The classic battle: Marijuana should it legalized?

[SheetWise]

Of course it should be.

I'm surprised so many posts make the assumption that conservatives are against legalization. Who could be more conservative than William F. Buckley, who has been promoting legalization for years.

[natedogg]

This forum is about 50% libertarian so to most of us you actually sound like an authoritarian dictator since you aren't sure if pot should be legal.

Here you say: "even thou I enjoy smoking the green sticky stuff I dont wont my kids smoking it or do I condone smoking it while driving." which just about makes me want to throw up if you for even one second support drug prohibition while taking them yourself.

natedogg

[coffeecrazy1]

No...no...I think that we should realistic about drugs and their effects.

I just think that, typically(and that's the key word), we should caution them to avoid doing drugs...if you are talking about responsible adult teaching, etc.

[Richard Tanner]

I share the opinion that all drugs (yes even licking toads)should be legal. It should, of course, be illegal to operate a car/other heavy machinery while under the influence of any drug (any drug hereafter refers to any drug currently considered illicit) and to do anything that might indanger the well-being of another while under the influence of any drug.
I have two reasons for feeling this way. The first is that I love natural selection and if you do enough of any drug (or perhaps you'd make a drug cocktail, same rules apply) to kill yourself, quite honestly, we need less of your genes.
Secondly, I don't feel I have the right nor responsibility to protect anybody else from what they do to themselves (and only themselves, hince the guidelines given in the first paragraph). As such, I feel people should be able to injest any drug they want, and barring interfearence into another persons life, be unpunished.
I assume at least part of this was what the previous poster was alluding to, but I don't propose to speak for him.

Cody

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
Here you say: "even thou I enjoy smoking the green sticky stuff I dont wont my kids smoking it or do I condone smoking it while driving." which just about makes me want to throw up if you for even one second support drug prohibition while taking them yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say that makes perfect sense. What someone wants to do in the privacy of their own home (or hell, so long as they can restrain themselves, on a damn park bench) is their own business. However if a drug impares with one's ability to operate a car or anything else that would endanger the safty of another, those actions (driving under the influence, not doing the drug itself) need to be prohibited. As for the children, that's really another topic about the age of consent. I would say 12, but then I'm a pedophile [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] so my opinion may not be best.

Cody

[BillUCF]

Leagalize it and tax it. Use the revenue to pay off the national debt. The US would be debt free inside a decade.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
Leagalize it and tax it. Use the revenue to pay off the national debt. The US would be debt free inside a decade.

[/ QUOTE ]

and huuuuungry man

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
So it makes me wonder who is in bed with who?

[/ QUOTE ]

The temperance movement was funded by bootleggers.

Almost every referendum has been passed -- the voters agree. It's unusual when politicians don't do what their constituency wants. This true with both Democrats and Republicans.

[nicky g]

It should definitely be legalised. One reason that hasn't been mentioned is the hundreds of thousands of lives ruined (at vast, vast expense) through the jailing of people involved in drugs.

[coffeecrazy1]

You are correct in that assumption...up to a point. I actually take it a step further.

I don't believe that it should be illegal to drive or operate heavy machinery under the influence of alcohol, pot, or any other substance. Yes, that's right, I don't believe in drunk driving laws.

What I think we should do is abolish drunk driving laws, but ramp up the penalty for getting into an accident or harming others while under the influence. Call it a special circumstance. I could even understand the line of thinking that doing so constitutes premeditation.

The point is, I don't like any laws that are preventative in nature, by and large. On the flip side, I demand a heightened sense of personal responsibility from people in society. I want to punish the part of drunk driving that hurts others, not the part that does not.

I know...it'll never happen...and my view is out there on the fringe...I'm aware of that fact, as well...but I stand by my conclusion on this one, even if it draws me flames.