Why REALLY is marijuana illegal?

[rlrose328]

In other words, we say "it is right and noble for a man to risk death by climbing a mountain", but we say "it is foolish and stupid to waste one's life by doing drugs".  

Well... I think risking death by climbing a mountain, racing a very fast car, having unprotected sex, using drugs... hell, even playing football... is foolish and stupid.  I know I'm in the minority here... I used to be VERY adventurous and would try all manner of idiocy that came my way, but I'm smarter than that now.  Can we just inject everyone with "maturity" when they're born and get it over with?  Geez.

As I'm thinking while I type... I hate doing that... is making all of these things illegal... wanting EVERYONE to stop doing anything that is dangerous because we fear for their safety... the same as Christians wanting everyone to be a believer so they don't go to hell?

 :raised:

[SteveS]

Hey Jolly Snapper, I don't think the collateral damage issue is quite that clear cut.  For one thing, going on a rampage and denting the domes of people at Walmart is already illegal, whether you do so because you are on drugs or not.  It doesn't really matter why I "go on a rampage", and this is why I specifically said that I don't feel that drug users should get magical immunity from responsibility for their actions.

If we're talking about prevention .... well, how many massive homicidal rampages are committed because people are "coked up"?  The most spectacular instances of mass-killing "rampages" have been committed by, it seems, completely sober people.  Columbine, 9/11, Virginia Tech, etc.  I can't help but wonder if the drug-crazed mass-murderer is a mythical beast that maybe doesn't really exist.

In any event, if there does exist such a drug that would cause, through vivid hallucination, say, one to become a serious risk to others then I would agree there wouldn't seem to be any possible defense of consuming such a dangerous drug.  Even if we go this far, though, does marijuana qualify as this drug?  Does smoking marijuana induce baseball-wielding homicidal attacks at Wal-Marts?

So on one hand there are those who are pretty responsible with their illicit behaviors (sex, booze, pot, heroin, LSD, etc) who want to be allowed to use. On the other hand are those who want to see the use restricted or banned because some of the worst consequences can effect more than the person using the illicit substance.

In what manner is sex illicit?  Also, I think it's more than just users who want to use.  This is the point I'm trying to make: if we believe in freedom and personal liberty than how do we justify restricting what people do to themselves?  I don't think I've heard any compelling argument anywhere that a person lighting up a reefer (or several) in their bedroom is placing other people at significant risk.  I don't smoke --- but, I can't find any good reason to forbid people from smoking.  I don't understand how a pot smoker is going to get me killed simply by virtue of the fact that he smokes pot.

[Tom62]

My 2cts. Making things illegal doesn't mean that people will stop using it. Countries that have strict anti-drugs policies seem to have much more problems with drugs than countries that are more lenient towards drugs. The other effect of making drugs illegal is that the drugs market moves into criminal hands. Some drugs are more harmful than others, but I don't think that it is up to the government to decide what people are allowed to use or not. In fact any substance is dangerous when not taken in moderation. From a rational point of view there is no reason why marijuana should be forbidden, but alcohol not. The number of deaths caused by alcohol consumption heavily outweighs the number of deaths caused by marijuana consumption. It is also a fact that many people become aggressive when they consumed too much alcohol. So far as I know, marijuana has never caused people to beat up other people, just because they'd smoked too much of that stuff.

[Stoicheion]

So far as I know, marijuana has never caused people to beat up other people, just because they'd smoked too much of that stuff.

One of my friends asked me this once, when i knew less than i do now, about marijuana : "which is more dangerous : a drunken cowboy or a hippie toking it up?" He went on to say something like this...
The cowboy is going to want to beat and rape his wife. The hippie is going to want to cuddle and pass the joint.

[rlrose328]

In fact any substance is dangerous when not taken in moderation.

Exactly.  IT's just that once under the influence, it's impossible for some personality types (like mine) to stop, so the concept of moderation is irrelevant to them.  But we can't test personality types before allowing people to partake.

From a rational point of view there is no reason why marijuana should be forbidden, but alcohol not.

That is true... but we have all read about how successful the FIRST prohibition was, back when organized crime was in its infancy in this country and there were fewer money-hungry industrialists around.  Can you imagine what would happen if alcohol were banned now, even if it made it to the discussion phase?  <shudder>

The number of deaths caused by alcohol consumption heavily outweighs the number of deaths caused by marijuana consumption.

True... primary and collaterol deaths are much higher with alcohol...

It is also a fact that many people become aggressive when they consumed too much alcohol. So far as I know, marijuana has never caused people to beat up other people, just because they'd smoked too much of that stuff.

Only when a toker wants more and someone won't give it him.   roflol

[Martian]

Why are ANY drugs illegal?