XPost: talk.politics.drugs, alt.philosophy   
   From: mhelm@not.known   
      
   On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:03 -0500, "Miller"   
      
      
   >   
   >"Eric Johnson"  wrote in message   
   >news:BC257BF6.3F348%erj66@xs4all.nl...   
   >> On 10-01-2004 00:32, in article vvuegvk2916g3c@corp.supernews.com,   
   >"Miller"   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> > "Mike Helm"  wrote in message   
   >> > news:e52svvkahbbb0te1mmfbq7je5idfu8j2p8@4ax.com...   
   >> >> On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:59:42 -0500, "Miller"   
   >> >>    
   >> >>   
   >> >>   
   >> >>>> x   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>> The main problem with legalizing pot, or any other recreational   
   >illegal   
   >> > drug   
   >> >>> is:  that once its legalized, if it does turn out to be a mistake,   
   >> > society   
   >> >>> will have a hell of a time making it illegal again.  (Look at how   
   >badly   
   >> >>> prohibition worked).   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Look how badly it's "working" right now.   
   >> >>   
   >> >>   
   >> >>> So if you want to make pot legal, you better be pretty   
   >> >>> damn sure it is not going to have a lot of social and health costs   
   >> >>> associated with it.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Could those costs possibly be higher than the current societal and   
   >> >> health costs of prohibition?   
   >> >>   
   >> >   
   >> > I don't know.  What do you think the current costs are now?  The drug   
   >has   
   >> > been decriminalized to the point where casual use is not much of a risk,   
   >> > crime-wise, as it used to be.   
   >>   
   >> It has -never- been as illegal as it is now. We don't yet have statistics   
   >> for arrests in the bush years, but should we believe that this number is   
   >far   
   >> below the 650,000 or so who were arrested on pot, mostly simple   
   >possession,   
   >> during each of the last several years of clinton?   
   >>   
   >> When during the 1970s were so many people arrested?   
   >>   
   >> EJ   
   >>   
   >   
   >There was an establishment-anti-establishment going on at the time, as   
   >everyone knows.  There were those that hated the idea of kids enjoying pot,   
   >and those that enjoyed pot who hated those that hated them.  If I am not   
   >mistaken, it was then a felony anywhere you went in the US to possess even   
   >one joint.   
   >   
   >There are many places now where pot use is a misdemeanor.   
      
   Do you not have a record if you are convicted of a misdemeanor?   
      
   >People rarely   
   >even talk about it anymore.  It does not seem to be much of an issue.   
      
      
   You haven't seen those ads with the "It's more dangerous than we   
   thought" tagline?   
      
   You didn't hear about Goose Creek?   
      
   You didn't hear about the incarceration of Tommy Chong?   
      
   >  30   
   >years ago it was a cultural point of contention.  I remember when Nixon   
   >cracked down on Mexican sources of pot smuggiling, the price of an ounce   
   >went from $10 to $20 and then $40 in about 2 years due to the influx of the   
   >more expensive Columbian stuff.   
   >   
   >It is not surprising that it is not such a big deal anymore.  Law   
   >enforcement was part of that.  Now many of the people who enforce the law,   
   >from police chiefs to presidents, were once part of that youth culture of   
   >sex, drugs and rock and roll.   
   >   
      
      
      
      
   >Scott   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)