Marijuana arrests approach record high in US

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 12:54pm

Fresh meat....

Death from the Sea wrote:So what the arguement is that since so many people break the law because of marijuana, and that if marijuana was legal then other crimes could be combated more effectively so we should make it legal.....

Yes, among other arguments against prohibition, that's the idea. The real travesty is that 600,000 people now have criminal records for victimless crimes (I don't count nonviolent dealing of a drug less dangerous than alcohol as a crime with victims, as everyone involved in the transaction is there voluntarily).

Fortunately that is not how it works, because if it was then I am sure burglary or domestic violence or drinking and driving would become legalized.

Oh wow, I've never heard this argument before. Quick, tell me the difference between breaking into someone's house or beating the shit out of your wife or getting drunked up and getting behind the wheel and smoking marijuana? That's right--smoking marijuana only harms the user!

According to a report put out by the state of Texas one in four drivers that are puled over for DWI and tested, test positve for marijuana. So going with that; 25% of the DWI's are for pot, imagine how many more people would that be if marijauna was actually legal.

A problem, I'll concede, that stems from the fact that many people don't belive marijuana impairs their driving as much as alcohol does. That's correctible--people used to think alcohol didn't impair their driving, either, until a massive public service campaign coupled with stiff penalities for drunk driving made them see the light. The government is even trying to do that--unfortunately, the message is lost in the muddle of misleading propaganda the government is spewing.

No responsible advocate for marijuana reform has ever said smoking and driving should be legal. The day prohibition comes off the books should be the same day existing drunk driving statutes are amended so stoned drivers recieve the exact same penalties as drunk drivers. And once prohibition is ended, the government can be honest about marijuana, including its real harmful effects. Even if legalization brings about more stoned drivers (due to the number of people in general who smoke increasing), the problem, if handled correctly, would be temporary and not as severe as the drunk driving problem still is anyway. The threat of a few more stoned drivers in the aftermath of legalization is enough to justify neither the massive expenditure made at all levels of government to enforce prohibition nor the imprisoning of thousands of people for smoking marijuana.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 12:56pm

Durran Korr wrote:I would expect pot decriminalization anywhere from 10-25 years.

Maybe sooner, considering international trends or the spread of domestic medical marijuana. The Feds look more and more foolish every day California and Arizona continue to defy them, and it's only going to look worse when New York passes a medical marijuana law.

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-10-29 01:13pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3223385.stm

Excellent....

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 01:24pm

Medical Marijauna is another silly issue. Marijuana does not heal or cure any disease, it just gets the person stoned so they don't feel the pain or feel sick. Masking the injury or sickness has no real medical value.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 01:28pm

Death from the Sea wrote:Medical Marijauna is another silly issue. Marijuana does not heal or cure any disease, it just gets the person stoned so they don't feel the pain or feel sick. Masking the injury or sickness has no real medical value.

Morphine is just another silly issue. Morphine does not cure or heal any disease, it just gets the person stoned so they don't feel the pain or feel sick. Masking the injury or sickness has no real medical value.

I hope you understand how absurd your last statement is now.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 01:31pm

But morphine is restricted to those only under the doctors direct supervision and in extreme cases. Lighting up a joint in the marijuana shop and recieving a morphine injection from a doctor cannot really be compared. After all you can't take your injection of morphine and sell it on the street.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 01:33pm

nor does morphine cause cancer as smoking anything does.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-10-29 01:33pm

Right, right, no one sells morphine illegally...

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 01:36pm

Durran Korr wrote:Right, right, no one sells morphine illegally...

never said that, just said that you can't take the morphine a doctor injects you with and sell that. Morphine produced elsewhere or stolen is not the same thing as what I am talking about.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 02:07pm

Death from the Sea wrote:But morphine is restricted to those only under the doctors direct supervision and in extreme cases. Lighting up a joint in the marijuana shop and recieving a morphine injection from a doctor cannot really be compared. After all you can't take your injection of morphine and sell it on the street.

Alright, what about prescription painkillers then? Oxycontin is an opiate, chemically related to morphine and heroin, and is far more dangerous than THC (it's highly addictive and easily fatal if combined with other drugs), and is widely abused, but it can be legally prescribed by doctors. Of course, it's also the only effective treatment for some forms of chronic pain (including my father's when he injured his neck badly enough to nearly paralyze him), but since it doesn't actually cure anything, by your logic, it should be illegal. Not that that would do a thing to prevent abuse of opiates, much like preventing chemo and HIV patients from taking marijuana to control nausea and increase their appetities doesn't do a damn thing to prevent recreational use of marijuana, but drugs are bad, mmmkay?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 02:10pm

Death from the Sea wrote:nor does morphine cause cancer as smoking anything does.

Of course, an accidental overdose of morphine can cause respitory failure, whereas there's no known fatal dose of THC, but we'll ignore that.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 02:11pm

By the way, are you ever going to reply to my first rebuttal, or shall I just assume you've conceded those points?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-10-29 02:18pm

RedImperator wrote:
According to a report put out by the state of Texas one in four drivers that are puled over for DWI and tested, test positve for marijuana. So going with that; 25% of the DWI's are for pot, imagine how many more people would that be if marijauna was actually legal.
A problem, I'll concede, that stems from the fact that many people don't belive marijuana impairs their driving as much as alcohol does. That's correctible--people used to think alcohol didn't impair their driving, either, until a massive public service campaign coupled with stiff penalities for drunk driving made them see the light. The government is even trying to do that--unfortunately, the message is lost in the muddle of misleading propaganda the government is spewing.

No responsible advocate for marijuana reform has ever said smoking and driving should be legal. The day prohibition comes off the books should be the same day existing drunk driving statutes are amended so stoned drivers recieve the exact same penalties as drunk drivers. And once prohibition is ended, the government can be honest about marijuana, including its real harmful effects. Even if legalization brings about more stoned drivers (due to the number of people in general who smoke increasing), the problem, if handled correctly, would be temporary and not as severe as the drunk driving problem still is anyway. The threat of a few more stoned drivers in the aftermath of legalization is enough to justify neither the massive expenditure made at all levels of government to enforce prohibition nor the imprisoning of thousands of people for smoking marijuana.

RedImperator, you are arguing the wrong point with him. One in four people test positive for Marijuana because marijuana stays in the bloodstream for WEEKS after use. I've seen these studies before and they don't differentiate between being stoned and having been stoned sometime in the past. Actually, the police in the US are clamoring researchers to come up with a way to test for marijuana intoxication, but so far they haven't found much of anything.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-10-29 02:23pm

RedImperator wrote:Kernel: Eh, let's not get ahead of ourselves here. The reason marijuana is the number one cash crop in the US is because its price is artificially inflated by prohibition. Legalization will bring the price more in line with tobacco, depending on the quality. And I don't think marijuana use will ever reach the same level as alcohol or tobacco. Nevertheless, like cigarette taxes, marijuana taxes could be a significant source of income for states, and even if the stuff was tax free, it would still be better than the 20 or so billon collectively spent by the states annually on enforcement. It's not going to be enough to provide free universal health care, though.

Don't be so sure that the cost will go down that much if it is legalized. Ever been to Amsterdamn? It's cheaper then here I'll grant you, but it isn't THAT much cheaper. Also, if you go to the medicinal marijuana clinics in California, their prices are in-line with street prices (although part of this is because they don't want people reselling it so small amounts are cheaper then larger amounts).

As for it not being enough to give us Universal Health care, can you imagine what a cash infusion of 20-40 billion dollars a year would do for our health care industry? I don't want to get into ana in-depth discussion about this (I've hijacked enough threads this week

) but suffice to say that it would be a HUGE help if managed properly.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-10-29 02:28pm

Death from the Sea wrote:Medical Marijauna is another silly issue. Marijuana does not heal or cure any disease, it just gets the person stoned so they don't feel the pain or feel sick. Masking the injury or sickness has no real medical value.

I guess you've never met someone with constant, recurring pain that they have to live with their entire live and the doctors can't treat. My roommate is such a person; his back has been in constant pain since he was a kid. The doctors haven't been able to help him so far, and he is working to exhaust all possible methods before having to resort to going to a pain clinic for the rest of his life (never heard of these I imagine; they're for people with incureable pain).

Smoking marijuana helps dull his pain significantly and doesn't have the extreme drowsiness and laziness that comes with taking the muscle relaxants that his doctor describes. He can still function while slightly stoned instead of having to be doped up on extreme amounts of pain medication. Medical marijuana isn't just some bullshit excuse because some people choose to use it that way.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-10-29 02:49pm

The Kernel wrote:RedImperator, you are arguing the wrong point with him. One in four people test positive for Marijuana because marijuana stays in the bloodstream for WEEKS after use. I've seen these studies before and they don't differentiate between being stoned and having been stoned sometime in the past. Actually, the police in the US are clamoring researchers to come up with a way to test for marijuana intoxication, but so far they haven't found much of anything.

I can't believe I missed that point. I must be slipping. At any rate, it doesn't change my basic point--the presense of stoned drivers (and let's not kid ourselves, they exist) is a problem that can be dealt with without banning marijuana entirely.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-10-29 03:07pm

RedImperator wrote:
The Kernel wrote:RedImperator, you are arguing the wrong point with him. One in four people test positive for Marijuana because marijuana stays in the bloodstream for WEEKS after use. I've seen these studies before and they don't differentiate between being stoned and having been stoned sometime in the past. Actually, the police in the US are clamoring researchers to come up with a way to test for marijuana intoxication, but so far they haven't found much of anything.
I can't believe I missed that point. I must be slipping. At any rate, it doesn't change my basic point--the presense of stoned drivers (and let's not kid ourselves, they exist) is a problem that can be dealt with without banning marijuana entirely.

Oh, I absolutely agree with you that marijuana education is essential. Did you ever see that South Park epsiode where the parents started lying to the kids about smoking pot? They told them that if the even TOUCHED pot then they would become a crackhead and a terrorist. The whole thing was hillarious, but it shows the effectiveness/danger that drug education has on kids. We need to start being honest with children about this and since schools aren't going to do it (trust me, not going to happen) the parents have to step up and tell their kids the truth about pot. My parents always avoided the issue and because of it, I only had the junior-high propeganda to go on. Can you imagine that until I was 18 I STILL believed that marijuana could kill you after a single use? Yes, this is what I was taught in school and I always thought my teaches were infallible (and people wonder why I've turned into such a cynic).

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 03:42pm

RedImperator wrote:Fresh meat....Yes, among other arguments against prohibition, that's the idea. The real travesty is that 600,000 people now have criminal records for victimless crimes (I don't count nonviolent dealing of a drug less dangerous than alcohol as a crime with victims, as everyone involved in the transaction is there voluntarily).

As Jim Carey so brilliantly put it in the movie LIAR LIAR "STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLE!" really that is as simple as it gets it is illegal so the folks possessing the stuff are breaking the law. Breaking the law is breaking the law you can't pick and choose what crimes to enforce and which ones not to, speeding, drinking underage, stealing or possessing illegal narcotics are all illegal and those 600,000 people knew it when they bought the drugs so they pay the price. Victimless crimes??? do you ever watch COPS ? the children of the dope-heads are the victims, the neighbors are the victims, random people walking down the street are victims.

Oh wow, I've never heard this argument before. Quick, tell me the difference between breaking into someone's house or beating the shit out of your wife or getting drunked up and getting behind the wheel and smoking marijuana? That's right--smoking marijuana only harms the user!

Well if marijuana is harmful to the user why do you want it to be legal? since you admit it is harmful. You know what the difference between all of those crimes is? nothing they are ALL illegal.

A problem, I'll concede, that stems from the fact that many people don't belive marijuana impairs their driving as much as alcohol does. That's correctible--people used to think alcohol didn't impair their driving, either, until a massive public service campaign coupled with stiff penalities for drunk driving made them see the light. The government is even trying to do that--unfortunately, the message is lost in the muddle of misleading propaganda the government is spewing.

the stoners and pro-marijuana folks spread false rumors and propaganda as well, and why do people believe it? because they aren't the evil government out to get them

No responsible advocate for marijuana reform has ever said smoking and driving should be legal. The day prohibition comes off the books should be the same day existing drunk driving statutes are amended so stoned drivers recieve the exact same penalties as drunk drivers. And once prohibition is ended, the government can be honest about marijuana, including its real harmful effects. Even if legalization brings about more stoned drivers (due to the number of people in general who smoke increasing), the problem, if handled correctly, would be temporary and not as severe as the drunk driving problem still is anyway. The threat of a few more stoned drivers in the aftermath of legalization is enough to justify neither the massive expenditure made at all levels of government to enforce prohibition nor the imprisoning of thousands of people for smoking marijuana.

A DWI is a DWI doesn't matter if it is pot or beer or crank they get booked for driving under the influence. And if we let the cost of punishing those who break the law dictate what laws we enforce, then how long before we start letting people off for more serious crimes that cost us more to imprison them for longer terms? I for one am not willing to go that route. The law is the law, break it and you risk being caught and having to pay the consequences.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-10-29 03:43pm

One other thing is how many of those 600,000 people are repeat offenders? I would bet a good portion of them are.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-10-29 03:59pm

Death from the Sea wrote: As Jim Carey so brilliantly put it in the movie LIAR LIAR "STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLE!" really that is as simple as it gets it is illegal so the folks possessing the stuff are breaking the law. Breaking the law is breaking the law you can't pick and choose what crimes to enforce and which ones not to, speeding, drinking underage, stealing or possessing illegal narcotics are all illegal and those 600,000 people knew it when they bought the drugs so they pay the price. Victimless crimes??? do you ever watch COPS ? the children of the dope-heads are the victims, the neighbors are the victims, random people walking down the street are victims.

You must be the single most ignorant person I've ever seen. You think marijuana creates dope heads and broken homes? Those fuckers on COPS aren't that way because of pot, they beat their wives, drive into posts and swear at the cops because the are DRUNK. Alchohol is the single most self-destructive drug in America and it creates the most victims from drunk driving fatalities to domestic abuse. Marijuana doesn't contribute significantly to any of the social problems that alchohol has created.

Well if marijuana is harmful to the user why do you want it to be legal? since you admit it is harmful. You know what the difference between all of those crimes is? nothing they are ALL illegal.

Your stupidity know no bounds does it? Are you saying that all things that are harmful should be illegal? McDonalds will kill thousands of times more people than pot each year, yet junk food isn't illegal. Compared to pot, cars are deathtraps on wheels, yet they aren't illegal. Hell, sex kills a hell of a lot more people than pot, should it be illegal? Fucking idiot.

the stoners and pro-marijuana folks spread false rumors and propaganda as well, and why do people believe it? because they aren't the evil government out to get them

Riiight, it's the anti-marijuana people that are being persecuted. Keeping dreaming kiddo.

A DWI is a DWI doesn't matter if it is pot or beer or crank they get booked for driving under the influence. And if we let the cost of punishing those who break the law dictate what laws we enforce, then how long before we start letting people off for more serious crimes that cost us more to imprison them for longer terms? I for one am not willing to go that route. The law is the law, break it and you risk being caught and having to pay the consequences.

Once again, your stupidity and ignorance rear their ugly head. You are saying that people can abuse pot. Congradulations, people can abuse damn near ANYTHING. People can abuse paint thinner if they want. It doesn't change the fact that people can use pot responsibly and in moderation, just as some people can drink in moderation.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-10-29 04:05pm

Durran Korr wrote:I would expect pot decriminalization anywhere from 10-25 years.

Hoepfully sooner, it's harmful health effects (while pretty serious) don't justify the cost of the continuing prohibition of marijuana.

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2003-10-29 04:08pm

I can tell you marijuana actually affects people differently, i know people who have been smoking the stuff since they were 14/15, now 16, they are fucked up kids i can tell you. So fucked up it put my girlfriend off smoking the stuff, she is also asthmatic but only mildy, she also (wisely) refuses to smoke cigarretes.

on the other hand i know someone who smokes joints like they are cigarretes, his cig break at work consists of smoking a joint, and he barely has any side effects, sure he eats ALOT but he has none of the side effects i've seen in the other guys.

I guess some people are just more succeptable to these things than others, maybe its in the brain chemistry, i dunno.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-10-29 04:21pm

I know potheads who are apathetic losers. I also know potheads who are friendly, industrious, and intelligent.

Well if marijuana is harmful to the user why do you want it to be legal? since you admit it is harmful. You know what the difference between all of those crimes is? nothing they are ALL illegal.

There has never been a single recorded death due to marijuana use in the history of the United States. Tobacco, on the other hand, kills about four hundred thousand each year. Another fifty thousand people die each year from second-hand smoke. How many people die from 'second-hand cocaine'?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-10-29 04:26pm

HemlockGrey wrote:I know potheads who are apathetic losers. I also know potheads who are friendly, industrious, and intelligent.

Well if marijuana is harmful to the user why do you want it to be legal? since you admit it is harmful. You know what the difference between all of those crimes is? nothing they are ALL illegal.
There has never been a single recorded death due to marijuana use in the history of the United States. Tobacco, on the other hand, kills about four hundred thousand each year. Another fifty thousand people die each year from second-hand smoke. How many people die from 'second-hand cocaine'?

If you want to record deaths of secondary to smoking, there are plenty of car accidents (including the one that killed a cousin of mine) that have involved people that are high. Not to mention a life long marijuana habit stands to do more harm than tobacco given the greater levels of carcinoigens and other toxins.

It's hardly as harmless as the pro-pot crowd make it out to be.

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2003-10-29 04:27pm

[quote="Stormbringer]
It's hardly as harmless as the pro-pot crowd make it out to be.[/quote]

I agree with this statement, as i said above, everyone is affected differently, but it is far from harmless, i for one can't stand the smell... but thats just me