Drug Abuse: Methadone Symptoms & Side Effects

Question: Would legalization of marijuana lead to more or less drug abuse?

(Posted by: Tony I on 2010-01-11 16:44:00)

Currently our jails and court systems are clogged with people who were arrested for possession of marijuana. The benefits to the court system, tax revenue and freeing up law enforcement to pursue those who deal in truly dangerous drugs would seem obvious, but would legalization end up leading to more or less use of other drugs?. Buying anything other than medical marijuana often means being in contact with someone who sells other drugs which are many times more harmful. On the other hand, people who hang out with other pot smokers also come into contact with other drugs and most drug addicts started out with that first puff of marijuana. What do you think? EDIT- Andrew, I am sure you could find no end of tobacco growers who would agree with you about taxes. Insofar as addictive, people can become psychologically addicted to just about anything - such as sex for example. I have known lots of folks who liked to constantly get high who fiended pretty bad when they ran out of pot. At any rate, my question is not intended to be a referendum about the merits of marijuana or taxation of it, but rather about whether or not legalization might lead to more or less drug abuse - and perhaps help take more harmful drugs off the street. EDIT - So far most people seem to be misunderstanding the question. I am not looking for justifications for marijuana, but rather if it were legal would it lead to more or less drug abuse and/ or use of other drugs or less. FYI - I promise you that in my lifetime I have smoked more pot than anyone posting on this board who is less than 25 years old. I was after all a child of the late 60's and 70's. Woodstock, Cream, Jimi Hendrix. Rolling Stones Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Stevie Ray Vaughn (actually smoked a doobie with him once) etc. Got the concert ticket stubs and loss of hearing to prove it. So far be it from ME to be a hypoctrite and condemn pot smoking. Though I would like to think I am a bit wiser than back when I was young and immortal and knew it all. I may well condemn other drugs but that is a different issue. Now, hopefully people will answer what I am asking. I think it is an important question - and I'll give my own thoughts when this is over. Thanks Bad call Stoner. I have never reported anyone for advocating or advising about marijuana. I have reported people who advocate illegal and other harmful drugs that might ruin their lives, as you have done in the past (and THAT is why you were suspended). Those are decidedly NOT alternative medicine and should not be welcome here.

Posted by: Andrew on 2010-01-11, 16:58:12

Marijuana and drugs should never be confused with each other. You can get chemically addicted to drugs, not marijuana. I turn a cold hand it its legalization, however. Legalization will bring taxes. Taxing something that comes from the earth is unbelievably ridiculous.

Posted by: Dan on 2010-01-11, 17:16:34

There is no disadvantage to marijuana. If anyone wants to argue with my please IM me on AIM at pTxFraGzx. If you would like to know more about the benefits to marijuana and what your government has been keeping from you please watch a movie called The Union.

Posted by: freshbliss on 2010-01-11, 17:18:49

I think we are one of the few countries in the world that treats drug addiction as a moral and thus legal issue, instead of a medical issue. One that generates huge revenues for the court systems, and creates many jobs for law enforcement, prisons, etc. Considering that many in prison are there for repeated drug offenses, or drug related offenses, it becomes clear that treating addiction along these lines is expensive to society: both in terms of taxes, and shattered lives; not just the addicts, but the families as well. I don't know of anyone who has been rehabilitated by the prison system. Putting an individual in contact with other criminals only creates a better criminal. If we were to treat drug addiction as a medical issue, and then provide social supports such as therapy for these individuals, it would cost nearly half as much each year as incarcerating them. When the federal drinking age was raised to 21, alcohol abuse rates dropped. I think that legalizing majiauna would have the inverse effect and thus increase rates of "hard " drug use: perhaps not initially, but if you look at data over decades; I predict that pattern will become defined. Most people who are going to abuse drugs start with risk-taking behaviors such as drinking and drug use as adolescents. Most children do not have great difficulty acquiring beer in high-school. Whether by older siblings or friends. Marijuana would not be much different. I would prefer for marijauna to remain illegal (at least, without a presciption), however, considering that the federal government sees the issue as one more way to tax the people, I predict it will be made legal and taxed extensively. There is very little about this issue on a political level that is actually related to the issue of drug addiction directly.

Posted by: xjoizey on 2010-01-11, 17:25:11

Marijuana is NOT a gateway to illegal drugs. It should be legal and regulated and taxed like liquor.

Posted by: Gary Y on 2010-01-11, 17:43:15

"people who hang out with other pot smokers also come into contact with other drugs and most drug addicts started out with that first puff of marijuana " I would doubt that Tony. Perhaps in some cases only, but I think that would be an over-generalization. I wonder if perhaps it would be better to 'decriminalize' possession for personal use, but leave the selling as illegal. This is the case in some states where I live, and you can also have a plant or two for personal use - obviously not enough to be considered growing for the purposes of sale.

Posted by: chris on 2010-01-11, 17:48:54

Marijuana would benefit everything! it is not addictive nor is it a gateway drug so i think it should be legalized. alcohol should be banned because it is highly addictive and weed isnt!

Posted by: William T on 2010-01-11, 18:10:44

I am pretty much always in favor of increasing the rights of the individual. While claiming marijuana is completely safe and not addictive at all is ludicrously stupid, it is on par with alcohol and nicotine which already are legal. Sadly the politics of marijuana interferes with scientific studies. Groups for legalization "never " find evidence of dangers associated with smoking and "always " find evidence of benefits. Just as bad, the government studies are the opposite, claiming crazy dangers and no potential benefits at all. We need good science to be done without a political agenda pushing the data. As for your claim that "our jails and court systems are clogged with people who were arrested for possession of marijuana ", well that's just plain not true. Violent crime is far and away the largest offense that comes through American courts. Even when all drug crimes are combined together they are less than half of violent crime. Even if we made the foolish assumption that all drug crime in America is the possession of marijuana that statement still isn't right. The chart I have cited is a survey of the population of prisoners in America. I suppose it's possible that most people on possession of marijuana charges go to court but not jail but even so, our courts are not clogged with them. In my opinion legalizing marijuana would increase on one category of drug use; casual/ social marijuana smokers. I don't think that many people would be serious smokers, but aren't only because of the law. I think a lot more people would try it a few times, maybe use it at parties instead of getting drunk or while getting drunk. But much in the same way the most people give up partying with alcohol after college I think most people would stop using marijuana. Those that won't stop likely weren't being stopped by the law anyway. EDIT - Rhianna: It's "effect " in that sentence, you got it right. Effect is a noun and affect is a verb. Something affects an effect.

Posted by: theend on 2010-01-11, 18:11:35

Marijuana has done nothing but help people with sleep, appetite, creativity. If people don't like smoking marijuana then they don't do it. I know some kids that get extreme negative affects from MJ that they resort to terrible drugs. The theory that MJ is a 'gateway drug' is completely bias. Do you notice how stoners get along with others better, and are pretty happy people? It's not addicting at all, coming from experience, and ones own life leads one to try hard drugs. Would make the world a better place if MJ was legal.

Posted by: Rhianna Returns on 2010-01-11, 18:21:44

Here in the UK, cannabis has been reclassified to a class B drug. I used to be of the opinion that drugs are trouble period. However, looking at the evidence, there is no clear evidence to suggest that MJ automatically leads onto other drugs, the gateway theory has been thoroughly debunked. Taking everything into consideration, I think MJ should be legalised, taxed and regulated. It's probably safer than tobacco and alcohol. Addendum: There's no valid reason why legalisation should end up leading to more use of other drugs, in fact, I think it would have the opposite effect (damn it, effect or affect? I need Skep again, I can't do it on my own) if the drug was readily available.

Posted by: Round 2 on 2010-01-11, 19:18:23

Even when you post something semi-intelligent, you still can't avoid the pitfalls of propaganda. I'll address the most glaring inaccuracy. Most drug addicts first try alcohol, not marijuana. I support full legalization of all drugs. Not because I want to get high, but because our society is supposed to be free. That freedom extends to wanting to use drugs for recreational purposes. However, anything done to obtain a drug, or while under the influence of a drug, is the sole responsibility of the person who does it (part of being free is taking responsibility).

Posted by: Fight the system on 2010-01-11, 19:49:06

Legalize it of course. I smoke it more than I eat food. rianna can i talk to you & dr frank about my surgery please

Posted by: GREASY on 2010-01-11, 20:17:56

I smoke herb for healing, thats why god made it. its not a drug, if you call weed a drug, than you must also call nutmeg a drug, because nutmeg in large quantities can make you hallucinate , too much and it can kill you, yet you can get it at the grocery store. its illegal because they think they make more money that way, but just wait, they are wrong, because now they have to hire more cops , how have nothing better to do than look for people with Gods plant. paying those officers is costing us to pay more taxes. like how that works eh? they say you cant do something, than charge you to pay for the service, that says you cant do it. people are fkin stupid. they are no more than your big brothers and sisters bossing you around, do what you want, wherever you want, as long as it isnt violence.

Posted by: S on 2010-01-11, 20:35:10

YES, it would, cuz now more people will have access to it. Sure it may be cleaner, and provide some tax revenues. But this will cause more people to buy up and smoke it more. If it's not addictive then how come u guys still smoke it? LOL Marijuana is a carcinogen meaning it causes cancer. Yep, laugh all you want. Don't matter how you try to paint a good picture on this sin stick, but it's the devil's hair and I think you're sick if you want to promote such a deadly product.

Posted by: Truthseeker on 2010-01-12, 00:15:48

What the heck is wrong with you people. Eat the stuff, drink the stuff, but don't smoke it. Not the grass itself - but to smoke the culprit is carcinogenic. It could be the heavenly mana - if you smoke it it's just a sh*t. PS: Concerning the gateway. I am over 60 years old and I have seen in my practice - with my own eyes - more than150 people whose addiction to marijuana led to the hard core drugs.

Posted by: Alex F on 2010-01-12, 02:11:49

It's pretty much openly known within the policy circles that the only way to solve the drug issue is with decriminalization or legalization (and between those two it's a matter of opinion on which is better depending on which data sources you use). I basically think illegal drugs fall under two categories: *Harmful profitable addictive substances. *Harmless substances with ulterior motives to be banned. Over the whole progression of the war on drugs, those two were originally separate, but many policy actions have dovetailed towards them being viewed similarly. One of the most effective ways to create a demand for a product, especially when it has an addictive nature is to prohibit it. The most poignant example of this would be the "lessons of prohibitions. " Before prohibition there were moderate rates of drinking in the country, after prohibition it became socially ingrained and drinking rates permanently skyrocketed (not to mention it led the creation of the Mafia since providing alcohol was a lucrative business opportunity). Beyond creating a demand since people always want what's taboo, a huge business opportunity is created, since the regular laws of supply and demand are superseded, and as the primary costs shift to bypassing the law rather than production, criminal organizations naturally are created. Ron Paul has been on record for many years saying this, but basically one of the main groups which actively lobbies against drug legalization are drug dealers; as legalization would destroy their entire business. To add in one final point on this topic, once drug dealers are established, to further their market, due to the inherent addictive nature of hard drugs, they will typically push them on other people. The best (and saddest) modern example I can think of is in the Native American reservations (where they basically live in horrible depressing conditions). Mexican drug cartels have been giving free crystal meth away to residents there, quickly getting them hooked, then charging the normal rates and ripping the communities apart as the destitute individuals try and get money to pay for it (and on a related note alcohol is one of the leading causes of death for native americans). The whole reason drug criminalization can never work is due to the fact that a) it makes a financial incentive to break the law and make the situation worse b) the government is not all powerful to enforce the law The only exception I know to this rule is in Singapore where there is a shoot on sight policy for anyone caught with heroin, which has been a sufficient deterrent to mitigate the trade. It’s fairly inhumane though. Portugal recently decriminalized drugs, despite all the dire apocalyptic warnings of what would follow. What ended up happening? Drug usage rates dropped across the board, and Portugal essentially has been more successful against the war on drugs than any other country. time.com/ time/ health/ article/ … (good source) So the question becomes, why on earth would a horrible policy like this be put into place? Marijuana is the archetypal example of the first category. The drug itself is harmless, especially compared to something legal like alcohol. It got outlawed due to the fact hemp competed with the paper (tree farm), cotton and oil industries, and they put out a PR campaign to scare the living daylights out of anyone using it, which led to it being made illegal and by extension hemp.1 The second category falls into a more general inclusive category. Drugs being illegal is a massive industry, not just for the drug cartels. The entire prison system gets a large amounts of funding from drug criminals; as do the many people who have their lively hoods staked to drug enforcement (and both which actively lobby to maintain the status quo, to the point the US has threatened foreign countries for focusing on treatment rather than imprisonment as that could create a ripple effect in social policy undermining our industry). If you google vid the prison industrial complex this is explained quite well. Lastly, (I've seen enough hard evidence to know it's true) the intelligence agencies make a lot of money from drug trafficking (MI-6 does heroin, CIA does cocaine). Having drugs legalized destroys this market, and as the CIA is an integral part of the government, the government is motivated to not pass laws which legalize drugs. The absolute best example I can think of for the merits of legalizing marijuana comes from the fact the DEA has been fighting unsuccessfully for decades to destroy the mexican marijuana trade in california. However, california legalizing medical marijuana and thus producing cheap high quality indoor product managed to kill it, since the Mexican cartels could not compete (or cause wildfires with illegal grow operations). So to paraphrase: Legalization has been shown to be the most effective and humane way to solve the problem. Many influential parties opposed to drug legalization profit from it. Your question has already been answered in Portugal.

Posted by: Redeye Jedi on 2010-01-12, 03:18:02

Ok, well I've read your profile and am aware that you are an educated man. I am sure that you are aware that critics have maintained that one of marijuana's greatest dangers is its potential to be used as a gateway to harder drugs. Currently, this notion serves as one of the key facets of the prohibitionist argument. Ironically, there exists little scientific data to support this theory A new Rasmussen poll shows that nearly half of America (46%) believe marijuana use leads to use of harder drugs. There is of coarse reason for this. Because marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug, it is predictably the first illicit drug most people would encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first. However, most drug users begin with alcohol and nicotine before marijuana, usually even before they are of legal age. Surely then, nicotine or alcohol should be considered as a gateway drug as well. More than 100 million Americans have tried marijuana, 14.4 million Americans are estimated to be "past-month " users. Yet there are only an estimated 2,075,000 "past-month " users of cocaine and 153,000 "past-month " users of heroin. Clearly, people who use marijuana overwhelmingly do not move on to other drug use (or at least a minimal amount). Laws against marijuana have created an unregulated black market, in which criminals control the supply and may attempt to market more dangerous drugs to people who just want marijuana. This argument provided a strong impetus for the Netherlands to effectively decriminalize cannabis use in an attempt to separate cannabis from the hard drug market. This strategy may have been partially successful as rates of cocaine use among those who have used cannabis are lower in the Netherlands than in the United States. All in all, as you have mentioned earlier, you too have dabbled a bit with marijuana, and in your own experience did you ever feel the need to experiment with harder drugs? If you in fact did then you are part of the minority. As a pro-cannabis activist, who has only ever seen positive results due to marijuana smoking (both in myself and others), I really do believe that the legalization of marijuana would lead to less hard drug abuse.

Posted by: irenaaneri1980 on 2010-01-12, 08:31:43

Im not for smoking marijuana when non medical use and yes it is very bad for you-anyone who tells themselves that it isnt simply doesnt want to know about it because they enjoy smoking pot too much so they try to justify it to themselves that it is "not that bad " however this is based on because of wanting to think that because you enjoy it and not from actual scientific evidence. However,i also think that it shouldnt be a criminal offense to be in possession but that selling it or any drug should remain a punishable offense but i think it shouldn't be illegal for someone to smoke it or have one or two small plants. At the same time while i dont think smoking should be criminal offense,i dont encourage it either as it does have negative health effects-eg:i can often easily spot a chronic pot smoker by their skin.People that smoke pot regularly/ alot often have sallow,dull skin. I had to do a boring essay on it about 3 years ago and adverse effects from smoking marijuana definately are worse then adverse effects from smoking tobacco by a long shot. Is it worse then alcohol?-hmm,i cant say,that is debatable as both can be pretty bad. Smoking marijuana is without a doubt "psychologically " addictive.Unfortunately i also used to smoke alot when i was a teenager-its absolutely addictive. I think making it legal would probably keep a similar level of drug abuse,maybe a bit more,i cant say for certain.

Posted by: homebirthmoma on 2010-01-12, 09:52:17

Weed is addicting it controls your mood and it is not easy to just stop it! I know this first hand I bought into the it's not addicting when I got up the first thing I had to have weed I would smoke at least two to three joints a day by myself and it was the good stuff.If I did not have it i was not a person you wanted to be around.If I ran out I would look for it till I found it.That's not very addicting now is it.Now for the part about weed leading to other drugs.At some point weed don't do what is use to do the buzz is not as good as it once was so a little bud and a beer hits the spot.Then that does not work and your weed friends find something better and you say cool man a beer a joint and some acid ! Ok I had I can't count all of my friends that smocked weed all of them around 100 friends.Ok my sister that got me hooked on weed turned to crack and pill so did her hub.My cuz that just did weed died of o.d. on pills at 19.Another friend that just smocked weed she got hooked on pills crack and killed her baby she did not know she was going to have a baby.Out of all my friends that smocked weed only one stop doing drugs! ONE! This was a long time ago that we hung out now weed just don't do it they moved to hard stuff such as pills,crack! When I see these people now they look like death.Someone I know right now that is very near and dear to me say's it is not addicting and he has tryd to stop it about four times in 10 years when he does he gets really moody to the point he makes me cry he gets really bad headaches he cant eat and he can't sleep! No it is not addicting not at all!!!!!!!!!!! If it does not lead to other drugs I guess im the only person in the world that looks at all the people I hung with and sees the road it lead to at one point if your out for the buzz you need more bigger and better.My old weed friends are on hard drugs or dead and some of them say ahhh weed did work I had to move on to bigger and better things.I would crave it like I did cigs I would sit and think man I need a joint.Anyhow does it have health benefits yeah I would think so and my dead friends thought so and all the old friends that are hooked on bigger and better thought so to.

Posted by: PStir on 2010-01-13, 01:10:25

Well, to answer your question - Yes, it will lead to more drug abuse. However, this is not due to cannabis, it is due to some people having addictive personalities and others thinking that it's cool to do drugs. The average person who tries cannabis and finds that they enjoy it might dabble in drugs (Cannabis is not a drug, it is a plant), either find that they enjoy it and carry on using it responsibly or find that they don't enjoy it and stop using it. From the stats, you can see that a very small percentage of the world population become addicted to drugs, yes it is a problem and causes hurt in a lot of families, but it is still a small percentage of the population, even of cannabis users. The reason I say drug abuse will increase is because more people with the addictive personalities and those looking to be cool will then use cannabis and find that it is harmless and move onto actual drugs. Another point to look at is that the drug abuse stats might drop if cannabis is no longer listed as a drug :)

Posted by: midnightmoon on 2010-01-14, 06:27:17

I think it would lead to lower abuse of other illegal drugs. Marijuana is the most common illegal drug. If its legalized, it will no longer be illegal. It will be produced by legit companies who are on the up and up and available at stores - people wont be forced to search out drug dealers to get marijuana. As a marijuana user, I think this is the best point of legalizing it. I use marijuana, but its not possible for me to grow my own. I have a group of friends who are mostly good people, but I do know they are involved in some other things that are illegal. I dont participate with them, or anything like that. But even though they are good people, I feel uncomfortable going to people I know are involved in other illegal activities. That point in and of itself, leads to people being exposed to a lower amount of other illegal drugs. I am hoping that with the legalization, it will loose the automatic association with other illegal drugs. I mean, tobacco is a drug, but would you ever say people who smoke cigs are more likely to be around illegal drugs? No, not today. But wouldnt they be if tobacco were suddenly made illegal? If it were illegal, wouldnt it be sold by drug dealers right beside cocaine and meth?