Do you think cannabis should be made legal?

I'm Pro-Legalization (especially when it comes to the medical use of cannabis). Still, I would feel uncomfortable if it was made too easy for kids to get their hands on it. (let's face it, if they want to smoke pot, they'll do it, even if it's illegal).
Legalization would at least mean, īthat you don't have to smoke shoeshine and other stuff, and socialize with people you normally wouldn't want anything to know about. (I know a lot of very nice people who smoke hemp, but only a few of the ones who sell it are that much fun)

What's all this I hear about legalizing cannibals? I say let the dead rest in peace... how would you feel if complete strangers got together and chowed down on your still-warm corpse...
Oh, cannabis! Never mind.

Mostly, I think criminalizing narcotics (chemical and otherwise) misses the point. Worse, it makes it hard to get real data about how and why people choose to numb themselves, which bugs me, since habitual anaesthesia is a really bad symptom in both an individual and a culture (IMHO) and I'd like to see us treat the underlying conditions. Natch, that's not going to happen.
Making nicotine and alcohol legal and cannabis illegal confuses me. If the government chooses to get out of the narcotics-enforcement business altogether, that's fine, but again, that ain't gonna happen. If the government chooses to ban all narcotics altogether, I don't have a problem with that per se but I dislike the concentration of power it implies and would oppose it on those grounds.

Having said all that, I don't much care about the legal status of cannabis in and of itself -- it's not a very important issue.

MEDICAL ONLY : AND THAT'S MY VERY VERY STRONG OPINION. People that say it's not as bad as alcohol or jerks are stupid. People that smoke cannibis are more likely to experiences other drugs so even though independentely, cannibis may not be as bad ( where's the evidence )? , there's a lot more to consider.

Yes, and so should a lot of other things... Laws should address issues in which one person directly infringes on the basic human rights of another. Laws should not address what a person does privately, nor should they force people to act "safely".

Point of interest to those who don't know: In England (where Wicksy comes from I believe) jerks==cigarettes

bill : Yes, but if it is made legal, it wouldn't be done in private, there would be tramps on the street smoking the stuff, there'll be precocious children smoking it everywhere you look to try and be ' in '. Keep it illegal and let's clean up the streets once and for all !!!

milktree : yep, I'm from London

Wicksy, are you aware that "jerk" is usually considered a derogatory term for a homosexual in the states?

As for tramps and precocious children - does smoking pot cause them to exist, or does it just aggravate the problem? Would you prefer a law that directly involves "cleaning up the streets" (i.e. getting tramps and precocious children off the streets) to a law that makes smoking pot illegal? Are you saying that it's OK for people to smoke pot in private (but that the law is there to prevent people from doing it in public)?

I found the two linked sites interesting, especially in the contrast between the two. Of the two, the DEA site is far and away the more propagandistic. You'd think their salaries depended on it or something

Yes, with an age limit. Treat it like alcohol and tax the hell out of it.

I've never used the stuff & don't plan to ever use the stuff, but I always thought it should be legal. It doesn't seem to be any more harmful than tobacco & alcohol products & should not have more stringent restrictions than either of those.

Wicksy, I don't think the current laws keep precocious children from smoking pot. It just makes it more dangerous to get and use the stuff.
To get it, because you just can't go to the local store and say 'Hey .. I want 2 grams of Maroccan and perhaps 5 grams of Northern Lights'. You have to meet with very dubious people, who are very likely to have other stuff they want you to buy.
Dangerous to use, because it may get mixed with other stuff (shoeshine can be sometimes found in hashish. Wonderful if you like real black oily smoke and a taste like s**t), or get in contact with other smokeable drugs. (I saw a few 'friends' who had mushrooms and hashish in the same bag, which is fine if you like both and know about it. Normally it's not enough psylocybin to really freak you out, but the visuals can be quite distressing if you don't know what's happening).

As far as I know, it's generally admitted that pure smoked hemp is far healthier (read: not healthy as such!) than both alcohol and nicotine. At least a German supreme court admitted it. They although admitted that they didn't care. So alcohol is still very popular (especially in Bavaria, where I live), cigarettes lost some glamour but are still rather big, and everything hempy may cause you to lose your job and your driver's license (along with your freedom of course).

Legalize it and tax it, to go with the rest of the "sin" taxes on alcohol and tobacco.

Wicksy, did you check out either or both of the sites listed?

I believe marijuana, as with any illegal drug, should not be legalized except for medical use. Can you imagine the world filled of unmodivated, lazy, drug addicts driving on the streets with our children in the passing vehicles? I'm not saying EVERYONE who smokes pot is like that, but if is so easy to recieve it's just as easy to get Amotivational Syndrome (cronic pot smokers disease)...Plus, half the fun is in it being illegal, right??

lovenlife: so, should we make alcohol illegal?

Yeah, it was sure fun the last time we made alcohol illegal! speak-easies and gangsters! woo hoo!

Sammy70 - I found eating hash to be much more psychedelic than smoking it. It took a while to take effect, but it was much more like tripping than smoking pot. So, I could see where mixing shrooms with it would be a natural thing to do (though, I never did it).

I don't know whether or not I'd set an age limit... I can't believe the government hasn't legalized it already so they can tax it.. Also, think of the jobs that it would provide... if it were legal... farmers, warehouse, factory... and so on...

Wicksy.. raise your children to think that way... according to your own ideals and you'll be alright... If people want to pump drugs into their veins, huff it into their lungs, or snort it into their brains, it's their business... not yours... It seems like you have a bad opinion of drug users anyway.. so why do you care if the drug effects them in a bad way? I say let people do what they want, we'll have more overdoses, which means less people... it just might help out with the overpopulation problem... which is something we need to worry about more than whether or not people can smoke pot.

I just can't make up my mind about drugs. How high should you be allowed to be? Some common spice are quite potent drugs (nutmeg...). Should these be illegal?
Even if I don't use cannabis should other people be forced not to?

THEY : So, do you think people should be allowed to smoke pot in public, with no age limit ? If you do, there must be something very wrong without yourself. Do you know how strong the smell of pot is, would you let your kids walk to school with that vulgar scent floating around. Would you let your kids smoke pot at 10. Would you feel safe letting your kids walk to school, knowing that there are junkies on the streets so influenced by the drugs in their systems that they are capable of anything.
Also, if cigarettes and alcohol were discovered today, they would almost certainly be illegal, the only reason they can't be changed from legal to illegal is becaues it would cost too much.

An acre of hemp will produce more paper than an acre of trees, and it's easier and faster to replenish.

wicksy: there are "junkies on the streets" right now. They are near children every day. I don't see how legalising anything is going to make that any different (except possibly make "junkies" -- as you put it -- more likely to have a place off the street to be).

Wicksy: We actually did make alcohol illegal here in the U.S. at one point. It didn't cost too much, but we did relegalize it. My understanding of it is that prohibition didn't work - people drank anyway, and possibly with worse social effects than when it was legal.

However, I think you have put your finger on an interesting idea when you say, "there are junkies...capable of anything." Much of current anti-drug sentiment (laws, propaganda, etc.) seems to have at the heart of it a profound fear of losing control - of one's environment ("druggies" in it), of one's "subjects" (as a government), or (and perhaps this is the real root of the matter) of oneself. I strongly feel that people/governments who are attempting to maintain control for these reasons are misguided, in that the world is inherently out of our control to a certain degree, and nothing more so than other people (remembering that they are pretty much our only rivals for "top dog on the planet"). Only when we recognize this can we be really constructive in our attempts to influence our environment (with stress on the distinction between influence and control).

Hear, hear. Wicksy, have you ever seen a roomful of people on hash or pot? It's more amusing than anything else. Crazed junkies are a myth of the group who thinkgs "we know what's best for you".

I'm not particularly interested in the assorted drugs myself, but I am very interested in the effects that unenforcable laws have on our society, in terms of the effort expended on them and how those laws by their very existence reduce the impact of other, enforceable laws. I'm curious to see what will happen over time as people who came "of age" in the 70s, 80s, and 90s assume positions of power in the political and judicial systems, i.e. whether other people share my pragmatism or not.

they, it seems very unlikely that there would be more "overdoses" if, for example, heroin were legally regulated, rather than illegal, since "overdoses" are not the result of taking too much heroin, but of uneven purity and content. At least, that is what studies seem to indicate...it's very hard to get funding on this kind of thing. "Overdoses" are a whole variety of reactions to heroin and not well understood, but it seems likely that regulation would cut them down, not increase them.

Since we're discussing cannabis, on which no one has ever managed to "overdose," that is, die from the chemical effects on the body, it's not really relevant, but I wanted to clear up a common misconception.

hail eris! (great comment, dude!)

Oh, by the way, I looked through that DEA link (given above) and I was a bit shocked to read that the DEA has a policy of opposing legalization. Um, isn't that none of their business? Aren't they just suppose to enforce laws? In my mind, it would be OK if a consortium of DEA employees wanted to form a group that opposed legalization, but the government agency itself shouldn't have a policy of anti-legalization sentiment, right?

bill: if they didn't oppose legalization then they might one day wake up and not have jobs.

Eevil!

I like to see the day when I say...
"medium coffee with cream & 2 sugars & a dime bag to go please"!

presti - if it worked out anything like the recent spate of trendy coffee shops in the northeast, the counterperson would reply "now, do you want that dime bag in plastic or foil? Hungarian Boolah, Blue Ridge Leaf, Morrocan Batlack or the house blend? Would you like rolling papers with that? What color? Flavored or non? Blah blah blah..."
I dunno... it might make me long for the days of interacting with dubious-looking characters in back alleys...

yes with an age limit.. same as alcohol.

Wicksy...

1. I would not let my kids walk to school by themselves right now, and pot is illegal.

2. My kids would be raised with enough sense to know what is right and wrong for them to do. If you can't raise your kids with common sense, then please, for my children's sake... don't have children.

Marijuana will not eat up one's liver, lungs, or mind the way the tobacco and alcohol do. Marijuana may give off a scent, but it won't cause your children to get cancer from the second hand smoke...

There are bars for people to drink alcohol, I don't see why there couldn't be the same thing for marijuana.

I'm ignoring the insults, as it just stresses your ignorance on the matter...

You're too high strung... try smoking a joint, it might cool you off a little bit.

After reading the comments, I think that I should have added one more option :

- Yes for Medical and Recreational use, with the limitation that you are not allowed to use it in public places (Except perhaps for coffee shops and such)

I would have marked the first option, but some things I've heard Steve say have convinced me to mark the second one instead.

is that suppose to be kids<16 are NOT able to buy it?

I asked a question very similar to this awhile ago.

phi, I don't see any comments here by steve. Care to share?

Do you think we should make alcohol et al medical-use-only too?

Jeff, in survey #1215, "Would you punish your kids for smoking pot?" steve commented "I would try to discourage it in a young child; I am not entirely unconvinced that it can mess up your hormonal development if you start too young. (Gynecomastia!"

jefff: My first/second option thing was as to the order in the original question, not the order after sorting which you see looking at the comments. The first option was unconditionally; the second was for limiting to over-sixteens.

There should be an 'other' option.

Yes it should be, but not now - there is no quick way to test if people have been smoking it like you can alcohol. If there was a quick way to test this then it should be legalised with similar laws to tobacco imho.

legalize it and sell it in liquor stores with the same regulations as alcohol