English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Been asked before. Just seems so DUMB seing as ALCOHOL is perfectly legal and MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH more unhealthy and DEADLY than marijuana EVER could be. Stupid governments.

2007-03-29 19:19:39 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

21 answers

because they dont understand it fully? someone didnt like feeling stoned? dont know. the real question is why havent they legalised it yet or made alcohol illegal?
i always say this to people who think its right for it to be illegal while we can drink alcohol: how many times have they heard of someone getn stoned and beating up their families.. now compare that with getn drunk and doing it.. which seems worse?

by the way do you people not realise that you can grow tobacco plants? so it should be no different, they would be able to, if they wanted, treat it like cigarettes and sell it in bags or whatever.. adding all their chemicals, it would end up just like cigarettes

2007-03-29 19:29:54 · answer #1 · answered by zimba 4 · 2 0

Alcohol is a depressant and marijuana is a narcotic. Alcohol poisons the body by shutting down the higher learning systems in the brain. Marijuana alters the neuropathways and changes the signals sent to and from different parts of the body. Both drugs are dangerous in the wrong hands, and can cause harm to the user and the others around him/her. The only reason alcohol isn't illegal today, is that prohibition didn't work. Anywhere from 65-75% of Americans consume at least 1 alcoholic drink in a year as opposed to around 30% who smoke marijuana at least once a year. The government couldn't make alcohol illegal again even if they wanted to. There's too many people that drink, and wouldn't stand for it.

2007-03-30 02:38:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

both alcohol and marijuana should be. I honestly think it is stupid that you can sit there and be a freakin drunk, but yet smoking weed is much worse. I don't understand. If alcohol is legal I honestly think both of them should be. I know if weed were legal it would be a tough time trying to figure out how to tax it. I don't see it happening though beacuse they have a lot of ciggarette smoking ban in a lot of states which I also do not agree with. I think the American government sucks.

2007-03-30 02:25:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I don't understand it either. For that matter, cigs are much more dangerous, and they're legal too. Alcohol and cigs can kill you, and marijuana can't. I think it's because anyone could grow it, and they can't control it so they could tax it. Furthermore, the anti-marijuana commercials make no sense. Like the one where one kid shoots the other because they're high. That's a stupid parents leaving a gun around, that has nothing to do with marijuana. The only one that ever made sense was the one where they say it makes you lazy. The rest are stupid, and incorrect. Poo! :P

2007-03-30 02:27:57 · answer #4 · answered by SoCalQT23 2 · 0 1

Nixon & Co..
Declassified Oval Office tapes from 1971-1972
demonstrate that the foundation of marijuana
criminalization is misinformation, culture war and
prejudice.

"Highlights of Nixon comments on marijuana:
* Jews and marijuana: "I see another thing in the news summary this morning about it. That's a funny thing, every one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana is Jewish. What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob, what is the matter with them? I suppose it's because most of them are psychiatrists . . ."
* Marijuana and the culture wars: "You see, homosexuality, dope, immorality in general. These are the enemies of strong societies. That's why the Communists and the left-wingers are pushing the stuff, they're trying to destroy us."
* Marijuana compared to alcohol: marijuana consumers smoke "to get high" while "a person drinks to have fun." Nixon also saw marijuana leading to loss of motivation and discipline but claimed: "At least with liquor I don't lose motivation."
* Marijuana and political dissent: ". . . radical demonstrators that were here . . . two weeks ago . . . They're all on drugs, virtually all."
* Drug education: "Enforce the law, you’ve got to scare them."


Findings of the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse include:
- “No significant physical, biochemical, or mental abnormalities could be attributed solely to their
marijuana's smoking.” (National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, “Marijuana: A Signal of
Misunderstanding; First Report, Washington, DC, U.S. Govt. Print. Off, 1972, p. 61)
- “No valid stereotype of a marijuana user or non-user can be drawn.” (p. 36)
- “Young people who choose to experiment with marijuana are fundamentally the same people, socially
and psychologically, as those who use alcohol and tobacco.” (p. 42)
- “No verification is found of a causal relationship between marijuana use and subsequent heroin use.”
(p. 88)
- “Most users, young and old, demonstrate an average or above-average degree of social functioning,
academic achievement, and job performance.” (p. 96)
- “In sum, the weight of the evidence is that marijuana does not cause violent or aggressive behavior; if
anything marijuana serves to inhibit the expression of such behavior.” (p. 73)
- “In short marijuana is not generally viewed by participants in the criminal justice community as a major
contributing influence in the commission of delinquent or criminal acts.” (p. 75)
- “Neither the marijuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety.” (p. 78)
- “Recent research has not yet proven that marijuana use significantly impairs driving ability or
performance.” (p. 79)
- “No reliable evidence exists indicating that marijuana causes genetic defects in man.” (p. 84)
- “Marijuana's relative potential for harm to the vast majority of individual users and its actual impact on
society does not justify a social policy designed to seek out and firmly punish those who use it.” (p. 130)


-= It was a way to control those that spoke against his policies, thoughts, ideas and a way to strike back at what he perceived as enemies.

2007-03-30 03:17:56 · answer #5 · answered by friendlyflyr 5 · 0 0

Well the history of Marijuana criminalization actually had to do with racism toward blacks and immigrants from mexico. Im kinda fuzzy about the dates with this but the information is out there. At one time pretty much any drug one could imagine was legal here.

2007-03-30 02:24:22 · answer #6 · answered by Theodore Sebastian 3 · 0 0

because people abuse it alot more. and the government thinks it is making money by all the fines they charge first offenders but its costing us money they should make it legal control the quantity that people can buy maybe by giving them a card or something that shows each time they get some. sell it at a really high price and tax the far out of it. that would solve most of the abuse problems. more of the dope heads would get out and work to make money just to be able to buy it. and it would make it harder for minors to get it. use the money to help out the poor and homeless and the elderly.
by the way they need to do that with beer as well that would stop some of the dui's

2007-03-30 02:27:21 · answer #7 · answered by unitedfaith 4 · 0 0

This is just my thoughts on the subject:
If it was made legal it would be taxed just as tobacco. Because it is easy to grow people would grow bootleg bud and the govt would loose out on $$$$. Too much bs to deal with
Besides it is a mind altering drug.

2007-03-30 02:51:22 · answer #8 · answered by wookie 3 · 0 0

The answer is really quite simple, and it is pushed by corporations.
What happens when you smoke pot( and most of us have at one time or another)?
You think you are moving right along but in reality you are moving in slow motion, because your brain has been altered.
Now if pot was legal you would end up with a work force that would get out worked by a sloth, and that would kill this country as a world leader in the business market.This is why pot has been on the outs with government.

2007-03-30 02:48:06 · answer #9 · answered by ULTRA150 5 · 0 2

Centuries ago it was law in the US that large plantation owners had to grow pot..cannibus, on a small part of their land to supply the "druggists" so they could make laudanum, which was mostly made up of opium.

But on a brighter note, I live in Canada and it's not so illegal here.

2007-03-30 02:30:15 · answer #10 · answered by gemma 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers