On a regular basis, I hear people say, "Why don't we legalize marijuana? It's no worse than alcohol and the government could use the money that would come from the taxes on it." Of course, the ones making the comment are probably regular consumers of the "herb."
You know, the argument seems pretty sound.
Pot isn't a "hard" drug and it is used recreationally by plenty of people. And there is the "medicinal" use of marijuana. (In reality, most of that is just an excuse to get stoned because it makes you feel better, although some symptoms are lessened by smoking some dope.)
Why not legalize it, tax it and bring its sale and use out of the shadows? Just like alcohol.
Because.
There is one HUGE difference between booze and pot, and that difference is why no reasonable person can support the legalization of marijuana.
Simply put, we have no way to measure the level of intoxication from smoking marijuana.
When Charlie tokes up, jumps into his car and hits a kid riding a bike, we have no way to know if Charlie smoked one joint or one ounce. How high is he? What do we charge him with if the kid dies?
So, until someone invents a test to quantify the how high a marijuana smoker is, we simply cannot legalize the substance.
Here's another difference between alcohol and marijuana: I can consume alcohol and not get drunk.
Can you smoke dope and not get high? If you can, why smoke it? I may enjoy the taste of a beer, but can anyone truthfully say he/she enjoys the taste of a doobie?
But that's an argument for another post.
Until we can measure the level of marijuana intoxication, the debate over legalizing pot is just a lot of hot air.... Or maybe it's smoke.
that is a very weak argument sir.
ReplyDeleteYou are addressing an additional activity (driving) not the primary one (smoking).
There is a very simple solution, one that doesn't even need a change to the law. Keep the DWAI law intact. Make that allowable amount of "smoking while driving" zero.
It is the way the law is now, just keep it as is. If you are going to smoke, do it on your couch playing xbox.
"What do we charge him with if the kid dies?"
ReplyDeleteHow about vehicular manslaughter? Or failure to maintain control of the vehicle? Or any of a number of statutes that likely exist that don't involve alcohol or substance abuse? A man killed a kid with a car. Why does it matter if he was or was not drinking? (I suppose that last question is also fodder for a different discussion.)
In the absence of a "meter," make it binary: If it's in your system, you're under the influence and pay maximum penalty.
I don't know enough about pot to advocate for its legalization. I've never directly inhaled it, but have spent time with those who do. But I don't think your arguments against legalization hold as much water as you think they do.
Well, Mr. Gray, you asked your question about the legalization of marijuana, and you of course, answered it, in a most hilarious and unfactual way, may I add.
ReplyDeleteAs you already pre-judge the people who would make the argument for legalization (which includes tens of thousands of law enforcement officers and DA's around the nation) as "the ones making the comment are probably regular consumers of the "herb", why would anyone bother attempting to educate you? Probably just another pot smoker anyway.
People who drive under the influence of marijuana are already tried and convicted in our courts when caught doing so. The courts nor the State of NY need to have a "number" stating how high the driver was before pulling the license and requiring the driver to attend drug/alcohol rehab.
You can consume the drug known as "alcohol" and not get drunk? Only one other person was alleged to be able to pull that trick off - he was famous for turning water into wine at a wedding feast. But I see nothing "divine" in your character other than being divinely entertaining.
As of almost 21 hours later there are no posts to post your Superhonorsir?
ReplyDeleteSurely I submitted at least one. Others have also by this time. Why the delay in showing us the incoming comments?
Requires time to consider how to respond?
I do not smoke marijuana, but I think that it should be legalized. Your reasons for keeping it illegal are ridiculous... At best. Just because you can't measure the amount in someone's system is bogus. What about prescription medication? If someone is suspected of driving under the influence of drugs, they can still be charged with DWAI (Drugs). You see it all of the time. If they fail a gaze and nystagmus and/or field sobriety check, they can be charged. You say that you can consume alcohol and not get drunk. Then why are you consuming it? Most people and I stress, most people drink alcohol to get some form of intoxication. As for drinking beer because you like the taste... REALLY??? As for someone not being able to enjoy the taste of a doobie... What makes you so sure? The marijuana smoker might enjoy the taste of a doobie, just as you may enjoy the taste of a beer. What makes your argument the correct one? And finally... Your statement that "no reasonable person can support the legalization of marijuana" is nonsense. Why is smoking cigarettes legal? What does a person get from smoking tobacco? Other than a "nicotine fix? 151 rum is a flammable liquid, but it is legally sold as a beverage. I'm sure that people drink it for the taste though and not to get intoxicated. Regardless... Alcohol, tobacco and marijuana are all drugs. The difference is that people can and have died from alcohol poisoning and it is legal. Thousands of people have been killed by drunk drivers, but alcohol is legal. Thousands die each year from tobacco use, but it is legal. Now a marijuana overdose on the other hand has never killed anyone. Although there probably have been some automobile fatalities caused by someone under the influence of marijuana, it would be substantially less than alcohol related incidents. The bottom line is this. People have always and will always use marijuana, but people like you are going to keep it illegal because your drug of choice is alcohol and it's your way or the highway. I personally do not drink alcohol or use any form of drugs (NOT EVEN ASPIRIN), so I say either legalize pot, or make alcohol illegal!!! From past experience, I would rather be around someone that is high than someone who is drunk. I really would rather be around someone that is sober though.
ReplyDeleteWait, wait. We can tell if people have been smoking dope. Seems like the law would be pretty simple; no smoking dope(none, zippo, zilch, nada, the big goose egg) and driving. Why? not because you would run over some poor soul, but because you would probably have a line of cars miles long behind you, since you'd be driving about 15 miles an hour.
ReplyDeleteFrank, will you keep your shirt on!!!
ReplyDeleteI don't blog 24/7. I have a life and other responsibilities. If you've read my intro, I will post any comment that is not libelous or completely vulgar or insanely stupid.
So chill out, Frank, you'll get your say. And if you've ever spoken with me in person you will see that I don't need time to formulate a response.
I may be conservative but I'm not dimwitted or slow, despite what liberals like you may thin
Most of the comments presented here were pretty predictable. Maybe I should have asked why should we legalize pot? What's the benefit?
ReplyDeleteI knew the left would come screaming out over this one.
I am surprised, however, that so many liberals would advocate a zero tolerance approach to pot and driving. Test positive and lose your license? Man, that's touch stuff.
And all of the anti-smokers and anti-drinkers weighed in as well.
Why? My guess is because bankers, investors and their parents smoke cigarettes and enjoy a martini or two.
Oh, and yes, Frank, I do drink and not get drunk. I don't drink to excess - I have maybe one drink every week or two, if that often. I haven't been drunk or even legally intoxicated in well over a decade. I like the taste of an occasional beer or gin and tonic. I don't drink to get drunk.
And Anon. 11:35 - sit on the couch, smoke dope and play xbox? Give me a freakin' break!
That will probably last until they get the munchies and start jones-ing for a Big Mac or Taco Bell. Then they'll jump in a car and run over some kid.
Legalizing pot won't rid the problem of marijuana trafficking. They still chase down moonshiners even though alcohol is legal. growing and selling pot is much easier than making whiskey. There will still be illegal sales - possibly more as once it becomes legal to use it more people will. It also amazes me to see the people who would ban cigarettes completely be in favor of smoking pot.
ReplyDeleteYou knew the left would come "screaming out" at this one? People who write in disagreement to your thoughts must be "screaming" and from the "left?" So, by default, in your mind, people who write in support of your thoughts must be genteel thinkers and from the Right?
ReplyDeleteYou only drink very rarely, which means you have not built up a tolerance for alcohol. Most people who consume so little, find it much more likely to be getting a charge from one or two drinks that a more experienced drinker does not feel.
You also set up a false dichotomy with your claim that "investment bankers" prefer booze (martinis)while those who smoke pot are somehow less capable citizens. Without realizing that millions of respectable, hard-working people from all classes of society, imbibe in alcohol and marijuana both. Yes, bankers, investers, and lawyers have been known to also do cocaine,a habit that requires one to have access to lots of cash.
You also were the person who made the argument that pot should not be legalized because our courts have no way of dealing with stoned drivers - yet when the error of your thinking is pointed out to you, you come back with some snarky remark about how you are "surprised at how many liberals would advocate a zero tolerance approach..". People educating you as to what penalties exist for driving under the influence of pot are not "advocating" for any damned thing. Just stating facts as currently exist in NY State is not the same as being an advocate.
But I'm on to your tricks, Mr. CONservative. I was once part of your crowd and played the same word games myself, mistating the words and opinions of others to create strawman arguments and to muddy the waters when on the losing side of an idea.
The main objection to the legalization of pot is how the government could control and tax it as they do tobacco and alcohol. If a person could legeally grow their own, why buy any from anyone else unless your stash is gone? It is all an issue of control and money. As far as medical usage is concerned, I would suggest the blogger only spend a little time with a cancer patient or glaucoma patient. Maybe a mile walked in someone else's shoes might enlighten the perspective also. In conclusion I say to the blogger standing firm in your position is your individual right but opening your ears might possibly open your eyes unless you are stone blind.
ReplyDeleteYou claim a big difference between drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana is that you can drink and not get drunk. Medical science disagrees with you on that one. Alcohol is a toxin that starts to have affects on everything within you central nervous system within minutes of consumption. There have been numerous tests done to show that even one drink can be one too many for some folks. See the commercials out recently about "buzzed" driving? I'm not dead drunk, just feeling a little good after that gin and tonic. Just because you are aware of it this effect does not negate it.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, did you ever hear of a guy named Bill Clinton? Good for you, because Mr. Clinton famously claimed that while he smoked marijuana he never got high because HE DIDN't INHALE the smoke into his lungs! He just liked the taste (don't even get me started on how he misused good cigars). I suppose one can sip wine, whiskey or beer and spit it back out without swallowing, but that would be wierd, or even "liberal" wouldn't it Mr. Superhonorsir?
The only reason the Pot isn't legal is because anyone can grow it in their back yard and that would be impossible to get 100% Tax from it ....... and no matter what if We the People Like it or use it or have fun with it , The Government HAS TO TAX IT, ( its like they have no choice )
ReplyDeleteWhat would the benefit of legalizing pot be? Massive tax savings in court/jail/prison fees for people who are put through the system on minor possession charges. The legalization would also introduce a new tax to make money for state and federal agencies. How about getting younger folks out of drug dealer homes which can trigger them to eventually buy other products on the dealers list of goods they sell.
ReplyDeleteOh, we also have the entire medical reason to legalize. These are of course off the top of my head. I am sure a much more comprehensive list of what benefits would be incurred form legalization.
By the way, this forum is so stereotypical it is pathetic. It is OK to not support an argument but when your defense to both the argument and responses to posts involves stereotypes and clichés you lost all credibility.
In this country, law enforcement is an industry, one with a vested interest in keeping marijuana illegal. Since the days of the ridiculous government film "Reefer Madness," careers have been made on the alleged evils of pot. Police resistance to legalizing marijuana really shouldn't surprise anyone.
ReplyDeleteepic fail of an argument mr. supervisor! for some of us smoking it helps with the pain we constantly suffer from injuries or bone, muscle deseases. it also helps some with no sex drives to get their mojo back. better than popping pills all the time and ruining your liver! appears your for a military police state of contant harrassment from law enforcement in massena and the area. i'm tired of road blocks every day so they can arrest you for having a pinch of weed. the government made it illegal in 1936 just to make money off arrest.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/healthcare/petition/combined_document.pdf
ReplyDeleteIt's rather long, but you might learn something and the writer of this blog may lose some ignorance.(Note: I didn't call the writer ignorant, just some ideas in the post were.) It's a recent report from the governor's of Washington and Rhode Island written for the DEA to try to convince them to reschedule marijuana. These aren't people sitting on their couch smoking playing xbox.
Actually from at least my own reading, pot was made illegal because it stood to replace timber as a paper product, and paper companies were not liking that idea, but that's a moot point.
ReplyDeleteI have to say Mr. Super that your argument is weak in many areas. I write to you as an upright citizen of Massena, and as a pot smoker.
THC, the chemical that makes you high can be measured in urine. Urinary drug tests can just test to see if there is THC present in your urine, but most tests measure the level of THC that is found. For example, Department of Transport Federal Regulation Law Book (aka the DOT Green Book), section 40.87, "What are the cutoff concentrations for initial and confirmation test".
(A) A laboratory, you must use the cutoff concentration displayed in the following table and confirmation drug tests. All cutoff concentrations are expressed in nanograms per milliliter.
So it is very possible to test the level of THC, obviously the higher the level, the more recent a person has smoked. Yes, not as easy as blowing into a little box, but someone who is highly suspect of driving under the influence, much like a blood test for being under the influence of alcohol, could be made to take a urinary test at the hospital asap.
The one issue I would hold with a zero tolerant law against driving under the influence of pot is the fact that THC remains in your system much longer than alcohol. Alcohol is expelled through your urine and filtered out by the liver. THC on the other hand has the tendacy to remain in your system for a longer period. Generally it can be said to smoke 1 joint of pot will make you test positive for 7 days afterwards. THC also embeds itself into your fat cells, thus a husky sized person carring a lot of body fat will remain positive for a longer period of time. This is why someone who is heavy has to wait many months before testing negative, while someone who is really skinny can smoke up to almost the day of testing.
So yes, it is possible to test people and get a number, but its also difficult due to the life span THC has in your body. Personally as someone who enjoys smoking a bowl after a long hard day at work, would be utterly fine with a zero tolerance. Much like alcohol, there are plenty of people who are more than capable of driving while under the influence of pot, just like all the drunks I know that drive drunk and never get caught. But then there are morons who shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel, drunk, stoned or even sober.
As for your excuse of the medical use of this, I will take high offense to this. Yes sadly like anything the system gets abused, out in California you can basically get a life long prescription for weed because you get a headache once a month. Pot might not heal you, but it helps with many medical cases.
My girlfriend of many years suffers for end stage renal disease due to a massive misdiagnosis by doctors, they failed to detect her high blood pressure being caused by hypertension and in the end destroyed most of her kidneys. She thankfully retained 20% function which is enough to keep her off dialisys. She spends many days out of the week feeling horribly ill, and she has many days of hours of vomiting the toxins from her body. Is it so wrong that if she smokes weed, that she does not vomit so much, and actually has an appetite?
Is it wrong for me to want to smoke a bowl after a hard days work, because I do not enjoy alcohol? Or the fact that I'm currently suffering from a destroy disc in my lower spine that prevents me from having a good nights rest due to the pain being caused by my sciatic nerve being crushed, while I wait month after month for our abortion of a medical system to help me, because I don't earn several thousand dollars a month to afford medical insurance and am not poor enough for welfare insurance? I think not.
+10 for actually bringing the subject up though Mr. Super.
As long as big pharma rules, it's not gonna happen. In addition to observations of the above posters please note:
ReplyDeleteMarijuana is a weed. It can't be patented. Interestingly, the effects of cannabinoids have been studied quite extensively and in a rather interesting comparison to aspirin many of the pharmacological effects remain as much of a mystery as aspirin in terms of "How Does This Substance Work?"
We don't know how exactly marijuana works; however, apparently it does particularly for some patients and medical issues. (Please see JAMA for research.)
I have no "Dawg in this fight"-or discussion. Just an observation. Alcohol is far more deleterious to the human body. In fact, no system/organ of the body is left untouched by alcohol-and I'm speaking here to ONE drink regardless of the type of alcohol. While one clearly can point to the adverse effects of smoking any substance marijuana can be ingested in a variety of ways: Ex: Food, vaporizers.
Respectfully, the initial hypothesis proffered by Mr. Grey while provocative lacks substance. Quite frankly as a tax payer, I would much prefer to see my tax dollars spent on law enforcement that makes SENSE, not $$$. Those who grow marijuana for their own personal use should not be treated as criminals.....and enriching the local town/village courts is clearly a part of the agenda here, IMO. The DA's office is quite ineffective due in part to the backlog of cases involving personal use amounts of marijuana. My tax dollars at waste.....and I don't smoke or drink....and am a Registered "Republicrat."
The comments have gotten more substantive (for the most part) and thought provoking. Haven't convinced me to change my mind, though.
ReplyDeleteI've seen the toll that habitual pot smoking takes on sharp, creative minds. It may not be addictive in the truest sense, but it can be consuming to the point that it damages lives and families and brains. Of course, habitual abuse of alcohol does the same.
Research has shown that regular, heavy use of dope impacts DNA and probably contributes to birth defects, let alone the damage to lungs from smoke that is as bad as regular tobacco.
Still haven't heard a strong argument in favor of legalization other than not making people "criminals." Easiest enough to avoid by stopping "criminal" behavior, I might add.
I was waiting for the old "Blame the 'Reefer Madness' film" for the anti-pot "hysteria." Knew that would come out from someone soon enough.
That movie was made, what, 70-80 years ago? How many people younger than 60 have ever actually seen it for God's sake?
I must say, I'm surprised by the vitriol unleashed at me for raising this topic. No need to be nasty and insulting.
And Frank T., why try to disrespect me by calling me "Mr. Superhonorsir"? Have I shown you any personal disrespect?
What gives one human being the right to tell another human being that they can't grow or consume a naturally occuring substance? I used to smoke marijuana and I found it very relaxing and it actually put me in a good mood. The only reason that I do not smoke it now is because it could lead to me getting fired from my job. Even if I only smoked it at night after work. I can drink as much alcohol as I want after work and I would not lose my job, but I don't really care for the effects of alcohol. I just don't think that it is right for someone to tell me what I can and can't do during my own time. As for your comment on not being able to measure the level of intoxication... Think about this. Pot is illegal now, but people still smoke and drive right now. So does that mean that they can't get in trouble now for driving under the influence, simply beause it's not legal? They can only get in trouble if it was legal and they have a way to test for the level of intoxication. People shouldn't drive under the influence of any drug. Legal or illegal.
ReplyDeleteMr. Supervisor, your honor, sir. Is that better?
ReplyDeleteIn you mind, "Mr. Superhonorsir" is disrespect?
But the way you self-righteously mislable and categorize people who may potentially disagree with you is not disrespectful?
And once people actually do disagree with you, the mockery and put-downs you issue should not be met?
You will post this, right, Mr. Superhonorsir?
Since you moderate these, just wanted to say another +10 points for actually posting my comment. I always commended you for starting this blog, its allowed me, an average almost 30 something citizen of Massena to follow and even reach out to a local politician. We got many different views, but you most definitely have my vote next round. Now if only I could get you to get Time Warner to run cable all the way down Route 42.
ReplyDeleteMr. Supervisor, although the government-sponsored film "Reefer Madness" was, indeed, produced decades ago, colleges and universities still use it to demonstrate the absurd lengths to which a government will go to further an agenda. A fundamental American belief is that virtually everything is legal until it's demonstrated that it shouldn't be. As Ronald Reagan said, the government that governs least governs best.
ReplyDeleteI would like to turn the argument back on you at this point. Your main argument to not legalizing pot is because you cannot measure how intoxicated someone is from smoking. After this you pose a rather open ended question of "what would the benefits be of legalizing pot".
ReplyDeleteWhat is the benefit of keeping it illegal? Please do not use smoking and driving as an argument for this. As we all know, drinking and driving is a big problem and it isn't because drinking is legal.
My goal in posting was not to "change minds" but rather to add to the discussion. We all feel as we do and that's OK in my book. However, I do agree with your observation regarding the deleterious effects of chronic marijuana use and brain development/family/community impact particularly as it applies to the developing brain-which, by the way doesn't stop developing until around 25 yrs. The reality is we ALL (including the professionals who deal with the results) need to respect and understand research in this area... and respect what the research results say about this substance in terms of validity and reliability.
ReplyDeleteThe disparity in my mind exists between what's legal and what's not based on historical precedence in this country and the obvious results of such here in St. Lawrence County. Addressing issues of poverty and their structural genesis/components are far more worthy of concern (and tax dollars) in my opinion than arresting/prosecuting adults for personal use/consumption of marijuana.
Good discussion, and thanks to all who have participated.
Wow Joe, what a "buzz" this topic generated, and yes, the pun was intended. The people from NORML have been trying to get pot legalized for decades without any luck. Yes, there are a lot of pros and cons to it. The way the laws are now about marijuana in NYS are fine. The states and local governments make a tidy sum every year from simple UPM charges. The larger busts net municipalities vehicles and other tangible goods as well as a lot of cash. The way things are now, there is some control and uniformity in the cat and mouse game. If it were legalized, pages and pages of new law would have to be written and ammended and ammended and ammended. There are so many strains of the plant that it would be near impossible to control. Different strains have different potency and to the wrong people, could be dangerous. The laws, as they are written now, are fine. So, you get your name in the paper and get to go and visit your local justice but for a simple possession charge, you pay a few dollars to support your local economy and walk out of there without anything on your record and free to go home and sit on the couch and take a few more hits off your favorite bong. It's a cat and mouse game for the average user. Most of the time you win, but sometimes you lose. It just makes people be a little more discreet when you do get busted.
ReplyDeleteSmoking weed is not healthy. If you need to get high you have some issues. Get professional help.
ReplyDelete