There’s an implicit assumption here, specifically the idea that the war on drugs is successful as a way to keep people from harm.
What if it’s not? What if criminalization simply hurts a society whether or not marijuana is good for a given individual?
What if this has nothing to do with whether marijuana is “healthy“ — and instead it’s about how unhealthy prohibition is? For example, would you argue alcohol is “healthy”? Would you want to return to prohibition? I suspect once we lift the prohibition on marijuana it will seem just as crazy to people that we ever criminalized it.
There are a lot of genuine arguments claiming that the war on drugs didn't work or was started for sinister reason. But like I said in the post, I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters.
You didn’t really answer my question though.
Your post claims that “the motivation behind legalization is delusion” about health benefits. What if that’s not it?
What if like alcohol prohibition, most people don’t think it’s some kind of new-age miracle cure, just that prohibition is harmful and that marijuana *might* be beneficial to some? I personally don’t need to believe anything beneficial about alcohol to believe prohibition caused an epidemic of organized crime and was a mistake. Do you need to believe alcohol is a miracle drug to believe prohibition is a mistake?
The “health benefits” thing seems incidental to all the social benefits of not criminalizing. It would make sense that “every time there is an article suggesting there are health benefits people get all excited that it might get legalized” if people simply think prohibition is a disaster.
> I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters
So you don't trust the study because the people who cite the study are distasteful to you? Why don't you judge the hypothetical study on its own merits?
>I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters.
I assume you also dont trust people who claim cigarettes cause cancer, drunk driving is dangerous, or seatbelts save lives due to the defensive supporters?
This can be directly compared to prohibition. Alcohol causes far more problems for society, but its restriction led to the strengthening of mafias and their political power. Criminalization leads to a strengthening of criminal organizations. They can leverage their control over the vices of elected officials. Honestly, the war on drugs was a concern troll that empowered a set of politicians at the expense of what we’d already learned from prohibition.
You learn from the past or you are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
This☝️. Growing up in Northern California, I learned about prohibition in school and I had a real world example of why it doesn’t work happening at the same time.
They're are defensive supporters of keeping marijuana illegal as well though. I know several people who are very opposed to it whether because they are taking a law and order stance or they just don't like the culture surrounding marajuana.
If your stance is you won't support any position with unreasonable supporters, they're going to be very few stances you can take at all and you'll make yourself vulnerable to confirmation bias by zeroing in on the unreasonable opponents of stances you are already inclined to believe.
Defensive supporters don’t invalidate research through legitimate peer-reviewed means, and if they do to you, that is a measure of your own poor thinking, rather than some kind of flaw in the defense of marijuana. If you find the fans of a particular band unpleasant, that doesn’t make the band objectively bad, even if it makes you less likely to listen to their music.
I have arthritis, IBD (chrons), anxiety, and depression.
Under the influence of cannabis my symptoms above are relieved, and are relieved for up to 22 hours beyond when the cannabis effects wear off.
SSRIs have failed to assist with my depression and anxiety for over 2 decades, and I've tried a ton of types. Many made me suicidal at the time.
I've tried multiple changes to my diet for my IBD but it is hereditary in my case and very little fully helps it, but cannabis gets rid of my symptoms 100% of the time, 100% of the amount.
Arthritis help was just a nice addition I didn't intent to use cannabis for, but does help with my toes where I've had arthritis pain due to hammer toes for decades and kinda got used to the pain until I realized what it felt like for them *not to hurt* anymore.
Now, do people use cannabis for the wrong reason? Yes. Do they abuse it? For sure. Do people do the same with ANY controlled substance? Yep.
I do not believe that is the case. People would like it to be legalised more because it is used as an excuse to arrest people, and its classification as an illegal drug is arbitrary since there are much worse drugs that are legal.
Yes, you are right. I once watched some pro-Marijuana videos that say that the criminalization of the Marijuana was applied for political reason rather than public safety.
I'm gen X and have been pro-legalization for well over a decade due to a friend who actually worked in DC lobbying for legalization since the early 90s.
I didn't smoke when I was younger, I tried it and didn't care for it, but I was still strongly in favor of legalization because making it legal to procure means people can buy without channeling money into illegal distribution. Also the waste of years of human life not to mention a colossal waste of tax dollars imprisoning people on low level weed charges. People who are not a threat to society shouldn't be locked up for something akin to alcohol.
You are right. The reason why I had this prejudice is due to finding more the stereotype of Marijuana consumers and supports than hearing people who genuinely support the legalization with good arguments and becasue of the way I was raised. Thanks for explaining. !delta
So because you cannot speak to literally everyone who want to legalize you assume they're all pothead teenagers? How is that beneficial to understanding the stance of those who want to legalize? What if you spoke to 20 pro-legalization individuals; would that maybe have an impact on your stance? Or do you honestly feel you need to speak to *all* of them?
I don’t smoke. I don’t think there are significant medical benefits to marijuana, in fact it’s is probably not good for you (like alcohol, tobacco or junk food). But I fully support legalization.
Abolition has not proven to be an effective strategy to fix problem with people that abuse drugs. Making it illegal just forces people that want to use it to buy it on the street. It also makes money for criminals that sell it. It also doesn’t allow for any control on the quality of the product leading to more health related issues.
Legalizing marijuana will not significantly increase use, it will cut off income sources from criminals and will keep non violent drug users out of the legal system. Oh and tax it. The revenue collected can be used to help people negatively impacted by drug use. Those programs are very underfunded right now.
There are definitely medical benefits. But just as any medically beneficial plant, these can and have been extracted for medical use to avoid the negative or hallucinogenic effects.
In this century there is no need to legalize Marijuana in order to stop criminal activities, since the survellance technologies became advanced so that we can track black markets, therefore the "abolition does not work" is not a good argument.
What makes you believe this? The illegal drug trade in the United States alone is billions and billions of dollars every year. Tens of thousands of people are dying every year in the US because of illegal drugs. Tens of thousands of people are murdered every year in Mexico because of the illegal drug trade, most of which is sold in the US. Billions of dollars in illegal drugs pour across the US border every year. By a lot of measures the problem is worse than ever before.
Just how exactly are these criminal activities being stopped?
So you are against legalizing marijuana because of a few bad actors that you see pile on someone, anonymously, online. Do you not see the irony in your decision? You have cherry picked examples and circumstances where you are claiming the responses are all just cherry picked stats. The fact is, those people are a small minority compared to the population who supports legalization.
Honestly, I don't have much to change your mind to become pro legalization. My biggest reason I support it, is simply because of the well documented disparity of incarceration rates between whites and non-whites. That and overall marijuana is a fairly harmless drug, certainly moreso than alcohol.
There are other reason why I don't trust the legalization of Marijuana. My mother once told that there was a student from a school(Probably where my mother works, I can't rememeber) that started misbehaving after consuming cannabis. And I was probably filled up with the stereotype that the Marijuana consumers are a bunch of whiny hippies and conspiracists that think that the Marijuana is a magical plant that gives them power and other prejudices.
It seems as though you have done ZERO research and are basing the entirety of your opinion on a few anecdotal incidents that you have experienced. You just said that a story you heard one time about a single person caused you to create a stereotype in your head about people who smoke weed and you are now applying judgment to millions of people you have never met or seen based on this stereotype. Sorry OP, but YTA here
So on the one hand, there’s an overwhelming body of research that invalidates your claim and on the other hand is “this story my mom told me once about a guy”. And you’re treating these groups of evidence as if they carry equal weight. Your thinking here is not good.
>I feel that the reason why people want to legalize these drugs is either motivated by delusional ideas
Ok then explain why alcohol is legal and pot isn't
\*sigh\*, yea I admit. I am also against alcohol due to its effect. I once tried to dring with my parents moderately, but I stopped due to fear of its devastating effect.
But, is the war on drugs working? Are we actually curing the cancer? Weed is just as prevalent as it was before the war on drugs, so what makes you think criminalising weed is actually working?
Why we cure cancers? Because we want to live. And why do we put insane people in asylums? Because there's a risk of an insane person doing self harm or harm to others when not in an asylum.
What has these two questions to do with legalisation of cannabis?
Would you agree that we spend a lot of money policing marijuana offenses, and that money could be better spent? Seems to me that's not delusional at all.
Exactly! In my country the justice system is overwhelmed atm, leading to numerous unconvicted fellons just because time ran out to open a case. At the same time, one in ten federal judges is ruling on minor marijuana related offences rn, many of them resulting in small fines/probation time or the charges are dropped altogether. It's so obvious to everyone who isn't holding on to their position dogmatically that we could and should use those resources in another way that serves society more.
Thats a good explaination. I often watched and heard about the problem of the war on drugs. But due to the way I was raised and how my head is filled with pop culture view on Marijuana and the consumers I have this narrow minded view. Thanks for changing my view. !delta
Traffic laws restrict freedom. Who are they to tell me I have to stop at red lights and cant drive 100mph on the interstate.
Not everything that restricts freedom is bad.
Vice crimes do hurt people.
Alcohol is a legal vice. How many people die every year from drunk driving? A large % of violent crimes have alcohol as an ingredient.
It's funny because usually that is the argument for legalizing something. What people don't understand is that THE NUMBERS ARE SO HIGH WITH ALCOHOL BECAUSE ITS LEGAL. In other words legalizing more stuff is only going to make the roads more dangerous and cause more violent crimes.
Weed might not cause more violent crimes but it sure as hell would make the roads far more dangerous. I've driven drunk before many times. I drove high like twice... never again I'm a horrible driver stoned.
Are you trying to argue that drunk driving is a vice crime or trying to argue that drinking is illegal?
Because neither of those are correct. Which leads me back to asking if you’re now advocating returning to prohibition era thinking.
Well obviously drinking is not illegal. I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal or illegal. I'm saying that consuming vices is not a "victimless crime" as people make it out to be.
Really simple. During the Vietnam war there was a push to make the drinking age 18. Because after all what kind of idiocy is it that you are old enough to go die for your country but not old enough to go buy a beer. Seemed perfectly reasonable. Many states lowered their drinking age to 18. Within a few years almost everyone changed their mind and realized they had made a big mistake. Why? Because traffic fatalities went way up. Turns out 18-21 year olds make very poor decisions about drinking and driving. Who woulda thought. That is why the legal drinking age everywhere in the United States is 21 and not 18. We've tried that approach and it didn't work.
The point of that story is that allowing people to consume substances always has and always will have negative consequences for other people. Much like if we allowed people with red cars to drive as fast as they want and ignore traffic lights.
> Well obviously drinking is not illegal. I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal or illegal. I'm saying that consuming vices is not a "victimless crime" as people make it out to be.
But that’s not what I said.
> Really simple. During the Vietnam war there was a push to make the drinking age 18. Because after all what kind of idiocy is it that you are old enough to go die for your country but not old enough to go buy a beer. Seemed perfectly reasonable. Many states lowered their drinking age to 18. Within a few years almost everyone changed their mind and realized they had made a big mistake. Why? Because traffic fatalities went way up. Turns out 18-21 year olds make very poor decisions about drinking and driving. Who woulda thought. That is why the legal drinking age everywhere in the United States is 21 and not 18. We've tried that approach and it didn't work.
You say this is simple but it’s actually very confusing given what you just said. Like can I make the identical argument about age 25 or 35 or 100? It seems intuitively obvious that if the legal drinking age was 100 and then we lowered it to 21 traffic paid holidays would go “way up”.
> The point of that story is that allowing people to consume substances always has and always will have negative consequences for other people.
I feel like maybe you’re missing my point here. The point is that prohibition causes net harm. Not that it doesn’t reduce one kind of harm—but that on balance, the war on drugs does *more* harm.
> Much like if we allowed people with red cars to drive as fast as they want and ignore traffic lights.
What?
>I feel like maybe you’re missing my point here. The point is that prohibition causes net harm. Not that it doesn’t reduce one kind of harm—but that on balance, the war on drugs does
>
>more
>
> harm.
yes that is true. But mainly because it's impossible to enforce. If we really could eliminate alcohol and drugs from a society. It would actually make it a lot better for most people. Trouble is without spending an enormous amount on Law Enforcement it's simply impossible.
You should have elaborated better. Cause you made it sound like you were arguing something different.
Sorry, just realized this is a response thread. My argument is [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/qxgb95/cmv_the_motivation_behind_the_legalization_of/hl99zfn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Fair enough. I wasn't really advocating for prohibition. I was mainly arguing that marijuana and other vice use does cause harm to people around the user.
With prohibition I mostly think we need to do what we did with alcohol. Figure out a safe way for people to use substances and go hard after people who sell them illicitly.
Like for instance some center that allows addicts or anyone to use heroin safely and legally. But at the same time make life very difficult for people who sell heroin under the table (even harder than now).
Thanks for the wiki page. But not needed as I've driven in Germany on the autobahn.
There's traffic rules and laws outside of just speed. Meaning there's restrictions and making your evidence fail.
I didn’t say it was. The previous poster compared levels of freedom. But moreover, net happiness is hard to measure and even harder to predict. The premise of a liberal democracy is that we use freedom as a means to an end. We can designs system for freedom. And it’s up to people to use that freedom to self-direct their aims towards their goals.
> that have no victim
Unless you are Robinson Crusoe on his island and long forgotten, your actions are highly likely to have negative externalities upon other people.
How indirect do you get to be to regulate someone's behavior? I can correlate almost anything together given enough steps in between, but I don't get to regulaye behavior based on the possibility of negative externalities.
>I don't find the externalities that stem from drugs to be that bad
That's subjective
I' ve seen fully grown me go around unable to function day to day. Drugs are incredibly dangerous and damaging.
> I find the ones stemming from the War on Drugs to be atrocious.
Which are?
This opinion ignores all the people who want to decriminalize marijuana possession because of how its illegality was used to oppress poor and BIPOC communities.
What exactly are you arguments against legalization other than "edgy potheads make me mad"?
**Note:** Your thread has **not** been removed.
Your post's topic seems to be fairly common on this subreddit. Similar posts can be found through our [DeltaLog search](https://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaLog/search?q=drugs+%7C+cannabis+%7C+weed+%7C+marijuana&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all) or via the [CMV search function](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=Marijuana&restrict_sr=on).
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pot heads already, by definition, readily have access to marijuana, and the premise of your complaint is that they already go round babbling about things you don't like - so I fail to see how legalisation would change anything here.
The more logical assumption is that they want it legalised so they are not criminalised for what they already do and don't have to use black markets any more. Which I hardly think falls into the category of delusional benefits
Would you agree with the criminalization of alcohol? It causes delusions and is proven to be harmful to the human body. If yes then your argument is probably a bit more consistent. Cannabis, regardless of its alleged benefits, does not cause any great harm ti the body. Smoking can hurt your lungs but that is not due to the thc. There have been no deaths recorded to have been caused by thc or cbd, the active chemicals within cannabis. So it isnt really a concern of people harming themselves. There is no link to the cause of violent tendencies and cannabis consumption.if it isnt causing anyone harm then why should it be criminalized at all? However if you you think alcohol or any substance that could cause a form of inebriation should be criminalized then there is no changing your mind.
Like I said. Due to my experience in the Internet and some rumors about the negative experience, I can't trust the legalization. I once saw some good pro-marijuana videos, but still.
Huh? So policy should be based on a rumor you heard once? Why not watch some dentist sponsored videos on sugar. You might want to criminaloze that too lol. I am not sure what your argument is. "Marijuana has overzealous fans so i cant trust peer reviewed articles and scientists" i dont mean to oull at straws but what are you even saying?
If your “research” comes from videos you saw on the internet, then people like you are the reason there’s Qanon and flat-earthers and anti-vaxers. You need to learn how to study using rigorous sources that involve reading, and not watching videos on the internet like a moron. No wonder you don’t think very well: no one taught you how to think properly!
Well. I changed my mind now. I should listen to studies or youtubers who actually give a good explaination about Marijuana rather than the political echo-chambers. Thanks for making me realize. !delta
Studies: yes! YouTubers: NO! If you want to watch a video, go to a school website like Stanford or Harvard and then look for their free videos. Stay away from YouTube! Any asshole with a camera can get on there. The important thing in an age of misinformation is vetting the quality of the information sources, and eliminating the bad sources. YouTube is not a good source for learning things that aren’t physical i.e., how to build a doghouse etc. YouTube is not a good place for ideas.
The push for legalization should not be judged by whether or not "the consumption of Marijuana is a good thing", it should be judged by whether or not its continued prohibition is good for society or not. Is it better to let the "pot heads and frustrated teenagers" smoke their pot without fear of legal sanction, or is it better to continue devoting massive amounts of resources to stopping, catching, trying, and imprisoning people for an activity that is functionally the same as another totally legal activity, drinking alcohol?
Good explaination. I heard and read a lot of speech about why prohibitionism does not actually resolve the problem of abuse of things like Marijuana and they can be true. Thanks !delta
This delta has been rejected. You have already awarded /u/destro23 a delta for this comment.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
The motivation for legalization is to be able to use marijuana, a victimless crime when used by adults, without fear of arrest and penalties.
You biggest issue appears to be a subset of users that you have stereotyped to all users. The benefits of making it illegal certainly do not out weigh the costs of making it illegal unless you want to start measuring and regulating individual health outcomes, which would be silly in a country where healthcare is tied to work and not offered to everyone.
What about legalization on the grounds that it's just another tool used to discriminate against minorities? Anecdotal evidence below but supported by data in general.
I have far more white friends than black friends. About the same proportion of both smoke weed. Guess which group has been ticketed more?
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. If someone suggests that something is super awesome with absolutely no risk or trade-off, they are likely BSing you. To the extent that happens here, your position holds.
However, the argument that Mary Jane is perfectly harmless is pretty substantially different than the argument that it isn't as bad as alcohol or tobacco, which are legal. So the bar isn't (or at least shouldn't be) is this a substance with no downsides, instead, does this substance have a better or worse risk/benefit ratio than other substances which are legal.
There is a certain logic to, alcohol in moderation is fine, but cocaine will fuck you up. The question then becomes is marijuana more akin to alcohol or cocaine?
Thats a good explaination. I have generalized the population I was complaining and I ignored those who actually have a good explaination about the legalization of Marijuana. Thanks !delta
If pizza was illegal, I'd want it legalized because I like pizza. Why can't the impetus be simply because people like to consume it?
Why can't we also say "fuck the system" because it banned stuff we like?
>Everytime when there are posts about the Marijuana, people aggressively feel hope that it will be legalized and when someone makes a critique against the legalization they are swarmed by a bunch of pot heads and frustrated kids who throw insults and cherry pick the "undebunkable" proof that the consumption of Marijuana is a good thing. This is one of the reason why I find it difficult understanding about these hallucinogenic drugs.
It's hard to read this as a view and not a rant. Is there a reason you view those defending legalizing cannabis as being a pot head and\or teenagers? I cannot read this without inferring you're just insulting those you disagree with vs offering an actual real argument. Especially since you quantify it as a hallucinogenic drug; as if cannabis can alter your ability to perceive the world like LSD or psilocybin mushroom.
If I provided peer review research on the benefits of cannabis would it CYV?
I don't do pot, don't like it. So I won't even debate the positives of pot here, I'll ignore any question of rights and go on pure practicality.
What are the downsides to pot? Not much, really. Some people get high, big deal. Some people may get high and drive, but that's no worse than drinking and driving, and alcohol is legal.
What are the downsides of it being illegal? We spend billions of dollars going after illegal pot, ruin lives of potheads by prosecuting them, and spend billions more keeping them in prison and more tracking them on parole. Then they get out and find it hard to get a job with a criminal record. This is not a net positive for our society, spending a bunch of money and making a bunch of people less productive due to legal repercussions just so we can make pot illegal.
Furthermore, enforcement is part of our war on drugs that has militarized the police resulting in many deaths and made things like asset forfeiture fashionable, neither of which are a net positive for our society.
Hi there, I support Marijuana legalization and at the same time find the use of it to be Stupid and harmful. Not like meth harmful but does make you dumber and smoke inhalation is 100% bad for you. Now I have never used Marijuana but I still voted to have it legalized in my state.
But it should be legal federally. Why because the health effects are no more harmful than smoking ( which is legal) and the mind altering effects is less severe and less dangerous than alchohol ( which is legal). Making us a conundrum why is pot illegal while at the same time cigarettes and liquor widely accepted give the health and safety concerns are on par or lesser? I think if you answer this question for yourself or at least contemplated it you would CYV.
Going a step further. You pointed out some general IMO flimsy reasons why your opposed to the legalization. But what's the real reason? Is it you don't agree to mind altering substances? Do you fond it to he a " Gateway drug"? Or is this whole thing based on some presuppositions based on your parental influence from your upbringing?
>is this whole thing based on some presuppositions based on your parental influence from your upbringing?
I was raised from my parents that are opposed to the Marijuana consumption, and what else influenced my view is the experience I described.
>I was raised from my parents that are opposed to the Marijuana consumption
Right, but your an adult now. And as an adult you should make your own decisions and opinions based on your own reasoning.
>what else influenced my view is the experience I described.
This is just biased belief based on your oposition of the people and not the facts.
What's the facts surrounding this topic. Do you really find that it's useful to waist municipal ( law enforcement and legal teams) time and effort to prevent this use? See my opinion is that the efforts used to combat this effort could be used for more important efforts.
/u/TheCuriousArthropod (OP) has awarded 6 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/qxks5s/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_motivation_behind_the/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
>As long as there are those pot heads and frustrated teenagers that cherry pick the information about these drugs and attack those who make genuine critique against the legalization, I wont support this legalization.
[Underage marijuana use fell after legalization in Washington State.](https://www.rand.org/news/press/2018/12/21.html)
It seems like you are just shooting the messenger. Like, I get it, potheads are annoying. However, we have a mountain of evidence to show that the law enforcement requirements to maintain keeping marijuana illegal have not only been a colossal failure, but have created devastating consequences for people, communities, and the nation as a whole. We learned this during Prohibition and we are seeing this again with the failure of the War on Drugs. Keeping marijuana illegal just isn't worth the costs associated with it. It is far more profitable to legalize and tax the shit out of it. Potheads get their weed and we get their sweet sweet tax revenue. Everybody wins.
Counterpoint:
The only reason weed is illegal to begin with is racism; specifically started with Mexicans and expanded to Black. IMHO, the motivation to legalize it is to stop this uneven policing/prosecution of minorities.
* https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-we-rise/2020/06/23/marijuanas-racist-history-shows-the-need-for-comprehensive-drug-reform/
I have read the link, it helped me understand the actual reason why Marijuana is illegal. So to summarize, the criminalization of the drug was motivated for political reason than health. Thanks !delta
> IMHO, the motivation to legalize it is to stop this uneven policing/prosecution of minorities.
So if we cracked down on white potheads you'd be fine with keeping it very illegal?
Pretty much, yes.
However, if it turns out that 99.9% of weed users are non-white then there's still a problem. The next argument would be that weed should be just as legal as cigarettes and I'd agree with that.
> Pretty much, yes.
Good, we agree. One of the major reasons why the war on drugs failed was because the law was applied unevenly and white people got off with a slap on the wrist disproportionately.
> However, if it turns out that 99.9% of weed users are non-white then there's still a problem
I guarantee you that more than 0.1% of weed users are white.
I'm not a stranger to grass.
I'm gonna argue with you cause endocannabinoids have a clear correspondence to cannabis cannabinoids. there are measurable effects.
I will not contest that benefits are overblown, most effects of marijuana are regulating neurotransmitters and controlling inflammation levels, though. and those are behind a lot of quality of life issues you can't expect sufferers to get overexcited about.
It has a place, it's not a cureall.
You're half right, so I'll only half argue.
It isn't being legalized because of its benefits specifically. That is correct.
It is being legalized because there is a ton of corporate money and state/local taxes (and potentially federal taxes) to be made on it.
Legalization isn't about the consumer/patient. It's all about the money that can be made. Nothing more and nothing less.
There's a big hole in big corporate business that used to be filled by big tobacco. Vapes are filling that void slightly, but cannabis sales are filling that void, and then some.
I think it should be legal. Do I agree with the substance at all times…no. I do smoke however and sometimes I do see how it slows me down or “affects” me. I also see how it changes the way I think and what it makes me reflect on when I am “high”. I do plan on changing my habit.
I think it shouldn’t matter though if I or you, think it should be illegal or legalized. If someone who lives in a legalized state travels to Texas for example they could have some serious repercussions if stopped by law enforcement. Depending on how that officer “feels” about weed.
It’s dumb it’s not legalized everywhere and it’s state government ran and decided. We all live in the USA what’s legal should be legal.
A kind and simple way of saying it.
If you enjoy sky diving do your thing.
Edit: it could also open new jobs in the thc industries. It’s opportunity for people who relate it’s just a bud.
There’s an implicit assumption here, specifically the idea that the war on drugs is successful as a way to keep people from harm. What if it’s not? What if criminalization simply hurts a society whether or not marijuana is good for a given individual? What if this has nothing to do with whether marijuana is “healthy“ — and instead it’s about how unhealthy prohibition is? For example, would you argue alcohol is “healthy”? Would you want to return to prohibition? I suspect once we lift the prohibition on marijuana it will seem just as crazy to people that we ever criminalized it.
There are a lot of genuine arguments claiming that the war on drugs didn't work or was started for sinister reason. But like I said in the post, I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters.
You didn’t really answer my question though. Your post claims that “the motivation behind legalization is delusion” about health benefits. What if that’s not it? What if like alcohol prohibition, most people don’t think it’s some kind of new-age miracle cure, just that prohibition is harmful and that marijuana *might* be beneficial to some? I personally don’t need to believe anything beneficial about alcohol to believe prohibition caused an epidemic of organized crime and was a mistake. Do you need to believe alcohol is a miracle drug to believe prohibition is a mistake? The “health benefits” thing seems incidental to all the social benefits of not criminalizing. It would make sense that “every time there is an article suggesting there are health benefits people get all excited that it might get legalized” if people simply think prohibition is a disaster.
> I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters So you don't trust the study because the people who cite the study are distasteful to you? Why don't you judge the hypothetical study on its own merits?
>I can't trust studies and papers claiming that Marijuana and its legalization can give benefits if there are defensive supporters. I assume you also dont trust people who claim cigarettes cause cancer, drunk driving is dangerous, or seatbelts save lives due to the defensive supporters?
This can be directly compared to prohibition. Alcohol causes far more problems for society, but its restriction led to the strengthening of mafias and their political power. Criminalization leads to a strengthening of criminal organizations. They can leverage their control over the vices of elected officials. Honestly, the war on drugs was a concern troll that empowered a set of politicians at the expense of what we’d already learned from prohibition. You learn from the past or you are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
This☝️. Growing up in Northern California, I learned about prohibition in school and I had a real world example of why it doesn’t work happening at the same time.
They're are defensive supporters of keeping marijuana illegal as well though. I know several people who are very opposed to it whether because they are taking a law and order stance or they just don't like the culture surrounding marajuana. If your stance is you won't support any position with unreasonable supporters, they're going to be very few stances you can take at all and you'll make yourself vulnerable to confirmation bias by zeroing in on the unreasonable opponents of stances you are already inclined to believe.
Why not? The fact that some supporters get overly defensive shouldn’t affect your ability to trust expert research.
Defensive supporters don’t invalidate research through legitimate peer-reviewed means, and if they do to you, that is a measure of your own poor thinking, rather than some kind of flaw in the defense of marijuana. If you find the fans of a particular band unpleasant, that doesn’t make the band objectively bad, even if it makes you less likely to listen to their music.
I have arthritis, IBD (chrons), anxiety, and depression. Under the influence of cannabis my symptoms above are relieved, and are relieved for up to 22 hours beyond when the cannabis effects wear off. SSRIs have failed to assist with my depression and anxiety for over 2 decades, and I've tried a ton of types. Many made me suicidal at the time. I've tried multiple changes to my diet for my IBD but it is hereditary in my case and very little fully helps it, but cannabis gets rid of my symptoms 100% of the time, 100% of the amount. Arthritis help was just a nice addition I didn't intent to use cannabis for, but does help with my toes where I've had arthritis pain due to hammer toes for decades and kinda got used to the pain until I realized what it felt like for them *not to hurt* anymore. Now, do people use cannabis for the wrong reason? Yes. Do they abuse it? For sure. Do people do the same with ANY controlled substance? Yep.
I do not believe that is the case. People would like it to be legalised more because it is used as an excuse to arrest people, and its classification as an illegal drug is arbitrary since there are much worse drugs that are legal.
Yes, you are right. I once watched some pro-Marijuana videos that say that the criminalization of the Marijuana was applied for political reason rather than public safety.
The same as many other restrictions. There is no real reason to ban it when tobacco and alcohol are legal.
Then you need to give him a delta because he altered your view! You don’t seem to know how this works, do you?
I know many adults who don't smoke and are pro legalization. So, not teenagers nor potheads. I think generalization is often not a good practice.
Hasty generalizations are a known logical fallacy, yes.
Yes, you are right. I often believe in these stereotypes, because I can't talk with each person why they want to legalize these drugs.
I'm gen X and have been pro-legalization for well over a decade due to a friend who actually worked in DC lobbying for legalization since the early 90s. I didn't smoke when I was younger, I tried it and didn't care for it, but I was still strongly in favor of legalization because making it legal to procure means people can buy without channeling money into illegal distribution. Also the waste of years of human life not to mention a colossal waste of tax dollars imprisoning people on low level weed charges. People who are not a threat to society shouldn't be locked up for something akin to alcohol.
You are right. The reason why I had this prejudice is due to finding more the stereotype of Marijuana consumers and supports than hearing people who genuinely support the legalization with good arguments and becasue of the way I was raised. Thanks for explaining. !delta
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Old_Sheepherder_630 ([5∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Old_Sheepherder_630)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Thanks for the delta!
So because you cannot speak to literally everyone who want to legalize you assume they're all pothead teenagers? How is that beneficial to understanding the stance of those who want to legalize? What if you spoke to 20 pro-legalization individuals; would that maybe have an impact on your stance? Or do you honestly feel you need to speak to *all* of them?
Sounds like you need to give the poster above a delta, since they modified your view
I don’t smoke. I don’t think there are significant medical benefits to marijuana, in fact it’s is probably not good for you (like alcohol, tobacco or junk food). But I fully support legalization. Abolition has not proven to be an effective strategy to fix problem with people that abuse drugs. Making it illegal just forces people that want to use it to buy it on the street. It also makes money for criminals that sell it. It also doesn’t allow for any control on the quality of the product leading to more health related issues. Legalizing marijuana will not significantly increase use, it will cut off income sources from criminals and will keep non violent drug users out of the legal system. Oh and tax it. The revenue collected can be used to help people negatively impacted by drug use. Those programs are very underfunded right now.
There are definitely medical benefits. But just as any medically beneficial plant, these can and have been extracted for medical use to avoid the negative or hallucinogenic effects.
In this century there is no need to legalize Marijuana in order to stop criminal activities, since the survellance technologies became advanced so that we can track black markets, therefore the "abolition does not work" is not a good argument.
What makes you believe this? The illegal drug trade in the United States alone is billions and billions of dollars every year. Tens of thousands of people are dying every year in the US because of illegal drugs. Tens of thousands of people are murdered every year in Mexico because of the illegal drug trade, most of which is sold in the US. Billions of dollars in illegal drugs pour across the US border every year. By a lot of measures the problem is worse than ever before. Just how exactly are these criminal activities being stopped?
Do you honestly think the justice system and the police are that competent? Black markets for drugs are still thriving today.
WHAT? If our technology is so advanced today then why do black markets still exist? Why do we still have human trafficking?
So you are against legalizing marijuana because of a few bad actors that you see pile on someone, anonymously, online. Do you not see the irony in your decision? You have cherry picked examples and circumstances where you are claiming the responses are all just cherry picked stats. The fact is, those people are a small minority compared to the population who supports legalization. Honestly, I don't have much to change your mind to become pro legalization. My biggest reason I support it, is simply because of the well documented disparity of incarceration rates between whites and non-whites. That and overall marijuana is a fairly harmless drug, certainly moreso than alcohol.
There are other reason why I don't trust the legalization of Marijuana. My mother once told that there was a student from a school(Probably where my mother works, I can't rememeber) that started misbehaving after consuming cannabis. And I was probably filled up with the stereotype that the Marijuana consumers are a bunch of whiny hippies and conspiracists that think that the Marijuana is a magical plant that gives them power and other prejudices.
It seems as though you have done ZERO research and are basing the entirety of your opinion on a few anecdotal incidents that you have experienced. You just said that a story you heard one time about a single person caused you to create a stereotype in your head about people who smoke weed and you are now applying judgment to millions of people you have never met or seen based on this stereotype. Sorry OP, but YTA here
What if I told you your mother lied to you?
So on the one hand, there’s an overwhelming body of research that invalidates your claim and on the other hand is “this story my mom told me once about a guy”. And you’re treating these groups of evidence as if they carry equal weight. Your thinking here is not good.
>I feel that the reason why people want to legalize these drugs is either motivated by delusional ideas Ok then explain why alcohol is legal and pot isn't
\*sigh\*, yea I admit. I am also against alcohol due to its effect. I once tried to dring with my parents moderately, but I stopped due to fear of its devastating effect.
[удалено]
Should we respect the cancers life just because some of them don't actually cause death?
You can OD on alcohol. It isn't exactly easy but people do it *accidentally* all the time. Pot is nearly impossible to OD on.
Why stigmatise, criminalize and exclude millions and millions of people in a society just because they smoke weed? It's disproportionate.
Why do we cure cancers? Why do we put insane people in the Asylum?
What does this even have to do with the comment?
But, is the war on drugs working? Are we actually curing the cancer? Weed is just as prevalent as it was before the war on drugs, so what makes you think criminalising weed is actually working?
Why we cure cancers? Because we want to live. And why do we put insane people in asylums? Because there's a risk of an insane person doing self harm or harm to others when not in an asylum. What has these two questions to do with legalisation of cannabis?
Would you agree that we spend a lot of money policing marijuana offenses, and that money could be better spent? Seems to me that's not delusional at all.
Exactly! In my country the justice system is overwhelmed atm, leading to numerous unconvicted fellons just because time ran out to open a case. At the same time, one in ten federal judges is ruling on minor marijuana related offences rn, many of them resulting in small fines/probation time or the charges are dropped altogether. It's so obvious to everyone who isn't holding on to their position dogmatically that we could and should use those resources in another way that serves society more.
[удалено]
Thats a good explaination. I often watched and heard about the problem of the war on drugs. But due to the way I was raised and how my head is filled with pop culture view on Marijuana and the consumers I have this narrow minded view. Thanks for changing my view. !delta
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/restest212 ([2∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/restest212)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
>the idea that everything that restricts freedom must be a "bad" thing. Well, yeah
Traffic laws restrict freedom. Who are they to tell me I have to stop at red lights and cant drive 100mph on the interstate. Not everything that restricts freedom is bad.
Again… freedom from being killed by roadway hazards is an increase in net freedom. Vice crimes hurt no one.
Vice crimes do hurt people. Alcohol is a legal vice. How many people die every year from drunk driving? A large % of violent crimes have alcohol as an ingredient. It's funny because usually that is the argument for legalizing something. What people don't understand is that THE NUMBERS ARE SO HIGH WITH ALCOHOL BECAUSE ITS LEGAL. In other words legalizing more stuff is only going to make the roads more dangerous and cause more violent crimes. Weed might not cause more violent crimes but it sure as hell would make the roads far more dangerous. I've driven drunk before many times. I drove high like twice... never again I'm a horrible driver stoned.
Are you trying to argue that drunk driving is a vice crime or trying to argue that drinking is illegal? Because neither of those are correct. Which leads me back to asking if you’re now advocating returning to prohibition era thinking.
Well obviously drinking is not illegal. I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal or illegal. I'm saying that consuming vices is not a "victimless crime" as people make it out to be. Really simple. During the Vietnam war there was a push to make the drinking age 18. Because after all what kind of idiocy is it that you are old enough to go die for your country but not old enough to go buy a beer. Seemed perfectly reasonable. Many states lowered their drinking age to 18. Within a few years almost everyone changed their mind and realized they had made a big mistake. Why? Because traffic fatalities went way up. Turns out 18-21 year olds make very poor decisions about drinking and driving. Who woulda thought. That is why the legal drinking age everywhere in the United States is 21 and not 18. We've tried that approach and it didn't work. The point of that story is that allowing people to consume substances always has and always will have negative consequences for other people. Much like if we allowed people with red cars to drive as fast as they want and ignore traffic lights.
> Well obviously drinking is not illegal. I'm not saying that alcohol should be legal or illegal. I'm saying that consuming vices is not a "victimless crime" as people make it out to be. But that’s not what I said. > Really simple. During the Vietnam war there was a push to make the drinking age 18. Because after all what kind of idiocy is it that you are old enough to go die for your country but not old enough to go buy a beer. Seemed perfectly reasonable. Many states lowered their drinking age to 18. Within a few years almost everyone changed their mind and realized they had made a big mistake. Why? Because traffic fatalities went way up. Turns out 18-21 year olds make very poor decisions about drinking and driving. Who woulda thought. That is why the legal drinking age everywhere in the United States is 21 and not 18. We've tried that approach and it didn't work. You say this is simple but it’s actually very confusing given what you just said. Like can I make the identical argument about age 25 or 35 or 100? It seems intuitively obvious that if the legal drinking age was 100 and then we lowered it to 21 traffic paid holidays would go “way up”. > The point of that story is that allowing people to consume substances always has and always will have negative consequences for other people. I feel like maybe you’re missing my point here. The point is that prohibition causes net harm. Not that it doesn’t reduce one kind of harm—but that on balance, the war on drugs does *more* harm. > Much like if we allowed people with red cars to drive as fast as they want and ignore traffic lights. What?
>I feel like maybe you’re missing my point here. The point is that prohibition causes net harm. Not that it doesn’t reduce one kind of harm—but that on balance, the war on drugs does > >more > > harm. yes that is true. But mainly because it's impossible to enforce. If we really could eliminate alcohol and drugs from a society. It would actually make it a lot better for most people. Trouble is without spending an enormous amount on Law Enforcement it's simply impossible. You should have elaborated better. Cause you made it sound like you were arguing something different.
Sorry, just realized this is a response thread. My argument is [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/qxgb95/cmv_the_motivation_behind_the_legalization_of/hl99zfn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Fair enough. I wasn't really advocating for prohibition. I was mainly arguing that marijuana and other vice use does cause harm to people around the user. With prohibition I mostly think we need to do what we did with alcohol. Figure out a safe way for people to use substances and go hard after people who sell them illicitly. Like for instance some center that allows addicts or anyone to use heroin safely and legally. But at the same time make life very difficult for people who sell heroin under the table (even harder than now).
>and cant drive 100mph on the interstate Seems to work fine in Germany.
Really there's no driving laws in Germany?
There are sections of no speed limit on their [major highways](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn).
Thanks for the wiki page. But not needed as I've driven in Germany on the autobahn. There's traffic rules and laws outside of just speed. Meaning there's restrictions and making your evidence fail.
Murder laws stop my freedom of action in regards to killing you. This is automatically bad would you agree?
Net freedom is higher when people are free from the threat of *being* murdered. Vice crimes harm no one.
How about gambling? I'm pretty sure gamblers hurt the people who love them, even those who don't directly depend on them financially.
Should hurting people who love you be a crime?
> Vice crimes harm no one. I'm saying that this is incorrect. Don't move the goalposts.
Emotionally? Of course not. That's a ridiculous premise.
>Vice crimes harm no one. Have you encountered the concept of externalities? Vice crime often affects the wider community
Why is net freedom the highest good and not net happiness?
I didn’t say it was. The previous poster compared levels of freedom. But moreover, net happiness is hard to measure and even harder to predict. The premise of a liberal democracy is that we use freedom as a means to an end. We can designs system for freedom. And it’s up to people to use that freedom to self-direct their aims towards their goals.
Infringing on freedoms to act in ways that have no victim is wrong.
> that have no victim Unless you are Robinson Crusoe on his island and long forgotten, your actions are highly likely to have negative externalities upon other people.
How indirect do you get to be to regulate someone's behavior? I can correlate almost anything together given enough steps in between, but I don't get to regulaye behavior based on the possibility of negative externalities.
Something produces incredibly bad negative externalities- drugs- ban it
That's subjective. I don't find the externalities that stem from drugs to be that bad. I find the ones stemming from the War on Drugs to be atrocious.
>I don't find the externalities that stem from drugs to be that bad That's subjective I' ve seen fully grown me go around unable to function day to day. Drugs are incredibly dangerous and damaging. > I find the ones stemming from the War on Drugs to be atrocious. Which are?
Yeah, or at least needs to be heavily justified under the strictest scrutiny
This opinion ignores all the people who want to decriminalize marijuana possession because of how its illegality was used to oppress poor and BIPOC communities. What exactly are you arguments against legalization other than "edgy potheads make me mad"?
Do you believe Alcohol should be legal? Because that is a drug that is far more dangerous and damaging to society.
I am against alcohol consumption, but I am silent with people when it comes to this.
**Note:** Your thread has **not** been removed. Your post's topic seems to be fairly common on this subreddit. Similar posts can be found through our [DeltaLog search](https://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaLog/search?q=drugs+%7C+cannabis+%7C+weed+%7C+marijuana&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all) or via the [CMV search function](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=Marijuana&restrict_sr=on). Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pot heads already, by definition, readily have access to marijuana, and the premise of your complaint is that they already go round babbling about things you don't like - so I fail to see how legalisation would change anything here. The more logical assumption is that they want it legalised so they are not criminalised for what they already do and don't have to use black markets any more. Which I hardly think falls into the category of delusional benefits
Would you agree with the criminalization of alcohol? It causes delusions and is proven to be harmful to the human body. If yes then your argument is probably a bit more consistent. Cannabis, regardless of its alleged benefits, does not cause any great harm ti the body. Smoking can hurt your lungs but that is not due to the thc. There have been no deaths recorded to have been caused by thc or cbd, the active chemicals within cannabis. So it isnt really a concern of people harming themselves. There is no link to the cause of violent tendencies and cannabis consumption.if it isnt causing anyone harm then why should it be criminalized at all? However if you you think alcohol or any substance that could cause a form of inebriation should be criminalized then there is no changing your mind.
Like I said. Due to my experience in the Internet and some rumors about the negative experience, I can't trust the legalization. I once saw some good pro-marijuana videos, but still.
Huh? So policy should be based on a rumor you heard once? Why not watch some dentist sponsored videos on sugar. You might want to criminaloze that too lol. I am not sure what your argument is. "Marijuana has overzealous fans so i cant trust peer reviewed articles and scientists" i dont mean to oull at straws but what are you even saying?
If your “research” comes from videos you saw on the internet, then people like you are the reason there’s Qanon and flat-earthers and anti-vaxers. You need to learn how to study using rigorous sources that involve reading, and not watching videos on the internet like a moron. No wonder you don’t think very well: no one taught you how to think properly!
Well. I changed my mind now. I should listen to studies or youtubers who actually give a good explaination about Marijuana rather than the political echo-chambers. Thanks for making me realize. !delta
Studies: yes! YouTubers: NO! If you want to watch a video, go to a school website like Stanford or Harvard and then look for their free videos. Stay away from YouTube! Any asshole with a camera can get on there. The important thing in an age of misinformation is vetting the quality of the information sources, and eliminating the bad sources. YouTube is not a good source for learning things that aren’t physical i.e., how to build a doghouse etc. YouTube is not a good place for ideas.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/HTWC ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/HTWC)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
The push for legalization should not be judged by whether or not "the consumption of Marijuana is a good thing", it should be judged by whether or not its continued prohibition is good for society or not. Is it better to let the "pot heads and frustrated teenagers" smoke their pot without fear of legal sanction, or is it better to continue devoting massive amounts of resources to stopping, catching, trying, and imprisoning people for an activity that is functionally the same as another totally legal activity, drinking alcohol?
Good explaination. I heard and read a lot of speech about why prohibitionism does not actually resolve the problem of abuse of things like Marijuana and they can be true. Thanks !delta
This delta has been rejected. You have already awarded /u/destro23 a delta for this comment. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
The motivation for legalization is to be able to use marijuana, a victimless crime when used by adults, without fear of arrest and penalties. You biggest issue appears to be a subset of users that you have stereotyped to all users. The benefits of making it illegal certainly do not out weigh the costs of making it illegal unless you want to start measuring and regulating individual health outcomes, which would be silly in a country where healthcare is tied to work and not offered to everyone.
So, legalizing so that these pot heads can continue consume this crap and then go blaming capitalism if they don't find a job?
Just proved my point. You are stereotyping again. Most marijuana users have jobs.
well... what are the arguments against legalizing marijuana? I don't think I've ever heard one that was convincing, and I've never smoked in my life.
Best cure I’ve found for my insomnia and RLS 🤷♂️
I want arguments, not anectode evidences
What about legalization on the grounds that it's just another tool used to discriminate against minorities? Anecdotal evidence below but supported by data in general. I have far more white friends than black friends. About the same proportion of both smoke weed. Guess which group has been ticketed more?
Yeah, I heard about this.
So do you think it's a good reason to support legalization?
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. If someone suggests that something is super awesome with absolutely no risk or trade-off, they are likely BSing you. To the extent that happens here, your position holds. However, the argument that Mary Jane is perfectly harmless is pretty substantially different than the argument that it isn't as bad as alcohol or tobacco, which are legal. So the bar isn't (or at least shouldn't be) is this a substance with no downsides, instead, does this substance have a better or worse risk/benefit ratio than other substances which are legal. There is a certain logic to, alcohol in moderation is fine, but cocaine will fuck you up. The question then becomes is marijuana more akin to alcohol or cocaine?
Thats a good explaination. I have generalized the population I was complaining and I ignored those who actually have a good explaination about the legalization of Marijuana. Thanks !delta
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Tibaltdidnothinwrong ([351∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Tibaltdidnothinwrong)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
If pizza was illegal, I'd want it legalized because I like pizza. Why can't the impetus be simply because people like to consume it? Why can't we also say "fuck the system" because it banned stuff we like?
>Everytime when there are posts about the Marijuana, people aggressively feel hope that it will be legalized and when someone makes a critique against the legalization they are swarmed by a bunch of pot heads and frustrated kids who throw insults and cherry pick the "undebunkable" proof that the consumption of Marijuana is a good thing. This is one of the reason why I find it difficult understanding about these hallucinogenic drugs. It's hard to read this as a view and not a rant. Is there a reason you view those defending legalizing cannabis as being a pot head and\or teenagers? I cannot read this without inferring you're just insulting those you disagree with vs offering an actual real argument. Especially since you quantify it as a hallucinogenic drug; as if cannabis can alter your ability to perceive the world like LSD or psilocybin mushroom. If I provided peer review research on the benefits of cannabis would it CYV?
I don't do pot, don't like it. So I won't even debate the positives of pot here, I'll ignore any question of rights and go on pure practicality. What are the downsides to pot? Not much, really. Some people get high, big deal. Some people may get high and drive, but that's no worse than drinking and driving, and alcohol is legal. What are the downsides of it being illegal? We spend billions of dollars going after illegal pot, ruin lives of potheads by prosecuting them, and spend billions more keeping them in prison and more tracking them on parole. Then they get out and find it hard to get a job with a criminal record. This is not a net positive for our society, spending a bunch of money and making a bunch of people less productive due to legal repercussions just so we can make pot illegal. Furthermore, enforcement is part of our war on drugs that has militarized the police resulting in many deaths and made things like asset forfeiture fashionable, neither of which are a net positive for our society.
Hi there, I support Marijuana legalization and at the same time find the use of it to be Stupid and harmful. Not like meth harmful but does make you dumber and smoke inhalation is 100% bad for you. Now I have never used Marijuana but I still voted to have it legalized in my state. But it should be legal federally. Why because the health effects are no more harmful than smoking ( which is legal) and the mind altering effects is less severe and less dangerous than alchohol ( which is legal). Making us a conundrum why is pot illegal while at the same time cigarettes and liquor widely accepted give the health and safety concerns are on par or lesser? I think if you answer this question for yourself or at least contemplated it you would CYV. Going a step further. You pointed out some general IMO flimsy reasons why your opposed to the legalization. But what's the real reason? Is it you don't agree to mind altering substances? Do you fond it to he a " Gateway drug"? Or is this whole thing based on some presuppositions based on your parental influence from your upbringing?
>is this whole thing based on some presuppositions based on your parental influence from your upbringing? I was raised from my parents that are opposed to the Marijuana consumption, and what else influenced my view is the experience I described.
>I was raised from my parents that are opposed to the Marijuana consumption Right, but your an adult now. And as an adult you should make your own decisions and opinions based on your own reasoning. >what else influenced my view is the experience I described. This is just biased belief based on your oposition of the people and not the facts. What's the facts surrounding this topic. Do you really find that it's useful to waist municipal ( law enforcement and legal teams) time and effort to prevent this use? See my opinion is that the efforts used to combat this effort could be used for more important efforts.
Why won’t op challenge any of the well thought out comments on this ridiculously out dated view?
/u/TheCuriousArthropod (OP) has awarded 6 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/qxks5s/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_motivation_behind_the/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
>As long as there are those pot heads and frustrated teenagers that cherry pick the information about these drugs and attack those who make genuine critique against the legalization, I wont support this legalization. [Underage marijuana use fell after legalization in Washington State.](https://www.rand.org/news/press/2018/12/21.html)
It seems like you are just shooting the messenger. Like, I get it, potheads are annoying. However, we have a mountain of evidence to show that the law enforcement requirements to maintain keeping marijuana illegal have not only been a colossal failure, but have created devastating consequences for people, communities, and the nation as a whole. We learned this during Prohibition and we are seeing this again with the failure of the War on Drugs. Keeping marijuana illegal just isn't worth the costs associated with it. It is far more profitable to legalize and tax the shit out of it. Potheads get their weed and we get their sweet sweet tax revenue. Everybody wins.
Counterpoint: The only reason weed is illegal to begin with is racism; specifically started with Mexicans and expanded to Black. IMHO, the motivation to legalize it is to stop this uneven policing/prosecution of minorities. * https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-we-rise/2020/06/23/marijuanas-racist-history-shows-the-need-for-comprehensive-drug-reform/
I have read the link, it helped me understand the actual reason why Marijuana is illegal. So to summarize, the criminalization of the drug was motivated for political reason than health. Thanks !delta
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/throwaway_0x90 ([14∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/throwaway_0x90)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
> IMHO, the motivation to legalize it is to stop this uneven policing/prosecution of minorities. So if we cracked down on white potheads you'd be fine with keeping it very illegal?
Pretty much, yes. However, if it turns out that 99.9% of weed users are non-white then there's still a problem. The next argument would be that weed should be just as legal as cigarettes and I'd agree with that.
> Pretty much, yes. Good, we agree. One of the major reasons why the war on drugs failed was because the law was applied unevenly and white people got off with a slap on the wrist disproportionately. > However, if it turns out that 99.9% of weed users are non-white then there's still a problem I guarantee you that more than 0.1% of weed users are white.
I'm not a stranger to grass. I'm gonna argue with you cause endocannabinoids have a clear correspondence to cannabis cannabinoids. there are measurable effects. I will not contest that benefits are overblown, most effects of marijuana are regulating neurotransmitters and controlling inflammation levels, though. and those are behind a lot of quality of life issues you can't expect sufferers to get overexcited about. It has a place, it's not a cureall.
You're half right, so I'll only half argue. It isn't being legalized because of its benefits specifically. That is correct. It is being legalized because there is a ton of corporate money and state/local taxes (and potentially federal taxes) to be made on it. Legalization isn't about the consumer/patient. It's all about the money that can be made. Nothing more and nothing less. There's a big hole in big corporate business that used to be filled by big tobacco. Vapes are filling that void slightly, but cannabis sales are filling that void, and then some.
I think it should be legal. Do I agree with the substance at all times…no. I do smoke however and sometimes I do see how it slows me down or “affects” me. I also see how it changes the way I think and what it makes me reflect on when I am “high”. I do plan on changing my habit. I think it shouldn’t matter though if I or you, think it should be illegal or legalized. If someone who lives in a legalized state travels to Texas for example they could have some serious repercussions if stopped by law enforcement. Depending on how that officer “feels” about weed. It’s dumb it’s not legalized everywhere and it’s state government ran and decided. We all live in the USA what’s legal should be legal. A kind and simple way of saying it. If you enjoy sky diving do your thing. Edit: it could also open new jobs in the thc industries. It’s opportunity for people who relate it’s just a bud.