Following up on last week’s “The way I see it” column, with real-life lessons on the pot and med-pot controversy, I read online comments and some emailed thoughts from readers.
The good: some were supportive and appreciative of my strong positions based on logic and experience in the user culture from decades ago. Also good: Sincere and well-thought-out opinion from reasonable folks pointing out serious arguments for legalization, regulation, taxation of, and adaptation to, marijuana in society.
To that line of argument I would only say that, while it could be reasonably said that if adults vote to make such policies the norm so be it, I am unalterably opposed to sending a message of acceptability to the vulnerable and impressionable young people in our schools. Much of normal adolescent emotional development could be described as dysfunctional and aberrant to begin with, so don’t make it even easier for that group to ingest substances guaranteed to screw them up even further.
Don’t you see that society has a major stake in producing the best-educated, healthiest, hardest working and emotionally stable next generation possible? Pot usage undermines and erodes all of that, trust me.
Trust you? Why should I put blind faith in something that has patently been proven wrong time and time again? My Best Educated Award goes to former pot smoker Barack Obama. He attended and graduated from Harvard University and went on to run a successful corporation, I mean, the United States of America. The Healthiest Award goes to Michael Phelps with a PILE of Olympic gold medals. My Hardest Working Award goes posthumously to Doctor Carl Sagan. He worked for years to make hardcore science interesting and accessible to non-scientists. A nod for the most Emotionally Stable Award to goes to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Take a look at what he’s dealt with during his tenure; he should be given medical marijuana to relax on the weekends.
The bad: arguments from some that they smoked pot and still got their degrees; I understand, having a relative that did just that (to their credit). That person still became aware and realized that the people they associated with were losers, dead-enders, dealers, marginally criminal, or some combination, and not contributing anything to a successful and fulfilling life. They subsequently cut their associations. Other folks I know are productive and well adjusted, use pot but are still somewhat emotionally distant from other, non-user family members.
According to whom? Prohibition forces marijuana users into hiding for fear of losing everyone they love and everything they own. Everyone that smokes marijuana is a federal criminal; we should be thankful for you to point this out?
The ugly: cheap shots directed at my story from those who castigate as ignorant anyone criticizing pot usage that hasn’t actually used it. However, when someone has actual experience but disapproves of pot smoking, they find that a cause for hurling insults.
Your story is based on ignorance and lies. Is it any wonder that people that know the truth are tired of endless drug warrior deceit?
Don’t take my word for it. From National Review Online readers: “I have worked in the criminal justice system for 20 years, and I could not disagree more with the attitude that since marijuana is not addictive, it should be legal. If marijuana is not addictive, it is certainly very strongly habituating. In the criminal system, the vast majority of crimes committed stem from the illegal use of drugs and alcohol. It is very common to see marijuana DUIs, and in most cases the marijuana DUIs involve traffic accidents as opposed to simple traffic stops. Also, at least from my perspective, most addicts start their life in drugs with marijuana and never really give that up although they do continue to consume other drugs and alcohol as well. And I cannot tell you how many people I have seen come through this system with lives rendered completely useless because they can’t quit weed. Addictive? Maybe, maybe not. Damaging? Absolutely.”
Really ratcheting up things on the Anslinger scale, aren’t we? Neither this site nor any other major marijuana reform site argues that marijuana does not have the potential to be addicting. The rate of addiction is small compared to other legal drugs and the physical side effects of stopping use are trivial compared to quitting use of other legal drugs. It is common to see marijuana come up in toxicology reports as it can take 30 days or more for the drug to be completely removed from the body unlike more serious drugs like heroin or cocaine. I’m not bothering debunking the gateway theory as it’s been as dead as Julius Caesar since 1999. Lives rendered useless by marijuana? Perhaps from legal complications but anyone that sits around and smokes marijuana all day is no different than playing video games, gambling, watching TV, or anything else you do to keep from doing what you should be able to do as a functioning adult. Stop blaming marijuana for basic human behavior.
Another wrote: “I’m a felony drug prosecutor in the county just north of Chicago, and have prosecuted drug charges for a few years now. The scary part of this debate being raised at this time is that parents are profoundly uninformed about the dangers of today’s cannabis because they presume it’s the same pot they smoked in their “hippie” period. THC, the active ingredient in cannabis that gives its users the high, is technically classified as a psychoactive/hallucinogenic drug.
“Thanks to the blessings of capitalism (the incentive to “build a better mouse trap”), the THC level of today’s cannabis is off the charts. The pot that baby boomers used to smoke was about 2.5-5% THC. A great deal of the cannabis on the streets is hydroponically grown, making its THC levels in the 30% range. The long-term effects of smoking this kind of concentration would shock many of these parents and if they truly had their children’s best interests in mind, they would never favor decriminalization.”
So what? You simply smoke/vaporize/eat less. Marijuana Prohibition is the cause for this. It’s the same reason bootleggers preferred to transport liquor rather than beer during Alcohol Prohibition. It was more lucrative to ship liquor as you made more money for the same amount of liquid volume. This is basic economics and you’re trying to turn it into some Tony Montana scary thing. Your Woodstock numbers are low (more like 7.5%) and your current numbers are high (7.5% – 23%). And what are the long terms affects that will shock us? They must be really scary … so what are they? Not much so far, eh?
Here’s the deal: come up with facts not conjecture or your moral views. Present them in a logical fashion to sway people to your point of view. Problem: you can’t. Current science and 10,000 years of anecdotal evidence are against you. And, finally, a growing majority of citizens are opening their eyes and realizing they should be against you and the failed War on Drugs.
Loading ...
When Prohibs spout off any line about why Cannabis prohibition is “good for the children” we should be asking: ” So then would you also agree that Tobacco & Alchohol should be scheduled & regulated by the DEA/FDA so that they can be kept out of the hands of minors? Since this is such a sucsessful tactic. Why or Why not?”
Maybe if they have to go on the defensive about the constistancy of their own logic, they might start to realize that they are persecuting individuals not too different from themselves.
but think of the children who can buy pot easier than alcohol from people who require no age minimum, are used to sell / transport drugs because they can’t be tried as adults, and are forced to go through a violent black market to possibly get caught and have their future ruined by a law, not a drug.
Dude, Spof, way to tear that ass up!
“Here’s the deal: come up with facts not conjecture or your moral views. Present them in a logical fashion to sway people to your point of view. Problem: you can’t. Current science and 10,000 years of anecdotal evidence are against you. And, finally, a growing majority of citizens are opening their eyes and realizing they should be against you and the failed War on Drugs.”
Cheers to a well put response