Should weed be legalized? POLL

[zeta1]

So what is your opinion on this matter? Please explain why you agree or disagree.

[t3xasdolly]

It is just a plant. You should be not only allowed to grow it at your backyard for your personaluse, but also grow it for profit to stimulate economy

[pedrog]

It is just a plant. You should be not only allowed to grow it at your backyard for your personaluse, but also grow it for profit to stimulate economy

This ^

[Dabs]

Yeah, why murder an innocent green plant? Has it ever done anything to you? No one has ever died because of it.

[herzmeister]

There shouldn't even be a long-term stable authority to beg for an innocent plant to please please legalize it.

also, hemp will save the economy and the whole world of course https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDeyNLUwf_U

[Mike Christ]

I don't want weed legalized, or for it to be illegal; this implies government knows better than you do as to whether everyone should be allowed to use it or not.

I'd rather politics simply stop encroaching my personal life.  The ban on weed is completely moronic; even with weed being illegal, it is still used by many people.  The ban does nothing (as with all bans) but make criminals out of once innocent people.  The only thing a ban can possibly do is result in a new form of taxation; catch all the people with item X and make them pay extra for it, and all that money goes straight to the state.  And remember: "It's for your own good."  And yet, we already know what's best for us, so we're already comfortable knowing whether we want to smoke weed, or if we do not want to smoke weed; this vote is made easily by either smoking, or not smoking.

But I guess it doesn't matter to me; I don't smoke the stuff.  And if you smoke the stuff, you already know the law is a meaningless, and expensive inconvenience; time, and time, and time again, we prove that threats of violence cannot sufficiently govern behavior, else murders would be a relic of the past.

[pedrog]

I'm gonna quote this here as it's relevant to this discussion:

It's all supply and demand. it depends on the events occurring after it is criminalized or decriminalized; the level of enforcement and more.

Yes, and we can look at concrete data, at least when it comes to addiction.

I was involved in the pro cannabis liberalization and drug consumption decriminalization movement 13 years ago in my country. I grew up before decriminalization. I grew up seeing junkies in every corner, I played near used needles and syringes, cases of addiction in family, neighbors... Practically everybody new someone close with heroin addiction.

13 years after decriminalization things are much better, there are syringe exchange programs, rehabilitation programs, everybody caught using something had to have a few meetings with a psychiatrist, several of my friends had to go, fortunately, I was never caught, and it was always my opinion that send 20 year old college guys who smoke joints to psychiatric consultations a waste of resources, many people with serious addiction could use the attention.

On the other hand, we have US War on Drugs, and has far as I know drugs are winning big time.

Europe's Drugs Bazaar - Portugal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEDZXuRcGig

[Wilikon]

Yeah, why murder an innocent green plant? Has it ever done anything to you? No one has ever died because of it.

The Mexican Cartels would disagree with you about this. But yes it is a natural plant... Until its THC level is artificially boosted by humans, and transformed into pure hashish.

GMO Weeds are next.

So I vote yes for the weed you find in the forest, untouched. And no for the weed with blood on it.

[Dabs]

Hashish is just "plant concentrate". You can shake the plants on a sieve to collect the resin or "pollen" or THC, you can do it dry or cold and wet.

We're talking about the plant itself, not the cartels. You legalize weed, then the cartels will no longer find weed to be profitable as every medical dispensary around the corner will have one. Then they won't murder you over weed.

I can't say the same about other drugs though.

[01BTC10]

I don't want any government interference on my own business unless it threatens another human being.

[ktttn]

Laws make problems, nothing more. Any law, or lack of law dealing with weed (or anything including crack, murder, traffic violations, and tax evasion, ect) only serves to hurt people.
An arena where legislation is impossible, where institutionalized, state-violence-backed laws are obsolete is what I'm voting for.

[Maidak]

Of course it should it needs to be recreational hands down and I dont understand why it hasent been nationwide yet.

[cbhelp]

I do not partake, but I do not see a reason why it should not be legal.

[dragonkid]

Alcohol kill more people than anything else, and it is legal. How does that work? 

[pedrog]

Alcohol kill more people than anything else, and it is legal. How does that work? 

They also tried to ban that, didn't went well, and they have the 21 years old stuff, and no open containers thing... Murican freedom!

[hawkeye]

Drug prohibition should be ended.  It was bad idea from the start.  Just like alcohol prohibition.  The only reason the govt gets away with it is because they are less popular than alcohol. 

It's making criminals of what are otherwise innocent people.  Those who consume and those who supply it.

It's a victimless crime.   No-one has the right to tell another person what they can and cannot grow and what they can or cannot put in their body?  Certainly not a bunch of beuracrats, half of whom have probably willingly partaken in such substances at one point themselves.

You start thinking about the drug war and you realise it's completely insane. 

It's welfare in disguise for the DEA.  Just like the fake wars started by lies is welfare in disguise for the military.  It's excuses to keep people in jobs and keep money flowing through the Govt so politicians can divert a certain amount into their pockets.

[zeta1]

Drug prohibition should be ended.  It was bad idea from the start.  Just like alcohol prohibition.  The only reason the govt gets away with it is because they are less popular than alcohol. 

It's making criminals of what are otherwise innocent people.  Those who consume and those who supply it.

It's a victimless crime.   No-one has the right to tell another person what they can and cannot grow and what they can or cannot put in their body?  Certainly not a bunch of beuracrats, half of whom have probably willingly partaken in such substances at one point themselves.

You start thinking about the drug war and you realise it's completely insane. 

It's welfare in disguise for the DEA.  Just like the fake wars started by lies is welfare in disguise for the military.  It's excuses to keep people in jobs and keep money flowing through the Govt so politicians can divert a certain amount into their pockets.

Do you think the same of "Hard"drugs?

[Mike Christ]

Do you think the same of "Hard"drugs?

Yes.  It costs far too much of my money to stop people from doing what they're still doing after this long, drawn out "war" against drugs; you simply cannot tell a person what it is they're going to do and expect good results to follow.

If people want to do it, they will do it, regardless of what any law says.  There has been a law against killing (your fellow citizens at least) for thousands of years with varying punishments and people still don't "get the message"; law, then, does not prevent anything, it only puts a bandaid on the problem after it occurs.  It is knowledge which dictates prevention (not propaganda, as nations love to use, but real knowledge); if a person knows why they shouldn't do hard drugs, they're far less likely to do them.  For those who still do, they would understand the risks, and would know their own limits, and when they're ready to kick the habit, businesses would already be around, not to prosecute them for what they've done, but to help them so they'll stop.  Prison has been the absolute most ineffective rehab for hard drug use; in fact, placing a bunch of drug addicts in a cage has led to even more prison violence and even more organized drug cartels, where people come out of prison (if ever) even more convinced that their way is the right way.

Coercion doesn't work, not with drugs, not with anything, and forcing people not to take hard drugs when it's already obvious that they're very, very bad to take, means just these things: people are either still ignorant of the effects of these drugs, are flatly curious (e.g. doing something that's banned is a sign it's "badass"), or don't have enough self-worth to care.  These are the underlying problems that the "war on drugs" not only does not fix, but makes worse.

[01BTC10]

If you search on Google, you will find a study done on Switzerland on prescription heroin. This study concluded that crime and disease transmision was considerably lowered. If you take the Netherlands, prevalence of marijuana use is lower than most other countries that criminalise recreational use like Canada or the US.

Disclaimer: I don't do "drug" but I drink alcohol. I'm for harm reduction rather than criminalisation.

[MAbtc]

Of course. 1) It's inevitable and 2) it's mostly harmless. (Yes, all smoke causes cell trauma, but it's obviously a personal choice.)