And those are VERY gray lines you're taking a hard line stance around. Where does one draw the line between "moderate" drinking and getting drunk? It will vary based on how much you've eaten, whether you're hydrated, etc. And I find it really odd that you can respect people who get a little bit high, but have no respect for people who get just a bit more high. They're all getting high - it's why they drink.
And the problem with legalized alcohol is the same as any other drug. There is a fairly significant share of the population who will predictably abuse alcohol - they're the 88,000 who die annually from alcohol use.
From where I sit, people should do what works for them. For both of us, abstaining works - for others, getting high on occasion works. That's fine with me - more power to them, it's their life.
-I don't trust a man who talks about ethics when he's picking my pocket.- Time Enough For Love - Robert A Heinlein
My avatar created by Feliza Estrada firstname.lastname@example.org
And my argument to legalize pot isn't that alcohol is also harmful. That was just to push back on those who are vehemently against "drugs" except alcohol. That position isn't against drugs, just opposition to some drugs used by some people who are not my friends, family and colleagues.
But the arguments for legal pot stand on their own merits. The War on Drugs has failed, pot is widely used, available to any HS kid in the country with a phone call, cheap, more potent than ever, and the money we spend fighting this war is nearly entirely wasted, destroys many lives, for no good purpose. If someone can point out a benefit of this War on Drugs, or the War on Pot, feel free....
Drug laws should be left up to the states. Abolish the DEA, now.
I don't think we should give up on the war on drugs just because we've hit some bumps in the road. Anyone who compares it to the prohibition era is overstating the problem. Drug use in this country is not nearly as rampant or widespread as alcohol use was during that time, and that's because we send a clear message about its effects on health.
At the end of the day, to me, it's about kids. If the only people smoking weed were old hippies from the Tommy Chong era, I wouldn't have any problem with that. To those people, I say toke up man, you earned it. But I'm not for anything that encourages, or imparts an air of permissiveness toward weed smoking among people under the age of 30.
At that age, the brain is still developing, and drug use can be extremely harmful.
I think I could get behind legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes, although I'm on the fence there. For recreational purposes to anyone over 18.... hell no.
it was still there choice to use it, stay on it, abuse it and not stop it. That has nothing to do with weed. studies have shown video games, internet and many technologies have done the same.
2.) again thats a problem with the people, not the drug
as few as i know that fit your descriptions i know probably 10x more that dont . . . so what is the reasoning behind that? its the people, not the drug . . .
weed had nothing to do with thier shortcomings