No.
If anything, it’ll make it even more available for underage users, and seriously, do you think anyone will actually follow the 1 oz. limit?
Then people will bitch and moan about how the government is limiting they’re freedom because they can only carry 1 oz. of weed, and underage people will bitch and moan and then keep buying it illegally from they’re friends/siblings/random crackheads on the street.
Strawman arguments.
This is a silly claim on your part, at best. Generalizations never do anyone good. You are completely misunderstanding the claim marijuana proponents are trying to make.
The use of a controlled substance, regardless of legality or otherwise, is the private business of the party using it. The interference of law enforcement invades said privacy in order to determine the legality of the substance in question. There have been countless recorded cases in California where medical marijuana users have been arrested by law enforcement without probable cause, and thus, the privacy of those individuals, who were in complete obedience of the law, was violated. Your argument is based on the fallacy that no one has personal privacy in regards to the law, which is completely false.
You’re twisting the words of the statement (some of which you can’t even make out) to suit your own claims. In other words, you’re wrong.
Access to military grade weaponry and a deadly chemical are extremely different from the choice whether or not to purchase marijuana. Besides, they’re charging people for the marijuana, it’s not free. The choice whether or not to smoke is the issue being dealt with in this statement, not in regards to whether or not they have access to it. And comparing weed to military weaponry and sulfuric acid? Come on. You’ve got to be kidding.
Perhaps you missed the link I posted. A simple $50 levy could generate tax revenues of up to $1.4 billion dollars. And that’s from weed, and nothing but weed. That is not a small sum, even by government standards. And again, you’re comparing weed to military grade firearms. How are they anything alike?
So far, it sounds like you only know what proponents against marijuana have told you, most of which is false or based on studies run in the 60’s. As for your three reasons why people think marijuana should be legalized, I’ll go ahead an analyze those claims.
It helps the economy: Well, it would if they would legalize it. See my previous link.
It’s not dangerous, which is completely false: Again, it’s no more dangerous than alcohol, which, may I remind you, is completely legal in the U.S. Marijuana law would mimic existing alcohol law. Weed is safer than tobacco, and will NOT give you cancer. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong.
How many people do you honestly believe think like this? This is not the sixties, where hippies reigned supreme. Studies have been performed on weed in the last 50 years, and, turns out, it actually has many medicinal benefits, as well as improving mood, reducing stress, and relaxing tense muscles.
As for the respect bit at the end there, I recently endeavored in the unknown (at the time), and smoked weed. I told my friends if they asked, and I even told my parents. No one lost any respect for me whatsoever.
In other words, you’re ignorant. Educate yourself on this matter from unbiased sources before making outrageous claims.
No, whatever the word is, it probably wouldn’t change the context of the phrase. Unless it was something like “Freedom to make no mistakes”, which wouldn’t make sense. And there’s nothing else freedom to make mistakes could mean. You can’t twist that to suit a claim. There’s no subjectivity there that would make any sense.
Jesus Christ, I hate that argument so much. It’s like saying hitting yourself in the head with a log doesn’t hurt because it’s not as painful as breaking your leg. I specifically said- well, right here:
I’ve seen that most everyone who argues this subject outside of this site thinks like that.
You’re missing the point. Regardless of what the word is, you’re not even analyzing what they may be trying to say there. You’re choosing to ignore the message they’re conveying, thereby disbarring your opinion.
You’re misinterpreting the argument I’m making here. You’re saying that it’s good that weed is illegal, and that it should stay that way, due to the fact that it’s a dangerous substance. The issue is that alcohol is legal, despite the fact that marijuana is similar in many ways to alcohol as a controlled substance.
Then the people you discuss this issue with are ignorant of what Proposition 19 is really attempting to do. More than anything else, Prop 19 is California’s way of helping itself. There a lot of pro-marijuana people in California, who would love to see its legalization. The California government isn’t just going to legalize marijuana for the hell of it, though. By attaching a tax levy, the state of California can make money off of the government regulated sale of marijuana.
California is doing with marijuana what the rest of the country has done with alcohol for several decades now. More than anything else, it’s a tax break. A way to generate revenue to decrease the ever-increasing debt across the country. California is doing it in a way that helps itself while supporting the majority of people in the state.
They’re trying to say that government regulation of marijuana limits the people’s freedom.
One of their examples is the freedom to make (something) mistakes. In context, I assume that means they’re saying using marijuana is a mistake. Otherwise, that wouldn’t be there.
If you have an example of anything else this could mean, I’d really like to hear it.
You’re skipping a few steps when you jump to the conclusion that using marijuana is considered a mistake. I never said it meant anything else. I’m saying you’re choosing to ignore what they may be saying about the freedom to make mistakes, and jumping straight to “Using marijuana is a mistake.” You’ll notice the video never says that. Marijuana is never even individually mentioned in the video, anyway.
In short, you’re jumping to conclusions, and twisting what the video is saying to suit your means. The video includes that freedom to state the simple fact that making a mistake is something that everyone is entitled to. It never once directly connects mistakes and marijuana together. This is a jump made by you, to try and suit your opinion. An opinion without any substance, I might add.
I’d love to hear what you have to say about the multitude of other points I brought up as well.
I could say the same thing about your post. That was just one example.
And it never directly says “marijuana is a mistake”, just as it never directly says “government limitations destroy your freedoms”.
About your other points, let’s see-
Yeah, small mistake there. Most people say marijuana isn’t bad at all because it’s not as bad as alcohol/tobacco, though. And those people are just ignorant or stupid. And why would we want to make more dangerous substances legal just because others are? It’s like lemmings, or at least the popular image of them. Not considering the economy for a second, the world would be better if alcohol and tobacco had always been illegal.
Yep. Most of their arguments consist of “Everyone should be able to have anything they want because if they don’t they’re being oppressed”.
I believe that it would have very limited impact on the economy. The black market for it is already there, and it’ll stay there, to avoid government taxes, limits, and whatnot.
This. It’s just one new product that’s (estimation, I didn’t check any facts) maybe half as popular as cigarettes. And regulation won’t make all the problems that come with drug trade magically disappear.
Well that’s because the drug trade involves more than just marijuana. But if the stuff were legal where do you think that the average user is going to go to get some? A dangerous black market or a pharmacy where they’re getting a safely regulated dosage, something like this will take revenue out of organized crime and put it into a government in desperate need of money.
The most dangerous part of marijuana is the risk of getting ‘tainted’ stuff, which won’t be an issue if it was legalized and regulated. And I don’t know where you’re getting this “.01%” bullshit; I don’t have the exact stats handy but it would be quite a boost.
But the real problem is that marijuana never should have been illegalized to begin with. It was just some crazy propaganda campaign to keep black people and jazz musicians down. And now the “weed is bad” mentality is so ingrained in our heads that people won’t even listen to the arguments, they just figure it’s illegal for a reason.
Yeah. But it’s safer than what’s already legal, it can’t kill its users, it would help our economy, it has massive medicinal qualities, but OH GOD IT’S BEEN ILLEGAL SO IT HAS TO STAY THAT WAY OUR WORLD IS FULL OF IDIOTS IF THEY’D CONSIDER THIS AAAH THE SKY IS FALLING
Fucking morons.
Most importantly is the drug class rescheduling that would presumably come with this. My mom just went through chemo. The stuff helped the hell out of her and I don’t know if she could have gone through with the accompanying sickness otherwise. But as the law stands, we’re the only country left where not only can we not use it, we can’t even do research on it medically. “California leads the way,” and if this passes we have a chance to help a LOT of people.
Beyond that, growers are currently doing what they can to minimize CBD and increase THC in their crop. The opposite could easily be done, resulting in weed with medicinal qualities but without the memory loss and “high” effects.
Of course, we can only do that if they drop the schedule, which will only happen if this passes.
So even if you don’t want people to get high, for the sake of those with cancer, multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer’s, stop bashing this bill.
I think we should treat it like a prescription drug rather than a common substance. Then we don’t have as many stoners buying it for their stoner kids, but we can still have its medical advantages.
But we can’t do that until they declassify it to Sch-II or III, which this bill does.
And again, how is this different from alcoholics buying booze for alcoholic kids?
Do you have a problem with others using alcohol or cigs in general? If not, shut the hell up. If so, well, fair enough I guess. Though it’s really none of your business.
It doesn’t affect you one iota if some other kid smokes a joint once in a while as long as they do it privately and not on the job or something.
Fuck the economy, thousands of people in Mexico are dying because of the drug war. That should be enough to make you vote for it, even if you’re afraid of the OH MY GOD SO POTENT 50% heart rate increase.
Talking about violating people’s rights because it won’t help the economy “that much” is the most misguided approach to legislation in history. Start talking about the shit that matters. Why should the government have a say in what you ingest? What does it mean for people’s well-being? Not USING marijuana, but having it legalized. I think it’s fairly natural that what using marijuana does to you should have no impact on the legalization of the drug, except as far as it extends to the people around you, particularly as it’s well established that there is no physical addiction from marijuana, unlike alcohol (withdrawal symptoms of which can actually physically kill you) or nicotine (which “can be harder to quit than heroin or cocaine”, according to Canada). Get some secondhand smoke (the only legit point you have, really) research, under the influence driving (I’ve driven with people smashed out of their minds and high alike, and I assure you being high does NOTHING to someone’s driving) research, etc., and use that to back up your point. “Some people get chest pains”? Give me a fucking break. Let’s take Tylenol off the shelves too while we’re at it - that shit KILLS PEOPLE MAN!
Ask any cop, they’d rather deal with a high person than a drunk person.
There’s a reason for that.
Fun weed fact #3:
Did you know that early American documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were written on hemp paper?
Phlakes, as someone who really doesn’t care either way on this issue: you really look like you’re stubbornly pushing out silly arguments that don’t even make sense because you don’t want to look at it logically.
My biggest problem with it: I hate the fucking smell, and as someone who goes to school in Canada, I really wish people wouldn’t friggin’ smoke it in the middle of the school bus stop. The big-ass ash bin is around the corner for a reason.
But that’s not quite enough for me to think it should stay illegal.
Weed fun fact 4:
In Canada medicinal marijuana is legal in all 10 provinces and the 3 territories under federal law, hell in places like Alberta it is even covered by Blue Cross. Whereas in places like California the weed farms they use to grow medicinal marijuana are technically illegal under federal law and are therefore hidden from the feds.
That’s actually been a rather significant problem in our area even as far as just regular cigarettes go. We had a push for a brief time for a smoke-free campus, then we realized–hey, if we ban it, people will do it anyway, so let’s regulate it instead. So we made little designated smoking zones, so that you don’t have to smell it or breathe it in (lol, secondhand) unless you choose to.
Problem was, we were looked at as promoting and supporting smoking, so it got shot down immediately.
Note that almost no one on the deciding committee actually smoked, by the way.
As it stands, we still have smokers roaming the halls instead of being stuck in a few designated areas, so… yeah.
Clearly, outright bans work, right folks?
Yes, they work very well. That’s why so many people support them for guns! 
That said, there will actually be limited boost to the economy. The money already circulates for the weed, it would simply be in the open now. Add taxes for obvious reasons, and bam, perfect reason for the underground to continue to exist.
It’s a no-win situation. Legalize everything. 