• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Legalisation of Marijuana

Should marijuana be legalised?

  • Total voters
    57
mhurford said:
So since we can't control it at all as you say, we should throw down our efforts to trying to get people to make smart choices in their life and just legalize it?

Shoot we could even advertise in commercials to buy it at your local gas station. Maybe in ten or twenty years we can legalize crystal meth too because once it gets too hard to control we should give up and legalize it. Sometimes, for the better of man kind, things should be denied to others simply because it's stupid. Anything that impairs your senses or your judgement should be illegal (in my opinion because i'm all about getting smarter, stronger and more advanced versus other nations). We should just be like Amsterdam and make weed legal. open up a few 'Weed Cafe's'. What better way to spend the day then to smoke a plant. It is very productive (sarcasm). You might bring drinking in to this saying it's not productive and it's legal. Well let me say that two wrongs don't make a right. We shouldn't expand choices for stupid options (ie. "hmm... today should i go to a bar and drink my brains out? or maybe grab some weed around the corner and chill at home all day?).

When things get hard to control, we don't give in and just legalize it like we did with Alcohol. People ask why won't Washington look at legalizing Marijuana when that's what the people want? well in my opinion, I would ignore the issue too if I was in Washington because smoking a plant isn't productive and i wouldn't want to educate people on how 'great and amazing' it makes you feel. I'd rather invest resources in getting people to get more help on career fields they are interested in but don't have money to pursue.

I never said the DEA was 100% successful. but they have made accomplishments if you look back at their timeline. they have caught several drug lords and thousands of small drug dealers. I'm not sure how you see drug dealing as something as you going to someone and simply applying. trust plays a big role in this system since drugs like marijuana are ILLEGAL. So if your a drug lord who had all your friends arrested for dealing your just gonna go downtown and ask around, "excuse me, can you deal some drugs for me?". It doesn't work that way. Drug dealing is enticed through connections. connections are not made over night. As far as you saying kids find it easier to go to a drug dealer to get drugs. This same rule applies. He doesn't go to google and search for his local drug dealer. He also doesn't ask a kid he barely knows where to get drugs. Even if a kid told another kid where to buy drugs, the dealer doesn't know if this random kid is going to report him or not. Cash rewards are given to people who report drug dealer, not sure if your aware of that (rewards upwards to $10,000 depending on your state). Money like that being rewarded for turning in a drug dealer makes finding trustful customers and loyal drug dealers hard to come by.
Click to expand...

Your post is a litany of red herrings, we can still get people to make smart choices through education, treatment where needed, and as have said repeatedly, the most important step delaying the age of first use. And no legalization does not mean that there will be commercials or that it should or would be promoted, if we do go this route it is crucial we do it right, we deglamourize drugs, and we hobble the black market, we offer treatment where needed, and once again DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE.

attempting to deny drugs (via prohibition) does not keep them from being used, and it has not done anything for usage rates. A properly implemented legalization is not giving up it is changing tactics.

Getting back to the availability of alcohol versus marijuana these stats are from the NIDA here is the link:
High School and Youth Trends | DrugFacts | National Institute on Drug Abuse

this is a comparison of alcohol and marijuana usage rates by grade in school children (within the last month):

8th grade:
marijuana 7.2%
alcohol 4.4%

10th grade:
marijuana 17.6%
alcohol 13.7%

12th grade:
marijuana 22.6%
alcohol 25%

So tell me, how effective is this drug war in keeping drugs from our kids, and how effective is it at delaying the age of first use? it seems that the majority of kids start on marijuana - the prohibited and supposedly least available option MUCH earlier then the prevalent and supposedly more available alcohol. Kids use marijuana more frequently at younger ages then they do alcohol. The stats do not support what you are trying to argue. If we legalize it and control it we can -say it with me now - "DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE" - and this is critical for a long term and overall drug strategy of minimizing addiction rates, usage rates, and the associated harms that may occur as a result.
 
Last edited:
zstep18 said:
What about the fact that keeping marijuana illegal fuels drug cartels and adds to an already overpopulated prison population? There are ill effects to keeping marijuana illegal.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying legalizing Marijuana would be super terrible. Both choices have their pros and cons. I lean more towards it being illegal because i'd rather deal with the issues of keeping it illegal vs. legalizing it and observing our nation become less educated by the month because they are not motivated to get out and get things done. I'd rather invest more money (money we don't have, I know) into agencies like the DEA and taking down cartels. Yes, cartel will be ALWAYS be around, however, if you end them before they grow into a serious illegal organization then it becomes harder to build it back up again when there's a bigger guard on drug trafficking.

I would also increase the number of prisons in America which would also increase a small number of jobs for those who don't make stupid choices. It's like most elders tell me, "If you're stupid enough to make wrong choices then you can live with the consequences."

If your fired up for legalizing Marijuana then you do not have your priorities straight.
 
mhurford said:
So since we can't control it at all as you say, we should throw down our efforts to trying to get people to make smart choices in their life and just legalize it? Shoot we could even advertise in commercials to buy it at your local gas station. Maybe in ten or twenty years we can legalize crystal meth too because once it gets too hard to control we should give up and legalize it. Sometimes, for the better of man kind, things should be denied to others simply because it's stupid. Anything that impairs your senses or your judgement should be illegal (in my opinion because i'm all about getting smarter, stronger and more advanced versus other nations). We should just be like Amsterdam and make weed legal. open up a few 'Weed Cafe's'. What better way to spend the day then to smoke a plant. It is very productive (sarcasm). You might bring drinking in to this saying it's not productive and it's legal. Well let me say that two wrongs don't make a right. We shouldn't expand choices for stupid options (ie. "hmm... today should i go to a bar and drink my brains out? or maybe grab some weed around the corner and chill at home all day?).

When things get hard to control, we don't give in and just legalize it like we did with Alcohol. People ask why won't Washington look at legalizing Marijuana when that's what the people want? well in my opinion, I would ignore the issue too if I was in Washington because smoking a plant isn't productive and i wouldn't want to educate people on how 'great and amazing' it makes you feel. I'd rather invest resources in getting people to get more help on career fields they are interested in but don't have money to pursue.

I never said the DEA was 100% successful. but they have made accomplishments if you look back at their timeline. they have caught several drug lords and thousands of small drug dealers. I'm not sure how you see drug dealing as something as you going to someone and simply applying. trust plays a big role in this system since drugs like marijuana are ILLEGAL. So if your a drug lord who had all your friends arrested for dealing your just gonna go downtown and ask around, "excuse me, can you deal some drugs for me?". It doesn't work that way. Drug dealing is enticed through connections. connections are not made over night. As far as you saying kids find it easier to go to a drug dealer to get drugs. This same rule applies. He doesn't go to google and search for his local drug dealer. He also doesn't ask a kid he barely knows where to get drugs. Even if a kid told another kid where to buy drugs, the dealer doesn't know if this random kid is going to report him or not. Cash rewards are given to people who report drug dealer, not sure if your aware of that (rewards upwards to $10,000 depending on your state). Money like that being rewarded for turning in a drug dealer makes finding trustful customers and loyal drug dealers hard to come by.
Click to expand...

Your rhetoric suggests you've never smoked marijuana. Have you?
 
mhurford said:
I'm not saying legalizing Marijuana would be super terrible. Both choices have their pros and cons. I lean more towards it being illegal because i'd rather deal with the issues of keeping it illegal vs. legalizing it and observing our nation become less educated by the month because they are not motivated to get out and get things done.
Click to expand...

This wouldn't happen. In fact, evidence seems to suggest that if marijuana were to be made legal, there would be not dramatic increase in usage, and there's a possibility that usage may even go down.
 
marduc said:
Your post is a litany of red herrings, we can still get people to make smart choices through education, treatment where needed, and as have said repeatedly, the most important step delaying the age of first use. And no legalization does not mean that there will be commercials or that it should or would be promoted, if we do go this route it is crucial we do it right, we deglamourize drugs, and we hobble the black market, we offer treatment where needed, and once again DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE.

attempting to deny drugs (via prohibition) does not keep them from being used, and it has not done anything for usage rates. A properly implemented legalization is not giving up it is changing tactics.

Getting back to the availability of alcohol versus marijuana these stats are from the NIDA here is the link:
High School and Youth Trends | DrugFacts | National Institute on Drug Abuse

this is a comparison of alcohol and marijuana usage rates by grade in school children (within the last month):

8th grade:
marijuana 7.2%
alcohol 4.4%

10th grade:
marijuana 17.6%
alcohol 13.7%

12th grade:
marijuana 22.6%
alcohol 25%

So tell me, how effective is this drug war in keeping drugs from our kids, and how effective is it at delaying the age of first use? it seems that the majority of kids start on marijuana - the prohibited and supposedly least available option MUCH earlier then the prevalent and supposedly more available alcohol. Kids use marijuana more frequently at younger ages then they do alcohol. The stats do not support what you are trying to argue. If we legalize it and control it we can -say it with me now - "DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE" - and this is critical for a long term and overall drug strategy of minimizing addiction rates, usage rates, and the associated harms that may occur as a result.
Click to expand...

oh boy. okay, first, let check out this golden plan of yours. By legalizing weed, you actually seriously believe the use of it will go down with minors? You must be using some intense educational tactic to do this because no one listens in school about drugs (Maybe you went to a private fancy school, but I went to a public school). you really don't think a 21 year old relative is gonna buy kids marijuana like they do with beer? you just make it easier for them. so your wonderful plan to "DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE" (this is my favorite..lol) becomes increasing easy to get. there must be hundreds of kids at school who i could ask them to ask there older brother to buy a bunch of weed. your not thinking IN DEPTH about your answer that we have all been waiting for.

Addiction rates would increase because someone could pay a person who needs some cash and is over a certain age to get them weed.

what I'm very interested in with you good sir is this "control" you speak of. Really really really think about it and all the back doors please. thanks.

This might be too far forward for you to think about your plan but you can try I hope. Say you legalize it, think of the market your opening, more competitors means lower prices. lower priced weed makes it super tempting to try.

We 'delayed the age of first use' with cigarettes, I see 16 year old kids running around smoking cigarettes because it is simple to get.
 
Last edited:
zstep18 said:
This wouldn't happen. In fact, evidence seems to suggest that if marijuana were to be made legal, there would be not dramatic increase in usage, and there's a possibility that usage may even go down.
Click to expand...

You mean like how alcohol use was virtually eliminated after it became legal? Oh wait...
 
mhurford said:
oh boy. okay, first, let check out this golden plan of yours. By legalizing weed, you actually seriously believe the use of it will go down with minors? You must be using some intense educational tactic to do this because no one listens in school about drugs (Maybe you went to a private fancy school, but I went to a public school). you really don't think a 21 year old relative is gonna buy kids marijuana like they do with beer? you just make it easier for them. so your wonderful plan to "DELAY THE AGE OF FIRST USE" (this is my favorite..lol) becomes increasing easy to get. there must be hundreds of kids at school who i could ask them to ask there older brother to buy a bunch of weed. your not thinking IN DEPTH about your answer that we have all been waiting for.
Click to expand...

The usage rates I provided render your rebuttal to a whole lot of empty bluster. If you want to even have a chance of doing anything aside from attempting a very weak attempt at ridicule (and if you want your attempt at ridicule to have a remote chance of success) you have to refute the data I provided - because it absolutely contradicts what you are trying to use as your rebuttal.

simple question from the usage rates i provided, which is used more frequently at a younger age? Alcohol which is legal and controlled, or marijuana which is illegal and uncontrolled?

edit since I see you edited this in:
We 'delayed the age of first use' with cigarettes, I see 16 year old kids running around smoking cigarettes because it is simple to get.
Click to expand...

Some will still use, no doubt about it, the whole point is to minimize this not eradicate it, it is impossible to do that. But lets look at cigarettes.. there are no advertisements for them anymore, they have been deglamourized, and people have been educated on their potential harms. Guess what has happened? usage rates have been steadily declining for some time now. the facts again support what I am arguing here.
 
Last edited:
I think it should be illegal to sell Pot. However, I don't think the government should prohibit it to be grown on private property.
 
marduc said:
The usage rates I provided render your rebuttal to a whole lot of empty bluster. If you want to even have a chance of doing anything aside from attempting a very weak attempt at ridicule (and if you want your attempt at ridicule to have a remote chance of success) you have to refute the data I provided.

simple question from the usage rates i provided, which is used more frequently at a younger age? Alcohol which is legal and controlled, or marijuana which is illegal and uncontrolled?

edit since I see you edited this in:


Some will still use, no doubt about it, the whole point is to minimize this not eradicate it it is impossible to do that. But lets look at cigarettes.. there are no advertisements for them anymore, they have been deglamourized, and people have been educated on their potential harms. Guess what has happened? usage rates have been steadily declining for some time now. the facts again support what I am arguing here.
Click to expand...
the answer to your question is marijuana. You are failing to answer my question. how is your "delaying the age of first use" going to decrease this percentage? I would like a VALID response.
 
99% of all heroin users drank milk as a child, therefore milk is a gateway drug. If pot is illegal . . . shouldn't milk be illegal as well?
 
X Factor said:
You mean like how alcohol use was virtually eliminated after it became legal? Oh wait...
Click to expand...

Well, the rate of marijuana use in the Netherlands (which has the most lax marijuana laws) is lower than in the United States.

You would expect a higher rate of us in a country where marijuana is practically legal.
 
marduc said:
The usage rates I provided render your rebuttal to a whole lot of empty bluster. If you want to even have a chance of doing anything aside from attempting a very weak attempt at ridicule (and if you want your attempt at ridicule to have a remote chance of success) you have to refute the data I provided - because it absolutely contradicts what you are trying to use as your rebuttal.

simple question from the usage rates i provided, which is used more frequently at a younger age? Alcohol which is legal and controlled, or marijuana which is illegal and uncontrolled?

edit since I see you edited this in:


Some will still use, no doubt about it, the whole point is to minimize this not eradicate it, it is impossible to do that. But lets look at cigarettes.. there are no advertisements for them anymore, they have been deglamourized, and people have been educated on their potential harms. Guess what has happened? usage rates have been steadily declining for some time now. the facts again support what I am arguing here.
Click to expand...

Well we can go back and forth all day. We both have different views that we cant change on each other. However, there is one thing I agree 100% with you on, that is the education of marijuana. I believe a lot of people don't realize the health effects that it has. So we do need to invest in more education on this issue.
 
DiavoTheMiavo said:
99% of all heroin users drank milk as a child, therefore milk is a gateway drug. If pot is illegal . . . shouldn't milk be illegal as well?
Click to expand...

That a very invalid point. almost every human being drinks milk unless they are lactose intolerant.

That is like me saying 100% of people who smoke weed breath air. air is a gateway drug, shouldn't it be illegal?

It's invalid.
 
mhurford said:
the answer to your question is marijuana. You are failing to answer my question. how is your "delaying the age of first use" going to decrease this percentage? I would like a VALID response.
Click to expand...

Because there are studies and ample evidence that shows that the later in life one tries a drug for the first time, the less likelihood that their usage will become habitual or problematic, and also there is a significantly lower chance of them going on to use harder and more dangerous substances. Delaying the age of first use also lessens the likelihood that they will try the drug in the first place. This is especially true in their formative years,m when we have 8th and 10th graders using marijuana, these kids have the odds stacked against them right out of the gate. If we can get at least some of them if not the majority to wait just a few more years then they will be more mature, and more able to make a rational informed decision.

edit: and yes the answer to my question IS marijuana. more kids use marijuana at an earlier age than they do alcohol. So if we want to minimize and delay usage, which strategy is clearly the least effective here?
 
Last edited:
marduc said:
Because there are studies and ample evidence that shows that the later in life one tries a drug for the first time, the less likelihood that their usage will become habitual or problematic, and also there is a significantly lower chance of them going on to use harder and more dangerous substances. Delaying the age of first use also lessens the likelihood that they will try the drug in the first place. This is especially true in their formative years,m when we have 8th and 10th graders using marijuana, these kids have the odds stacked against them right out of the gate. If we can get at least some of them if not the majority to wait just a few more years then they will be more mature, and more able to make a rational informed decision.

edit: and yes the answer to my question IS marijuana. more kids use marijuana at an earlier age than they do alcohol. So if we want to minimize and delay usage, which strategy is clearly the least effective here?
Click to expand...

I'm following and it is a valid plan but how would you carry out this plan? maybe making the age to buy Marijuana 30 years of age or older? this ould prevent younger people selling to minors I suppose.
 
mhurford said:
Your wrong on that statement.
The Netherlands Compared With The United States | Drug War Facts

That data tells you that the use marijuana in the Netherlands is way higher then the use in America
Click to expand...

from YOUR link:

(1997-1999) "The figures for cannabis use among the general population reveal the same pictures. The Netherlands does not differ greatly from other European countries. In contrast, a comparison with the US shows a striking difference in this area: 32.9% of Americans aged 12 and above have experience with cannabis and 5.1% have used in the past month. These figures are twice as high as those in the Netherlands."
Click to expand...
 
zstep18 said:
Well, the rate of marijuana use in the Netherlands (which has the most lax marijuana laws) is lower than in the United States.

You would expect a higher rate of us in a country where marijuana is practically legal.
Click to expand...

So, you're saying, having m/j available at every 7-11 across the country, means less people trying/using it? Lol. One thing that has always puzzled me about the pro legalization crowd. On one hand we're told that m/j is not a bad thing at all, in fact, it might be a good thing, relieves stress, whatever. So why try to take both roads? Why promote it, but yet try to argue that usage rates will go down? Why do pro legalization people care about usage rates at all?
 
mhurford said:
I'm following and it is a valid plan but how would you carry out this plan? maybe making the age to buy Marijuana 30 years of age or older? this ould prevent younger people selling to minors I suppose.
Click to expand...

Give up your insistence on using the word "prevention" this is an impossible fools errand. It is about doing what we can to minimize usage among juveniles. I see no reason the age should differ from that of alcohol. I also think the penalties for distributing both alcohol and other substances to minors should be made tougher.
 
X Factor said:
So, you're saying, having m/j available at every 7-11 across the country, means less people trying/using it? Lol. One thing that has always puzzled me about the pro legalization crowd. On one hand we're told that m/j is not a bad thing at all, in fact, it might be a good thing, relieves stress, whatever. So why try to take both roads? Why promote it, but yet try to argue that usage rates will go down? Why do pro legalization people care about usage rates at all?
Click to expand...

post #142 then look at the post I linked to there. I will not argue that they will go down, but I will argue that the evidence to date does not support usage rates significantly rising as a result.

And why do pro legalization people care about usage rates? because we do not all have the same reasons for wanting legalization, some are actually concerned with alleviating usage rate (ESPECIALLY among children) and think that legalization can be a much better strategy than prohibition.

I could care less about being personally able to use drugs, I have not used them for many many years, and am quite proud of that. What I do care about is harm reduction, and prohibition causes more problems than it solves
 
X Factor said:
So, you're saying, having m/j available at every 7-11 across the country, means less people trying/using it? Lol. One thing that has always puzzled me about the pro legalization crowd. On one hand we're told that m/j is not a bad thing at all, in fact, it might be a good thing, relieves stress, whatever. So why try to take both roads? Why promote it, but yet try to argue that usage rates will go down? Why do pro legalization people care about usage rates at all?
Click to expand...

I'm not promoting it, nor do I think we should promote it. I'm just criticizing this idea that if marijuana were to be legal the entire United States would be high all the time.
 
marduc said:
So if we want to minimize and delay usage, which strategy is clearly the least effective here?
Click to expand...

This has been my question for the past 4-5 replies. what is YOUR PLAN to CARRY OUT "minimizing and delaying usage". this has been what I am looking for from our earlier argument, If you can find a sensible answer then I will agree with you.

(ie. do you want to make people have to get a license to buy it? to get this license they would have to take a class on understanding marijuana? I just want to know your process of carrying out this plan)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom