Why is Marijuana Illegal?

[Panjandrum]

Originally Posted by Racoon

I seriously doubt reasons for continued Illegalization of Cannibis Sativa.

As a natural plant with many uses, I think the laws need to be reformed.
Alcohol is worse. Causes more violence, criminal behavior.
Cigarettes are worse. Causes more sickness and health problems.

While I broadly agree with your position, saying there are worse things than weed is not a very compelling argument, it weakens your credibility by relying on analogy to argue to your case rather than letting the merits of your position stand by themselves.

I can see why Crank, Heroin, LSD, Ecstacy and those types of drugs are illegal.
I can't really see why Pot, or Hemp, is illegal.

Really? I can see no logical or moral reason why you would be in favour of legalizing weed but not meth or x. Could you explain your position for my benefit?

I really think its ridiculous...Its a Plant. an Herb. and should be used and respected like any other natural evolution of raw Organic materials.

By the same reasoning, private ownership of uranium and cyanide can be justified. Again, its not that I disagree particularly, but I think your arguments need to be better refined.

[C1ay]

I personally support the decriminalization of all drugs in the U.S. and abolishment of the DEA. The drug war is a war that cannot be won and should not be fought.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by C1ay

I personally support the decriminalization of all drugs in the U.S. and abolishment of the DEA. The drug war is a war that cannot be won and should not be fought.

While I agree, I think it’s important that the production and sale of recreational drugs be no less well regulated and documented than over-the-counter medication. As with any potentially harmful product, it’s essential that there be a trail of responsibility connecting producer, retailer, and consumer. One of the greatest problems with illicit drugs as they are currently available via black markets is their uncertain purity and potential for tainting. Without new regulation, legalization would not eliminate these problems.

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by CraigD

Without new regulation, legalization would not eliminate these problems.

The FDA could regulate what needs to be regulated. IMO, legalization would greatly reduce the profit margins currently enjoyed by illegal suppliers reducing their incentive to sell illicit drugs. They'd look for other business ventures and a lot of the illicit supply would dry up.

[Kayra]

As I remember, It is not an illegal drug, but rather a controlled substance.
There is a significant difference, and the laws for controlled substances are much easier for big business to manipulate, as it does not involve higher levels of government.

With that in mind, I had read (some time ago) that the reason that prohibition started on the drug was because of all the Mormons smoking up on Mexican weed The Mormon church frowned on this and made it doctrine that it was outlawed. Utah law almost immediately made a law prohibiting the drug. It grew to other states from there, but nothing happened at the federal level.

Past that, most of the problems came from a newspaper/timber magnate named Hearst, DuPont, and the man who ran the Federal Bureau of Narcotics Anslinger.

Anslinger needed to solidify his new department, Hearst wanted hemp paper gone and was a loud bigot against Mexicans (the main supplier at the time), and DuPont had a double reason to want hemp shut down. Both for Nylon and the chemicals that turned trees into paper. Hemp needed only a fraction of them to make far superior paper.

Stage set, Hearst made a fortune printing up fake stories about how Marijuana was affecting the people of the country, turning them into crazed ax murders and such. (only thing I ever see getting attacked by someone smoking marijuana is a bag of cheesies). The "Truth" of this was in a scrap book of newspaper articles.

Supported by DuPont and Hearst, Anslinger did a backroom deal with congress, not outlawing the drug, but in fact making it a "controlled substance" This gave them the right to tax it, but it also gave them the right to disallow sales of it. Not making the drug illegal, but making the sale of it illegal.

The scare that Hearst put into the people with his continual running of scare tactics stories had left a long standing misconception on the American people, and the world.

They created a gigantic meme that will not easily die.

Have no doubt that what you face in getting this drug removed from the controlled substance list will have little to do with evidence presented as to how safe, desirable, or helpful the product is. It has to do with a brainwashing of several generations of people so that a few companies and bureaucrats could benefit. ( and boy did they ever)

[Racoon]

Originally Posted by Panjandrum

Really? I can see no logical or moral reason why you would be in favour of legalizing weed but not meth or x. Could you explain your position for my benefit?

Well, I do.
Legalizing all drugs in one fell swoop would be less likely than simply legalizing Marijuana. It could be a first step.

From personal experience, of seeing the effects of Crank, and the long-term effects of MDMA not appearing to be great ,
I think Marijuana is much more Safe.
You cannot overdose. You will fall asleep before that happens.

Yeah. I think putting Crank and X in the same category of controlled substances as "weed" is wrong Panjandrum! For obvious reasons.
Manufacturing is a good example. How do you make Crank and X?

Marijuana grows. And Hemp also has many purposes beside getting high.
It could be used for creating rope, clothing, paper, oils, Bio-fuel, and many other consumer goods.

If Crank grew on trees, or X could be farmed, you might have a point. But I don't buy your analogy or logic.

I do agree with Clay.
The War on Drugs will never be won. It is an extreme waste of Money and Prison space.
There hasn't been any progress made despite hundreds of Billions of dollars being spent.

[Vicarious]

I have access to a documentary about the history and illegalization of drugs in the United States. It's in .avi format I think. One of the episodes details the reasons for the illegalization of marijuana. Bottom line, in my opinion, is that marijuana was a scapegoat, and the legislation made certain people seem like heroes in their day. Would you like me to arrange to transfer it to you?

[orbsycli]

Yeah,
if you can send it to jasonsmaxis@gmail.com

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by Kayra

As I remember, It is not an illegal drug, but rather a controlled substance.

This is correct. Cannabis is on Schedule 1 of the US Controlled Substances Act, which was passed into public law in 1970.

I’ve a personal anecdote concerning the legality of Cannabis. My father was an MD who obtained his license in the late 1950s. At was routine, and something of a ritual at this time for new MDs, he applied for and receive nearly all the federal and state licenses to which he was entitled. Among these was a federal license to prescribe Marijuana.

For a variety of reasons – the major ones being that he had only a vague idea how to instruct a patient to have such a prescription filled, the possibility of placing a patient in legal trouble, and the limited information available of the efficacy and use of it in modern medicine - my father never prescribed Marijuana. In the early 1970s, he moved his private practice to a new building. His new office was much larger, so he decided to decorate a long wall of it by hanging every license or certificate he had. Among them was the marijuana license.

As a teenager in the 1970s, I was shocked to see this small, framed document – which, I recall, was nicely printed, bearing a realistic green pot leaf similar to the ones coveted by me and my peers on tee-shirts, hats, and decals.

He explained its history, adding that sometime in the 1960s, new MDs applying for this license stopped receiving it, receiving instead a polite form letter explaining that the license was no longer being routinely granted, but required a detailed explanation of why it was required. Since hardly any MDs anticipated ever really needing the license, hardly any pursued the more complicated application process.

The same day, he took the license from the wall and rearranged the others to eliminate the gap, realizing that pot leafs, even on federal licenses, were not something a respectable MD has on his office wall.

I regret that, after my father’s death in 2002, I didn’t search for and take this document, which I’ve no doubt he still had, framed and buried in a box in his attic or his self-storage locker. It was a historic relic one would have a hard time finding in a museum.

[Racoon]

Originally Posted by CraigD

This is correct. Cannabis is on Schedule 1 of the US Controlled Substances Act, which was passed into public law in 1970.

As a teenager in the 1970s, I was shocked to see this small, framed document – which, I recall, was nicely printed, bearing a realistic green pot leaf similar to the ones coveted by me and my peers on tee-shirts, hats, and decals.

I regret that, after my father’s death in 2002, I didn’t search for and take this document, which I’ve no doubt he still had, framed and buried in a box in his attic or his self-storage locker. It was a historic relic one would have a hard time finding in a museum.

So, whats the difference between "illegal" and "controlled substance" ? I thought it was both.

Marijuana being a Schedule 1 is absurd!
If I had a Pot plant growing in my back yard, the Police could Arrest me AND TAKE MY HOUSE. which is asinine!
The fact they use this to grant authorities power to seize property is reprehensible!

Thats a nice personal story you shared with us CraigD.
But too bad that you no longer have that piece of Medical History and Family History.