Why is Marijuana Illegal?

[Racoon]

I seriously doubt reasons for continued Illegalization of Cannibis Sativa.

 

As a natural plant with many uses, I think the laws need to be reformed.

Alcohol is worse. Causes more violence, criminal behavior.

Cigarettes are worse. Causes more sickness and health problems.

 

:hihi:

 

Some of the reasons I have heard, include the tale of Du-Pont and Nylon invention!

Hemp is natural and easy to grow, so it was a economic-competition issue, as opposed to a morality issue. (I've heard that from a couple reputable people)

 

I can see why Crank, Heroin, LSD, Ecstacy and those types of drugs are illegal.

I can't really see why Pot, or Hemp, is illegal.

 

If legalized, it could be taxed, and police officers and Border Patrol could focus more on the Bigger Issues.

 

It is not a gateway drug. It hasn't been conclusively proven.

And yes, underage use is also a negative - like cigs and booze...

 

Why not make it legal??

I think it would clear prison and jail space. Increase taxable revenue, break-up Black-Market operations, and perhaps even lower usage!

 

Why is it illegal? because Government knows whats best for you?

I don't completely buy the argument it makes you lazy or dumb. Although it might, but that is more a reflection of the users personality and work ethic.

 

I really think its ridiculous...Its a Plant. an Herb. and should be used and respected like any other natural evolution of raw Organic materials.

 

here are a couple links, That show opposing view points.

Rational discussion and debate is encouraged.

 

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

&

http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs3/3593/index.htm

[Queso]

I have no idea why it's illegal.

All I know is I'm drawn to it,

I seek nonordinary reality.

I seek...herbs,

not for christs sake

But Mine.

And mine alone.

[Rincewind]

I can't see why any drugs are illegal. Drug abuse is a medical problem, not a legal one.

 

Keeping drugs illegal forces the supply into the black market, which means they can't be controlled by medical authorities (who should be controlling them), nor by law enforcement authorities, because the very nature of the black market engenders corruption amongst authorities.

 

Legalising drugs will not increase usage, because who amongst those who use illegal drugs was deterred by their legal status, and who amongst those who don't use them said to themselves, "I'm not having any of that because it's illegal" rather than because it's dangerous, or I don't want to do that to my perceptions and/or body?

[TheBigDog]

I can't see why it ever became a federal issue. This should be a state or local issue. The only thing the feds should have to say about it should surround importation and interstate commerce. Use should be a locally enforced thing, as well as distribution.

 

The leap that is needed for legalization is around public safety. If you cannot test the influence on a person at a given moment then it is difficult to enforce sobriety laws for operating equipment. If you want to work toward teh legalization, invent the machine that test for influence on a person and is portable and accurate for roadside use by cops.

 

Why hemp is an illegal crop is another mystery. It just doesn't make sense.

 

Bill

[Racoon]

I can't see why it ever became a federal issue. This should be a state or local issue. The only thing the feds should have to say about it should surround importation and interstate commerce. Use should be a locally enforced thing, as well as distribution.

 

The leap that is needed for legalization is around public safety. If you cannot test the influence on a person at a given moment then it is difficult to enforce sobriety laws for operating equipment. If you want to work toward teh legalization, invent the machine that test for influence on a person and is portable and accurate for roadside use by cops.

 

Why hemp is an illegal crop is another mystery. It just doesn't make sense.

 

Bill

 

You make a great point BigDog, about work and safety!

I do think employers should have the right to Drug Test their employees.

and refuse hiring or continued employment if those issues are ignored.

 

Smoking while driving should be considered the same as drinking while driving.

Because not everyone has the sense and sensibilities that others may have.

But I could almost say that Drunk driving is probably worse...

 

There should also be an age limit.

I think if Marijuana was that bad, but legal, people (especially young people) wouldn't see it as such a rebellious opportunity.

There are plenty far worse things they could do.

Like huff Glue.

 

Decriminalization would free up resources, space in jails, and time of Police to persue more serious crimes.

And Add Tax revenues while decreasing Illegal Trade! :hihi:

I wonder what Niviene thinks? or any other police officer or official.

 

It should happen.

To borrow a sentiment from InfiniteNow:

"What Century are we living in again???"

[CraigD]

Why hemp is an illegal crop is another mystery. It just doesn't make sense.

The only sense I can make of the US prohibition of the cultivation of fiber hemp – which, with its very low concentration of THC, has almost no psychotropic properties, is that it’s a reflection of the culture prevalent within the US DEA. This attitude appears to be very old, predating the 1970 founding of the DEA. It may have its origins in the law enforcement community around the time of Prohibition (1919), and/or the federal government during the cold war following WWII.

 

Just how illegal fibre hemp is in the US is difficult to determine. I personally know merchants who have been told by credentialed DEA agents that the sale of hemp fiber clothing and accessories – a multi-million dollar business in the US alone - is illegal and subject to criminal prosecution. The legal reality appears to be that this is an exaggeration of a 2001 regulatory interpretation of law pertaining to hemp-derived food products, which remains stayed by a US Court of Appeals. The practical reality is that it’s not a lot of fun debating law with DEA agents. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#THC_in_hemp has a very brief summary of some of these ideas and issues.

[Racoon]

George Washington and Tom Jefferson; Hemp Growers! :hihi:

 

If they didn't know any better, then I am certain George Bush Sr.'s War on Drugs is not going to work if they view Marijuana as an Illegal Substance! :cup:

[Racoon]

The only sense I can make of the US prohibition of the cultivation of fiber hemp – which, with its very low concentration of THC, has almost no psychotropic properties

 

Just how illegal fibre hemp is in the US is difficult to determine. The practical reality is that it’s not a lot of fun debating law with DEA agents. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#THC_in_hemp has a very brief summary of some of these ideas and issues.

 

You make good, logical statements here as well CraigD.

Hemp could be used for Bio-fuel as well! ;)

 

Didn't the Ford Company use hemp to make parts and Fuel back in the day ???

Before 1937??

 

Which is why DEA laws should be changed!! :hihi:

 

These Hemp Rules are ridiculous! :cup:

[Cedars]

If you want to work toward teh legalization, invent the machine that test for influence on a person and is portable and accurate for roadside use by cops.

 

Bill

 

Yes, part of the reason is the 'under the influence' technology. I agree with you that this machine would be very helpful for society in general, particularly in the workplace. The testing for marijuana and pulling a positive, under the methods used today, have no relation to whether or not a person is under the influence currently. A positive test for marijuana use only indicates that someone had partaken in the activity anywhere between 1 hour (estimate) and several months ago. I know several companies who have stopped using a positive marijuana test as a rejection for hire because they couldnt find enough workers who didnt pull a positive for marijuana, and in their experience, marijuana testing did not reflect whether the new employee would increase accident/injury or prove any other negative for their work environment.

 

I have had police tell me they prefered to deal with a pot head, rather than a drunk. There was virtually no chance of violence. I was also told by police that they could always tell when a carload of youth (youth being anyone under 24) were stoners. They were almost always driving much slower than the speed limit. And on the occasion that some stoner had to be transported to the station, they tended to be very cooperative compared to an alcohol user.

[Cedars]

The only sense I can make of the US prohibition of the cultivation of fiber hemp – which, with its very low concentration of THC, has almost no psychotropic properties, is that it’s a reflection of the culture prevalent within the US DEA. This attitude appears to be very old, predating the 1970 founding of the DEA. It may have its origins in the law enforcement community around the time of Prohibition (1919), and/or the federal government during the cold war following WWII.

 

 

Going from memory alone, I remember being told (or reading) the reason for this going on after the prohibition on cultivating hemp (there was much outcry from agriculture who didnt realize cannibis was the same crop they called hemp) and after the temporary removal of the cultivation restriction during ww2 , was because law enforcement couldnt tell the difference between a legitimate hemp crop and the cultivation of cannibis for smoking. But I cannot remember where I gleened this information from.

 

I remember when twine made from hemp finally ran out in my area. This was in the early 70s. Some farming company was bought out and the last of their hemp twine hit the local markets. The change over to nylon caused the death of some cattle, horses, and swine due to the numbers of them that ate the hemp twine. Hemp twine did not tangle up their intestines like nylon twine did. We all had to be very careful to make sure we got the rope and took it out of the feeding areas when we busted open bales. One family in my very small elementary school lost a horse their children all loved and rode. If you have never owned a pleasure horse, your attachment to them is equal to an attachment to a dog or cat.

 

The change over involved some work on older hay balers. Some farmers had to create new tying devices to accomodate the difference between the ropes. Others had to mess around with settings and adjustments. The effect on the farmers who had to create new tying devices was devestating for that hay/oat cycle. There is a limited window of opportunity to harvest these crops. As people figured out the settings and problems, they would spread the information to their neighbors and lessen impact as knowledge grew.

 

Up to a few years ago (and possibly still), there was an employee of my state whos job was to find old plantings of hemp. They interviewed him on the news... maybe 10 years ago... anyways he was talking about how many plants he finds that are left overs from the old hemp fields, how this old stuff is growing along the edges of fields. He does find cultivation in some places and was asked how he can tell the difference. He also finds spots where users throw seeds out (there are some in the smoking crowd who save seeds and toss them along freeways, in civic spots such as government center gardens, and a host of other public places as a protest to the laws.) * if there are any who are thinking of tossing seeds, this is illegal and could result in serious charges.

[Panjandrum]

I seriously doubt reasons for continued Illegalization of Cannibis Sativa.

 

As a natural plant with many uses, I think the laws need to be reformed.

Alcohol is worse. Causes more violence, criminal behavior.

Cigarettes are worse. Causes more sickness and health problems.

 

While I broadly agree with your position, saying there are worse things than weed is not a very compelling argument, it weakens your credibility by relying on analogy to argue to your case rather than letting the merits of your position stand by themselves.

 

I can see why Crank, Heroin, LSD, Ecstacy and those types of drugs are illegal.

I can't really see why Pot, or Hemp, is illegal.

 

Really? I can see no logical or moral reason why you would be in favour of legalizing weed but not meth or x. Could you explain your position for my benefit?

 

I really think its ridiculous...Its a Plant. an Herb. and should be used and respected like any other natural evolution of raw Organic materials.

 

By the same reasoning, private ownership of uranium and cyanide can be justified. Again, its not that I disagree particularly, but I think your arguments need to be better refined.

[C1ay]

I personally support the decriminalization of all drugs in the U.S. and abolishment of the DEA. The drug war is a war that cannot be won and should not be fought.

[CraigD]

I personally support the decriminalization of all drugs in the U.S. and abolishment of the DEA. The drug war is a war that cannot be won and should not be fought.

While I agree, I think it’s important that the production and sale of recreational drugs be no less well regulated and documented than over-the-counter medication. As with any potentially harmful product, it’s essential that there be a trail of responsibility connecting producer, retailer, and consumer. One of the greatest problems with illicit drugs as they are currently available via black markets is their uncertain purity and potential for tainting. Without new regulation, legalization would not eliminate these problems.

[C1ay]

Without new regulation, legalization would not eliminate these problems.

The FDA could regulate what needs to be regulated. IMO, legalization would greatly reduce the profit margins currently enjoyed by illegal suppliers reducing their incentive to sell illicit drugs. They'd look for other business ventures and a lot of the illicit supply would dry up.

[Kayra]

As I remember, It is not an illegal drug, but rather a controlled substance.

There is a significant difference, and the laws for controlled substances are much easier for big business to manipulate, as it does not involve higher levels of government.

 

With that in mind, I had read (some time ago) that the reason that prohibition started on the drug was because of all the Mormons smoking up on Mexican weed :) The Mormon church frowned on this and made it doctrine that it was outlawed. Utah law almost immediately made a law prohibiting the drug. It grew to other states from there, but nothing happened at the federal level.

 

Past that, most of the problems came from a newspaper/timber magnate named Hearst, DuPont, and the man who ran the Federal Bureau of Narcotics Anslinger.

 

Anslinger needed to solidify his new department, Hearst wanted hemp paper gone and was a loud bigot against Mexicans (the main supplier at the time), and DuPont had a double reason to want hemp shut down. Both for Nylon and the chemicals that turned trees into paper. Hemp needed only a fraction of them to make far superior paper.

 

Stage set, Hearst made a fortune printing up fake stories about how Marijuana was affecting the people of the country, turning them into crazed ax murders and such. (only thing I ever see getting attacked by someone smoking marijuana is a bag of cheesies). The "Truth" of this was in a scrap book of newspaper articles.

 

Supported by DuPont and Hearst, Anslinger did a backroom deal with congress, not outlawing the drug, but in fact making it a "controlled substance" This gave them the right to tax it, but it also gave them the right to disallow sales of it. Not making the drug illegal, but making the sale of it illegal.

 

The scare that Hearst put into the people with his continual running of scare tactics stories had left a long standing misconception on the American people, and the world.

 

They created a gigantic meme that will not easily die.

 

Have no doubt that what you face in getting this drug removed from the controlled substance list will have little to do with evidence presented as to how safe, desirable, or helpful the product is. It has to do with a brainwashing of several generations of people so that a few companies and bureaucrats could benefit. ( and boy did they ever)

[Racoon]

Really? I can see no logical or moral reason why you would be in favour of legalizing weed but not meth or x. Could you explain your position for my benefit?

 

Well, I do.

Legalizing all drugs in one fell swoop would be less likely than simply legalizing Marijuana. It could be a first step.

 

From personal experience, of seeing the effects of Crank, and the long-term effects of MDMA not appearing to be great :) ,

I think Marijuana is much more Safe. :singer:

You cannot overdose. You will fall asleep before that happens.

 

Yeah. I think putting Crank and X in the same category of controlled substances as "weed" is wrong Panjandrum! For obvious reasons.

Manufacturing is a good example. How do you make Crank and X?

 

Marijuana grows. And Hemp also has many purposes beside getting high.

It could be used for creating rope, clothing, paper, oils, Bio-fuel, and many other consumer goods.

 

If Crank grew on trees, or X could be farmed, you might have a point. But I don't buy your analogy or logic.

 

I do agree with Clay.

The War on Drugs will never be won. It is an extreme waste of Money and Prison space.

There hasn't been any progress made despite hundreds of Billions of dollars being spent.

[Vicarious]

I have access to a documentary about the history and illegalization of drugs in the United States. It's in .avi format I think. One of the episodes details the reasons for the illegalization of marijuana. Bottom line, in my opinion, is that marijuana was a scapegoat, and the legislation made certain people seem like heroes in their day. Would you like me to arrange to transfer it to you?