn't ask you about weed. I asked you about alcohol, because that's what you are talking about. I said, in the post you quoted above, "Didn't you just outline a laundry list of things you believed would help with the alcohol problems you have in the UK?"

The part you put up quoting me is about alcohol not weed. Are you messing me around?

Not on purpose. I'm trying to get you to answer a pretty straightforward question. I agree with you that alcohol creates problems. What then to do about it. Do you think prohibition would help?

You've given me the impression that you do not. As I said before, you outlined a list of items that you thought would help, most of which I would completely agree with.

The drugs you should be worried about with your children are the things like miouw miouw and the other stuff kids are taking these days, they can buy this stuff off the internet or even in shops.

Please don't use the term "should" with regards to how I parent my kids. I'm easy going about a lot of things, but people telling me what I 'should' do with my children is a trigger for me. Unless, of course, you also live in South King County, Washington, know my kids personally, know their friends, have first or even second hand knowledge of what they are doing and with whom, and know what sorts of things are happening with teenagers in general in the Covington, WA area.

Presuming that you are none of those things, let's keep the discussion general in nature and larger in scope. Shall we?

 

[Tez3]

So, then, you actually agree with me and believe that lifting the prohibition on weed is sensible? Well, if you would just say so.

Steve, sometimes I think we don't talk the same language, where do you get that by saying should, I am telling you how to bring up your kids? We should all be worried about these cheap 'party' drugs, it's nothing to do with the way you bring your children up! It's a generalised term not a specific one designed to annoy you, we should all be worried about a lot of things ie global warming, AIDs, world poverty, terrorism none of which has anything to do with your parenting skills. It's an expression, ie 'you should watch those stairs as there's no light' and 'you should watch out for those drugs'. You said you were worried about specific drugs and I answered that you should be worried about these other ones instead.

This is where you asked me about weed so I answered. I've answered every question you've put I can't see what else I can do.

 

[ballen0351]

Well, yeah, kind of. Law makers made it illegal based on misinformation and, like many laws are made, to receive money from lobbyist who represented interests that would profit from it being illegal.

And as far as "the people" still wanting it to be illegal, that is the result misinformation pumped out by gov't propaganda since the 1930s. A lot of those people REALLY BELIEVE pot is like heroin.

Pot is like Heroin they are both drugs and they are both illegal. No matter how hard you rub your little bong and wish upon the magic Bubba Kush fairy thats reality.

And its down to about half of "the people" wanting to keep it illegal. (I won't go into the cautions our forefathers issued regarding the tyranny of the majority )

So then its only about Half the people that want it legal (I wont go into the cautions our forefathers issued regarding the tyranny of the majority:bangahead:

But even in states where "the people" have decided they no longer want it to be illegal, there is still federal action against them and a federal bias toward enforcement regardless of state and local laws.

Because as we just saw in the AZ immigration case the Feds trump the states and they are allowed to enforce federal drug laws in states that want it legal.

Stoned people pissing in stairwells are *******s who would be *******s even without being stoned.

I understand that but the people calling in demanding the police do something about it dont care. They want the drugs out of their neighborhood.

I blame the DEA and gov't for continuing to spread lies that keep my neighbors against it. And those neighbors who ARE against it are mostly old people who are dying off. There is too much information readily available for younger people to swallow the ********.

Funny Im young and Im against it. I know lots of young people that are against it. Your girlfriends against it I guess she just an old person. I blame stoners
for saying stupid stuff like People high on pot never fight, speed, are better drivers then drunks, sit on their couch and dont bother anyone, Dont kill people, its not addictive, look how much worse beer is, pro-pot people are young and hip and anti-weed people are just Old and dont know how to have fun, if weed was legal all other drugs would go away because peole would stop smoking crack they would stick to weed, Blah blah blah.

Missouri's last vote on pot was pretty close.

So what your saying is more were against it then for it? OK

And look at this: http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/ind..._Legalization_and_Regulation_Initiative_(2012)

Turns out there are quite a few good ol' boys in Missouri who are closet smoke.

It may fail again...but every year, a few more of the old, misinformed die off. Watch the feds launch a massive campaign to help put this down.

Ok Rosie and fire cant bent steel either.

 

[Steve]

Steve, sometimes I think we don't talk the same language, where do you get that by saying should, I am telling you how to bring up your kids? We should all be worried about these cheap 'party' drugs, it's nothing to do with the way you bring your children up! It's a generalised term not a specific one designed to annoy you, we should all be worried about a lot of things ie global warming, AIDs, world poverty, terrorism none of which has anything to do with your parenting skills. It's an expression, ie 'you should watch those stairs as there's no light' and 'you should watch out for those drugs'. You said you were worried about specific drugs and I answered that you should be worried about these other ones instead.

This is where you asked me about weed so I answered. I've answered every question you've put I can't see what else I can do.

Do you think that prohibiting alcohol in the UK would help with the alcohol related issues the UK is dealing with? That's the question I've asked you more than once, and you have still not answered.

Here, same question, but in multiple choice format:

Making alcohol illegal in the UK would:

A: have a positive effect
B: have a negative effect
C: have no noticeable effect
D: None of the above (please elaborate)

Regarding the other thing, it's as much me as it is you. I know that when someone presumes to tell me how I should be raising my kids, I get a little uptight. For example, when you said, "The drugs you should be worried about with your children are the things like...." That's a known trigger for me. It angers me because I take the welfare of my children very, very seriously, whereas I'm pretty sure you've never even met them. Once again, I'm trying to acknowledge that this is a trigger for me, and I'm asking as politely as I can for you to drop it, keep the discussion general in nature and to please not presume to tell me specifically what I should or shouldn't do with regards to the children I am raising.

 

[ballen0351]

Do you think that prohibiting alcohol in the UK would help with the alcohol related issues the UK is dealing with? That's the question I've asked you more than once, and you have still not answered.

Here, same question, but in multiple choice format:

Making alcohol illegal in the UK would:

A: have a positive effect
B: have a negative effect
C: have no noticeable effect
D: None of the above (please elaborate)

Regarding the other thing, it's as much me as it is you. I know that when someone presumes to tell me how I should be raising my kids, I get a little uptight. For example, when you said, "The drugs you should be worried about with your children are the things like...." That's a known trigger for me. It angers me because I take the welfare of my children very, very seriously, whereas I'm pretty sure you've never even met them. Once again, I'm trying to acknowledge that this is a trigger for me, and I'm asking as politely as I can for you to drop it, keep the discussion general in nature and to please not presume to tell me specifically what I should or shouldn't do with regards to the children I am raising.

Im not from the UK but Ill take a shot at it. I think in the short term it would be chaos. It would take a few generations for the law to become successful. Then I think the effects on the UK would be positive. I think thats where the US went wrong they caved in too soon. You cant take something thats been legal for a persons entire life and say ok starting tomorrow your done and not expect backlash. Now you deal with it as that gerneration ages and newer generations come up and its been illegal someones entire life they would feel differently. Take cell phones for example People lived 1000s of years without them when they came along during our life time I could take them or leave them. BUT the younger 20 something gereration thats had them for there entire life cant imagine being with out one. I believe the opposite effect would happen with outlawing something. Now you will never get 100% of people to follow the rules but same can be said for all laws. But look at drug use in the US by your own numbers 17 million pot smokers in the US vs 300 million people thats a very small % of people using marijuana. Now make it legal like Beer and then see how high the % goes. Both in my opinon are not good for soceity. Regardless of "Its my body my choice" would you really want your kid smoking pot? I dont I dont want them drinking either. Do you believe people smoking pot like cigarettes is good for society? I dont. You may and thats your choice we just disagree.

 

[Steve]

Im not from the UK but Ill take a shot at it. I think in the short term it would be chaos. It would take a few generations for the law to become successful. Then I think the effects on the UK would be positive. I think thats where the US went wrong they caved in too soon. You cant take something thats been legal for a persons entire life and say ok starting tomorrow your done and not expect backlash. Now you deal with it as that gerneration ages and newer generations come up and its been illegal someones entire life they would feel differently. Take cell phones for example People lived 1000s of years without them when they came along during our life time I could take them or leave them. BUT the younger 20 something gereration thats had them for there entire life cant imagine being with out one. I believe the opposite effect would happen with outlawing something. Now you will never get 100% of people to follow the rules but same can be said for all laws. But look at drug use in the US by your own numbers 17 million pot smokers in the US vs 300 million people thats a very small % of people using marijuana. Now make it legal like Beer and then see how high the % goes. Both in my opinon are not good for soceity. Regardless of "Its my body my choice" would you really want your kid smoking pot? I dont I dont want them drinking either. Do you believe people smoking pot like cigarettes is good for society? I dont. You may and thats your choice we just disagree.

Fair enough. Are you aware that many narcotics were formally banned at right around the same time period as alcohol was? It wasn't until the Uniform State Narcotics Act and the Federal Bureau of Narcotics came about that MJ was regulated in every State. Marijuana was pretty much uniformly banned in the late 20's/early 30's. It's been several generations. Do you honestly believe that things are going well? If anything, the resolve on the part of government to ban these substances has strengthened. The amount of money funneled into attempting to enforce the ban has increased exponentially. It's been generations since marijuana was legal, and yet you acknowledge that it is used by 17 million people in spite of being illegal several generations later.

You ask a good question. Do I believe that people smoking pot like cigarettes is good for society? I'd say no, but I wouldn't say drinking alcohol with the frequency of smoking cigarettes is good, either. It's not illegal to smoke a cigarette and drive or smoke while at work.

Do I think that responsible adults choosing to enjoy the effects of cannabis is bad for society? no. Do I think that anyone abusing anything is good for society? of course not.

It strikes me as odd that you seem to have a problem with the 'it's my body, my choice' but still allege to be a conservative. That's a weird disconnect for me. I think that adults should, in general, be allowed to kill themselves in pretty much any way they choose. Whether they want to go sky diving, fishing (statistically, the most dangerous sport in the USA, BTW), mountain climbing, or learn martial arts. If they want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or drive in a car without a seatbelt or smoke weed or drink booze. I'm pretty much okay with it provided that the risks are clear and all reasonable precautions have been taken.

Would I want my kid smoking pot? Of course not. Do you want your kid drinking Jack Daniels? No? Me neither. Frankly, that's a silly question to ask.