should marijuana be legalized?

Answer 1

If you do the least little bit of reading on the subject you will find that most people who answer here don't know the first thing about the subject.

First, you should read the short history of the marijuana laws at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm If you just read that one piece you will see that nearly all the answers here are wrong.

There are two major reasons that marijuana was outlawed. One was racial prejudice against Mexicans. The other was the fear that heroin addiction would lead to the use of marijuana -- exactly the opposite of the modern "gateway"myth.

When it was outlawed at the national level in 1937 (not 1935, as stated above) the American Medical Association said that they knew of no evidence that marijuana was a dangerous drug and, therefore, there was no reason for the law. In response, the AMA representative was told to stop interfering. You can read the full transcripts of the congressional hearings at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/taxact.htm

The only other doctor who testified was Dr. James C. Munch, who later testified under oath that marijuana could make your incisors grow six inches long and drip with blood. Dr. Munch became the US Official Expert on marijuana.

In short, the laws were absolute lunacy from the very beginning. No question about it.

There have been numerous major government commissions that have studied the issues. They all concluded that the marijuana laws were the result of the worst kind of racism, ignorance, and nonsense. They all said that the marijuana laws do more harm than good and that the laws should have been repealed long ago.

You don't have to take my word for this -- you can read them yourself at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/studies.htm

As for the driving issue - the major commissions studied that, too. They concluded that marijuana is not, and never has been, a major danger on the roads. They also said that there are enough problems caused by the law in other areas that -- even if you assumed it was a hazard -- the laws should still be changed. Besides, there are already laws on the books against driving while impaired on anything - and impairment can be determined from simple sobriety tests.

As for the idea that marijuana leads to harder drugs, first read the history of how it was outlawed for exactly the opposite belief. Then read the history of the marijuana gateway myth at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/gateway_myth.htm

Read the research I have linked and you will see that most of the answers here have no basis in fact at all. Don't accept answers from anyone who cannot provide you with references to back up what they say.

Answer 2

I am not totally against it being legalized, but for one reason. What kind of laws are going to be put into place for driving under the influence of it? With alcohol, they are able to determine whether or not you are OK to drive by setting a limit that is testable. With marijuana, even one hit will put you in a state where you are incapable of driving. You can't test for it using a standard breathalyzer. The police would have to determine by your behavior whether or not your under the influence, and then do a blood test to see if you are actually under the influence. A blood test would show positive for it even after you're no longer under the effects of it. It's going to create a WHOLE new set of problems there. The police have a hard enough time keeping people under the influence of alcohol off the road. Right now, all they have to go on to protect us from people driving under the influence of marijuana is the fact that it is illegal altogether. Maybe if we could trust people not to be a $ $ holes and drive under the influence of it, then I'd have no problem. That issue really concerns me, though.

Answer 3

Marijuana should remain illegal for the people who disapprove of marijuana use. If these people smoke some marijuana, they should be punished to the limits of the law in accordance with their desire to punish.

For everyone else who doesn´t care, it should be legalized.

Answer 4

No. It's just going to make it acceptable to be stoned. Not a great example for kids.

Answer 5

33 year addict sober first time in life for 4 months now hell no.For certain medical uses sure but to be able to be everywhere no.

Answer 6

No! At the most It should only be used for medical purposes!

Answer 7

For medicinal purposes only. That's the way it was before
1935.

MERRY CHRISTMAS and have a nice day.

Thank you very much, while you're up!!!

Answer 8

It would, but they can't standardize it, they can't tariff it, they can't control or monitor it.
There is no easy way to monitor or limit its growth or distribution.

Answer 9

NO B/C THERE WOULD BE SOME CRAZY **** GOING ON! PEOPLE CAN NOT EVEN DRIVE WHILE BEING DRUNK IMAGINE BEING HIGH!!!!!! WOW!