Putting people in cages is evil, don’t you think? And enriching the cartels and prison industry is stupid, eh?

http://tinyurl.com/Henningfield-Benowitz
http://www.google.com/search?&q=tashkin

There is no rational justification for cannabis prohibition, unlike traffic laws and building codes.

The law itself is the creator of the victims in the case of cannabis prohibition, and was intended to keep the [n-word]s down. Look it up.

The prohibition of cannabis is to be repudiated.

0. Drug use is unprohibitable, Its been tried multiple times and PROVEN a failure. Peole can get high on the oxygen in the air, the adrenaline in their own bodies, or on any multitude of substances that cannot all be contained and controlled. People can also become ADDICTED to almost *ANY* substance or activity. This biggest problem we have in this country is a JUNK FOOD ADDICTION, (BTW i’m fine with obese people’s addiction to food – it soothes the pain the same as alcohol or other drugs to for others.) Also, people use drugs not the other way around, drugs are inanimate objects that rest in the last location they were left, they don’t hold a gun to people’s heads, they don’t MAKE people do bad things, they don’t MAKE pople do ANYTHING. A Person picks them up and uses *them*. The best approach to the issue, therefore is EDUCATION and REGULATED USE.

1. Drug use of any kind is an adult behavior, minors who NEED certain drugs should do so after prescription of physician and under direct adult supervision. (and you’d have a hard time convincing me a minor NEEDS marijuana, unless they’re very ill i.e. cancer etc.)

2. Some “Adults” will prove they are also incabable of handling their decisions about their own drug use, and as this presents a small risk to society, a system should be devised to combat it. We are already doing a piss poor job of this, and thus the drug fears that pervade society. Here’s my opinion: I personally know 4 people with MULTIPLE DUIs. These people get their priviledge to DRIVE revoked for a period of time, but never their priviledge to BUY alcohol. The truth is they are totally trustworthy to drive, they aren’t trustworthy to CONSUME ALCOHOL. This presents a better solution. Tighter REGULATIONS, as opposed to tighter PROHIBITIONS. You should be carded for alcohol if you are 70, just to check if you are still allowed the priviledge, if you get a DUI you should get a MINOR’s Driver’s license again, and never be allowed to purchase alcohol (or any other drug) again – period – ever in your life, if you need prescriptions they would be given to you by a RN (Nurse) ONE AT A TIME, at a facility. The other side of the solution that should be run in tandem is drug education. Our current drug education is to actual drug use as Abstinence education is to actual sexual activity. The “just say NO” approach is a good 1st sentence on the 1st day of the class, but should not be the message as a whole, “just say no and here’s why” works better and also you’d have to have a section of “when to say YES” and show the positive effects drugs can have on people’s lives when used intelligently and maturely, i.e. Pharmaceuticals, the end of alcohol prohibition etc. Perhaps if someone who actually ever USED marijuana had taught you about it, you’d understand where all these people who HAVE used it and realized DARE *lied* to them about it are coming from. Our current drug education system is to actual drug use as abstinence education is to actual sexual activity. There’s simply more to know than “just say no” The education should be a consistent: Use the availalbe drugs RESPONSIBLY. You see it already with the alcohol commercials, relax responsibly. You relax with your alcohol, I’ll relax with my THC.

Nowhere in my post did I provide one iota of information for you to infer in any way shape or form, that anybody (myself or anyone else) “sent a message” that it was “okay to do what you want,” and then “we’ll get angry at the consequences later.”

Yes he knew beforehand what the rules were. He stupidly thought he could outsmart the system, as I specifically described. He was a part-time recreational user (against my wishes and NOT with my permission or blessing) and finally gave it up for good – in anticipation of shipping out.

Kind of the mentality some young men have before their wedding I suppose – a lifestyle of carefree bachelorhood – and then a couple of final last nights out with the boys at the girly bars leading up to the big day…and then its domestication time and no regrets and no looking back. That was, I think, what was going through his head with respect to the weekend “partying,” with his buds, as the date to get shipped out approached.

But he was dumb, immature, miscalculating, thoughtless, and…didn’t give it up soon enough.

But nobody was “angry” at the consequences.

I DO happen to think that a LIFETIME ban from ever re-enlisting — even if he stays clean for ten years, gets a college degree and has all sorts of employer references (which we are now 1.5 years and counting, into achieving) is a bit over the top, in terms of being harsh. Just as I think it is overly harsh for a young person with a criminal conviction on their record – and who “did their time for doing the crime” to be considered unemployable.

And Joshua, with all due respect, my son (and I) still hold the U.S. military and those who serve in it, in the highest regard. If he could, and if they would let him, he would go back in tomorrow. And I would not consider him to be anybody’s “hit man.”

What if that illegal activity is, for example, worshipping at the church of your choice? You don’t have a lot of sympathy because you don’t like pot, not because you revere the state. At least, I hope so.

As for not making the military, hooray! Your son won’t be the state’s hitman.

My typo wasn’t meant to be a poke at the type of people who might use that faulty logic. It was merely a typo. No offense was intended.

2 points to ponder:
1) Cops currently enforce dangerous driving. There’s no scarlet letter on your car that tells them that the driver has been drinking. So really, what changes? Don’t tell me your argument is “well you’ll never catch them because you can tell from their driving if they have been smoking”. Do you realize how your danger/fear argument goes right out the window? Otherwise, your question is really about “how do I add punishments on top of the underlying offense of reckless/dangerous driving?” Which leads to point…

2) Just like with breathalizers, the existence of something in the law will create a market to make the lives of law enforcement and adjudication easier. Once cannabis is no longer a Schedule I drug, scientists will have the ability to research the substance which will certainly lead to ways to test for proximate use. Problems are the genesis of solutions, people.

All I want is consistancy when making laws. As a building contractor I am micro-managed with laws all to serve a higher purpose evidently, to protect workers and consumers both whom are consenting parties to contracts. If your arguments go beyond “pot” i’m open to discussion, but “free the pot” doesn’t cut it for me. The discussion has to be bigger than pot, bigger than drugs.

Also, when a person knowingly engages in illeagal activity and then is upset about the consequences later…I don’t have a lot of sympathy. I understand the disappointment felt as I was disqualified from military service because of a perforated ear drum. But I thought it was common knowledge that the military does not tolerate drug use…if military service was an ambition why jepordize your opportunities for a short term high? What message do you want to send young people(or any people)…go ahead and do what you want and we’ll get angry at the consequences if you get caught.

“The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free.”

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n945/a08.html

In fact, University of Toronto adjunct professor Alison Smiley studied this issue extensively. She drew her results from a “metanalysis” of existing research into the effects of marijuana on driving ability, combined with traffic accident statistics in the United States and Australia, finding that “(w)hile smoking marijuana does impair driving ability, it does not share alcohol’s effect on judgment. Drivers on marijuana remain aware of their impairment, prompting them to slow down and drive more cautiously to compensate . . .”

from: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/03/990325110700.htm

More on this issue, here, with extensive footnotes:
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7459

and see “researchers found that the mellowing effects of cannabis made drivers more cautious and so less likely to drive dangerously.”, here:
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n1161/a02.html

Also “The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free.”

from: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n945/a08.html

I share your concern about actions under the influence. Those are the only “drug crimes” that make sense to me- those committed under the influence of a drug or narcotic, not possession, or distribution (or those silly “possession with intent” charges). The bottom line is that people need to be responsible for their own actions. If a person chooses to drive and smoke, he puts others at risk and needs to accept the consequences for his actions. Smoking, whether for medicinal or for recreational use, should not be a crime.