My perception of the present mania for (prescription) drugs is that it is driven by the medical industry.  Many doctors and other medical-industry operatives own stock in pharmaceutical companies, or otherwise benefit from their huge profits.  Since most of these drugs are paid for through insurance or government programs, their prices and profit margins are truly impressive.  But besides the monetary cost, the physical downside of receiving numerous drugs is generally significant, unless experiencing and recounting symptoms happens to be your hobby.  So more than one price is paid.  Anecdotes on request.

Since it is mediated by prescription, this scheme would not be much affected by the legalization of marijuana or any other substance, unless people suddenly stopped believing in the medical industry.  But at present their preference is for authority, and they pay the price.

Drbhelthi makes an interesting point about the prolific addiction to psychotropic drugs in this culture. I wonder how much (if any) the pharmaceutical industry gives each year to the pro-drug war lobby. It seems logical that big pharma would stand to lose billions if high-grade, perfectly legal marijuana were made available to the millions in this country currently spending a fortune on dangerous, barely regulated psychotropics.

Marijuana, like several other drugs, has a positive value in that in gets a lot of people high.  Being high is fun.  Having fun, feeling good, is a positive value.  Indeed, it is one of the most primordial of positive values.

Marijuana has no positive value outside of its honest medical
applicatons.  oddsox

Empirical evidence of 100 yrs ago indicates that its medical
application would replace the synthetic drugs of today. When one
looks at the percentage of patients on prescribed, psychotrophic
drugs, and the percentage on prescribed statin drugs, and the percentage of the duped who take aspirin as a preventative, over 90% of the population is covered.

When percentages are added, more than 100% is covered due to the multiple prescriptions that double and triple cover a significant
percentage. Not to include persons who continue prescriptive
medications long-since expired, plus those who take aspirin - and in too large doses.

I, for one agree, that cannabis has no positive value outside its
medical applications.  Its medical application requires consideration within the context of fear that the super-rich, with their falsified war on terror and comet and ET invasion fairy-tales have whipped on the US for twenty years. Plus the joblessness and destruction of the middle class. Who knows the percentage of US population, in this day and time, that would benefit from medicinal usage of cannabis products ? 

Why do I hold this opinion?  Sixteen years as clinician and administrator in drug rehab programs probably has an influence on my opinion.

@darkcycle:
You write: “Fer crissakes, we’ve been trying to get this stuff legal and regulated for forty years.” 
Well, if you mean yourself personally, then with due respect, I’d say you’ve leaned your ladder against the wrong tree.

Still, your side has made advances. 
Here, DC, a peace offering: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGsTabUeB58
I googled my alleged employer, Kevin Sabet, and found this “debate.”  Your NORML buddy, Allen St. Pierre didn’t even have to get involved for the first half as CNN “moderator” Don Lemon carried the fight for him.  But listen to St. Pierre starting at 4:06. 
At 4:15 “marijuana’s ... been de facto legalized (in CA)under the guise of medical marijuana.”
There you are, sweet victory!

You mention personal reasons for your passionate pro-pot position. 
I have experiences of my own. 
Fortunately, they’re limited to dealing with messes and damaged property left behind by users of pot and other drugs—including “medical MJ patients.” 
I put that in quotes because at least one of these patients was also medicating with Marlboros.

Alas, Anarcissie is correct when she writes we’re not going to agree. 
You believe recreational-use marijuana should be legalized and regulated. 
I believe that’s the first step down a long, dark, dangerous road.
Marijuana has no positive value outside of its honest medical applicatons.

@Gulam and others with open minds:

The Rand Corp papers are just 2 of many sources. 
By the way, I don’t concur with all of their findings, so you might find common ground with the Rand reports.  Take the challenge, take a look if you care to.

Very lenghty papers but here they are.
And now free.  They used to charge to see these.

Altered States August, 2010
http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2010/RAND_OP315.pdf

Reducing Drug Trafficking Revenues and Violence in Mexico, October 2010
http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2010/RAND_OP325.pdf

“Anarcissie is right.” “The thought process itself comes to mirror the language of obfuscation, such that the doublespeaker eventually falls victim to their own games of misdirection. Insanity is the result.”  Project Mayhem

It certainly appears that way. 
“Only after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry died did ATF Agent John Dodson blow the whistle and expose the scandal.”  “Brian was killed by well armed drug runners when Brian had a rubber bullet gun. This was Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s genius move.”                                   
http://www.teapartytribune.com/2011/06/11/obamas-doj-leads-mexican-and-american-citizens-to-slaughter/ 

Is there a worse example than Napolitano´s placing rubber bullets in the weapons of USBorder Patrol while the US DOJ provided guns and real bullets to the Mexican drug-runners?

Such examples are representative of the al Qbush bin Obama entourage.

“If Drug Warriors could reason from evidence, they wouldn’t be Drug Warriors.”  Anarcissie

Redundant clarification of the facts will not stop remunerated shills from propagating their
falsifications. Very stupid people, either.

Anarcissie is right. Oddsox’s bizarre doublespeak is endemic to this culture, particularly among the corporate-political element. Perhaps over time doublespeak becomes so ingrained and natural-seeming to those immersed in it that they lose any facility for rational discourse. The thought process itself comes to mirror the language of obfuscation, such that the doublespeaker eventually falls victim to their own games of misdirection. Insanity is the result.

I don’t think you’re going to get anywhere with Oddsox.  If Drug Warriors could reason from evidence, they wouldn’t be Drug Warriors.

Wow. Really. The Rand Corporation is your source?

@Project Mayhem, Anarcissie and others:
You see a contradiction in my two statements:

“Also common is some variation of ‘It’s Prohibition that causes the killing,’ argument.  Implying or inferring it’ll all stop once pot becomes legal.  No, it won’t.  Legalization will just cause shifts in tactics and venues.”
And
“It’s our lust for illegal drugs, principally marijuana, along with easy access to assault weapons, that fuels the drug war.”

Connecting the Dots:

No contradiction.  First, it’s our (US) demand for illegal drugs that fuels the Drug War, not the laws that make them illegal.  Blaming “Prohibiton” is the excuse employed by drug users and proponents of legalizaton to distance themselves from the carnage they support with their drug dollars. 

It’s plain to see many Americans have a wanton desire for illegal drugs and marijuana is first among them.  A lust, “an uncontrolled or illicit …desire or appetite.”  The demand is real.  No argument, is there? 

(As for the assault rifles, that’s what makes the Drug Wars possible on the scale we see in Mexico.  Take away the assault rifles and there would still be killing, but less of it.)

Even in this tight economy, even with our high unemployment, there are still plenty of dollars in the US for illegal drugs.  Plenty of people willing to pay black market prices.  Even the risk jail time isn’t deterrent enough for those determined to have their drugs (instead, they complain about the makeup of the prison system). 

And, there are people willing to kill for the opportunity to sell those drugs.  Now Mexican Cartel violence has begun to spread to the US.  Not a Comfortable Truth for those who enjoy recreational drugs, but perhaps something to remember next time they fire up the pipe. 

The so-called contradiction is in the first statement, isn’t it?  That even if pot becomes legal the killing will continue.  I’ll admit, it seems counter-intuitive.  (Much like a lower use rate in Portugal following MJ legalization, despite increased availability and lower prices). 
Sadly, though, legalization will not stop drug-related violence.
T repeat, we’ll just see shifts in tactics (methods, scale, timing) and venues (US border towns and rural “growing” areas, I fear).

Most of my research on marijuana has been in conjunction with California’s Prop 215 (the Compassionate Use Act, which passed in 1996) and Prop 19 (which failed in November 2010). 

I’ve read many reports, including two by the Rand Corporation, many articles and testimonials by law enforcement experts and by those promoting legalization.  What scares me most is the unpredictability of consequences following legalization.  It should scare you, too. 

Legalize pot in Mexico and the killing may continue over other drugs, over who gets to distribute the legal marijuana there and who gets to “export” to the US, not much different from now. 

Legalize pot in CA and the state likely becomes a distribution hub for trafficking to other states.  Perhaps LA gangs get more involved.  It’s easy to envision conflicts between them and Mexican drug cartels – they already have grows in CA and in other states.

Legalize pot nationally and perhaps the violence spreads to Canada. 
Even if MJ were legalized world-wide (good luck with that) there would there be some level of violence over it, just as there is now over other possessions. 

The main takeaway here is: legalization of marijuana is not a cure for crime.
It would be a crime in itself.

@ darkcycle: you’re being funny, aren’t you? 
Nobody is paying me here. 
Are you suggesting I turn pro? 
I don’t know these people or organizations to whom you allude. 
If you care to, contact them and if they like what I write, ask them made a donation to their local Red Cross.  Thanks.

—-

@ francis & anarcissie:
Yes, money is one key that induces violence over prohibited behavior. 
But it’s the demand for the prohibited item that pushes the money. 
If there were no demand, the money wouldn’t be there, and neither would the violence.
In the case of illegal drugs, including marijuana, there is fierce demand.  The US War on Drugs has been ineffective largely because it has focused on restricting the supply.

Well, don’t hold your breath.  Drug warriors are not long on evidence and reason.  They are more likely to take Mr. O’s route of laughing off criticism, secure in the support of the sadistic and the superstitious.  It’s ugly stuff.

Oddsox,

Shall we continue to stay tuned whilst you explain the contradiction in your thinking I addressed in an earlier post?

“I am surprised this has to be explained.” Anarcissie, September 20 at 21:01 hrs

The earlier summary by malcolm kyle, September 20 at 12:39, explains it well.  Drug-rehab programs, that are adequately supported, work for people who need them. All of which are reasons for which drug lords in the USGOV insure that similar USGOV programs serve their motives, instead of public needs.  The same motives underlie the implementation by the US Department of (In)Justice of the illegal sale of automatic weapons to their drug operatives in Mexico.  How many such >new< programs have appeared in the USGOV since the presidential election of 2008?

U.S. Marines guarding the poppy fields in Afghanistan ?  Since 1962 in Viet Nam, already, cocaine continuously shipped into the U.S. via USAF cargo aircraft, delivered to the cargo aircraft via USARMY helicopters back then?  1962, a couple years after George H. W. Bush Sr. became secretive C.E.O. of the C.I.A., which he denied until proven by the F.B.I.  One of his former C.I.A. assassins, Doris “Chip” Tatum, reveals some of these facts in:  http://www.whale.to/b/tatum.pdf

Hitler-types in the USGOV scape-goat users of cannabis, distracting from their illegal cocaine and poppy-derivative drug operations.  Which, suppresses the use of this natural herb that harmonizes brain and overall body function, empirically established by physicians one hundred years ago in the U.S.  Such suppression also provides live bodies, funneled into prisons illegally established and operated by the same drug lords, with U.S.Taxpayer dollars, by the often-bribed court system

Which information is known by drug-lord shills, who actively distract from the truth. Redundant clarification of the facts will not stop remunerated shills from propagating their falsifications.

oddsox, September 20 at 7:23 pm:

@Francis
You write: “...please stop blaming “drugs” for the violent nature of the drug trade when it is PAINFULLY, BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that prohibition is the real culprit.”

Well, no it isn’t.  Look around you.
Over time and still today, many things are (or have been) prohibited for the sake of public health and safety.
Gambling, prostitution, driving without a seatbelt, polygamy, public nudity, shoplifting, the list goes on and on.

Yet we don’t have the level of violence seen in the Mexican Drug Wars associated with the Prohibition of any of these activities, do we? ...

I would think it would be obvious to you that the factor which increases violence is the amount of money involved.  Goods around which similar violence has occurred in the last century or two have included slaves, guns, alcohol, silver, gold and diamonds.  Competition for sugar and oil have set off major wars, sugar in the 18th century, oil in the 20th and 21st.  There is nothing intrinsic to these substances which connects them to violence.  Yet violence surrounds them, or once did, because of their high value and the political and social conditions which were or are the context of their production, transport and distribution.  The high value of most recreational drugs, however, is entirely artificial.

I am surprised this has to be explained.

@Francis
You write: “...please stop blaming “drugs” for the violent nature of the drug trade when it is PAINFULLY, BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that prohibition is the real culprit.”

Well, no it isn’t.  Look around you. 
Over time and still today, many things are (or have been) prohibited for the sake of public health and safety. 
Gambling, prostitution, driving without a seatbelt, polygamy, public nudity, shoplifting, the list goes on and on.

Yet we don’t have the level of violence seen in the Mexican Drug Wars associated with the Prohibition of any of these activities, do we?

And we have black markets, too: in DVDs, cigarettes and Rolex watches.  Same thing, no significant violence.

So there has to be something more than mere Prohibition causing the violence we see in Mexico today or under Prohibition during the ‘20s.

And there is.

stay tuned.

@Gulam and Duncan20903

Re: “marijuana…can help to wean
people off of alcohol.”

Very good.  Did not know this, thanks for sharing the links to studies, Duncan.  They go back a long way.

This falls under the heading of Valid Medicinal Applications.  And I’m all for them, so long as they’re administered by professionals with valid medical credentials under proper supervision following FDA and AMA guidelines.

stay tuned..

@Duncan20903
Please forgive the delayed response to your posts.

On Prohibition:
Despite Gulam’s cheerleading, I’m not impressed with your skills at statistics.  I haven’t read the book you cited, How to Lie with Statistics, but evidently you have.

First, I double-checked and, indeed, “the actual consumption of alcohol fell, not just during prohibition, but for many years after - did not reach pre-1914 levels until 1971.” 
http://www.johndclare.net/America5.htm

That’s all I was asserting on that post.
But here’s another source:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=172370
(sidebar: also from the above abstract:  “the incidence of cirrhosis and alcoholic psychosis declined dramatically during Prohibition.”)

Next, you assert, “The only alcohol that was re-legalized in 1933 was beer at 3.2% ethanol by volume.”
That’s irrelevant: I cited absolute alcohol consumption statistics, which takes into account relative alcohol content in beer, wine and the spirits.

More:  You ask, “Why did you fail to notice that per capita consumption was lower between 1871 and 1880 than it was in your cherry picked 1916-1919 time frame?”
Because I was writing about the lasting impact of the Volstead Act.  And based on life expectancy at the turn of the century, most legal drinkers in the 1870s wouldn’t be around during Prohibition.

Also, I “cherry-picked” 1906-1915 as the base years for Pre-Prohibition comparison, if you’ll re-read the post.  No better time to use.  That was a 10-year period with stable levels throughout.  Before our full involvement in WWI.  Also before the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 which may have had an even great effect on alcohol consumption, as it killed up to 10 times the Americans (of all ages) as did the Great War (http://virus.stanford.edu/uda/). 

Still more:  “It is absurd to assert that one can accurately estimate the occurrence of covert activity.”  Ok, so throw out 1920-1933 if you must.  It still took until 1971 for alcohol consumption to return to 1915 levels.  Which, again, was all I was asserting.

..stay tuned

keep it illegal you narrow minded morons, I have been able to get it every single day for the last 40 years, and i will NEVER PAY 1 CENT IN TAXES… IDIOTS…

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

I’m hardly glib about the Drug War.  The Drug War is caused by the irrational intrusion of a prohibitionist government into private behavior.  It is an expression of sadism and superstition—and the unconscionable opportunism of mainstream politicos.  Why you want to perpetuate it is beyond me.

There are very few drugs which, in themselves, cause risky behavior to others.  Alcohol might be the unique exception.  So do you propose raids on frat parties by the Federales, demanding that the boozy participants show their drunk licenses?

You already are restricted in your drug use. Just as you are restricted in your car use, or
your ability to practise surgery or law without a license.

Our society licenses activities that are inherently risky, to individuals that demonstrate
the capability and judgement to do them responsibly.

Drug use should be no different, just as bars are liscensed to serve liquour to those that
can drink responsibly but are required by law to cut them off when they are out of
control, we should license drug use. Just as we allow some psychiatrists to investigate
the use of controlled substance to treat intractable depression.

Don’t be so glib about the murder of men women and children caught in the drug war
crossfire, Americans are responsible for this.

If I am to be licensed or restricted or forbidden to use some drugs, of course it’s about me.

As for the Mexicans, if there were no prohibition they’d have to find something else to smuggle, assuming they were devoted to smuggling.  Assuming they exist.

Due to the tyrannic and mindless actions of prohibitionists, tens of millions of
people world-wide (both users and non-users) have been either killed, maimed,
incarcerated or had their lives very seriously disrupted. Prohibitionists are solely
responsible for an immense increase in violent organized crime, an AIDS
Pandemic, the undermining of international development and security and a
grave abuse of human rights on a scale barely witnessed in human social
history.

Corporate greed and individual bigotry have accelerated us towards a situation
where all the usual peaceful and democratic methods needed to reverse the
acute damage done by prohibition no longer function as envisaged by the
Founding Fathers of our once great and free nation. Such a political impasse
coupled with great economic tribulation is precisely that which throughout
history has invariably ignited violent revolution.

In order to avert what will surely be a far more violent situation than we are all
presently experiencing, there appears to be just one last avenue left to us - Jury
Nullification.

Jury Nullification is a constitutional doctrine that allows juries to acquit
defendants who are technically guilty, but who don’t deserve punishment.  All
non-violent drug offenders who are not selling to children, be they users,
dealers or importers, fall into this category. If you believe that prohibition is a
dangerous and counter-productive policy, then you don’t have to help to apply
it. Under the Constitution, when it comes to acquittals, you, the juror, have the
last word!

The idea that jurors should judge the law, as well as the facts, is a proud and
vital component of American history.

The most shining example of Jury Nullification occurred during the shameful
period in US history when slavery was legal. People who helped slaves escape
were committing a federal crime - violation of the Fugitive Slave Act. Jurors
would often acquit, even when the defendants admitted their guilt. Legal
historians credit these cases with advancing the abolition of slavery.

No amount of money, police powers, weaponry, wishful thinking or pseudo-
science will make our streets safer; only an end to prohibition can do that. How
much longer are you willing to foolishly risk your own survival by continuing to
ignore the obvious, historically confirmed solution? - When called for Jury
Service concerning any non-violent prohibition-related offense, it is your moral
and civic duty to VOTE TO ACQUIT!

“To function as the founders intended, our republic requires that “the tree of
liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and
tyrants. It is its natural manure.”
~ THOMAS JEFFERSON, letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787.

To avoid such carnage and turmoil on a scale not seen in this land since the
1860s, we may have just one last chance.

If you wish to see this insane prohibition replaced by drug policy based on
science, public health and sound principles of human rights that will ensure a
safe future for your children and grandchildren, PLEASE VOTE TO ACQUIT!

It’s not about you…...

It’s about those 50,000 Mexican nationals murdered smuggling those drugs into you…

I’m not interested in having anyone license my drug use.  I don’t really see why it’s the government’s business.

In a real world, not in the imaginary one we live in thanks to laws that are the end result of someones delusion.

Drug use could be a licensed activity. People could be issues licenses to use, by that state, and those licenses could indicate prohibited froms of social activity for the user. Like chemically abusing children.

The money collected from users for their license could fund research into more effective treatments for those outside of the law, and the creation of more benign forms of drugs.

Sanctions could increase for users engaging in barred activities, up to the point of vacination.

In effect, this process has already begun in medical marijuana. It offers an alternative to the drug war, and would be a cost savings to the taxpayer.

Let’s cease and desist from pushing either down the beer-bong-primed throats of America’s youth—we are already winning the race to the bottom—The article is a waste of space.

The glorification of all drugs and all mood-altering substances (alcohol etc.) is rampant in our society.  Our celebrities snicker publicly about cocaine and marijuana and alcohol use. Films and raps and popular songs are filled with either comic references to the substances or the actual need for someone to use them.  Ever see a western in which the hero used whiskey to seal a bargain or to heal a wound or barter with a native american or to promote comeradery?  How effective have legal efforts been to stop Lindsey Lohan or Paris Hilton or Charlie Sheen .... or old-timers like Dean Martin?  Comic routines of Foster Brooks or Crazy Guggenheim are woven into media lore. 

The “war” on drugs or alcohol has never really focused on users or finding less dangerous alternatives other than reducing sales. 

What is needed is something that alleviates the need for mind-numbing itself.

Quite right: Oddsox, like most Drug Warriors, is self-contradictory.  I’ll be interested to see if he can untangle his pretzelized logic.  Meanwhile, the Drug War remains an atrocity, a crime against humanity, responsible for many thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of harmless people in prison.  The question, of course, is not whether this drug or that is good or bad for you, but whether prison and death are an appropriate social response to the use of (some) drugs.

Drbhelthi’s analysis is on the money here. Prisons are one of the last growth industries left in this country, and they’re chock full of non-violent drug offenders.

Oddsox, you seem to contradict yourself when you write:

“Also common is some variation of ‘It’s Prohibition that causes the killing,’ argument.  Implying or inferring it’ll all stop once pot becomes legal.  No, it won’t.  Legalization will just cause shifts in tactics and venues.”

And then follow it up with:

“It’s our lust for illegal drugs, principally marijuana, along with easy access to assault weapons, that fuels the drug war.”

According to your logic, if marijuana and other drugs were legalized wouldn’t the “fuel” for the drug war (i.e. illegal drugs) disappear? Also, what do you mean by a shift in tactics and venues? If narcotics were legalized, drug trafficking would go the way of bootlegging and moonshining, wouldn’t it?

Prsnersdilema, you failed to accurately explain your views until that last post. I agree that there’s merit in what you suggest, but it doesn’t tend to the some of the root socioeconomic reasons for drug use. Still, given that this country seems hellbent on exacerbating those problems, your idea might be the best (or only?) way to go.

The alcohol vs other-drugs issue, underlying motive is revealed by Susan
Lindauer, CIA whistle-blower. Top level, US politician drug lords ordered the C.I.A. to murder two hundred and fifty nine (259) onboard the PAA 747 over Lockerbie, Scotland, (plus eleven deaths on the ground) to insure the assassination of two agents, returning from the Beka Valley. US Marines now protect the poppy fields of Afghanistan, which US politicians defend with contrived lies. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHjSE9JqdaU&feature=related
US troops in Afghani poppy fields, and opium production, are an excellent distraction from the cocaine production and importation by USGOV drug lords.

In my experience, info in the blogs of prisnersdilema relates more to
cocaine addiction, opium addiction and heroin addiction. I have seen many overcome alcohol addiction and cocaine “usage”.  I have never seen genuine addiction to cannabis. USGOV drug lords do not want cannabis products to interfere with their various illness machines. Hitler, Patriot-Act-types need Americans to fill their prisons. Cannabis users very rarely engage in behaviors that support Hitler-type, prison-filler, subversive-to-the-U.S.A. activity. Thus, Hitler-types scapegoat cannabis users and cannabis, in order to fill their questionably legal prisons, while suppressing this natural herb and the wellness it provides. Many university administrators are Federal Funds-addicted rather than truth-addicted, and eagerly punish cannabis users while allowing alcohol free-flow, per directive of Patriot Act-types.

ON THE DRUG WAR:
Not surprised by the insults and name-calling from those who so fiercely defend their cannabis.

And that they would either ignore or try to distance themselves from the carnage in Mexico.

But those who care to can keep up with the latest on the drug wars here:
http://projects.latimes.com/mexico-drug-war/#/its-a-war

Also common is some variation of “It’s Prohibition that causes the killing,” argument.  Implying or inferring it’ll all stop once pot becomes legal. 
No, it won’t.  Legalization will just cause shifts in tactics and venues.

It’s our lust for illegal drugs, principally marijuana, along with easy access to assault weapons, that fuels the drug war.

——-
FOR LEGALIZED MJ?

It’s typical of proponents for legalized recreational use to employ the “better-for-you-than-cigs-and-booze” excuse.  Sirota does this in this article and has before.  It’s rather shopworn by now.  Zzzzzzzz.

Don’t get me wrong, I recognize there is a real value to marijuana as medicine, and I’m all for its compassionate use as such.  That would include cultivation under USDA supervision and distribution with FDA oversight.  But that’s not what’s happening with MMJ, is it?  I’m not a doctor, therefore not qualified to say who’s in need and who isn’t, but it seems there is much room for abuse. 
But don’t take my word for that, look here:

http://www.californiapolicechiefs.org/files/marijuana_files/files/CCOP_Presentation_01.pdf

It’s easy to see that mine are the minority views on this comment page.  And perhaps nationally.  So in the future, we may see the legalization of marijuana far beyond its honest medicinal value.

But if so, there will be consequences. 
Most of them unintended, unforeseen and unfortunate.
Watch and see.

It would be voluntary…all the drugs you want for free,, as long as you use birth control. I
am sure we could even find a way to put birth control in drugs directly. I don’t care if you
get high, veg all you want. Just don’t have kids. And don’t mainline smack while your
pregnant. Because I can pick a Heroin exposed child, out in a crowd based on the
sound of their voice alone. And I’ll turn you in.

...  You just don’t know what your talking about. Save your indignation…Spending time
around chemically abused children is for those with compassion, it’s a calling.

So, that’s your solution? Forcibly sterilize the “problem population” and let them kill themselves off? Don’t condescend to me just because I don’t have the opportunity to spend time around “CPS medical placement units.” I’ve been in education my entire adult life. I’ve worked and conducted research in depressed rural areas and in the inner city for years; I understand how/why drugs have become so problematic for populations that experience multi-generational unemployment and the prolific disintegration of community. Your so-called “solution” fits in perfectly with what the ruling class would love to see—the slow, steady liquidation of the ghetto. Instead of reviving eugenics and dressing it up as “solving the drug problem”, a sane and civilized society would address the real source of the problem—spiritual/emotional/intellectual death in the face of a chronic and overwhelming socioeconomic crisis. It’s unfortunate that “sane” and “civilized” does not describe the US.

I suggest a visit to a CPS medical placement unit, to take a look at the things that used
to be children. Victims of a victimless crime. 

I remember seeing hundreds of tracheotomied babies, some with breathing machines,
homes full of blind deaf and dumb teenagers in diapers rolling on the floors. Thanks to
moms drug use.

Millions who grow up in foster care all across the country, while mom and dad geeze
junk in some shooting gallery.  Or drank themselves to death slowly over decades.

There no such thing as harm reduction for these kids. No addicts rationalization for why
the drug use is ok.  Only some one else who has to take responsibility for the life they
can’t take responsibility for. Some cop, some judge, some one else who has to baby sit
the addict. And worst of all their children.

So go ahead quote some book you read about addiction, numbers can’t be felt.

prsnersdilema,

For a poster who usually offers well-considered opinions, I find your thoughts in this thread disturbing. Vaccinations in tobacco? Against what, exactly? Contraceptive-laced narcotics? If I’m honest this sounds a bit to me like forced sterilization, something last in vogue with the Eugenics movement. I’m not sure why you’ve chosen this hardline, fascist stance for dealing with drug consumption, which has less to do with “narcissism” and more to do with hopelessness, despair, depression, and a desire to escape the vagaries of existence. You seem intent on associating drug use with self-indulgent celebrities and spoiled White college kids, but that’s a false representation. Drug use is disproportionately high in the most impoverished and marginalized communities, and they’re the same demographic that suffers most from the criminalization of that use. This foolish and unjust criminalization, as many posters here have accurately debunked, just compounds the harm done to everyone except the booming prison industry. You claim in another post that…

“Generalizing personal experience, viewing the world soley from personal experience, is the hallmark of a narcissist.”

...but then you go on to make sweeping generalizations about drug use and drug users, topping it off with bizarre suggestions about “treatments” like forced sterilization and “vaccination.” I think you need to reconsider your views on this subject, perhaps. As it is now you come across as both hypocritical and extreme.

Well Rehab has a 1% success rate, in other words one year after completing Rehab out
of a group of 100 one will be sober. 12 step meetings are free. You don’t have to pay
$1000 a day, for a Yoga lesson and a bus ride to the nearest home group.

No prohibition won’t work, but vaccination will.  That’s next up, first for tobacco, then
Cocaine, Heroin.

I think that we should all give Duncan20903 a hand for really putting the facts and
arguments together so well on this round? And, I must admit that it was useful
having Oddsox dole out standard fascist baloney so that others would have
something off of which to bounce.

The notion that laws are made in the US on the basis of what is best for the populace is a part of that Americana that the blog began with, and like the rest of that Americana, is based in a truth so steeped in the past it is simply nostalgia, not reality. Laws in the US are made by powerful people paying to have their cronies elected, or paying to gain the allegiance of people already in office. “Follow the Money” is not just a useful tool for social analysis. It demystifies the workings of government in the US, which is why roadblocks are constantly thrown in the way, not of bribers and bribe-takers, but of those trying to determine to whom a public figure is beholden. It is considered normal and natural that, whatever their state on coming to Congress, no member leaves office not a millionaire.
Despite what our elementary school teachers pounded into our heads, this is a Dollar Democracy.

As it is with any pathological liar, the United States, even while knowing the present official stand on marijuana is wrong, will not back down even in the face of overwhelming proof to the contrary. They will continue to spout those outrageous lies in the face of steadily increasing pressure to back down and do the right thing. This law-and-order mentality has overtaken common sense to the point of comical hypocrisy, or at least it would be if people weren’t being punished by the courts for indulging in and growing the stuff. It’s long past time to reconcile this issue, and no fine or jail time is required.

Let it be.

Generalizing personal experience, viewing the world soley from personal experience, is
the hallmark of a narcissist.  Drug policy can never be based on your experience of a
drug. Nor on heady intellectualisms or pipe dreams, that result from intrusive sub
conscious impulses, allowed by weakening the brains defense mechanisms via drug
use. All drugs….all drugs do damage..The question is whether locking up drug users for
their own good is more damaging to society, than allowing them to use? ( Another
answer could be to allow drug users to have access to all the drugs they want, but put
contraceptives in them so they can’t have children while their doping.) End of story.
Forcing drug users to care about others is one of the reasons 12 step groups work. “The
core of our disease is our obsession with ourselves”....Bill W. Couldn’t have said it better.

Follow the money and it all makes sense why cannabis is illegal.
Imagine 10 million Americans quitting their $1,000 dollar a year anti-
depressants addiction for an herb you can grow for free.Big Pharma would lose
10 Billion Dollars.Big Pharma is not about to lose 10 Billion Dollars.They buy
Congressmen, doctors,“experts’’ and the media to lie ,misinform ,and protect
the legal drugs they peddle.
Or what if 10 million Joe Sixpacks trade their $2,000 dollar a year alcohol
expense for cannabis.That is 20 billion dollars.
Real Fucking Money.The kind that lets you own jets, yachts,sports teams,and
politicians.

“Conventional wisdom has it that Prohibition (the Volstead Act, the 18th Amendment 1920-1933) didn’t work.

Well, it didn’t LAST. And it couldn’t STOP people from drinking.

But if the idea was to REDUCE alcohol consumption, it worked rather well.

First, look at total per capita absolute alcohol consumption levels from 1906 to 1915. That’s BEFORE temperance really took root and before prohibition. Levels drifted lower from 1916 to 1920, then fell sharply when the 18th Amendment was first implemented.”
—————————————————————————

Blah, blah, blah, more hogwash disguised as fact. First of all the point was not to reduce drinking per se, it was to deliver a healthier, happier, more productive population. Drinking alcohol prohibition accomplished none of that.

I notice that you like the PFTA number of per capita consumption between 1920 and 1933 but skip the documented by the Census bureau fact that death rate from chronic or acute alcoholism increased 250% between 1920 and 1932, and that 250% increase was down from what had been an increase of 400% in 1927. Oh sure, no problem, use is cut in half but the death rate increases 250%. But everyone knows the motto of the Know Nothing prohibitionist.

Why did you fail to notice that per capita consumption was lower between 1871 and 1880 than it was in your cherry picked 1916-1919 time frame? Were you aware there was quite a brouhaha in that time called World War I which saw a very large percentage of Americans of the prime drinking age go overseas where their drinking wasn’t included in the statistics?

Drinking alcohol prohibition started when Kansas adopted its prohibition law going as far as including it in the State Constitution in 1881. That was the first State level prohibition law which wasn’t repealed until after ratification of the 21st Amendment. By the time the National Prohibition Act (NPA) was implemented just over 30 States had criminalized drinking alcohol on the State Level and some had criminalized for decades. Neither did drinking alcohol prohibition end in 1933. The only alcohol that was re-legalized in 1933 was beer at 3.2% ethanol by volume. It was 1966 before Mississippi repealed the last State level criminalization. It’s wholly inaccurate to use the time frame of the existence of the NPA as the duration of the idiocy of drinking alcohol prohibition.

It is absurd to assert that one can accurately estimate the occurrence of covert activity.

Productivity did not increase during the days of the NPA.

The murder rate skyrocketed, including murders of Law Enforcement Officers.

The incidence of corruption among public officials also skyrocketed to never before seen levels.

BTW New York was the first State to repeal it’s State level prohibition laws in 1921.

I guess it all depends on how you define the word “worked.”
———————————————

A really good book to help you understand why the self serving analysis that you are promoting is specious is “How to Lie With Statistics” by Darrell Huff
http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Mark Twain said, “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

P.S. if you really think that cannabis is causing the deaths in the Mexican Civil War you really could benefit from taking a remedial course on the relationship between cause and effect.

Here, let me save you the trouble of Googling that. I’m perfectly willing to spoonfeed a Know Nothing prohibitionist if there is a genuine desire to cease being a Know Nothing. That’s as easy as just learning the facts and rejecting the propaganda and poof! no more a Know Nothing.
—————

Why yes, this one is from the National Institute of Health’s server:

“Cannabis as a substitute for alcohol and other drugs”

Amanda Reiman corresponding author

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2795734/?tool=pubmed

Conclusion:

The substitution of one psychoactive substance for another with the goal of reducing negative outcomes can be included within the framework of harm reduction. Medical cannabis patients have been engaging in substitution by using cannabis as an alternative to alcohol, prescription and illicit drugs.”
/snip/

There are at least 2 dispensaries in California which sponsor modified 12 Step meetings on their premises. There is a significant population of people who use cannabis substitution for drinking alcohol abuse, as well as for cocaine and opioids. We just tend to keep quiet about it because there’s very little support for what we know is fact because we’ve seen it with our own eyes. My DOC was crack though we called it freebasing way back then.  I haven’t touched that garbage since May of 1989. 22 years later and people still say it doesn’t work and I’ll be smoking coke again before you know it. Either that or make the idiotic claim that I’ve just traded one thing for another. To me a very valid analogy is that someone had a gold brick, and I had a dog turd, and that I gave him the dog turd and he gave me the gold brick. All I did was trade one thing for the other.
—————————————————————————
“Cannabis as a Substitute for Alcohol:
A Harm-Reduction Approach”
Tod H. Mikuriya

http://www.mikuriya.com/cw_alcsub.pdf
—————————————————————————

Marijuana To Control Alcohol Abuse
By Rick Nauert PhD Senior News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on December 1, 2009

http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/12/01/marijuana-to-control-alcohol-abuse/9863.html
—————————————————————————

Your claim of cannabis as a gateway drug is absurd. I wonder, did you know that the rate of Californians in “treatment” for anything has fallen 9.19% since 1996 when the Compassionate Use Act (CUA) was implemented, and the rate of Californians in “treatment” for opioid addiction has fallen 54%?

That’s not a nationwide trend either. In the same time frame Illinois suffered a 566.23% increase in the number of Illinoisan junkies in “treatment”, an increase of 137.49% increase in the number in “treatment” for anything as well as a counter trend increase in the number of Illinoisan crack heads in “treatment” of more than 40%.

Ohio suffered a 386.75% increase of the number of Ohioans in “treatment” for opioid addiction and a 21.72% increase of the number of Ohioans in “treatment” for anything.

Why am I picking on Ohio and Illinois? Well, mainly because their spectacular failure in addressing their respective States addiction problem but also because authorities in both States said they weren’t interested in passing medicinal cannabis patient protection laws because they “don’t want to be like California.” I guess they must love having lots of junkies.

The United States suffered a nationwide increase in the number of Americans in “treatment” for opioid addiction of 77.02% The number of Americans in “treatment” for anything of 21.07%.

As of 2009 California has 12% of the country’s population and 9.11% of the nation’s cohort in “treatment” for anything. In 1996 California had 10.48% of that cohort.

http://wwwdasis.samhsa.gov/webt/quicklink/us96.htm

change the link above to ca09.htm to get California’s 2009 number. change it to oh96.htm to get Ohio 1996, etc, etc and feel free to double check my numbers.

“In much the same way, Sirota, like so many others, uses booze (and tobacco) as an excuse to promote marijuana.”

Hogwash. The argument is promoting equal protection under the law, basic equity and fairness. You simply can not argue that we need to protect the population from the dangers of enjoying cannabis without also protecting the population from much more deleterious substances. If drinking alcohol is safe enough for the general population then so is cannabis.

Your assertion quoted above is absurdity in the extreme. If you think repealing the unjust criminalization is “promoting” anything you’re simply not thinking logically, because you must think that the government is promoting the inhalation of gasoline fumes to get high. After all, it’s perfectly legal to sniff gasoline.

The more accurate statement is that the Know Nothings are promoting systemic failure and the squandering of public resources because we’ve most certainly got a few tons of evidence that the war on (some) drugs is an epic failure of public policy.

@oddsox What century, what universe have you been inhabiting the past 40 years? Better yet, who hired you to post ridiculous statements like “They’re dying by the thousand in Mexico these past 4 years?” They’re dying because of absurd drug laws that make marijuana illegal and the subsequent criminal activity that surrounds that. You sound like a fifth grade anti-drug propaganda film. Who died and made you the emperor of what people choose to put in THEIR nervous systems. Anarchy is the novel idea that you don’t own other people.

“Tortured, disemboweled and hung from a bridge for tweeting: Couple killed by Mexican drug cartel “

...and yet the Know Nothing prohibitionists continue to defend and embrace the epic failure of public policy which we call the war on (some) drugs which created the incubators that spawned the grotesque monsters which perpetrate such evil. Congrats guys, you’re reaping what you have sown. How many more decades of guaranteed failure will you force our society to endure before you’ll admit that you’ve had your chance, that you’ve failed, and failed miserably? Don’t be embarrassed now, anyone without financial ties to prohibition with an IQ higher than the average room temp knows that your prohibition is a demonstrable failure. You’re only fooling yourselves if you don’t admit it. The people with financial interests know it too, they just like their income.

Gulam asks: “So what is wrong with promoting marijuana?”

Well, first, marijuana is indeed a “gateway” drug.  It places its users in the same social sphere as those who sell you the next upgrade: meth, coke, pills, heroin, acid, whatever.  Wanna ask what’s wrong with promoting THOSE drugs?

Next, as Sirota correctly points out, no one dies from using pot.  But he knows to choose his words carefully here.  They’re dying by the thousand in Mexico these past 4 years.  And it’s chiefly OVER marijuana.  Not the same thing you say?  Tell it to the families of the dead. 

Then, Gulam writes “If such a beneficent and pleasing substance can help to wean people off of alcohol, which Americans went to the trouble of outlawing entirely during my grandparents time, why fight it?”

Don’t know of any evidence pot helps reduce alcohol consumption, is that what you’re claiming?  A new one on me—got any sources to back that?

As for “beneficent,” are you referring (no pun intended) to medicinal MJ?  No argument there for those who truly can benefit and are truly hurting.
But, then, why isn’t medical marijuana grown under USDA supervision and distributed like other drugs with FDA oversight? 

Truth is, most medical marijuana “patients” are using those with real need as shields for their recreational use.

What in the world would you call the administration of an institute of higher learning that isn’t smart enough to look at the First Amendment case law and understand that they’re going to be laughed out of the courtroom if they try to pursue a plainly unconstitutional agenda of shutting down the Cannabinoidian celebration of life on 4/20? I must say if my son was a student at CU I’d vigorously lobby him to move to a school that’s not run by morons. I might even pick up the tab.

One of the most absurd ways of thinking that I’ve encountered in my life is the groupthink of the Know Nothing prohibitionists. Let me be clear, I call them Know Nothings because they know nothing about this subject, though they have created an intricate web of fantasy land “reasoning” built on a platform that consists of nothing other than bald faced lies, half truths, and hysterical rhetoric.

To conflate cannabis with drugs like drinking alcohol, cocaine, opioids, and methamphetamine requires a willful ignorance of factual reality and a totally baseless arrogance.

Prescription drugs have always caused more overdose deaths than the so called “controlled” substances that have the capability of being lethal. The body has no clue whether a drug is legal, illegal, or as is the case of drinking alcohol, unrealized. The phrase “alcohol and drugs” is the linguistic equivalent of “pizza and food.” All dogs are not poodles, but all poodles are dogs.

The problem with the willful ignorance of the Know Nothings occurs when it gets mixed with the malignant narcissism that a relatively small percentage of the population demonstrate as their permanent mindset. They might even regurgitate the word narcissism about the object of their insanity, but that’s a simple case of transference. These people simply can’t be content in minding their own business. What would be truly laughable were it not so pathetic is that they’ve mixed up the prohibitionist’s stew of bald faced lies, half truth’s and hysterical rhetoric and decides that this fantasy land “reasoning” means that their somehow superior. Yet these people seem unable to differentiate opioids from cannabis, unable to see the very obvious similarities between meth, heroin, cocaine and drinking alcohol, and for some incomprehensible reason seem to believe that prescription drugs are in some different class from “illegal” drugs because some lawmakers said so. If politicians ever started classifying drugs based on their characteristics rather than their popularity there might be a valid argument there. Give me a ring when drinking alcohol, methamphetamine and fentanyl get moved to schedule I, and cannabis and coca leaves are removed from the naughty list. It’s absurd that meth is FDA approved for school children older than age 6 and sold for consumption to school children nationwide for the ADHD is never mentioned but the proven medicinal benefits of cannabis are derided and ignored in the face of the evidence, that fentanyl which is some ungodly factor of magnitude more potent and addictive than heroin, so deadly that as little as a single milligram too much can result in death is nevertheless available by prescription, that a drug that kills (tens of?) thousands and thousands every year not only from fatal overdose but is also so addictive that as many as 20% of those who try to quit die from the withdrawal yet these same Know Nothings can’t even bring themselves to call drinking alcohol a drug because they know a guy that drinks a six pack on Sunday afternoon while watching pro football.

Cannabis enhances and enriches my life. If you think that I’m someone suffering from self hatred, some asinine deep seated feeling of inferiority, or whatever nonsense fantasies that fill your head and make you think that I’m a miserable failure simply because I enjoy cannabis from time to time then you quite simply need a checkup from the neck up.

But, as we all know, the motto of the Know Nothing prohibitionist is “never let the facts get in the way of disseminating an effective piece of hysterical rhetoric” and they most certainly are loyal adherents to that platitude.

Conventional wisdom has it that Prohibition (the Volstead Act, the 18th Amendment 1920-1933) didn’t work.

Well, it didn’t LAST. And it couldn’t STOP people from drinking.

But if the idea was to REDUCE alcohol consumption, it worked rather well.

http://www.hoboes.com/Politics/Prohibition/Notes/Drinking/

First, look at total per capita absolute alcohol consumption levels from 1906 to 1915. That’s BEFORE temperance really took root and before prohibition. Levels drifted lower from 1916 to 1920, then fell sharply when the 18th Amendment was first implemented.

From there alcohol consumption increased in spite of Prohibition, it’s true. But nowhere close to what it had been.

And even though the Volstead Act was repealed in 1933, the consumption levels of 1906-1915 didn’t return until the advent of Monday Night Football and my 21st birthday (1971).

From 1915 to 1971 was 56 years, a pretty strong run for the Temperance & Prohibition crowd.

(If you really want to see some two-fisted drinkin’, take a look at per-capital consumption during the time of our Founding Fathers. More than double what we put down today.)

So what is wrong with promoting marijuana? If such
a beneficent and pleasing substance can help to wean
people off of alcohol, which Americans went to the
trouble of outlawing entirely during my grandparents
time, why fight it? If the Dean of Harvard Medical School
tells his own children that it is far safer to smoke pot
than drink been, who besides the alcohol industry
would argue against this?

{“students at more than a dozen schools across the country recently voted for referendums demanding administrators equalize punishments (for marijuana and alcohol possession/use)”}

You can bet these students want punishments for use/sale/possession of pot lowered to the levels of those for alcohol.  Not the other way around.

In much the same way, Sirota, like so many others, uses booze (and tobacco) as an excuse to promote marijuana.

Tortured, disemboweled and hung from a bridge for tweeting: Couple killed by Mexican drug cartel

infowars dot com

David Sirota:      9/16/2011
    There has always been hypocrisy even within the
arena of the drug culture that says,“At least,I don’t
do the hard stuff,or I don’t drink before 9:00 AM.The
truth is,is that most people who are chemically
addicted have a dual addiction and look down on
others abusing different substances.Even those
abusing licit prescriptions. 
    It would be fair to say that if alcohol were
discovered today,it would not be allowed on the
market - it is that dangerous.
    What position has The National Institute on
Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism taken on this matter,if
any?
    Alcohol,and those individuals who sanction and
approve its use on campus are responsible for leading
students on with meaningless rhetoric of,“drink
responsible”,and assist in courting the disaster they
meet.This is but one example of knowing who your
friendenmies are.
    “Teach your children”
    Thanking you for the opportunity to comment -
    James M. de Laurier
    KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK !

Many Americans who cannot afford to party on a college campus go into the
military. In Afghanistan the Americans and their European camp followers
started building bars and whore houses as soon as they arrived, to service the
“servicemen.” There was virtually no alcohol or prostitution in Afghanistan
before the the two big masters of materialism, the Soviet Union and the United
States, arrived to ram Western values down the throats of a religious people,
already impoverished by a century of British and Russian colonialism. When this
period of Western colonialism is finally over and great long-standing
civilizations return to life in China and India, their historians will study this time
in conjunction with the invasions of the Mongols. That was another time when
barbarians from beyond the range of the ancient, civilized world who had better
transport and weapons came to plunder and dominate for a brief time. The
Mongols brought gunpowder, movable type, and the plague. They also
“liberated” women and declared freedom of religion in conquered territories,
because in weakening the cultural discipline and social structures of the
societies they made the people easier to rule. The Americans are particularly
like the Mongols, and centuries from now it will seem equally astonishing that
they could ever have had the upper hand over civilized people.

Yes, no doubt, this country has a drinking problem at College. It also as a problem with Pot, Cocaine, Heroin, Meth,  Oxycontin, and Mushrooms at school as well.

But those drugs, obscure a much larger issue, rampaging prescription drug abuse, and the use of prescription medications to supposedly treat poorly understood mental health issues, to repress symptoms. Those prescription drugs now account for more ER visits than the street drugs.

Narcissistic cultures, produce dependent children, who struggle with that dependency throughout their life times. Spending their lives recreating their pathological need for attention, but never resolving it. A nation of attention junkies addicted to celebrity culture.

What good is getting a degree when your so emotionally crippled that you cannot function..?