Forge said: "I personally don't and never have used the stuff, but I have no problem with it being legalized. The same rules that apply to alcohol should apply to drug use and we can move on with our lives. Now I don't believe it is JUST a plant. It's a plant that makes you do wacky things and effects your mind, but that is your choice."
MZ: And alcohol isn't just a liquid. It's a liquid that makes you do wacky things and affects your mind.
Bill Stankus said (in part):
"You can't talk about MJ as a weed or a window sill crop as if it existed all by itself- in fact, it is connected to all sorts of people - some are probably OK and just after making a few dollars but there are others - characters you don't want within 5 miles of where you live. I'm referring to oddball users and the distribution people. Would legalization change that? I don't know."
MZ: The "distribution people" are the ones that I wouldn't want in my neighborhood, but Bill, they'll be GONE once MJ is legalized. As for the "oddball users," I'm much more averse to drunks than to pot smokers.
Bill: "If you compare MJ to the prohibition era - there is a fact that should be known. Prior to prohibition there was an ungodly annual consumption of booze and beer. Honky tonks and saloons were everywhere and minors were not stopped at the doors. Drunken abuse of women was common and drunkards at work were a real problem."
MZ: Sorry, Bill, but except for the minors being stopped at the doors, this sounds just like America today. Have you ever attended an Al-Anon meeting?
Bill: "One more thing, saying something is human nature or laws should be changed because it is commonly done is a spurious argument. Just because the neighbors do something doesn't make it acceptable or right."
MZ: Of course! I didn't mean to imply that "laws should be changed because it is commonly done." Murder, rape, stealing and drunk driving are commonly done, and I am not suggesting that laws against those acts, WHICH ARE CLEARLY HARMFUL TO OTHERS, should be changed. And laws against those acts probably do have a deterrant affect. It is certainly clear to most citizens that those acts are intrinsically wrong. But laws against individual behavior that does not necessarily harm others will be resented and ignored. There is no more reason to attempt to ban pot than there was to attempt to ban alcohol, and there is no more chance of being successful in that attempt.
Bill: "By that logic, today we would all be tobacco users as was so common in the late 1940s and through the 1960s."
MZ: Tobacco use has declined because of gradually increasing awareness of the negative effect on health and because it is less socially acceptable, not because it was outlawed.
Bill: "Still, go ahead and legalize it and apply the same rules and regs regarding cigarette use."
MZ: Hooray! We agree!
Liquid said: I'll inhale and hold my breath waiting.....I swear....I will!
MZ: Um, maybe that's not a good idea...
Utah savage said: "... if you put the drug in the hands of the corps, there goes the narco-trafficker, off to find a new job. And couldn't we put all the crooks and liars and just plain criminals from the Bush admin, in one of those jails when we empty it of harmless pot smokers?"
MZ: YES! What a brilliant idea!