A light at the end of the tunnel
I am really glad to see that we are starting to have at least some debate on the status of marijuana in our society. My favorite quote:
""There's no doubt that if people choose to use marijuana instead of alcohol we would not have the same number of problems," said Mason Tvert, the 23-year-old campaign organizer."
Yup, that and a whole slew of other social malignancies that alcohol causes and marijuana does not. But then again, people will phrase the discussion in whatever way suits their argument. Ultimately, my contention with marijuana (and all other drugs for that matter) is that it is a matter of personal choice. The government should have absolutely no say in what we do with our bodies! It is none of their business. They can and should regulate its cultivation/production and distribution. They should tax it and use that money to fund medical assistance for addicts and any medical problems that might arise in some. As the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project (which recently relocated to Santa Cruz, CA) likes to say - drugs should not be a law enforcement issue, but rather a health issue.
No more nanny state!
""There's no doubt that if people choose to use marijuana instead of alcohol we would not have the same number of problems," said Mason Tvert, the 23-year-old campaign organizer."
Yup, that and a whole slew of other social malignancies that alcohol causes and marijuana does not. But then again, people will phrase the discussion in whatever way suits their argument. Ultimately, my contention with marijuana (and all other drugs for that matter) is that it is a matter of personal choice. The government should have absolutely no say in what we do with our bodies! It is none of their business. They can and should regulate its cultivation/production and distribution. They should tax it and use that money to fund medical assistance for addicts and any medical problems that might arise in some. As the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project (which recently relocated to Santa Cruz, CA) likes to say - drugs should not be a law enforcement issue, but rather a health issue.
No more nanny state!
posted by z @ 2:25 PM
14 Comments:
At 10:01 PM,
nell said…
I agree with much of this, but, I wonder what we can do to keep people from harming others while using drugs. Drunk driving has always been a problem, even while a legal activity, and other drugs have the potential to similar put users at risk for harming others whether intentional or not. A person's choice to use a drug ends at the point where it infringes on another person...
a tricky issue all around in my opinion.
At 9:59 PM,
z said…
i think that is always going to be a problem. moving the drinking age to 21 is an ass-backwards way to deal with it though. with liberty comes responsibility. ultimately i think the best solution is education and strong punishment. you educate people to understand the problem and then you inflict severe punishments on people who still do it.
At 7:57 AM,
Rama said…
ah yes. but today's society frowns upon "strong punishment". We can't hurt the criminals' feelings. That would be wrong. gag. *couch* gag.
At 7:54 AM,
nell said…
if we could actually learn to punish people, maybe I wouldn't be so doubtful as to the potential success. I laugh (cry?) everytime I hear on the news that some guy caused his sixth accident while intoxicated. seriously. one incident, you're done forever. that's how it should be.
At 8:13 AM,
Rama said…
we used to know how to punish people. then it was decided those methods were "inhumane". I say, if you're going to act like an animal or maniac, then you should be treated as such... bring back the stocks, bring back the water torture (for those with an imbibing problem). stop claiming that these issues are "diseases"...
At 7:45 PM,
z said…
i couldn't agree more. i think we could avoid the drastic measures (i.e. chopping of limbs, torture, etc.) while still inflicting severe financial and emotional distress on the person in question. penalties and alternative treatment (e.g. hypnosis) might be just what the system needs.
we could still consider some of these issues diseases, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to aggressively treat them.
ditto on the - if you're gonna act inhumanely, you'll be treated inhumanely!
At 3:09 PM,
Rama said…
ahhh... shucks. I was looking forward to chopping off appendages. nothing like a nice public blood splatter to keep people in line... :)
I do not like the idea of people enjoying "perks" in prison (i.e. Cable TV, internet, get a degree, etc). I used to joke that I was going to get myself thrown in jail just so I could get a college degree at the taxpayer's expense.
At 5:11 PM,
z said…
education is a good thing to provide. it gives people the ability to better themselves and come out of prison with better chances of survival without crime.
i think one of the major problems with the prison system (as far as i know) is that not enough effort is placed on re-integration into society. so, a prisoner is released a free man and if they do not have family or a support network they will mostly get back to the life of crime. and then the cycle continues as we spend money to catch them, try them and incarcerate them again. that money would be better spent on education and re-integration into society. sure, it's a shame that we have to pay for that, but it's a worthy cause... if for no other reason then at least because it makes us safer.
At 7:56 AM,
Rama said…
I'm of the opinion that very few inmates are actually worthy of reintegration. Every person has a shot at being a member of society. If you screw it up, you pay the consequences. Period. And all the excuses such as "I was beaten as a child" blah blah blah... yeah, that sucks, but I know more people than not that got themselves out of that situation and are productive members of the world.
At 3:13 PM,
z said…
ouch. that's pretty harsh. don't you believe in second chances? what about when they pay their due to society? let's say they are ready to return and want to integrate - don't you think they deserve a helping hand? we all make mistakes.
At 8:02 AM,
Rama said…
depends on the crime. if you killed someone, no second chance. if you raped someone... possibly. drug charges... sure.
just because a prisoner wants to reintegrate doesn't mean we should give him/her the chance. they made their bed, they lay in it. they knew they were breaking the law. they had a choice.
At 1:49 PM,
z said…
wow, i'm surprised you would be so lenient with rape. in my book it's the same with murder. as long as it can be proved, which of course can be tricky at times.
sometimes they don't have a choice. some people have hard lives. for non-violent crimes i think we should always help the willing reintegrate into society. violent crimes are a different story - for that one i would be willing to take a harder stance. still though... after a certain mandatory sentence (which should reflect the crime and not be too lenient) we should help them too, as long as they're willing.
At 2:22 PM,
Rama said…
not so lenient... it was a begrudgingly given "possibly"... that one needs to be reviewed on an individual basis.
what do you consider a "violent" crime? only those that do bodily harm? what about those crimes that deplete someone else of all their hard earned money (fraud)? I would consider that violent, since it hurts another person severely...
Everyone has a choice. Sometimes those choices must be between the lesser of the two evils, but it's a choice nonetheless. I do believe there are people who cannot mentally help it... those are the people who can plead insanity. If you don't think you have a choice, then you've given up on living.
At 4:12 PM,
Rama said…
but please, don't take anything I say as solid belief. I going on pure instinct, which makes sense to me, but isn't necessarily opinions I'm married to.
Post a Comment
<< Home