OpenGov - Open Government Brainstorm

I second that! Reform of our cannabis laws is a great opportunity to save billions of taxpayer dollars through increased revenue and reduced law enforcement costs. Also, wouldn't a regulated market in cannabis be safer than the criminal competition that often explodes into violence? I would seriously urge our government to reconsider its stance toward cannabis.

Less deaths, less people in jails for smoking a joint.

More money in our economy.

More money to spend on getting rid of real drugs like the pills in the medicine cabinet.

Heroin/crack. Drugs that kill.

Pot is not a drug.

Well put

Marijuana Debate 101

Announcer: Federal Government; you can go first...

Requirement #2 for a Schedule I Narcotic

The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

Rebuttal?

All of these are current article and news stories.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Scientists are high... marijuana reduces memory impairment"

"Marijuana Chemical May Fight Brain Cancer"

"Turns out that compounds in (marijuana) the drug have antibacterial properties that might even defeat antibiotic-resistant germs like MRSA."

"A former Miss New Jersey has put down her tiara and is ready to fight for the legalization of medical marijuana."

"Marijuana: Future Wonder Drug For Beauty?"

"Yes, I'm A Medical Marijuana Patient. No, I'm Not Sorry."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government:

But, but, um Requirement #1 says the drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

Rebuttal?

"Marijuana: Facts for Teens." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, D.C. 1995, p.10.

"Most marijuana users do not go on to use other drugs."

Announcer: Any more questions, Government? No?

Pro-Legalization Activists?

Why is marijuana illegal, again? Because I am very confused...

Government: Are you on drugs?

PLA: No, you just don't make any sense.

Just make sure there's enough tax to cover the externalities: eye-motion detectors for police to detect impaired drivers, an insurance fund to cover ALL crashes and thefts (shoplifted Doritos?) and the like....

eye-motion detectors? What is that?

But, if you actually ARE interested and not just "trolling"; check this out....

"This evidence strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments."

"The foremost impression one gains from reviewing the literature is that no clear relationship has ever been demonstrated between marijuana smoking and either seriously impaired driving performance or the risk of accident involvement."

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/MISC/driving/driving2_8.htm

Well, that or oral secretions or forehead swipe technology:

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=984267

... whatever is out there to detect impairment is my point.

However, if after a while States that DO allow smoking legally notice no increased rates of crashes or accidents, then I'd reconsider having such a requirement.

In my experience around dopers, they are just STUPID drivers (perhaps DOPE is the cause of a seemingly increasingly common problem?) and that MAY be a factor that should be paid for by the dope smokers. If you smoke dope, I mean no offense: in fact, I think we may find some common ground. I just mean that if you CHOOSE a behavior, you should have to PAY for the consequences -- and let's not single out dope smokers, but overeaters, cigarette smokers and alcoholics, and many other vices -- including those who over-exercise and wreck their kneew. If government would get out of the way in the health insurance industry, this would be possible -- assuming they don't take on insuring ALL of the stupid people -- oh wait, they're trying... :-)

FYI, I'd also be for the same tax on alcohol. There are a LOT of accidents caused by alcohol in which the drivers do not have insurance (other STUPID behavior caused by/as an effect of drug use) that just go uncompensated. I speak from experience on this, as a drunk driver totaled my parked car -- and DID NOT have state-mandated liability insurance.

Yeah, I get what you are saying. You already have me pondering.lol No, I don't smoke dope, but I did years ago. But, I've also seen the help that marijuana can give a sick and depressed person.

I think sometimes it helped my best friend just to be able to laugh a little bit. Marijuana helped her do that. Helped with her pain and helped her let go of her troubles for a short while. Trust me on this; the meds they had her on messed her up much worse than smoking a little marijuana did. Her liver was already shot. (and no, not from drinking.)

I don't want stoned drivers on the road either. IMO, most people that smoke, don't want to go anywhere, afterwards, anyway.lol

I am just saying marijuana should be legalized, with all the safety bells and whistles, and treated much the same as alcohol use. (although studies have shown that driving drunk is much more dangerous than driving stoned.)

Legalize and decriminalize!

Allowing the Government to control growth and distribution of Marijuana will do numerous things to help our culture and economy.

1) Marijuana has never been known to be a problem drug for users and people near them.

A) Marijuana users are not prone to using violence to solve disputes with other users or non-users.

B) Marijuana users are not aggressive drivers, and are usually very cautious, unlike alcohol users.

C) Marijuana users are seldom involved in

criminal activities while using the drug.

2) Government distribution of Marijuana is good for the economy.

A) Taxes on marijuana use will contribute tens of millions of dollars in taxes, maybe more.

B) Tax dollars will no longer be needed to fight the illicit marijuana drug trade.

C) The American Court system will be relieved of a great financial and case load burden through legalization.

D) American law enforcement will be able to use their funds and resources to address more serious issues of crime.

3) Improvement in health issues.

A) Users of marijuana for health issues will have a reduction in costs for the product, allowing them to use their resources for other aspects of health recovery.

B) Consistency of the strength of marijuana products will be greatly improved, thus allowing health users a more predictable result.

C) Elimination of stress for "illicit" users of marijuana for medical purposes. Users will no longer fear being jailed for using marijuana to settle their stomach after chemo, or increase their appetite when disease has taken it away.

4) Marijuana by-products will be more available and scientific discoveries more frequent.

A) Fiber for paper and textiles can be provided by the farms that grow marijuana.

B) Oils from the rendering of plant fibers can be used for a myriad purposes including fuel, cooking and cosmetics.

C) Derivatives may include control of glaucoma, a serious eye problem that causes blindness.

As a non-user of marijuana, I see many more benefits than problems that will come about when the government takes control of this product. When marijuana and other drugs are controlled by government, fewer crimes will be committed in order to acquire the substances. Our society will be a much better place because of it. Government as an Ideal, should foster the personal and collective growth of it's members, not seek to punish them for their every transgression.

41. Decriminalization of Marijuana: Medical or otherwise, marijuana should no longer be considered criminal activity by the public. I feel that this substance does not greatly produce criminal activity or criminal acts. Marijuana does promote a sedentary life, but that is a choice and a freedom. Throughout human history all societies have indulged in all kinds of narcotic drugs. Why should we, the modern society of this world condemn such a rich history of humanity? Marijuana should be taxed and part of the proceeds be spent on drug education and real effects of prolonged use. The current system criminalizes a non destructive behavior where no one other than the abuser is harmed. Driving under the influence offenses should be a mild misdemeanor, punishable by fine only. Marijuana should be packaged by content strength with FDA warning label and recommendations.

• One of the arguments of decriminalization is that of making all drugs legal. Do not fall for this logic trap. I would never recommend that all drugs become legal that would be stupid to the nth degree. Only marijuana should have its illegal status moderated, its use determined by the state, and taxed like any other chemical. Do not sell to persons under a certain age, must show ID to purchase, and tax it hard. Mom & Pop pot shops will spring up everywhere; hail small business enterprise.

Prohibition infringes on the natural right to own our bodies, to freely engage in autonomous behaviors, and falsely installs a parental quality to government it was never supposed to have.

All private behavior should be private, people should be able to inject toenail scrapings without risk of prosecution and punishment.

A proper use of the 9th Amendment would have prevented this atrocity against liberty.

I agree with decriminalization. We need to focus on the real criminals who harm us. 1 in 32 Americans are behind bars. This is unbelievable. We have become a "police state". Our liberties are being eroded. We need humane approaches to these issues.

"The only person who ever died from marijuana was shot by a cop."

- Jack Herer

There is another issue here about decriminalization. The medical community needs to be able to explore the uses of this plant without fear and without waiting years for permission. There is mounting evidence that the 1000 or so compounds in the cannabis plant benefit a wide range of illnesses. Since I began reading about this subject 4 months ago, I have read/watched many anecdotal testimonies and quite a few scientific studies on the benefits of cannabis to treat illness. I have become convinced we need more exploration in this area and it just wont happen until the danger of arrest is gone.

Revealingly, the percentage who opposed marijuana legalization and the percentage who believed in the gateway theory were identical, both coming in at exactly 46%. As we look for ways to persuade those who remain opposed to marijuana reform, it's clearly in our interest to work towards demolishing the pernicious gateway theory once and for all. Let's take a look at what the data shows.

In 1999, the National Institute on Drug Abuse commissioned a major study on medical marijuana conducted by the venerable Institute of Medicine, which included an examination of marijuana's potential to lead to other drug use. In simple terms, the researchers explained why the gateway theory was unfounded:

Patterns in progression of drug use from adolescence to adulthood are strikingly regular. Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first. In fact, most drug users begin with alcohol and nicotine before marijuana -- usually before they are of legal age.

…

There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.

In 2006, the University of Pittsburgh released a more thorough study in which researchers spent 12 years tracking a group of subjects from adolescence into adulthood and documented the initiation and progression of their drug use. The researchers found that the gateway theory was not only wrong, but also harmful to properly understanding and addressing drug abuse:

This evidence supports what’s known as the common liability model, an emerging theory that states the likelihood that someone will transition to the use of illegal drugs is determined not by the preceding use of a particular drug but instead by the user’s individual tendencies and environmental circumstances.

All prohibition needs to be eliminated. It is a violation of our constitutional 9th amendment right to run our own lives.

There should be barrels of opiates, tobaccos, amphetamines, etc. available at the front of every store.

Then, the prohibitionists can breath a sign of relief because surely everyone that partakes will be dead in a week, and the issue will be resolved.

Legalize pot and other controlled substances and put a 300% tax on it. Use this tax money to fund a children's health initiative, also collect data on who is using health-harmful and Doctor discouraged substances and bar them from public medicine other than quit/addiction programs until they are clean. The tax money generated and saved (by not paying for cocaine induced kidney failure, hear problems, etc.) can also be used to create the substance registry and increase quit programs for addicts as well as drug education programs.

This would accomplish 5 things.

1) Allow people to make decisions regarding substances and their own bodies.

2) Ensure that these decisions, if poor, do not cost the taxpayer. Any tax money spent will be used to encourage healthier decisions rather than mop up after peoples poor choices.

3) Increase the availability of quit programs and also make those who refuse to quit safer by ensuring untainted drug product.

4) Break the power of Drug Cartels in South America as well as make our border safer and stop much drug related border violence.

5) Make pot less attractive to kids with drug tax subsidized public service-don't do drugs programs and education. Also as drugs will be legal, these programs may have higher success, because rather than being glamorous rebel’s drug users will come to be regarded as burnouts.

http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/6079-4049

Please vote for unalienable birth rights..Thanks!!