SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

scandium · 07-13-06, 08:08 AM

I don't smoke pot but, but I am in favour of legalizing it. Here's why:

1. It is not physically addictive. This has something to do with the way the body metabolizes THC, but no matter how often you smoke pot the body never becomes dependent on it like it can with alcohol, tobacco, or heroin (all of which are extremely hard to kick, not the least of reasons being because of the physiological addiction). The "addictive aspect" that is attributed to pot lies solely in the fact that like anything that else that is enjoyed, the mind naturally wishes to experience the sensation again. The biochemicals, mainly endorphins, produced from sex and even exercise work in the same fashion and these activities are about as addictive for the same reasons; I would argue smoking pot is safer than sex has become, along with some "extreme sports" that are very hazardous but regularly engaged in for the "rush" they produce.

2. It is crime only because it has been criminalized; the act of smoking pot victimizes nobody. Decriminalize it and you will therefore see an immediate reduction in crime.

3. Decriminalizing it would place the distribution into the hands of government rather than the black market; this puts money into the regular economy rather than the underground economy where it can be taxed by the government and thus produce revenue that can be used to fund things beneficial to society (police, fire departments, education, etc) instead of into the hands of drug dealers.

4. It would eliminate the illicit traffic in pot and associated crime in the same way the elimination of prohibition killed the illicit traffic in alcohol and crimes associated with its distribution.

5. From points (3) and (4) we see a net gain to society in that decriminalizing pot, which people are smoking no matter what the law on it says, can generate tax dollars rather than wasting them to combat a non-problem to no effect, with ontold amounts being spent on the policing, courts, and prisons that could be freed up to be spent elsewhere.

6. Lastly, is policing the crminal offence of pot and underground distribution necessitated by its status as an "illicit" drug a rational use of police forces that are often overworked just dealing with real crimes? You know, rape, murder, child porn, assualts, burglaries, robberies, etc. And given the nature of our prisons, is it beneficial to incarcerate people for pot possession/trafficing whereby they go in for a victimless crime and come out stigmatized and experts on commiting real crimes through the school of higher criminal education that is our criminal system?

07-13-06, 08:08 AM	#55
scandium Ace of the Deep Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,098 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I don't smoke pot but, but I am in favour of legalizing it. Here's why: 1. It is not physically addictive. This has something to do with the way the body metabolizes THC, but no matter how often you smoke pot the body never becomes dependent on it like it can with alcohol, tobacco, or heroin (all of which are extremely hard to kick, not the least of reasons being because of the physiological addiction). The "addictive aspect" that is attributed to pot lies solely in the fact that like anything that else that is enjoyed, the mind naturally wishes to experience the sensation again. The biochemicals, mainly endorphins, produced from sex and even exercise work in the same fashion and these activities are about as addictive for the same reasons; I would argue smoking pot is safer than sex has become, along with some "extreme sports" that are very hazardous but regularly engaged in for the "rush" they produce. 2. It is crime only because it has been criminalized; the act of smoking pot victimizes nobody. Decriminalize it and you will therefore see an immediate reduction in crime. 3. Decriminalizing it would place the distribution into the hands of government rather than the black market; this puts money into the regular economy rather than the underground economy where it can be taxed by the government and thus produce revenue that can be used to fund things beneficial to society (police, fire departments, education, etc) instead of into the hands of drug dealers. 4. It would eliminate the illicit traffic in pot and associated crime in the same way the elimination of prohibition killed the illicit traffic in alcohol and crimes associated with its distribution. 5. From points (3) and (4) we see a net gain to society in that decriminalizing pot, which people are smoking no matter what the law on it says, can generate tax dollars rather than wasting them to combat a non-problem to no effect, with ontold amounts being spent on the policing, courts, and prisons that could be freed up to be spent elsewhere. 6. Lastly, is policing the crminal offence of pot and underground distribution necessitated by its status as an "illicit" drug a rational use of police forces that are often overworked just dealing with real crimes? You know, rape, murder, child porn, assualts, burglaries, robberies, etc. And given the nature of our prisons, is it beneficial to incarcerate people for pot possession/trafficing whereby they go in for a victimless crime and come out stigmatized and experts on commiting real crimes through the school of higher criminal education that is our criminal system? __________________ What can you do against the lunatic who is more intelligent than yourself, who gives your arguments a fair hearing and then simply persists in his lunacy? -- George Orwell Last edited by scandium; 07-13-06 at 08:11 AM.