If somebody who's stoned gets into a car and a car accident happens, then they are interfering with the rights of others. That's why I believe that pot should stay illegal. Keeping pot illegal will reduce car accident rates to some extent.
Nope. Alcohol is legal because a person can be responsible with it and it's possible to drink without getting drunk. Everybody who smokes pot, smokes pot to get high. That's the difference between pot and alcohol. Alcohol can be used responsibly.
That's what I figured. Predictable. Has it occurred to you that not everyone that smokes marijuana goes and drives afterwards? Has it occurred to you that someone can't take NyQuil and then responsibly drive an automobile afterwards? Of course you don't want to make NyQuil illegal, right? Why not just make driving impaired illegal instead of making anything that could cause someone to be impaired illegal? Seriously, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that marijuana should be illegal because people may drive irresponsibly when high and then turn around and say that alcohol should not be illegal in the same breath. I honestly have a hard time giving any credibility to people with such obviously contradictory stances.
Is it possible to drink alcohol without becoming drunk? Yes. Is it possible to smoke pot without being high? Nope. That's what I mean by using alcohol responsibly.
Is it possible to take NyQuil and still be able to drive responsibly? Nope. Do you advocate for the criminalization of NyQuil? Also, should being drunk be illegal in and of itself?
Keyword = then Not before that point when malicious intent is applied to a non-coercive tool. It's the same with guns, it's the same with alcohol, it's the same with anything. The capacity to cause harm is not sufficient cause to restrict ownership. Not sure how much experience you've had with cannabis, but this is a non-existent distinction. If you smoke a small amount of cannabis you will become mildly intoxicated, if you drink a small amount of alcohol you will become mildly intoxicated. It's not like the second one THC molecule enters your brain you instantly become super stoned - it's a gradual scale. Drunk, I suppose, means intoxicated beyond some arbitrary line. The concept is not exclusive to alcohol. [hr][/hr] Additionally, alcohol is responsible for 3.2% of total human deaths. That is no small figure. This is before you step in your car: people overdose, people get into fights, people get cirrhosis of the liver, people get cancer. Sure, it's arguable that if everyone started smoking cannabis cancer rates would increase, but not to 3.2% of total human deaths. Cannabis is carcinogenic because you're inhaling burnt plant matter - none of the cannabinoids have been shown to cause it themselves. You can mitigate this risk through using a vaporizer which doesn't ignite the plant matter, or get rid of it entirely by making edibles instead. [hr][/hr] It's a myth that a small amount of alcohol doesn't impair driving ability, likely brought about by the legal system's suggestion of such a fact through blood alcohol limits and the such. It's the same as any intoxicant in this regard - there is a relatively linear relationship between amount of substance consumed, and amount of intoxication. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2063-alcohol-impairs-driving-more-than-marijuana.html
Not really. The cost has steadily increased since the drug war started. That's the plan of those implementing it because they are the ones to benefit. Ever wonder why the price changes or it is a little harder to get when ever there is a presidential election?
No i never wondered that, and prices have gone down. Drug addiction rates have remained the same since the war started yet we're well over a trillion in spending on it. cocaine, meth, weed, ect are far much cheaper then they where in the 70's
The you need to hook me up with your dealer, cause I remember buying twice as much in the 80's for the same amount of money now days.
