Global Commission on Drug Policy has declared War on Drugs is lost.

[sirlancemehlot]

It being illegal isn't what's going to keep your kids from becoming baked out video game stoners - just like alcohol being legal doesn't mean they're destined to become alcoholics.

There's a case to be made that making weed legal will reduce the number of people moving onto to harder, more dangerous drugs. Lots of kids use weed now, and as a result have access to coke, ecstasy, etc. If weed were legal, they'd be buying it in legal, over the counter ways, and have less exposure to the illegal narcotic market.

Alcohol is illegal for anyone under 21. Why? Because adolescents, teens, and very young adults tend to be more prone to abuse. Weed being legal will make a huge difference in the number of users and, by sheer laws of probability, abusers as well. I'm not coming down on pot-smokers. I've got friends who've been potheads for over twenty years. Thing is...every damned one of them would've been better off without it. So much wasted potential bubbled away in bongs. And as far as removing the "gateway drug" to discourage illicit use of other drugs....sorry, but thats nonsense. Legalizing marijuana means more exposure to drugs. Exposure leads to experimentation. It just does. I've never met a junkie that skipped weed and went straight to crack or heroin.

[sirlancemehlot]

Agree to a point. But recall that when heroin use picked up as it became more pure and therefore easily-snortable in the 1990s, crack cocaine use dropped and so did crime.Some might say more focused policing and "Compstat" crime analysis played a part. But crackheads would steal anything and go batsh*t 24/7, smack users tend to pass out in hallways. The shock for me working in and around criminal courts was how many people are long-term daily smack users. Sooner or later they all crash and OD, but some can function for years.

Problem is while we argue baout street drugs prescription(or overprescribed, illegally-subscribed or falt stolen) pain killers are probably a bigger problem than anything else. But as you probably know for all the happy bullsh*t about the wonders of the herb, the most common drug found in study after study of violent criminals is in fact marijuana. Not sure it means pot makes you a criminal, more likely the lifestyle of a failure dumbass who falls into criminality has a healthy dose of street drug use. If you have a job that matters gettinmg high all the time doesn't work.

.

Is crack worse than heroin? Probably. Cheaper and easier access as well as easier ingestion. But Heroin users are no less likely to steal. Those folks are on a mission 24/7. Every one I encounter has a Suboxone packet full of sublingual strips--just to keep them from getting violently ill if they don't get fixed in time. As for your other point about prescription drugs---give the man a cigar! That's the huge problem no one seems to care about. Teens and early adults are getting hooked on this stuff and dealing it like you wouldn't believe. Oxycodone, Roxies, Xanax, and a half-dozen other big prescription drugs are flowing through the community (especially suburban communities) like you wouldn't believe. High Schools are overrun with the stuff. Kids and dealers are farming the stuff from medicine cabinets, stealing it, stealing scrip pads from DR offices and burglarizing pharmacies. Even worse, lots of older folks on fixed incomes are getting the pills legit, then selling them for $20 a pill--only to have the buyer turn around and re-sell for $35-$45 per pill. I've seen it with my own eyes. Arrested a seventy two year old man fro dealing oxycodone--he moved 160 pills in three days, mostly to minors.

[BroadwayJ667]

Do you really think you need to mention your gray eyes to get laid around here?

Any edge I can get

[Barcs]

Even if it were legalized, would I want them to become stoners? Would I want them to be baked and playing video games while eating chipwiches at three in the morning? Weed isn't as harmeless as we all joke that it is. Booze is probably more dangerous (outside of the lung-cancer issue) but we can't take that away and replace it with weed

Fair enough, you don't want your kids to be stoners, but do you want them to be alcoholics? Just because something's legal, doesn't mean that people are suddenly going to all start doing it in abundance. There's a reason there's a drinking age, and obviously there'd be a limit for marijuana as well. And what lung cancer issue are you talking about? You do realize that only a tiny percentage of marijuana only smokers (meaning no cigarettes) develop cancer, right?

Alcohol is illegal for anyone under 21. Why? Because adolescents, teens, and very young adults tend to be more prone to abuse. Weed being legal will make a huge difference in the number of users and, by sheer laws of probability, abusers as well. I'm not coming down on pot-smokers. I've got friends who've been potheads for over twenty years. Thing is...every damned one of them would've been better off without it. So much wasted potential bubbled away in bongs. And as far as removing the "gateway drug" to discourage illicit use of other drugs....sorry, but thats nonsense. Legalizing marijuana means more exposure to drugs. Exposure leads to experimentation. It just does. I've never met a junkie that skipped weed and went straight to crack or heroin.

Kids, by their very nature are rebellious. Practically EVERY kid has his or her experimental days. If weed was legalized, they wouldn't get it on the streets, they'd probably get an adult to buy for them, just like with booze (which is WAY safer). It's not like suddenly more kids will smoke weed simply because it's now legal after you turn 18. The gateway drug argument is bullsh*t. Everyone starts with weed because it's easily available almost anywhere. People try all kinds of things. The strong minded don't get addicted. It's that simple. Legalizing will absolutely NOT increase drug usage substantially. That argument is beyond absurd. It may grow a little bit, but not much. Anybody who wants to smoke now, already does unless their job prevents them by drug testing. I also have a feeling that if legalized, companies will still drug test because they enjoy being self righteous.

[slats]

Kids, by their very nature are rebellious. Practically EVERY kid has his or her experimental days. If weed was legalized, they wouldn't get it on the streets, they'd probably get an adult to buy for them, just like with booze (which is WAY safer). It's not like suddenly more kids will smoke weed simply because it's now legal after you turn 18. The gateway drug argument is bullsh*t. Everyone starts with weed because it's easily available almost anywhere. People try all kinds of things. The strong minded don't get addicted. It's that simple. Legalizing will absolutely NOT increase drug usage substantially. That argument is beyond absurd. It may grow a little bit, but not much. Anybody who wants to smoke now, already does unless their job prevents them by drug testing. I also have a feeling that if legalized, companies will still drug test because they enjoy being self righteous.

+1

How many kids tried weed without trying alcohol or cigarettes first? Marijuana is the gateway drug to other illegal drugs. Move it to the other side of the gate, and it's not a gateway drug any longer.

Plus, most sane people realize it's less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco, yet those are the only legal choices out there. If your kids wants to catch a legal buzz at 21, they need to do so by getting started on destroying their liver, severely impairing their judgment and driving ability, and perhaps get into violent situations with people who can't handle the same substance - or become violent themselves. If they want a smoke, they do so at the serious risk of cancer. Legal weed would be a nice alternative to all of that.

[CTM]

Agree to a point. But recall that when heroin use picked up as it became more pure and therefore easily-snortable in the 1990s, crack cocaine use dropped and so did crime.Some might say more focused policing and "Compstat" crime analysis played a part. But crackheads would steal anything and go batsh*t 24/7, smack users tend to pass out in hallways. The shock for me working in and around criminal courts was how many people are long-term daily smack users. Sooner or later they all crash and OD, but some can function for years.

actually the drop in crime rates coincides with about 17 or so years after legalized abortion

[Bugg]

actually the drop in crime rates coincides with about 17 or so years after legalized abortion

"Freakonomics" made that argument and did so convincingly. Neither side of the abortion argument nor any other pol wants to touch that and it's ramifications.Suspect it's not any one thing but several factors, some of which had more of an impact than others.

[RutgersJetFan]

I 100% agree with you. I just think that if we want to help people drug addiction we cant look at it as a "war". War is our answer for everything...and what ends up happening is exactly as you stated. We find profitability in it which prolongs the drug addiction because you need to prolong the war in order to prolong profits.

the "war" approach has never been the answer because ultimately it never helps. War is only won by the profiteers, not the dope fiends. I've worked for not-for-profit organizations that deal with recovery programs for drug addicts etc. Trust me that "not-for-profit", is just a name because this organization is receiving millions from state, federal and donation pools. And given my administrative duties i've been exposed to some things that clearly show that its not about helping people....but about the numbers.

War is "for-profit".

This is true, but the general populace is to blame as well. People, by nature, are insensitive pricks. If your congressman came out and said he'd like to put more of your tax dollars towards helping heroin addicts and less towards prosecution, the blowback would be insane from constituents and partisan media outlets alike.

And insensitivity aside, making such a declaration, short of in a few select districts and/or states, would be political suicide.

[villain_the_foe]

This is true, but the general populace is to blame as well. People, by nature, are insensitive pricks. If your congressman came out and said he'd like to put more of your tax dollars towards helping heroin addicts and less towards prosecution, the blowback would be insane from constituents and partisan media outlets alike.

And insensitivity aside, making such a declaration, short of in a few select districts and/or states, would be political suicide.

Certainly, society as a collective are stupid given what they allow to influence them. There are very few independent thinkers in society, by design. Not to say that the independent thinker always gets it right, but "the collective" always gets it wrong.

And you hit it on the head with the political suicide comment. This is why the approach to everything is with a war-like mentality. We can make a war out of anything and generate capital for them to burn through.

And I'll go a step further, it isnt simply political suicide, but that you'll got "suicided" by your fellow constituents via the lobbyist Solving the problem means ending the revenue stream which means pissing off alot of people who spent millions of influential dollars to not have you grow a conscience.

[Bugg]

A Call to Shift Policy on Marijuana By JIM DWYER

Night court in Manhattan, Monday, 7:30 p.m.

For a moment, after the lawyers had finished talking and the judge had murmured the sentence, Felix did not move. He stood in front of the bench, then looked at his lawyer, who nodded and sent him to wait in the pews with the spectators.

Felix slid into the second row, the tension heaving from him in a big sigh. For the first time in more than 30 hours, he was not sitting among the arrested in the holding cells. On Sunday morning, he was arrested on a charge of misdemeanor possession of marijuana with a group of other young men gathered on 42nd Street for the National Puerto Rican Day Parade.

“It’s jammed back there in the pens,” said the young man, who asked to be identified only as Felix to avoid jeopardizing his chance for a permanent job in the warehouse in New Jersey where he now has a temporary position.

More people are arrested in New York City on charges of possessing small amounts of marijuana than on any other crime on the books. Nearly all are black or Latino males under the age of 25, most with no previous convictions. Many have never been arrested before.

Last year, the police in New York City arrested more than 50,000 people on the marijuana possession charge, New York State Penal Law 221.10, which makes it a misdemeanor to openly possess or burn pot. During the first four months of 2011, the marijuana arrests increased by nearly 20 percent over the same period in 2010, said Harry G. Levine, a sociologist at Queens College who has closely tracked the data.

Under Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, the number of low-level marijuana arrests has exploded. A spokesman for the mayor described the arrests as a way to fight serious crime.

“Hot-spot policing that focuses on the most violent neighborhoods has led to dramatic reductions in violent crime,” Frank Barry, a mayoral aide, wrote in an e-mail. “Marijuana arrests can be an effective tool for suppressing the expansion of street-level drug markets and the corresponding violence.”

Other elected officials in New York are challenging Mr. Bloomberg’s position and are moving to change the law. Hakeem Jeffries, a Democratic member of the State Assembly from Brooklyn, said the arrests were an outgrowth of the aggressive program of stop-and-frisks in nonwhite neighborhoods.

“When these young people are stopped, they’re told, ‘Empty your pockets; show us everything you have,’ ” Mr. Jeffries said. “They take out a small quantity of marijuana, the cuffs are immediately put on. If it remained in their pocket, it would be a violation, like a traffic ticket.”

DURING an appearance before a City Council committee in March, the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, was asked about the arrests by Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito of East Harlem. Mr. Kelly said they helped keep crime low. When Ms. Mark-Viverito raised other questions, he said: “If you think the law is not written correctly, then you should petition the State Legislature to change it. The law clearly says if you have marijuana in public view, you should be arrested. It’s a misdemeanor.”

That led Mr. Jeffries and Mark Grisanti, a Republican senator of Buffalo, to sponsor a bill that would make open possession of small quantities of marijuana a violation, not a misdemeanor.

The mayor, who in the past has acknowledged personally enjoying the use of marijuana, is opposed to the change. “This would encourage smoking in the streets and in our parks, reversing successful efforts to clean up neighborhoods and eliminate the open-air drug markets like we used to find in Washington Square Park,” Mr. Barry said.

He dismissed concerns that records of young people’s arrests would hinder their chances of getting ahead in life. Most marijuana charges for first offenders are dismissed, Mr. Barry said.

“They are not saddled with criminal records because those records are sealed,” he said. Asked if the mayor’s office believed that people who had been arrested but had received a dismissal could honestly answer “No” if they were ever questioned by employers or colleges, Mr. Barry did not directly reply. He said, though, that under New York’s executive law, “employers cannot ask about old arrests.”

The charge against Felix, the young warehouse worker in night court on Monday, would be dismissed if he stayed out of trouble. “I’m glad to get out of there,” he said. “I’ve got to pay the rent by the 15th.”

E-mail: dwyer@nytimes.com

Twitter: @jimdwyernyt

[sirlancemehlot]

marijuana is most certainly a gateway drug. Not for everyone. and the argument can be made that removing the "gateway" does not necessarily stop those who would abuse from geting ino harder drugs. I think the best argument on the gateway issue in this thread is that it is more of a gateway due to its illegality, as those who step over the law to get stoned are less likely to fear the law when it comes to other drugs. REmove the illegality and the likelihood of drug use escalation is reduced. True? Maybe. A good argument certainly. Thing is, as far as gateway drugs go, I think marijuana is being rapidly replaced by illegal prescription drugs. Again, its an access issue. The more access the more recreational use. And the high from pills as well as the OD danger and addictive properties are far worse than marijuana. Yet weed gets more press and is more villified. I think people fear prescription meds less because they are FDA approved and come stamped with pharmaceutical logos on them. Bottom line, legal or not, mind and mood altering drugs are rampant and their use has no positive effects when abused. Quite the opposite. Schools fester with drugs, inner cities are paralized by drugs, bus drivers, pilots and cabbies and train engineers and even everyday automobile operators are putting the public at risk by using. Lots of folks puffing joints are harmless and responsible. Lots aren't, though. That's just the truth. I can't tell you how many horrible accidents I've responded to where the driver was high or drunk. OD's and suicide by OD are all drug related. Burglaries to home and auto are usually committed by drug users. The occasional pot smoker isn't usually a threat, but by saying that one drug is fine...you open up a big can of worms. What is the new criteria by which we can consider one drug "bad" and another harmless? Thje WAr on Drugs was a stupid, senseless campain, I agree. You can't legislate thought and you can't legislate desire. You can only limit access, educate potential users and attempt to rehabilitate. But rehab is not legislatable either. You can't force a junkie to be well. It fails every time.

[JerryK]

I think the only true gateway drug is: parents who are a-holes.

I had friends that smoked it just for the heck of it (more or less a science experiment), and others who went crazy and spent the next 5 years sucking or smoking anything they found.

In my experience, the second group had trouble at home (or chaos at home, or NO home), and those problems drove the hunger to be stoned.

[Bugg]

marijuana is most certainly a gateway drug. Not for everyone. and the argument can be made that removing the "gateway" does not necessarily stop those who would abuse from geting ino harder drugs. I think the best argument on the gateway issue in this thread is that it is more of a gateway due to its illegality, as those who step over the law to get stoned are less likely to fear the law when it comes to other drugs. REmove the illegality and the likelihood of drug use escalation is reduced. True? Maybe. A good argument certainly. Thing is, as far as gateway drugs go, I think marijuana is being rapidly replaced by illegal prescription drugs. Again, its an access issue. The more access the more recreational use. And the high from pills as well as the OD danger and addictive properties are far worse than marijuana. Yet weed gets more press and is more villified. I think people fear prescription meds less because they are FDA approved and come stamped with pharmaceutical logos on them. Bottom line, legal or not, mind and mood altering drugs are rampant and their use has no positive effects when abused. Quite the opposite. Schools fester with drugs, inner cities are paralized by drugs, bus drivers, pilots and cabbies and train engineers and even everyday automobile operators are putting the public at risk by using. Lots of folks puffing joints are harmless and responsible. Lots aren't, though. That's just the truth. I can't tell you how many horrible accidents I've responded to where the driver was high or drunk. OD's and suicide by OD are all drug related. Burglaries to home and auto are usually committed by drug users. The occasional pot smoker isn't usually a threat, but by saying that one drug is fine...you open up a big can of worms. What is the new criteria by which we can consider one drug "bad" and another harmless? Thje WAr on Drugs was a stupid, senseless campain, I agree. You can't legislate thought and you can't legislate desire. You can only limit access, educate potential users and attempt to rehabilitate. But rehab is not legislatable either. You can't force a junkie to be well. It fails every time.

All true. But not sure if criminalizing the admitted stupidity of marijuana make sense any more. The cost makes no sense, not in police manpwoer and hours nor court costs. Would rather cops do actual police work.

[sirlancemehlot]

All true. But not sure if criminalizing the admitted stupidity of marijuana make sense any more. The cost makes no sense, not in police manpwoer and hours nor court costs. Would rather cops do actual police work.

believe it or not, most cops agree.Most departments are stretched dangerously thin as it is.

[Barcs]

I think the best argument on the gateway issue in this thread is that it is more of a gateway due to its illegality, as those who step over the law to get stoned are less likely to fear the law when it comes to other drugs. REmove the illegality and the likelihood of drug use escalation is reduced. True? Maybe. A good argument certainly.

Ummmm, not really. It's illegal for kids to drink alcohol, yet most of them end up doing it before they turn 16 (and BEFORE they smoke weed). The illegality doesn't waiver the fact that drug abuse is more related to the individual, than the substance itself. All you have to do is look up the stats, most drug abusers today were abused as children, had drug abusing parents, or other problems with neglect. I believe this is where the problem lies, not with the drug itself, but with the parents who did a terrible job raising their kid. Some people have highly addictive personalities and others do not. I smoke weed, but don't drink, smoke cigarettes or touch prescription meds in most cases. I've tried other drugs in the past, but I stay away from them because they aren't healthy and the effects aren't desirable to me (alcohol included). I didn't try those other drugs because I tried weed. I tried everything in my younger days to get an idea of what's out there and because it felt cool since we weren't allowed to do it. Kids are rebellious as I said in the previous post. The gateway drug argument is dumb and has little logic behind it. You could call aspirin a gateway drug if you want to be technical about it. It's just propaganda. Caffeine has to be a gateway drug to cocaine since most cocaine abusers drank coffee or soda before they tried cocaine, right???

Bottom line, legal or not, mind and mood altering drugs are rampant and their use has no positive effects when abused.

That's definitely debatable. Some of the best music ever made was created by people under the influence of various drugs and substances. Plus you have the Rastafarian religion which focus on weed as a spiritual thing, and practices peace and positivity. I mguess Rastas wouldn't be considered "abuse", although they smoke a crapload.

Quite the opposite. Schools fester with drugs, inner cities are paralized by drugs, bus drivers, pilots and cabbies and train engineers and even everyday automobile operators are putting the public at risk by using. Lots of folks puffing joints are harmless and responsible. Lots aren't, though. That's just the truth. I can't tell you how many horrible accidents I've responded to where the driver was high or drunk. OD's and suicide by OD are all drug related. Burglaries to home and auto are usually committed by drug users. The occasional pot smoker isn't usually a threat, but by saying that one drug is fine...you open up a big can of worms. What is the new criteria by which we can consider one drug "bad" and another harmless? Thje WAr on Drugs was a stupid, senseless campain, I agree. You can't legislate thought and you can't legislate desire. You can only limit access, educate potential users and attempt to rehabilitate. But rehab is not legislatable either. You can't force a junkie to be well. It fails every time.

That's the whole thing. You are lumping in marijuana with the other drugs that really are a huge detriment to society. Marijuana shouldn't even be categorized as a drug. It is 100% natural, grown from the earth. It doesn't cause violence and car accidents.. not nearly as much as alcohol and hard drugs. I know there are rare cases, but with weed there's no scientific way to tell that somebody is high or smoked before driving, so any statistics that say this are wrong. Don't be fooled by the way the media portrays it. If they take a drug test on an car accident person and find weed, it could be from anytime in the past 3 weeks, varying on the person and is often very misleading when they say that. I disagree that forced rehab fails every time. If the person does need to want to help himself, yes it will fail, but if people support the person and he gets the right help he eventually WILL want to help himself. I've had friends who we've had to do interventions on, and every single time it worked out for the better. This is why I support Ron Paul so much. He's dead on when he says it's a health issue, rather than a criminal issue. Take the war on drug money and reinvest it in rehabilitation.

[billybroome]

Marijuana shouldn't even be categorized as a drug.

It alters you mentally as does alcohol, therefore it IS a drug. Please don't get me wrong though, I'm all for it's legalization.

[slats]

Hahaha... one dumb cop:

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

It alters you mentally as does alcohol, therefore it IS a drug. Please don't get me wrong though, I'm all for it's legalization.

I don't care if its legalized, at least decriminalize it for christ's sake.

[billybroome]

I don't care if its legalized, at least decriminalize it for christ's sake.

Ummm, aren't we talking about the same thing here?

[Larz]

marijuana is most certainly a gateway drug. Not for everyone. and the argument can be made that removing the "gateway" does not necessarily stop those who would abuse from geting ino harder drugs. I think the best argument on the gateway issue in this thread is that it is more of a gateway due to its illegality, as those who step over the law to get stoned are less likely to fear the law when it comes to other drugs. REmove the illegality and the likelihood of drug use escalation is reduced. True? Maybe. A good argument certainly. Thing is, as far as gateway drugs go, I think marijuana is being rapidly replaced by illegal prescription drugs.snip

yeah but...here is the chronology of my gateway

cigarettes

chew

beer

weed

I don't think I'm alone either

CT recently decriminalized it, which makes sense to me (pun intended) I don't want people blazing and driving, but the jails shouldn't be full of small time users either

my sistser caught her 14 year old with weed, but her 16 year old has come up clean so far. I told her to watch the scripts, he's proabably to smart to smoke

nasty habit, and harder to conceal !!!

[billybroome]

yeah but...here is the chronology of my gateway

cigarettes

chew

beer

weed

I don't think I'm alone either

CT recently decriminalized it, which makes sense to me (pun intended) I don't want people blazing and driving, but the jails shouldn't be full of small time users either

my sistser caught her 14 year old with weed, but her 16 year old has come up clean so far. I told her to watch the scripts, he's proabably to smart to smoke

nasty habit, and harder to conceal !!!

Uhh... you edited this post, and it still came out like this?

[Larz]

Uhh... you edited this post, and it still came out like this?

I was high on oxy's

[sirlancemehlot]

I was high on oxy's

' /> no. wait.

[rillo]

IMO alcohol is more of a "gateway" drug.