Marijuana.com

nacrypt

Are you serious about making marijauna legal again in the United States? Does it irritate you that police will arrest you for using marijauna receationally but responsibly? It's time to introduce our own government to a better solution. Lets lobby for the legalization of marijuana and absoutely no other drugs. We must use the legal framework in place for alcohol to base our case for the normalization of marijuana as a controled substance. We must keep our message clear and simple so our government will understand it. Remember, in the United States, the goverment is based on the consent of the people. A conservative estimate puts the number of marijuana users in the United States in the millions. If the freedom to change our laws to reflect the lives out citizens want to live means anything, then we have the right to make this simple change, completely within the context of the law.

Common Sense Coalition

 

Buzzby

You have restated the position of NORML and MPP. The Drug Policy Alliance is for the legalization of all drugs.

National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML)

Marijuana Policy Project (MPP)

Drug Policy Alliance (DPA)

I question why we need another pro-legalization organization when the ones we have are so under-supported.

__________________

Niteshift

A conservative estimate puts the number of marijuana users in the United States in the millions.

You presume that all of those people favor legalization. Have you considered that all of them might not.

Now let's think objectively about this for a minute:

The vague idea of "millions" of people simply isn't as significant as it once was. Well over a million people voted for a candidate other than Bush or Kerry, but that was less than 1% of the voters. Double, even tripple that number and you still only have 3%.

Hell, 59 million voted for Kerry, but that wasn't enough. Do you think you have 59 million pro-legalization voters?


the reason I point this out is because your premise is about the US being governed by the consent of the people. I think this is the wrong tactic for you to take because that is a numbers game and in the numbers game, you will lose. You need to make the changes by virtue of courts and legislation, not by voters numbers.

__________________
A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about. -Thomas Sowell

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is muzzle flash.

nacrypt

> The vague idea of "millions" of people simply isn't as significant as it once was. Well over a million people voted for a candidate other than Bush or Kerry, but that was less than 1% of the voters. Double, even tripple that number and you still only have 3%.

I agree, but since marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug, used by millions atleast, it is an ethical mistake to keep it illegal. The C.S.C. is not meant to replace these existing pro-legalization organizations, but rather to emphisize and symbolize exactly what their goal is. Not an unrealistic goal, like the legalization of all drugs but merely giving marijuana the same legal status as alcohol. We have a legal framework for that mind altering drug, why not apply the concepts to an even more harmless one.

I cannot convince Congress alone. We will need rally support for our cause, but we must be clear on what we want, and mobilize all those who agree with the basic proposal, whether they use marijuana or not.

Niteshift

I agree, but since marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug, used by millions atleast, it is an ethical mistake to keep it illegal.

Keep something in mind, I'm not arguing that pot should be kept illegal. I'm discussing only your reasoning here.

That logic is flawed. What you are essentially saying in that paragraph is that ethics is tied to popularity. The reality is quite the opposite. Sometimes the ethical decision is the least popular one.

Popularity is not the way to measure the ethical nature of a law.

 

kootenaykronic

The government wont make pot legal because they cannot tax it.

phuzz01

Millions of people drive drunk, does that mean it is an ethical mistake to keep driving drunk illegal?

nacrypt

Hello people!!!

You all sound like you want to keep pot illegal! I'm trying to find a pragmatic approach that will actually lead to legalization some day.

This is the ethical argument: marijauna is no more harmful than alcohol, thus if it is ethical and moral to consume alcohol responsibly, then it is ethical and moral to responsibly consume marijuana. Conversely, it is unethical and immoral to arrest people for doing something that is NOT unethical or immoral. Driving drunk is immoral because it puts people at a serious risk of injury, I'm not saying that drunk driving (irresonsible use of alcohol) should be legal.

Populist argument: since millions of people already use marijuana responsibly, the goverment, which is based on the consent of the people, should setup legal constructs that allow us to use this practically harmless drug within the context of the law. The laws for alcohol, and it history of failed prohibion, provide the legal definitons (21+, no driving, etc...) and social patterns that could be used to regulate legalized marijuana.

Buzzby

That's not a valid analogy. Driving drunk is putting yourself, your passengers, and other cars at risk. Possession of marijuana does none of those things. Possession of marijuana should be compared to possession of alcohol, not drunk driving.

Buzzby

Why not? They tax alcohol. That doesn't mean that bootlegging never happens but they don't use that as an excuse to make alcohol illegal (again).

You can make beer and wine at home without breaking the law. Under the same regulatory system you would be able to grow pot at home. How many people make their own beer and wine? A few hobbyists. It's much more convenient to go to the store and buy some at a reasonable price. I think the same thing would happen with marijuana when the black market profiteering is taken away and prices are subject to the competition of legitimate markets. If marijuana is priced and taxed too high it will become more convenient for people to grow their own, so they will. Neither the companies that produce it nor the government agencies that tax it would want to see that happen.