Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Today’s peek into how anti-choicers think Previous entry: Mafs Is Hard

A counter-proposal to ban patchouli

One of the biggest obstacles to massive decriminalization and perhaps even legalization of marijuana has been the loudest advocates of this policy.  There was a surge in pro-legalization organizing and sentiment a few years ago in Austin, and the only result I’ve seen is that the cops came down like a sack of hammers on pot smoking, which used to be tolerated to a much larger extent than it is now.  Seriously, when I first lived in Austin, someone who wanted to sit on her front porch smoking a joint rarely had to worry about any harassment, so long as she reasonably quiet about it.  I don’t know the last time I saw someone publicly smoking a joint outside of the context of a really crowded rock show, and even then it’s a much smaller amount of people—-I used to be surprised if I didn’t smell pot at a show, now I’m mildly surprised if I do.  Of course, with the overall decline in popularity of smoking, pot may be losing out, too, but I’d honestly be surprised since the percentage of pot smokers who smoke tobacco is probably about the same as the general population.

Before I digress further, I’ll say that I remember that back in the more liberal days the pro-legalization people were everywhere, and they had the deadly mix of hippieness and more than a whiff of crankery that made even people who agreed with their general points run in the other direction when you saw them descending on you with their pamphlets about how hemp can cure cancer, their tie dyed Bob Marley shirts, and their dopey smiles.  If that’s the face of your movement, no wonder they’re doomed to fail.  I wanted pot to stay illegal just to annoy them. But don’t take my word for it—-Obama hid behind this living stereotype in order to dismiss the people going on and on about it.  Will Wilkinson describes what happened.

“The answer is no, I don’t think that is a good strategy to grow our economy.” President Obama said it with a chuckle last week at a town hall-style forum. The idea was for Obama to answer some questions about the economy submitted to the White House website. The most popular ones all had something to do with the virtues of legalizing and taxing marijuana. “I don’t know what this says about the online audience,” Obama joshed, and the good Americans assembled at the forum shared a little laugh.


The worst part is he’s probably not far off. The pot question has created this black hole of effective advocacy, because we all know what sorts of people obsessively pepper presidential townhalls with those kinds of questions, and you’re ashamed for them that they think that their obsession with pop is a more legitimate concern than the other pressing issues, like the economy, the war, etc.  You can just picture them, blunt in one hand, pizza in the other, drifting between watching the Cartoon Network and writing the same question over and over into the townhall site.

It’s too bad, because they’re right.  And as long as we believe that being a stoner precludes being a serious person, and as long as we assume all pro-legalization/decriminalization people are stoners, we won’t get anywhere on this very serious question.  Unfortunately, I can’t out myself as a stoner like Will, because I’m not.  My attitudes towards pot vary between dislike and active loathing—-the last time I even touched the stuff, I spent an hour wishing repeatedly that I could just have my brain back sans fog.  Like Ezra, I used to be a big fan, and then suddenly one day it quit being fun, so I quit.  This isn’t an unusual trajectory, which strikes me as all the more reason that pot should be legal, because people actually put it down when they’re done with it, unlike so many other substances.  For this reason, I actually rank pot differently on the danger scale than Matt does—-it’s probably less dangerous than cigarettes, beer, and M&Ms, because of how M&Ms and all sweets are linked to the high rates of Type 2 diabetes in this country.  People who smoke pot in their leisure time and avoid driving cars stones are pretty much the definition of harmless.  Truth is, I’ve known people who were, without pot smoking, really mean assholes and so perhaps it’s a good thing they self-medicated that part of their personalities into submission.

I’m linking these guys (and Joe Klein!) because they’re reacting to Obama’s dismissal by coming out of the cannabis closet.  It’s really the only way, because these guys are not your stereotype of stoners.  (Then again, Ezra and Matt, like myself, aren’t big on pot, so it takes some of the punch out.)  I’ll add that they are working the same privilege that I noticed in the “yea hemp!” hippies all those years ago—-being a bunch of middle class white guys, they largely feel shielded from the dangers of outing yourself in this way.  But it’s a good example of how privileged people can use that privilege for social good—-Will Wilkinson especially makes a note out of how the War On Drugs is basically just a fancy excuse to make life harder for people of color and perpetuate poverty.  Reminding people that pot smoking is a cross-racial, cross-class activity can heighten the perception of the injustice of the War On Drugs.

I think it’s useful for those of us who don’t smoke pot to speak out, too.  The War On Drugs is perpetuated by the belief that people only have two opinions of a behavior: for it, or think you should be thrown in jail for it.  (The same kind of thinking motivates the anti-choice movement, who seems to think that disapproving of female sexuality means that you have to pull out all stops to punish it.)  I’m not big on pot smoking, and while I like a lot of stoners I know, I’m obviously impatient with the huge hippies who can’t or won’t put pot smoking into perspective.  But by god, it should be decriminalized and possibly even legalized.  If dirty hippieness is that big a public menace, then they should ban patchouli and not marijuana.  First of all, it would be more effective as a way to improve the air quality and comfort levels of those of us who share the city streets with hippies.  But mostly, it’s because a ban on patchouli wouldn’t become an excuse to put a bunch of people away in jail for being the wrong race, and I doubt a deadly cartel war that threatens the very stability of the Mexican government would erupt over the sale of patchouli.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 11:08 AM • (96) Comments

I’m linking these guys (and Joe Klein!) because they’re reacting to Obama’s dismissal by coming out of the cannabis closet.  It’s really the only way, because these guys are not your stereotype of stoners.

You know that dissertation I defended a couple weeks ago?  Yup, wrote it stoned. Unlike my MA thesis, though, I did not attend my defense stoned.

Comment #1: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  04/06  at  12:18 PM

Will Wilkerson, not Wil Wheaton. At least that’s where the link goes. No idea what Wil Wheaton’s view of the War on Some Classes of People Who Use Some Drugs is.

Comment #2: witless chum  on  04/06  at  12:23 PM

Unfortunately, the streak of puritanism in America as wide as the Milky Way precludes legalization, and Obama will waste no political captital on it.

De-criminalization, maybe, by inches. (Did I read something about the legalization of hemp recently, or is that a pipe dream?)

Comment #3: judybrowni  on  04/06  at  12:24 PM

You know that dissertation I defended a couple weeks ago?  Yup, wrote it stoned. Unlike my MA thesis, though, I did not attend my defense stoned.

Your buddies with the moving truck and the primo again, I assume?

Comment #4: Ms Kate  on  04/06  at  12:30 PM

I am hoping—well, hoping is perhaps not the right word, as I have little expectation that it will actually come to pass.  But I’d be grateful if the Demon Weed were at least recognized to have medical benefits.  It is the best drug I’ve taken for my fibromyalgia pain and fatigue.  “But at least you’re not on drugs!” protest the Pot Is Evil People.

Oh, yes I am on drugs.  I take Vicodin like I’m Hugh fucking Laurie.  It’s not as good as the Weed and has some unpleasant effects, but it’s legal.  So I settle.

Comment #5: kaninchen  on  04/06  at  12:45 PM

I don’t understand where the impetus for the war on weed comes from.  It really just seems to be a big wall of inertia aided by the anti-hippie stereotypes you talk about.  Cops seem to really hate it, but virtually everyone I know has tried it at some point.  My MOM has smoked pot, and she didn’t even let me watch the Simpsons until I was in high school.

Most responsible adults and voters seem to have tried weed and not had any major problems. Who keeps caring that it’s not legalized/decriminalized?

Comment #6: Billingham  on  04/06  at  12:48 PM

52 years old, smoke a little reefers about once a year when I feel like it and don’t touch it at all, or miss it, for eight or more months at a time.  Work full-time and my bosses seem to like my work.  Been working all my life (first job at 14).  I pay my taxes, never been arrested and never had a more serious legal issue than a speeding ticket.  I find I am pretty typical of pot smokers.  I smoked more when I was younger and now I smoke very little and very rarely.  I NEVER drive while stoned.  I don’t even like being a passenger in a car when I am stoned.  I much prefer, when I do have some reefers, to smoke a joint in my back yard, then watch a little TV or read, then go to bed.

According to the government, I’m a criminal and should be in jail.  According to the president of the United States, legalization of marijuana, and criminalization of myself and tens of millions like me, is something to giggle about.

I gave up trying to understand this a long time ago.

Comment #7: DBK  on  04/06  at  12:53 PM

Shit, I need more coffee.  I’ll fix it.

Comment #8: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  12:57 PM

Should be fixed, so now people can engage the argument.

Comment #9: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  12:59 PM

But I’d be grateful if the Demon Weed were at least recognized to have medical benefits.

I count myself fortunate that I live in California and have a physician’s recommendation, but still, I think that the revenue-generation potention of legalization is being underemphasized by the Obama administration. 

In Mendocino county alone, there’s enough marijuana production capability to generate several million dollars’ worth of sales tax revenues.  Enough to get California out of BK and rectify at least a part of our state’s budget crisis.  Why this isn’t being leveraged goes back to Amanda’s initial point about dirty hippiness and all stoners being characterized as good-for-nothing slackers instead of contributing members of society. 

Give growers a chance and they’ll build empires to rival the likes of any financial services firm in the state.  From the perspective of unfettered capitalism alone, everyone makes money, the customers get what they want, and the state broadens its tax base.  I just don’t see what’s wrong with that.

Comment #10: Mezosub  on  04/06  at  01:07 PM

Bye, Mitchforth.

Comment #11: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  01:09 PM

I don’t understand where the impetus for the war on weed comes from.

The War on Drugs is, like so many wars, a cash cow for all sorts of private companies.  Private arms dealers get to sell expensive weapons and ammo and protection equipment to DEA and SWAT teams.  Police officers get better pay and benefits on vice squads.  Equipment seized from drug dealers and put up for auction generates revenue for police offices.  You can use the drug issue as leverage for all sorts of state and local programs.  You think anybody made a buck off of D.A.R.E?  I do.

Anti-drug groups funnel money into faith-based initiatives.  Convicted criminals fill up private prisons and rehabilitation programs - all at taxpayer expense.  Lawyers make money on the conviction and on the defense.  Congressmen get elected and re-elected by being “tough” on whatever drug du jour is in the news today - ZOMG! Crack!  ZOMG! Heroine! ZOMG! Weed!  ZOMG!  Ecstasy!  ZOMG!  Meth!  ZOMG!  Crack again!  And you only need to look south of the border to see the news orgy that drug conflicts create.

Drugs are a hundred billion dollar industry before you even get to the sale of the actual substance.

Comment #12: Zifnab  on  04/06  at  01:10 PM

Legalization seems a better bet than decriminalization for shutting down the violent drug trade, too, though decriminalization that included growers and sellers would be effective at creating so much competition the money would be out of it for cartels.

Comment #13: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  01:12 PM

I can totally get on board with the patchouli ban.

Comment #14: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  04/06  at  01:17 PM

[half-joking]
I propose we go the opposite way. We need more prohibition, not less! Add nicotine to the list of Schedule 1 drugs! Ban tobacco cultivation!
[/half-joking]

Comment #15: Doug S.  on  04/06  at  01:18 PM

I may have been wrong about gradual decriminalization a possibility during the Obama terms:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/5/716890/-Holder-wants-MORE-Federal-Marijuana-Possession-Prosecutions-(Updated)

Comment #16: judybrowni  on  04/06  at  01:24 PM

... The funny thing is, about half of the cops I’ve known are pro-legalization. I used to work in a probation office, and the officers freaking hated arresting people for pot violations. They were like “Holy crap, they’re not hurting anyone, and now their mother’s crying in my office and I have to do all this paperwork and drag them back to court.” But the law’s the freaking law.

Comment #17: purpleshoes  on  04/06  at  01:24 PM

I read an item somewhere last week about Barney Frank and someone else sponsoring a bill to legalize production and sale of “non-intoxicating” hemp.

I agree with Zifnab ‘s summation of the cash incentives behind the so-called War on Drugs.  I would only add that crack, heroin, ecstasy and meth have been shown to have much worse side effects than mj.

I just wonder if legalization or decriminalization of mj would have any effect on the violence.  Crack, heroin and meth are more lucrative than mj and would still be illegal.  There’d still be fighting over those.

I think Amanda nailed it on why it’s been so hard to get decriminalization/legalization of mj.  “Mainstream” (conservative) Americans hate hippies and don’t want to be seen as enabling them.

Comment #18: liberalrob  on  04/06  at  01:27 PM

I don’t understand where the impetus for the war on weed comes from.

There seems to be a pretty direct connection between the passage of the Civil Rights/Voting Rights Acts, the end of Jim Crow (1965), the beginning of the Republican Southern Strategy (1968), and the beginning of the War on Drugs (1969). 

The US now has 5% of the world’s population, and 25% of the world’s prisoners.  Half our prisoners are black.  Half.  How is this possible?  Because black men are 12 times more likely to be arrested and jailed for drug offenses than white men.  (Source: Human Rights Watch.)  The War on Drugs is an explicitly racist policy, as evidenced by its results.  It is the key tool for keeping down uppity nigras in the 21st century.

Comment #19: BABH  on  04/06  at  01:31 PM

I’d rather be on the road with ten stoned drivers than one drunk driver.

In fact I’d pretty much rather be anywhere with ten heads than with one fucking lush.

Comment #20: Sarcastro  on  04/06  at  01:31 PM

I’ve never used marijuana, and I have no desire to ever try it, but I certainly think it should be legal.  It’s certainly no more dangerous to society than alcohol and nicotine.  Just because I think people shouldn’t do something doesn’t mean I want to make laws to force people not to do it.  Right now, the War on Drugs(TM) is just and excuse to imprison minorities and distract people from bigger problems.  No one notices their rights being taken away when they are worried about their kids smoking pot and jumping off balconies.

However, I wouldn’t expect any president to try to decriminalize it regardless of their own personal views.  It’s still too controversial.  Legalization needs to start locally, then move to statewide, and eventually federal over time.

Comment #21: bananacat  on  04/06  at  01:34 PM

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition: this is an organization of career police officers both retired and active, who have come to the conclusion that The War On Drugs is a waste of time and taxpayers’ money.


http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php

Comment #22: LCforevah  on  04/06  at  01:39 PM

I think that the individual states will have to decriminalize it and then gradually it’ll just become accepted. I know that in Arizona we voted to largely decriminalize it recently but it was overturned by the supreme court. I’m just surprised that there are people who think it’s just that dangerous that it needs to remain illegal. As if the criminal activity that’s sprung up around it isn’t that much worse.

I don’t think that legalizing marijuana is going to suddenly revitalize our economy or aything like that, but I can’t help but get annoyed when people have the attitude that there are just so many more important things to address than this. We actively arrest and jail hundreds of thousands of people every year for smoking a harmless weed. I think we should deciminalize it precisely so that we can devote more resources to more important things. It’s insane that we continue to divert police resources toward this dumb shit.

Comment #23: Jenny Dreadful  on  04/06  at  01:50 PM

Oh, another one.

www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com

Comment #24: LCforevah  on  04/06  at  01:50 PM

You’re onto something here. I’m pretty much a lush myself and don’t care for weed either, but there is absolutely no reason it shouldn’t be legalized, annoying potheads aside. I really can’t believe the baby boomers have not even managed to get that much done. And I agree, it’s time for people to come out of the closet, because let’s face it folks, pretty much everybody smokes weed.  The only thing keeping it illegal does is give the cops an arbitrary reason to hassle you if they so desire.

Comment #25: martha  on  04/06  at  01:50 PM

Unfortunately, I don’t think legalizing pot will have any real economic benefit.  Cannabis is a very easy plant to grow - there’s a reason it’s called “weed” - and requires minimal processing (unlike, say, tobacco).  Even with obscene (thousands-of-percent) taxes, the price of pot to the consumer will fall dramatically.  Assuming consumption doesn’t explode, the value of the market in general will be much lower than it is today. 

Of course, there would be other great benefits.  The profits of the trade would go to newly legitimate businesses, rather than to violent criminal conspiracies.  And legalization would free up vast law enforcement resources which could be redeployed more efficiently, and perhaps some day with less racial bias.

Comment #26: BABH  on  04/06  at  01:54 PM

“Mainstream” (conservative) Americans hate hippies and don’t want to be seen as enabling them.

I don’t think it’s just that.  A huge part of how we’ve been taught to think about drugs is talking about “gateway drugs,” which frankly I don’t think exist.  By now, I think there’s a huge load of evidence showing not that marijuana use is a slippery slope down to heroin addiction, but that people who have the potential to become addicts will use anything they can to get there.  No one ever talks about glue-sniffing or cough medicine abuse as “gateway drugs” to the harder stuff, because we can recognize that they’re a problem in themselves.  Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a marijuana addiction, but it happens to people who have a propensity towards being addicted.  It’s not automatic the instant you take that first puff.

We really need a better way to talk about and treat addiction in this country because the whole notion that people can “just say no” if they have a propensity towards becoming addicted is about as logical as expecting people who are clinically depressed to solve all of their problems by just smiling more.

Comment #27: Mnemosyne  on  04/06  at  02:01 PM

Our heavily privatized prison system is now a profit center for the companies running them.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4505278

As long as there’s a profit, the prisons will need prisoners, and the War on Drugs® will continue. Prohibition may have started as an extension of all-American puritanism, but it now has a lot more to do with all-American corporatism.

Comment #28: Momento Mori  on  04/06  at  02:11 PM

My mom smoked pot until the 80s.  Turns out she’s bi-polar and the occasional toke would even her out during a manic period, reliable anti-depressants hadn’t been invented yet. She switched to occasional alcohol use because she’d grown up, and she could do that in public with her friends on the weekends.  She didn’t find out about her illness until late in the 90’s, when she could finally get medication for herself.

We really need a better way to talk about and treat addiction in this country because the whole notion that people can “just say no” if they have a propensity towards becoming addicted is about as logical as expecting people who are clinically depressed to solve all of their problems by just smiling more.

This.  Especially how we stigmatize alcoholics as dangerous narcissists, so that people who do have alcoholism have trouble recognizing their problem and getting treatment.  So long as we treat addiction as a moral failing, there will be people who cannot or will not ask for help for fear of being stigmatized.

Comment #29: Godless Heathen  on  04/06  at  02:20 PM

I’ve smoked pot, on and off, for more than half my life. Started when I was 17, and I’m 37 now. Aside from a couple binges on camping trips and in college, I never smoked more than 2x/week, and my usual consumption is now maybe once or twice a month, with long periods of abstention.

It was never a gateway drug for me; never tried anything stronger, was never tempted to try. The only thing it was a gateway to was a lot of munchies and take-out food. 

I agree that stoners make the worst advocates for legalizing, which is why more people who don’t fit the spaced-out hippie stereotype need to own up and come out of the Cannabis Closet.

I think the really dangerous drugs, like heroin and meth, should stay illegal, but if half of the alcoholics in the country quit the booze and started tokin’ it up with the same frequency that they drink, crime and violence would fall precipitously.

Comment #30: Norsecats  on  04/06  at  02:22 PM

Potheads will help support children’s health care: the SCHIP bill Obama signed into law contains a tax on rolling papers, raising the cost of a box by a buck:

http://www.rollingpaperwarehouse.com/

Comment #31: Hector B.  on  04/06  at  02:23 PM

I think it’s useful for those of us who don’t smoke pot to speak out, too.

Yep.  As someone who has tried it and now looks down his pretentious nose at pot smokers, I see nothing wrong with wasting hours of your leisure time with it.

I find it encouraging to see Holder say, “The policy is to go after those people who violate both federal and state law”
(emphasis mine)

Comment #32: cynickal  on  04/06  at  02:33 PM

it’s a good example of how privileged people can use that privilege for social good

This is something I’ve heard Noam Chomsky emphasize several times.  Action is the responsibility of the privileged.  We have better access to power, and as you said, we have fewer risks.  We often get discouraged and feel powerless, but that’s a side-effect of the privilege itself: we’re shielded from how empowered we really are.

One of the things keeping the privileged in their place—that is, keeps us from mobilizing to change things for the better —is by keeping us aware of how much we have, so we fear how much we have to lose.  But we don’t recognize that we also have more protecting us from loss.

Comment #33: Cris  on  04/06  at  02:38 PM

Weed is actually less addictive and less dangerous than alcohol.  I think it would actually do far more to take it out of the hands of children and street dealers if it were legalized and sold like tobacco and alcohol are sold, with similar “where you can smoke” restrictions.

A panel of British Health and Drug Enforcement types weighs in on the subject:

The new ranking system places alcohol and tobacco in the upper half of the league table, ahead of cannabis and several Class A drugs such as ecstasy.

Horrors - this is what sort of immorality happens when you start listening to scientists and their silly fact-finding!

Comment #34: Ms Kate  on  04/06  at  02:43 PM

it’s probably less dangerous than cigarettes, beer, and M&Ms;

Oh, but marijuana is a gateway drug . . . for M&M;‘s . . .

Comment #35: rea  on  04/06  at  02:43 PM

Before I digress further, I’ll say that I remember that back in the more liberal days the pro-legalization people were everywhere, and they had the deadly mix of hippieness and more than a whiff of crankery that made even people who agreed with their general points run in the other direction when you saw them descending on you with their pamphlets about how hemp can cure cancer, their tie dyed Bob Marley shirts, and their dopey smiles.  If that’s the face of your movement, no wonder they’re doomed to fail.  I wanted pot to stay illegal just to annoy them.
[...]
I’m linking these guys (and Joe Klein!) because they’re reacting to Obama’s dismissal by coming out of the cannabis closet.  It’s really the only way, because these guys are not your stereotype of stoners.

So shouldn’t you be in some lesbian womyns collective somewhere, screaming about how bras are a violation of your rights?

The problem is that until we know better, we allow bias to only confirm our stereotypes - potheads are smelly hippies, feminists are angry dykes.  We don’t notice the others until we see past that.  If you can figure out a way to consistently do that, please tell us how.

My position on pot is the same as catgirl’s.

Comment #36: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/06  at  02:45 PM

Fair enough.  Perhaps the enormous American junk food cabal could be convinced to put together a legalization campaign.  They’d sell even more Doritos, so….

Comment #37: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  02:49 PM

I know that in Arizona we voted to largely decriminalize it recently but it was overturned by the supreme court.

How do you overturn decriminalization?  Did the Arizona Constitution have something specific about the state being required to prosecute drug offenses as felonies?

Comment #38: Zifnab  on  04/06  at  02:51 PM

They’d sell even more Doritos, so….

Flaming Hot Cheetos.

Comment #39: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  04/06  at  02:53 PM

Piator, I think putting a different face on it helps.  That’s one reason that the wingers spend so much time demonizing me and Jessica Valenti, because they don’t want anyone to know that feminists don’t all fit this specific stereotype.  I mean, you can’t deny that we’re feminists. 

Of course, the problem is that feminism isn’t illegal, but pot is, and most of the upstanding citizens who toke during their free time would risk losing their jobs if they came out.  The situation is completely ridiculous, because employers probably benefit from hiring stoners.  Someone who goes to work, goes home, rolls a joint and farts around before going to bed at a reasonable hour is like the perfect employee for many companies.

Comment #40: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/06  at  02:54 PM

Hey, here’s another Marcotte woman making the news: Spokane dish detergent smuggler Patti Marcotte:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-soap-smuggling6-2009apr06,0,3154007.story

Comment #41: Hector B.  on  04/06  at  02:55 PM

A few years ago, we had a bad rabies year and our cats did not have up to date shots.  We had two long spring weeks before we could get an appointment at the vet, and our big boy (the one who opens windows) was fit to be tied.

We had a large number of people in the house, all of which needed to leave at the same time.  Poor kitty was crying, howling, begging, and blocking the door.  Just when I thought there was no way to get out without him getting out, I got the catnip out of the fridge (one place he can’t get to) and poured some on the cat climber.

He ran over and started snuffling and rolling in it, oblivious to the people leaving through an open door.

I turned to my kids and said “drugs can distract you from demanding your freedom”.

Years later, they remember that vividly. It was a far more accurate and compelling anti-drug message than DARE would have been.

Comment #42: Ms Kate  on  04/06  at  02:56 PM

I’ll speak up as another non-pot smoker for legalization. (I was a complete goody-goody in high school, so I never got started then, and most drugs, including alcohol, don’t do much for me unless I consume quite a lot, which I’m not inclined to do.) The treatment of drugs in our legal system is completely insane. In addition to the profit motives that others have mentioned, I attribute a lot of it to the “be afraid” mentality that conservatives built their power base on—no distinction between users who just want to enjoy their substance of choice, and violent organizations fueled by illegality, and constant repetition of the fantasy that violence is the result of ordinary users turning into “drug-crazed lunatics.”

I must also mention the story of the first friend I had from the “Just Say No” generation. He had been fully indoctrinated and was absolutely against illegal drugs—but he was an alcoholic and a chain-smoker before he was 18.

I think the most likely avenue for improvement in this administration is Webb’s prison reform commission. Webb doesn’t shy away from the problems of our drug laws—he is fond of pointing out that when we have millions of people locked up for acts that our most recent three presidents have admitted doing, something is seriously wrong.

Comment #43: Redshift  on  04/06  at  02:57 PM

Fair enough.  Perhaps the enormous American junk food cabal could be convinced to put together a legalization campaign.  They’d sell even more Doritos, so….

Riiiiight.  You’ve seen what Big Pharma and Big Tobacco can do, so you now wanna encourage Big ExtrudedCheeseProduct?

Comment #44: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/06  at  02:57 PM

One of the biggest obstacles to massive decriminalization and perhaps even legalization of marijuana has been the loudest advocates of this policy. 

The biggest obstacle to solving a problem is anyone actively working to solve the problem.

What is it, talk like Willam Saletan day?

Comment #45: Dan  on  04/06  at  03:09 PM

Piator, I think putting a different face on it helps.  That’s one reason that the wingers spend so much time demonizing me and Jessica Valenti, because they don’t want anyone to know that feminists don’t all fit this specific stereotype.  I mean, you can’t deny that we’re feminists.

I don’t think it’s anything so cerebral, dear heart.  You’re both hot chicks who won’t shut up and simper - they have to tear you down because you won’t stay in the role you’re intended for.

Valenti (famously) has tits; if they start having to deal with her as a brain instead, it calls into question their entire view of the world. You two have to be cut down to size, marginalised, dismissed.

Give him credit - Dana doesn’t fall into this pattern, wingnut though he may be.

Comment #46: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/06  at  03:11 PM

I’m also a non-pot smoker who support legalization.  I suppose I might smoke if it were legal, but the hassle of finding a dealer, potentially losing him or her due to arrest and incarceration, and the somewhat lesser risk of being charged with possession myself just makes it not worth the effort.  I’ll bet it’s the same deal for a lot of other people in this country, much like during Prohibition where, even though drinking took on an underground cult status and was responsible for increased violent crime, most Americans just couldn’t be bothered to seek out alcohol as long as it was illegal.

That said, I’m very skeptical about the potential boost to the economy and government revenues.  Marijuana is a weed that’s very easy to grow.  What’s to keep people from just growing it themselves?  It seems like, in order to boost the economy or increase tax revenue, production of pot would still have to be tightly controlled, with only licensed growers allowed to produce it and criminal sanctions imposed on anyone who tries to grow it themselves.

Comment #47: keshmeshi  on  04/06  at  03:11 PM

“I know that in Arizona we voted to largely decriminalize it recently but it was overturned by the supreme court.”

I must have missed all the angry denunciations of “judicial tyranny!!!11!!!” from conservatives when the Arizona Supreme Court did this. Odd, that.

Comment #48: witless chum  on  04/06  at  03:21 PM

Kesh, hemp is easy to grow but decent psychoactive smokable marijuana is a bit more complicated. Not particularly hard mind you, but enough of a hassle that being able to purchase 20 joints for $5 is going to keep a lot of folks from growing it. I still, however, have to agree with Obama that this isn’t exactly a solution to our economic pains.

Am I the only one who saw a glimmer of hope there? Seemed like code for “Wait until my 2nd term you whacked out freaks.”

Comment #49: Sarcastro  on  04/06  at  03:26 PM

It seems like, in order to boost the economy or increase tax revenue, production of pot would still have to be tightly controlled,

The spread of hydroponics stores suggests that taxing growing equipment and supplies would be lucrative. I suppose there are some folks that shove seeds into their backyards, but rooted cuttings of high-THC varieties would seem more desirable, and thus amenable to taxation. Rolling papers are already being taxed, so why not bongs and water pipes?

Comment #50: Hector B.  on  04/06  at  03:27 PM

Back in 1995 I went to a Catherine Wheel outdoor show at Jones Plaza in Houston. Plenty of people toked and the cops did no more than to say “Hey, Put that out.” Things aren’t like that today.


But there is hope. The only televised debate for Harris County DA candidates last fall was moderated by local pro legalization advocate Dean Becker. That candidates would appear before him is sicn of hope. And the whole county flipped blue last election. Republicans had a night of the long knives last November. Sheriff, DA, and head of Commisioners Court are the only three offices they hold. It’s all Dems everywhere else.

Now we just gotta get Bill White elected governor. With luck the Republicans will suffer from KBH/Perry infighing, and white will cruise into office. Bill White is hugely popular in southeast Texas because of his excellent handling of hurricane Ike. He will also do well in Austin and the liberal enclaves of Dallas. If White can harness the machine Obama left behind in Texas, he’s moving to Austin.

Are there any other Dem heavy hitters in the race besides White?

Comment #51: Bacopa  on  04/06  at  03:29 PM

For another angle on this, Nate Silver did some number crunching yesterday on Why Marijuana Legalization is Gaining Momentum.

Comment #52: Redshift  on  04/06  at  03:31 PM

You’re looking at this all wrong - it’s not the money we make in revenue, it’s the money we save in expenditure.

The costs of the War On Some Classes of People Who Use Some Drugs are enormous.  We’re throwing good money after bad.  We do not need to spend that money on a program that is both extraordinarily wasteful and devastatingly destructive.  We do need to use that money for more important things.

Hell, yes, legalization is a great idea.

(I can’t stand the stuff, either - but then, I think people smell bad when they drink alcohol, too.)

Comment #53: Avedon  on  04/06  at  03:31 PM

The same thing that keeps people from brewing their own beer will keep many people from growing their own pot, I think.  It’s just easier to run to the liquor (weed) store than it is to plant your own.  And if you smoke a lot, it’s going to be harder for you to grow enough for yourself.  If you live in an apartment, you may not have dirt to grow it in.

There will be some people who grow their own weed, just as there are people who make their own beer.  But enough will not want to bother that there should be a pretty good revenue stream created by taxing it.

Comment #54: kaninchen  on  04/06  at  03:32 PM

When I was in elementary school with DARE, I wrote the best anti-drug essays and anti-drug skits, which I got to read aloud to every school in the district. I won by basically repackaging every lie told to me and treating drugs like poison, even though I didn’t know anything about them. I was used, and I’m very sorry.

I still have not used any drugs besides caffeine and alcohol, and alcohol is very rarely, and I am for legalizing everything, save meth. And I agree that this is an issue that shouldn’t be just on the bottom of priorities. Ending a war that costs billions of dollars for no results, and using all of that wasted money on anti-global warming research or stimulus is important.

Comment #55: Seebach  on  04/06  at  03:41 PM

Depending on how it was taxed and regulated, legalized marijuana could actually reduce tax revenues and total economic activity. The high price and lucrative nature of the business now is mostly a function of the criminal-incarceration risk; without that, you’d be talking about a price similar to any of the other dried vegetable products in your grocer’s spice aisle, single-digit dollars per ounce max. And all the security systems, indoor growing equipment, blah blah blah would no longer be getting bought, so marijuana farming areas would probably end up like any other poor agricultural community, only subjectively hungrier and more mellow.

None of that is an argument against legalization or decriminalization, just an argument against doing it for economic reasons.

Comment #56: paul  on  04/06  at  03:45 PM

I take what might be called a ‘strong legalization’ position—legalize everything.  Including today’s big scary super double extra bad drug, meth.  Amphetamines have been around for a long, long, long time.  (Stimulants in general have been around and used for even longer; indigenous mountain people in South America have been chewing coca pretty much ever since they got there.)  Militaries around the world use it to keep their folks awake and alert despite their fatigue.  Football coaches in Texas are famous for using it to keep injured players on the field.

Neither of which example means it’s particularly safe, but when manufactured and used correctly, it’s not much more dangerous than caffiene.  As for the dreaded ‘meth mouth,’ there isn’t more than anecdotal evidence for this phenomenon being anything more than the usual sketchy relationship between severely addicted people and hygiene, no matter what they’re addicted to.

Humans and other animals, looking at behavior in the aggregate, really like states of intoxication.  Most will seek them out at least occasionally.  Some are inclined to seek it out to the exclusion of nearly everything else, and damned little can be done to stop them.  Though perhaps if we had a more equitable society, where there wasn’t quite so much pain needing to be soothed, there’d be fewer people trying to find chemically-induced oblivion.  Or at least there would be more widely available and effective addiction therapies.  I personally wouldn’t mind seeing some real alternatives to Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, which tread pretty deep into cult territory with their insistence that all users are addicts, that addicts will never not be addicts, and that they provide the only means of salvation.

(As an atheist, I found the insistence on belief in a ‘higher power’ off-putting.  Also, I’m not an addict and wasn’t when I was <strike>made</strike> strongly encouraged to go to AA meetings.  I was desperately unhappy to the point of being mentally ill and self-medicating, but not an addict.  AA would point to everything proceeding in this parenthetical statement as proof that I was, in fact, an addict.  I’d point to my near-zero alcohol use today as evidence otherwise.)

Comment #57: kaninchen  on  04/06  at  04:01 PM

Apropos the conversation:

“Champions of harsh drug criminalization laws as the best solution to curbing drug use will be chagrined to find that Portugal’s eight year history of decriminalization has led to lower drug usage rates.”

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Portugals_drug_decriminalization_bizarrely_underappreciated_Greenwald_0406.html

But still doubt the Puritans in our midst will ever allow the horrors of legalization to replace the horrendously expensive and ineffective drug wars.

Comment #58: judybrowni  on  04/06  at  04:03 PM

You could write almost the same article about the anti-war and anti-globalist protest movements—their public faces are dominated by too many clowns and attention-whores and hippie wannabes stuck in false ‘60s nostalgia (sort of an analogue to the wingnut obsession with the 1950s that never was). Sometimes I wish these morons and fantasists would stop “helping” with their stupid stunts, but ultimately the rebellious veneer is more important to them than actually getting pot legalised.

As for ganja itself, I’d be happy to see it treated like tobacco (taxed, not available to minors, kept out of public indoor spaces, warning labels, etc.) and alcohol (no driving under the influence, clear standards on ingredients, etc.). I’ve never been interested in the stuff myself, but from observing the many people I’ve known who use it, solid citizen or patchouli-stained stoner alike, it seems similar to booze: most adults can handle it, some can’t; it’s a lot less addictive and unhealthy than tobacco for most users; and for responsible users it reduces inhibitions, generally for the good.

The only downside to legalisation would be the horrific additives that commercial manufacturers, evil crapweasels that they are, would inevitably put into mary-jane cigarettes. But with tobacco-like restrictions in place, that’s the end-user’s problem, not mine.

In any case, as Momento Mori notes, the “War on Drugs” (like the “Global War on Terror”) serves agendas beyond its publicly stated ends—it’s an easy way for the state and bigcorps to harrass just about anyone they don’t like, and promotes the culture of fear. On that basis alone, and despite the recent feel-good pro-pot campaign by the Judd Apatow film-making empire and pay-cable sitcoms, I wouldn’t expect de-criminalisation, let alone legalisation, in the U.S. anytime soon.

[Wil Wheaton, BTW, is addicted something far more stigmatising than pot]

Comment #59: Gracchus.  on  04/06  at  04:04 PM

Growing something that’s not going to give you a huge headache is a huge headache. I agree with the brew your own beer argument-a few will be doing it but not everyone.

Comment #60: dooflow  on  04/06  at  04:12 PM

I mean, if I smoked pot in the quantities I eat M&Ms;and their brethren, I might be in trouble. But in addition to the whole diabetes thing, pot just seems markedly less addictive than sugars and saturated fats.

Comment #61: Laura Clawson  on  04/06  at  04:28 PM

Sorry, that was a little flip. I’m pretty much pro-legalization, from the “tried it and didn’t like it” camp. And I take the issue seriously, I just read the line about M&Ms;as I sat here surrounded by candy wrappers.

Comment #62: Laura Clawson  on  04/06  at  04:29 PM

I would add that it’s actually a lot easier for most people to brew their own alcohol then to grow a constant supply of decent smoke. Brewing is relatively easy-add juice, yeast, maybe some sugar or honey, shake everything up and let it sit for a while.  Of course, you can do a lot of other more complicated things to improve/modify the final product, but it’s really not that hard to produce a decent-tasting beverage that will get you drunk.

I’ve never seriously tried growing weed, but I’ve known people who have tried and had problems regulating the light/getting the plant to bud, etc.

@Sarcastro-“Am I the only one who saw a glimmer of hope there? Seemed like code for “Wait until my 2nd term you whacked out freaks.”
yeah, I thought so, too. But maybe I was just stoned…

Comment #63: wednesdayaddams  on  04/06  at  04:39 PM

Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a marijuana addiction, but it happens to people who have a propensity towards being addicted.

I’m here to admit I am definitely addicted to weed, as is my mother. I’m not addicted to anything else, though, and neither is my mom.  So I don’t think we have a propensity to be addicted to anything except this. I really think it’s a form of self-medicating, as both me and my mother have mental illnesses including severe depression, and it really does help that. It’s a bad habit, though like anything else u get hooked on, but I don’t think it’s fair that I’m a criminal because I have this bad habit. I don’t smoke nearly as much as people hooked on nicotine… And I can easily be responsible with it. I don’t have to rob anyone to feed my habit, because there is no physical dependence, if I can’t afford it, i just miss it for awhile.

I am a web developer, my boss doesn’t seem to think it makes me stupid (most people in my office smoke pot occasionally, but i’m the only one addicted) and I have no problem keeping a job. (have had one since i was 15.)

Comment #64: slingshot  on  04/06  at  04:45 PM

The costs of the War On Some Classes of People Who Use Some Drugs are enormous.

Hmm. Got any quantification on that?

<i.I am a web developer, my boss doesn’t seem to think it makes me stupid (most people in my office smoke pot occasionally, but i’m the only one addicted) and I have no problem keeping a job. (have had one since i was 15.)</i>

Here’s an anthem for you.

Comment #65: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  04/06  at  04:51 PM

Since decriminalization took effect in Portugal, deaths as a result of drug usage have declined significantly. Opiate-related deaths experienced the biggest drop, falling from about 275 deaths in 2000 to about 125 in 2006, according to information provided in the report from the Portugal National Institute of Legal Medicine.>>

Comment #66: judybrowni  on  04/06  at  04:54 PM

I don’t smoke nearly as much as people hooked on nicotine… And I can easily be responsible with it. I don’t have to rob anyone to feed my habit, because there is no physical dependence, if I can’t afford it, i just miss it for awhile.

I am a web developer, my boss doesn’t seem to think it makes me stupid

I suspect Mnem’s definition of “addict” is different from yours, and that’s one of the core semantic issues that confuses the debate. When most people talk about addiction, they’re usually talking about degenerate addiction (i.e. the kind of out-of-control addiction that has serious negative impacts on one’s family and on one’s job/studies, and often prompts one into performing illegal or anti-social acts out of desperation to feed it). Degenerate addicts refuse to admit their addiction is destroying parts of their lives, if they’re even willing to admit they’re addicts in the first place.

You’d be better classified as either a functioning addict, or someone who’s taking FDA-unapproved alternative meds. It’s not a great situation to be in, and it can easily degenerate into a worse one, but it’s no reason to arrest someone, either.

Comment #67: Gracchus.  on  04/06  at  05:13 PM

I don’t understand where the impetus for the war on weed comes from.  It really just seems to be a big wall of inertia aided by the anti-hippie stereotypes you talk about.

The opposition to weed has always been about race. If you compare Loudobbs’s nativist ranting with inter-war hysteria, the same tropes are evident: those durned negroes and mescans are corrupting our youngfolk and turning them into dancing sluts.

Comment #68: pseudonymous in nc  on  04/06  at  05:20 PM

Hmm. Got any quantification on that?

A quick Google finds this site, which seems to be reasonably well sourced from government reports, and in 2002 estimated US$40bn per annum and climbing. Granted, it’s not bank bailout money or military contractor money, but I think we could find better applications for those funds.

Comment #69: Gracchus.  on  04/06  at  05:22 PM

I agree that race has always been a key component of the War On Drugs!, but beginning with Nixon, I think that its orchestrators have taken on a special antipathy towards young white people who smoke pot so that the whole phenomenon should really be labelled the “War on Hippies.”

Comment #70: Sadie Morrison  on  04/06  at  05:23 PM

Most responsible adults and voters seem to have tried weed

The last three Presidents of the United States have smoked weed.  Granted, it’s probably a stretch to classify #43 as a “responsible adult”.

Comment #71: DTG in STL  on  04/06  at  05:36 PM

Given the disparity in sentencing for crimes involving crack cocaine and powder cocaine (popular among poor brown people and wealthy white people respectively), I don’t see much evidence for a special antipathy against white folks in the War on Drugs.  Many jurisdictions barely bother with possession of marijuana, unless they just want to fuck you up.  Those suspected of distribution—again, mainly brown people—can expect harsher treatment.

Comment #72: kaninchen  on  04/06  at  05:37 PM

Who keeps caring that it’s not legalized/decriminalized?

I’d say Big Pharma has a major interest in keeping people from self-medicating away problems like PMS, depression, acid indigestion, etc. etc.

Also, don’t know if it’s still the case but I’d read that criminalization was actually pushed by Dow Chemical as a way to shut down commercial hemp production. Dow had just patented the formula for synthetic fibers and had a lock on production of stuff like nylon. Hemp is indistinguishable from pot from the air, and law enforcement has always said commercial hemp fields are a law enforcement problem because you could grow pot with the hemp and it would be very difficult to detect.

Don’t know how much of that is true, it’s what I’ve been told and what I’ve read.

Comment #73: SouthernBeale  on  04/06  at  06:16 PM

I am a responsible taxpayer and a high-flyer in my particular field. And if I didn’t smoke pot every couple of days, I would have to take Prozac or whatever to medicate mild depression. And pot is cheaper and more fun.

Comment #74: felagund  on  04/06  at  06:30 PM

Also, don’t know if it’s still the case but I’d read that criminalization was actually pushed by Dow Chemical as a way to shut down commercial hemp production.

I don’t know that this has been proven in the sense that we’ve found documents explicitly outlining this sort of strategy, but there’s a lot of evidence that this is the case.  The first book to tackle this subject is available for free online: The Emperor Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer  The fact that hemp, one of the earth’s most versatile plants, in utterly illegal is as much a travesty as locking up innocent tokers.

I don’t buy the idea that it’s the hippies fault that people oppose legalization.  Sorry, but it’s the fault of those who refuse to look past some tie-dye and patchouli and actually consider what the hippies say.  Wasn’t that a big motivator for a lot of the support for the Iraq War?  People saw that the hippies didn’t like it, so hell, there must be some good reason for the war.  Nope, as they always are, the Dirty Fucking Hippies were exactly right.

Also, very few potheads are hippies in any sense.  I had a job in a factory back in the midwest that was full of tough-guys, outdoorsmen, and plain old racist rednecks.  I was the closest thing to a hippie in the place, simply because I liked to read books and use computers.  About half of the staff was getting high on their breaks.  But, that’s dangerous, you say.  Not really.  Injuries were still very rare, and usually were the result of equipment malfunction.  The pot just made the dull drudgery and hard, heavy work a bit more bearable.

Comment #75: Jrod  on  04/06  at  06:53 PM

The funny thing is, about half of the cops I’ve known are pro-legalization.

At least one RCMP officer working in a remote community in Northern Canada that I personally know of is of the opinion that if he could offer free joints to people in exchange for booze, he’d do it in a heartbeat.  Alcohol is the single biggest immediate causative factor in a lot of the problems up here.

Another one I was friends with was of the opinion that if there was the equivalent of a breathalyzer to detect impaired people, the vast majority of cops would immediately be on bandwagon for decriminalization.

Comment #76: KeithM  on  04/06  at  06:53 PM

When most people talk about addiction, they’re usually talking about degenerate addiction (i.e. the kind of out-of-control addiction that has serious negative impacts on one’s family and on one’s job/studies, and often prompts one into performing illegal or anti-social acts out of desperation to feed it).

True, by this definition I’m not an addict. But I classify myself as an addict because I can’t quit, or even reduce my intake, despite the fact that I’ve tried. Does a nicotine addiction prompt one into performing illegal (i preform an illegal act just by owning a bong!) or anti-social acts out of desperation? I’m more like a cig smoker than an alcoholic.

It has had negative impacts on me, but only because it’s ILLEGAL. (I’ve been arrested, and DAMN is that expensive). If I had a min-wage job (the only ones I’ve ever had that drug tested) it could affect my job if they found out. The biggest reason I would like to quit, though, is it’s fucking pricey! I am glad I’m not hooked on the more expensive drugs.

I also have tried quitting my prescribed anti-depressants, because they cost me $200/mo (after insurance!). But I’ve finally admitted to myself I’ll have to be medicated forever. I really can’t live otherwise. And the prescribed drugs you can NOT just stop, unlike pot, or you get sick. Addictive does not always equal bad.

Comment #77: slingshot  on  04/06  at  07:01 PM

Pot is not addictive.  I realize I’m fighting a losing battle on this one, but an addiction is not just a habit.  An addiction is when the chemistry of your body changes due to ingesting a substance, to the point that not ingesting that substance causes negative physical effects, or withdrawal.  Nicotine and alcohol are both addictive because regular users will experience nasty physical ailments if they stop using.  Alcohol withdrawal, aka the delirium tremens, will kill a person stone dead if they don’t get medical attention.  Marijuana does not do this, therefore it’s not addictive.

The word is habituating.  And yes, that does mean the two biggest legal drugs are addictive, while the biggest illegal one is not.  This fact is deliberately obscured by drug war propaganda that has convinced people that addiction to a drug happens automatically when that drug is used regularly, assuming it’s illegal, of course.  This is similar to the way that Marijuana is called a narcotic; it’s not.  Narcotics are opium derivatives.  But, thanks to fifty years of propaganda, narcotics have simply become all illegal drugs.

Comment #78: Jrod  on  04/06  at  07:11 PM

Pot is not addictive.  I realize I’m fighting a losing battle on this one, but an addiction is not just a habit.  An addiction is when the chemistry of your body changes due to ingesting a substance, to the point that not ingesting that substance causes negative physical effects, or withdrawal.

Well, that’s the definition of physical addiction. What about psychological?

The term “addiction” is used in many contexts to describe an obsession, compulsion, or excessive physical dependence or psychological dependence

Psychological dependency is a dependency of the mind, and leads to psychological withdrawal symptoms (such as cravings, irritability, insomnia, depression, anorexia, etc). Addiction can in theory be derived from any rewarding behaviour, and is believed to be strongly associated with the dopaminergic system of the brain’s reward system (as in the case of cocaine and amphetamines).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction#Psychological_dependency

I agree that pot is not physically addictive. However, I feel like psychological dependency can sometimes be worse than physical dependency. For example, if I want to stop my anti-depressants (which i have a physical dependency on, but not psychological), i just lower my dose gradually. I don’t have the answer on how to stop a psychological dependence.

A person who is physically dependent, but not psychologically dependent can have their dose slowly dropped until they are no longer dependent. However, if that person is psychologically dependent, they are still at serious risk for relapse into abuse and subsequent physical dependence.

Comment #79: slingshot  on  04/06  at  07:30 PM

If they’re psychologically dependent, or habituated, on something benign, like weed, don’t do anything.  They’re fine.  If they’re habituated on something damaging, like gambling or WoW, find them a better hobby, provide support in their efforts to quit, remove their access to their habituation, etc.  You know what a bad way to handle it is?  Toss them in jail, get them fired from their job, force them to do humiliating things like piss in a cup on demand, confiscate everything they own, or otherwise ruin their lives.

Habituation is chemical, btw.  It could be called a dopamine addiction, if you wanna be saucy.  If you’d ever actually witnessed an honest-to-dog addict struggling to not die because they have no heroin, I don’t think you’d be inclined to toss the word addiction around so casually.

Comment #80: Jrod  on  04/06  at  07:39 PM

Some good thoughts on the racist basis and effects of the war on drugs here.

Comment #81: BABH  on  04/06  at  07:41 PM

An addiction is when the chemistry of your body changes due to ingesting a substance, to the point that not ingesting that substance causes negative physical effects, or withdrawal.

Good to know that gambling addicts who sell everything they own and rob their families to keep their habit going aren’t “really” addicted, so we can ignore their problems.

Was my brother physically addicted to marijuana?  No.  Did it wreck his life for several years and get him kicked out of college because he was staying in his apartment toking up rather than going to class?  How about the fact that he couldn’t hold down a job or even make it through a job interview?

Oh, but since it wasn’t a physical addiction, it was no big deal.  Let’s just ignore all of the people with addiction problems if they’re not real addicts.

Comment #82: Mnemosyne  on  04/06  at  07:43 PM

Also good to know that since my father wasn’t physically addicted to alcohol, the fact that he would come home drunk every four months or so and go into screaming rages wasn’t something for our family to worry about.  After all, he was just habituated, not addicted, so all we had to do was keep him away from alcohol.  Gosh, if only we’d known it was that easy!

Comment #83: Mnemosyne  on  04/06  at  07:48 PM

Habituation is chemical, btw.  It could be called a dopamine addiction, if you wanna be saucy.

I’ve been told by therapists this is my true problem - addiction to dopamine. I may get it various ways (pulling hair out, cutting, marijuana) but in the end, THAT is what i am addicted to. Unfortunately, no one has found a cure.

Also, I resent that you think WoW is more harmful than weed. WoW costs me $15 a month and causes no physical damage. Pot costs me $300 a month, and probably isn’t too great for my lungs. Which one is causing me more problems?

Not that I deserve to be in jail. Jail never fixed anyone’s addictions OR habits. (i was arrested and had to go through some rehab shit, too, and that didn’t stop me from smoking either.) In fact, if I made more money, I wouldn’t classify my pot habit as much of a problem. Mainly it’s a problem because I’m broke. This is also my problem with my meds. If only I wasn’t mentally ill, I would be so much richer!! =(

Comment #84: slingshot  on  04/06  at  08:01 PM

Best anti drug message was in 8th grade in ‘81 when I saw Dead is Dead.

It was the most disgusting film I have ever seen. Autopsy photos of coke-burned septums. Film of people rubbing heroin into gaping infected pits in their legs. Film of emaciated homeless junkies shooting up. A woman vomiting her guts out on a staircase. And worst of all, some dude’s liquid shit running down the side of the toilet as he withdrew from heroin. This film is 20min of pure terror. I was traumatized and couldn’t sleep for days.


http://www.answers.com/topic/dead-is-dead-1970-culture-society-film

Comment #85: Bacopa  on  04/06  at  08:01 PM

Mnemosyne - Pot does NOT make you stay home all day or keep you from getting a job (that’s a common myth). Sounds like your brother might have a mental illness.

Comment #86: slingshot  on  04/06  at  09:17 PM

Bacopa, I’m planning to show my kids Trainspotting when they are old enough to handle it - of course the gits and idiots who never saw it were protesting that it ‘glorified drugs’.  Um, yeah, whatever.

Comment #87: Ms Kate  on  04/07  at  12:27 AM

Was my brother physically addicted to marijuana?  No.  Did it wreck his life for several years and get him kicked out of college because he was staying in his apartment toking up rather than going to class?  How about the fact that he couldn’t hold down a job or even make it through a job interview?

I’m not sure marijuana is necessarily to blame for this as I’ve personally known plenty of undergrad classmates and friends who smoked MJ regularly and yet were able to fulfill their academic/professional qualifications without any issues.*  Some even excelled to the point of graduating with highest honors/promoted to powerful positions within their professions. 

I have, however, encountered far too many undergrads/people who failed to attend college classes, flunked out, and/or were unable to hold down jobs/get through job interviews without having taken MJ….or any drug for that matter.  It is often due to mental illness/trauma, lack of maturity, poor study/time management skills, inability/unwillingness to give academics/career/job the priority it deserves, or some mixture of all of the above.  Far more of the cases I witnessed in college and at work was due to the latter factors rather than to mental illness/trauma though YMMV….


* MJ usage at my undergrad was as widespread as binge drinking is at many mainstream US universities.  Though some MJ smoking classmates were a bit flaky at times with schedules and class participation, they were far easier and pleasant to deal with than rowdy drunken binge drinkers I had as neighbors in the Greater Boston area who not only made a lot more noise….but were also far more likely to vandalize property, litter the area with trash and human waste, and in extreme cases…get violent when they are confronted on their rowdy behavior by residents, campus cops, or the police.

Comment #88: exholt  on  04/07  at  02:03 AM

Nothing funnier than people who drink alcohol talking about stoner stereotypes and how they hold back legalization.

Seriously, it’s hilarious.

Time to go watch some Foster Brooks reruns on YouTube.

It’s always about whose ox is being gored.  If you don’t have any skin in the game chances are, most people, don’t give a shit.  All this bullshit talk of addiction and the deleterious affects of marijuana are irrelevant, and everyone knows it.  It’s as simple as, if you smoke it, you want it legalized, if you don’t, at best, you don’t much care or you find some excuse for being against legalization.

And fuck Obama for making a joke out of it.  The overwhelmingly black population in our prisons weren’t laughing.

Comment #89: ice weasel  on  04/07  at  02:14 AM

Mnemosyne said:

Also good to know that since my father wasn’t physically addicted to alcohol, the fact that he would come home drunk every four months or so and go into screaming rages wasn’t something for our family to worry about.  After all, he was just habituated, not addicted, so all we had to do was keep him away from alcohol.  Gosh, if only we’d known it was that easy!

in response to my saying:

Nicotine and alcohol are both addictive because regular users will experience nasty physical ailments if they stop using.  Alcohol withdrawal, aka the delirium tremens, will kill a person stone dead if they don’t get medical attention.

So Mnem, thanks for reading my post so carefully before jumping down my throat.  Why bother actually reading and understanding what I wrote when indignation is so much fun, amirite?

I didn’t say habituation was swell and fun.  I said it wasn’t addiction, and it’s not.

And please, don’t feed me a bunch of bullshit about how weed ruined whoever’s life.  Literally millions of people smoke weed daily without their lives being ruined.  They hold down jobs.  They raise families.

You know what?  Your brother ruined his own damn life, but it’s less painful for the both of you to just say it was the pot’s fault.  Sorry, but no.  I mean, you do realize it’s entirely possible to get stoned and then go to class, right?  It’s not just possible, but easy.  I did it in high school quite a lot, and it’d only be easier to do in college.  Your brother skipped class because he didn’t want to go.

What, do you think I should be subject to arrest, and having my life fucking destroyed, because your brother couldn’t handle it?  Screw you both.

Addiction is a word with a specific definition.  That definition does not include gambling.  It does not, or rather should not, include positive or negative connotations.  Stop using words wrong.  Stop pretending that someone who can’t stop playing video games or video poker or smoking pot has the same condition as someone who will literally get sick and fucking die if they don’t get their daily methadone.  Stop being a moron.

Comment #90: Jrod  on  04/07  at  03:22 AM

Oh, and I was sorta making a gag when I mentioned WoW addiction.  It’s pretty far down on my list of Bad Things To Be Hooked On.  It is, however, very possible for the right kind of person to get hooked on MMORPGs to the point that they do damage their lives.  I would probably rank that as a higher possibility than getting hooked on weed, but in both cases it’s difficult to say.  One of the great benefits I got out of being a young pothead was that I finally found a group I could hang with.  I made many great, lifelong friends as a direct result of smoking weed.  So, was I “addicted” to the weed, or was I “addicted” to the human companionship?

Wow has a very similar social aspect.  A lot of people who play it too much might be doing so because it alleviates their loneliness moreso than the dopamine production that comes with getting that new set of epic pants.  It’s an interesting subject, and is only beginning to get the study it warrants.

In general, these days I am a daily smoker, but I’ve quit many times before when I had to for whatever reason.  (Work, usually)  And heck, I wouldn’t hesitate to call it a habit.  Addiction?  Naw.  That dopamine rush is nice and all, and it makes shitty comedies into good-enough comedies, but when the time comes that it has to go away, it’ll go away.  I might be sad about it, but oh well.

Comment #91: Jrod  on  04/07  at  03:36 AM

like kaninchen, i have fibromalgia (and porphyria, and hip surgeries that went bad) so constant chronic pain. i am on fentanyl and oxycodone. addicted, at this point (let me tell you HOW MUCH that pisses me off!!!)
sadly, i am violently allergic to pot.

ya know, i have *never* heard of a man getting stoned and beating the shit out of his wife; i have never heard of a man getting stoned and raping his date; i have never heard of a woman getting stoned and putting herself into a position where everyone will blame her for being raped.

there is NO fucking reason for pot to be illegal.
legalize, regulate, tax.
jesus, isn’t something like HAVE the crimes committed are drug related? buying, selling, doing, stealing to pay for the drug that is inflated 5000% because it is illegal…

PROHABITION DOESN’T WORK! you’d think that we would have learned that the FIRST time around!

Comment #92: denelian  on  04/07  at  04:17 AM

i have never heard of a man getting stoned and raping his date

The ONDCP has.

I remember that they had a radio ad that was about your third example as well.  In fact, the ONDCP’s entire propaganda strategy seems to be 1) conflate alcohol’s effects with those of marijuana, and 2) try make marijuana seem boring and uncool, failing miserably.

Your tax dollars at work.

Comment #93: Jrod  on  04/07  at  05:20 AM

Since there seem to be a lot of people keen to say “I don’t smoke myself but I agree with legalisation”, I’ll chime in and say that I am (or more accurately, used to be) a huuuuge stoner in my 20’s (whilst simultaneously working successfully as lawyer in one of London’s largest law firms) and I also agree with legalisation.

Comment #94: Katherine  on  04/07  at  05:45 AM

If you live in an apartment, you may not have dirt to grow it in

That’s the least of it.  When my dealer “disappeared” earlier this year, I looked in to some grow-in-your-closet rigs and the biggest downside is that all those units are HUGE electricity drains—we’re talking hundreds of dollars extra on one’s electricity bill.  A spike in electricity use is also a red flag for the electric company > reported to the cops.  I went to a medical marijuana “doctor”, got my card and now I buy my sticky sativa bud about once every 2 months and I’m set.  It’s a farcical situation rife with hypocrisy, but hey, I’m not going to complain.

I wanted pot to stay illegal just to annoy them.

Also known as the Ezra Klein Is A Total Asshole Syndrome, wherein the delicate little flower Ezra was so traumatized by the DFH protesting the war at the hippie school he was stupid enough to attend (UC Santa Cruz) that he suddenly changed his mind and supported the invasion of Iraq.  Well, you useless little turd Klein, the hippies were right and you, you shitty little poseur and fifth-rate “intellect”, were wrong.

Comment #95: Henry Holland  on  04/07  at  08:23 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.