HuffPo blog: Time to End Marijuana Prohibition
But just because an activity is foolish, that doesn't mean we should pass laws against it and spend billions of dollars locking up the offenders. That's especially true if prohibition creates a huge, violent black market for the thing being outlawed and generates costs out of proportion to any social good the ban produces. Such is the case with marijuana criminalization, and it's time to put an end to it.
A current ballot initiative would decriminalize marijuana in Michigan for adults at least 21 years old. While the proposal would have zero impact on the federal laws against Mary Jane, putting it on the ballot and passing it would be worth doing. The simple reason: Decades of using the law to fight marijuana use have been a colossal failure.
Legal or not, people will use marijuana. That's a fact. The real issue is not how we eliminate the pot business; we can't. All we can realistically do is decide who to put in charge of it. It makes no sense to keep the pot trade in the hands of violent, unscrupulous criminal gangs when it could run by law-abiding citizens, taxed and regulated.
More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-melton/marijuana-prohibition_b_1449417.html?ref=detroit
= new reply since forum marked as read
I think it is alright to say what my experience has been.That's especially true when I come out and say that. It's doubly true when I never said that every use of pot in every instance ruins a person's life. I know, however, what I have seen. That's why I never made any "blanket statements," but used qualified statements ("can be" instead of "always is."
And, sorry, but the medical evidence backs me up on this. Smoking pot is not thought of by medical people as a healthy habit (and here, I am comparing it with not using pot. I am not comparing it to binge drinking, as some of the comments on this thread weirdly seem to assume). All things being equal, for most people, I think it's better to not smoke pot -- assuming the void is not filled with some even more dangerous alternative, such as alcohol (used in excess) or prescription pills. And that's not just my opinion. You will find loads of doctors on my side.
You can point to Steven Jobs and assert that his pot smoking led to his success. But there is no evidence for that. It's more likely that he succeeded for other reasons and keeping his pot smoking moderate meant that the habit did not hold him back. Good for him. But for every Steve Jobs or Miles Davis, there are others who don't handle it quite so well. I have met a lot of those people.
Look, there are very successful people who smoke cigarettes as well. But that does not mean tobacco is healthy or that it is somehow the cause of the success of those people. It just shows that some people are able to smoke and not let it interfere with the rest of their lives. Others, however, get heart disease and/or lung cancer.
Now, in a world in which alcohol and tobacco ARE legal, it makes no sense that marijuana, which is far less dangerous than those substances, is banned. It sure as heck makes no sense to me to facilitate the existence of a huge, unregulated black market. And, I have known people in pain who have gotten relief from medical use of pot. So, I am all for legalizing weed.
Just don't try to tell me it's healthy or that people should be encouraged to use it. And don't tell me that it is out of bounds to make decisions about what to do with my body based on direct experience with the world.
But, apparently, none of this is acceptable to the pro-weed culture. The only acceptable position, apparently, is to assert that marijuana is the equivalent of a unicorn that poops rainbows.
... is tiresome. I never defended alcohol abuse in my column. I never said pot was more harmful than drinking gallons of beer or vodka. I dd not make any kind of comparison to alcohol. But that is where this argument always goes.
What bugs me is that even though I say pot SHOULD BE LEGAL, I get attacked for saying I don't think it's healthy. The dangers of weed are not so great that prohibition makes sense -- and I state that categorically. But, there are real risks associated with using it that should not be ignored. There is a lot of research to back me up on this.
I also have known several people who were so consumed by the habit that it caused them a lot of problems. One good example: A guy who nearly lost his family because he "needed" to sit in the garage in smoke weed every night -- for hours -- more than he needed to talk to his wife and kids. He wanted to give it up, but for years, he couldn't. Only an ultimatum from his wife ("get help or I walk out and take the kids" woke him up enough to get into treatment.
Am I supposed to ignore all that?
This thread could have become a frank discussion of the risks of marijuana abuse and the potential benefits some people get from using it moderately or medicinally. But nope, that's not where this went. People reached for a knee-jerk redirection toward a discussion of alcohol abuse (which I NEVER defended) and a lot of personal attacks.
If this is how they treat me, how do these people talk to folks who actually disagree with them on legalization?
don't beat their wives, get in fights, die from drinking-related liver failure & "wet brain", and pot heads don't die from DT's.
This prohibition is idiotic BECAUSE marijuana has scientifically PROVEN medical benefits, and marijuana causes NO physical addiction. Ok, some people may develop "amotivational syndrome", but pot is STILL relatively benign.
On another note, I am changing jobs and will be required to undergo a pre-employment drug test. While I am not an active marijuana user, I resent it. I'm sure there are LOTS of people taking new jobs who are big DRUNKS who will probably miss plenty of work related to uncontrolled drinking, and they won't be turned away, whereas a light pot smoker would.
CRAZY!
One more thing--the Obama Administration needs to let the fuck up on marijuana dispensaries in California
A few weeks ago, there was a mass shooting at an Oakland University. The SAME day, what was the DOJ doing? Arresting some poor man in his WHEELCHAIR simply because his organization provided classes on cultivating and growing WEED.
And Obama said he would "respect state law."
He hasn't.
I AM flaming Obama on this, but OF COURSE I'll vote for him. I would NEVER vote for a Repuke!
I'm yapping without looking at the details!
Nevertheless, doesn't the DOJ have better things to do with its time, money & resources?
You mean like the propaganda you linked to from the NIDA? Well, that's a nice unbiased source..
Why don't you do yourself and us a favor and stick to topics you actually know something about?
I mean, what are you doing...looking for a job as Obama's next drug czar?
So I have no problem with that-- one can think/feel whatever one wants about marijuana, but legalization is really the only logical conclusion one can make. The drug war does NOT work, especially regarding pot, and people who smoke it should be able to do so at their own risk (NOT that I personally find it risky)
I guess we thank you for your support? 
BTW "based on what I have seen, and since I am a marijuana smoker and you are not, I would have to say you don't know too much about smoking pot. And should probably keep the "Reefer Madness" type comments to yourself. I'll give you one quick lesson. There are many strains of weed. Each having a different effect on the user. So your generalizations are amusing at best. Also study after study has shown that marijuana actually stimulates the creative areas of the brain. Nice try though.
