Comments | san_diego: Would you legalize marijuana?

vixyash in san_diego

Would you legalize marijuana?

Feb 26, 2009 08:44

With the legalization of marijuana in the California news lately, I posted this in my own personal LJ. But then I wondered what people thought on a larger scale, like in my own city. Granted, folks that have LiveJournals probably don't represent a fair demographic of the population, but I'm curious nonetheless.How would you vote if asked to ( Read more... )

politics, legal and g'vt, news

Comments 51

happynoodlelady February 26 2009, 16:55:50 UTC

*it's better for you than alcohol, which is legal and kills
*you ever hear of two stoners getting in a fight at a sporting events game? it just doesn't happen
*the only reason it's illegal is because of the cotton industry trying to get a foothold on the textile industry
*it's completely naturally occuring. God put it on the planet.
*we've already proven the war on drugs was a waste of taxpayer money and is failing
*we could take recreational user arrests out of our overflowing jails and focus on the criminals that really matter, like pedophiles and murderers
*think of the potential tax revenue it could generate

comon people, there are like a billion more Pro's to this argument. It's senseless to keep it criminalized and always has been.

theevillucy February 26 2009, 17:21:36 UTC

I totally agree with you and think you made some valid points

lizetta February 26 2009, 17:54:40 UTC

I'm for decriminalizing, but I still feel the need to disagree with logical fallicies. Arsenic is natural, but that doesn't mean that people should put it in their body, or that any deity put it here for the purpose of humans digesting it. I think there's plenty good reasons to discuss this, but that isn't one of them.

Just my opinion, of course

happynoodlelady February 26 2009, 18:34:46 UTC

In the early days of man when we were still evolving in this world we learned about plants and which ones could be used for medicinal properties and which ones to stay away from. Comparing a naturally occuring non toxic plant to lethal poison is ridiculous! Completely different categories. Obviously we don't go putting everything naturally occuring in the world into our mouth. Anyone who ingests sulphur or charcoal would have thier sanity in question. However, that does not change the fact that everything in the world does serve a purpose in it's own way.

It still does not detract from my origional point, which was more along the lines of classifying marijuana in the same criminal category as heroin or crack cocaine is simply nonsensical. Man made or processed drugs are much worse for you, are much more addictive, and breed a completly different class of criminal than those which are naturally occurring.

Just my opinion, of course.

Thread 10

(The comment has been removed)

happynoodlelady February 26 2009, 17:41:13 UTC

it is srs bznz.

vixyash February 26 2009, 17:44:47 UTC

I *am* the California Legislature. DUH.

megatexas February 26 2009, 18:28:57 UTC

I am Aquaman. Did you know that the ocean covers 70% of the earth? Puny legislature!

Thread 7

jacquelyn4444 February 26 2009, 17:58:56 UTC

I personally don't smoke weed, but in the grand scheme of things, it certainly makes more sense to legalize it to me...

sand_dweller February 26 2009, 18:00:28 UTC

With all the recent news about drug cartels and the related violence, it would seem the obvious solution is to legalize ALL drugs. Without the black market, what would happen to them? At the very least, legalizing cannabis would make a huge dent, never mind the huge tax revenue.

Too bad the DEA and friends make too much money off the silly "war on drugs" for this to ever happen. Also too bad that the American public has been sold on the idea that "drugs are bad mmkay" to even consider this seriously. It's just not going to happen.

vixyash February 26 2009, 18:14:09 UTC

Interesting point. My husband also feels the same about legalizing all drugs and I've always assumed he was the only person.

thedesolateone February 27 2009, 06:47:05 UTC

nah lots of people think that way. My only reason for potentially not legalizing everything (and really i think we may as well), is I worry about companies putting meth ads on Tv and all in the papers. But probably not a valid concern.

sand_dweller February 27 2009, 16:18:27 UTC

They already have...

Thread 10

There may be blood... tonygumbrell February 26 2009, 18:29:39 UTC

Does legalizing it mean that it could be sold commercially like cigarettes, or any other commodity that is packaged and advertised? Somebody, who gets in on the ground floor first, could get rich, like the tobacco companies, or any other company with a product that's mass marketed. Wrigley got filthy rich selling chewing gum. He practically owned Catalina island, and the Chicago Cubs. The Wrigley Bldg. in Chicago bears his name. BTW, Look what Bill Gates did by cornering the market on computer software. I'm looking for partners. Who wants to get rich beyond the dreams of avarice (an entrepreneurial spirit, i.e. with limited scruples, is what's needed)?

Re: There may be blood... happynoodlelady February 26 2009, 18:37:03 UTC

Marlboro or Camel, I forget which, already holds the patent on packaged marijuana cigarettes. Just as a fun fact. They actually have for a very long time, too.

More: Re: There may be blood... tonygumbrell February 26 2009, 18:59:58 UTC

How can such a thing be patented? They have their lawyers, I'll get mine.

Re: More: Re: There may be blood... meiczyslaw February 27 2009, 20:58:27 UTC

As I understand it, the manufacturing process can be patented.

However, a patent is only valid for a certain length of time. I suspect that if Big Tobacco actually held such a patent, then it would have since expired.

However (again!), they could instead have a patent pending, but as-yet-unapproved, that would then grant them a seven-year monopoly should marijuana be legalized nationally.

(Not a lawyer, but waaaaay too involved in IP law as a consumer.)

Thread 8