Denver Colorado

I think it is only a matter of time before pot is legalized in other states as well. It seems obvious that there is a very large demand for legal pot, and many states are in desperate need of additional tax revenues.

Personally, I smoked pot daily while at college and then well into my mid-twenties, but have not done so in over 30 years. I quit because I did not like how it effected my breathing -- it made it harder for me to enjoy sports and other outdoor activities.

Medical marijuana is, IMO, a no-brainer. And when used responsibly, I have absolutely no moral or ethical issues with recreational pot usage as well.  

But experience taught me that, while not physically addicting, pot could become psychologically addicting. I had a lot of friends who felt "normal" when they were high, and this is kind of sad if you think about it. Looking back, I think a lot of those kids never lived up to their potential, and getting high all the time did not help. Also, pot smoke is just plain horrible for your lungs, and I would not be surprised if the risks of lung cancer are equal to or even greater than cigarette smoking. I suppose that, like with so many other fun, risky and/or intoxicating things in life, moderation is key.

I hope that Colorado does not see any major negative side-effects to their decision, and I hope that people who can now, finally, purchase pot without the fear of being arrested, or the guilt trip associated with funding organized crime, do so responsibly and with some level of discretion. Also, I hope that legal pot stays price competitive with illegal pot, and that this source of funding for organized crime dries completely up.  

One path to seeing these new laws repealed will be if pot smoking now gets sensationalzed, and gets too much front page news. If, all of a sudden, we see reports claiming a large increase in pot smoking among very young teens, or if tourism suffers, if lots of families stay away from Colorado over concerns that it is now drawing the wrong sorts of people, then this could easily trigger a conservative backlash.

I doubt we will see any change in federal law any time soon, so another way this could be backfire would be if non-libertarian right wingers take back control of the White House. The justice department could be directed to override state or local laws, so it not be entirely shocking to see the DEA and FBI closing down otherwise legal pot shops. Personally, I hope it never comes down to this...

Hook

I have no moral argument against the legalisation of all narcotics. And the "war on drugs" is a frustrating and expensive exercise.

But the immense cost to society in health care due to cigarrettes and alchohol does make one wonder if more legal narcotics are really a good idea.

Legalise all drugs.

Used it a bit years ago, never smoked it though. Makes for an interesting curry...

Surely legalising 'drugs' would lead to a sharp reduction in criminal activity? Not to mention the revenue benefits. Or am I being a bit too simplistic?

steve

probably.

I consider drugs fit into a similar group as alchohol. eg we might need "limits" to reduce the risk of road accidents or accidents at work.

 I'm not sure what the risks involved are

National Public Radio had quite a bit of coverage of the issue yesterday.  One physician they interviewed said that he had no issue with the availability of marijuana per se, but that NO ethical physician could be in favor of humans inhaling any burning organic matter into their lungs.

I do not think it should be legalised.

I did smoke it back in early 90s when at uni and it was great. But, a good friend of mine who smoked it at the same time as me developed schizophrenia which has had a serious detrimental effect on his lifestyle since that time.

I know that he probably had latent schizophrenia prior to smoking and it was probably the smoking that brought schizophrenia to the fore.

It is my understanding that the drug is much more concentrated and stronger today and i therefore suspect more detrimental conditions could occur through smoking.

Regards,

Elkman

Voters in my state, Washington, recently legalized pot. I voted against it because I think it sends the wrong message to our youth. I've never smoked anything and have no desire to. As it was folks could readily get pot if they wanted. Now they can walk in a store and get it and pay a hefty tax on top of it. Good for them, but now we've got just another layer of unnecessary red tape and bureaucracy as far as I am concerned.

This is a very tricky question on many levels.  And, of course, ideally you wouldn't want to start from here.

The health angle isn't straight-forward with evidence being advanced by both camps.  elkman is right to point out the link to schizophrenia.  There's also some evidence suggesting that for some people pot is gateway to harder stuff.

The social cost is another.  Who would be brave enough to say that legalising will in net terms reduce the antisocial damage? Or would there be an increase with greater and legal availability? After all, there's already a strong lobby group pressing for something to be done about alcohol abuse because of the social harm it does.

Financial cost - if pot were taxed would it raise more revenue that the administrative costs and potential additional burden on NHS, social services, police forces etc?

Crime - it isn't axiomatic that the criminal activity associated with pot will disappear.  The criminal gangs will make an economic judgement about whether to continue to deal in the stuff based upon the 'price' the govnt decides is right for the product  (as the gangs already do will illicit tobacco and alcohol) so there could still be legal and illegal markets. 

Political cost - I think it would take a very brave political party to advocate such a policy. In the UK at least there's strong pressure on the Conservatives to move further right, and if Labour advocated such a policy it knows it would be attacked by tabloids (LibDems don't matter because they will never form a gvnt on their own). The argument wouldn't be about evidence and logic: it would be raw political mud-slinging. I suspect most politicians, notwithstanding their own private views, know this all too well and would rather not be drawn into a debate on the topic.    

Still, this Denver experiment will be interesting to watch.

MDS 

Be careful re schizophrenia -- it commonly first appears between the 16th and 25th birthdays, which coincide with starting and escalating drug use.  And marijuana often is turned to by the mentally ill attempting to "self-medicate." 

I think that the potential revenue is far too tempting to governments.  I think that more states, where the general population will vote it in, will go this route.

However for the non participant, it puts them one step ahead of the now legal drug user in the life struggle because of reduced exposure to mental and physical effects of taking the drug - not gloating just observing. 

You bring up an interesting point Derek, and to some extent, that is already the case today. Many employers screen very carefully before making a hiring decision. Lots of job applicants are required to pee in a cup.  Just because pot is legal, it does not mean that say, a long haul trucking company will now start hiring pot smokers as drivers.

In fact, given legalization may result in an increase in pot smoking, I would not be surprised to see even more employers start using some sort of drug test screening.  Making something legal does not automatically make it acceptable.

Hook

A public health campaign rather like the Aids awareness campaign in the UK in the 80s was very frightening and effective - so perhaps the way to handle the pot problem is to make people aware of the long term problems that the drug can have and not to try and legislate to close the shops.

So bring in laws that require the retail outlets to give education and warnings to customers of the potential downside effects of using the products to try and prevent the users from buying the stuff. 

not necessarily alcoholics yet

Choose your rant.

The other night I went to a local Mexican restaurant and saw four, no eight, no maybe a dozen obese patrons inhaling a variety of unidentifiable fried items, pork chili, and beef burritos smothered in cheese and sour cream...vile, disgusting, slobbish humans....

In many cases it is a moot point what the states do, because as long as the Feds keep it illegal, that means everyone who works for a company is potentially subject to losing their job from drug testing for doing something that is legal in their state.

While certainly not good for your lungs, I have always maintained that the comparison with cigarettes is not 100% valid, inasmuch as most cigarette smokers would smoke many more times a day (e.g., 20 times for a pack a day person), as well as all day, compared with a much more infrequent (one would hope) inhalation of the herb.

I have also wondered about the influence of Big Pharma on these laws, inasmuch as it might cut down the use of some of their products...and the power and impact of said influence in the USA is very strong & undeniable.  All our politicians are essentially for sale in both parties, corrupt dogs that they are.

I say legalize it.  Of course, you could just move to Uraguay.

You sound like a really FUN guy. Do come round my house sometime for a fag, a spliff, a line and a can of super-strength lager.

I could also teach you about the correct use of capitals.

Is that what Homer was contemplating during this episode of the Simpsons? 

Wow! I posted the same Simpsons image on two different topics on the same night. Involving Uruguay, no less. Time to go to Vegas?

How can we possibly continue keeping Marijuana illegal whilst allowing alcohol and tobacco to be freely available? It's a nonsense when you look at the evidence. If you've ever had to regularly deal with obnoxious aggressive drunks, spitting, swearing and vomiting, you might take a different view. But enough about the wife...

I smoked a few joints in my younger years and a few years ago attended a scientific and medical conference in Amsterdam where a few of us (some of whom were very august members of the medical profession) got completely moroculous on cannabis cakes, so you certainly don't have to smoke it. We were all very impressed how well we felt the next morning, compared with some of our colleagues who'd over-indulged on alcohol.

I confess to trying cannabis a short time ago in an attempt to suppress my rheumatoid arthritis. It didn't really work but before embarking on the experiment I did a fair bit of research into its possibly harmful effects. The upshot is, there are practically none. Again, making the comparison with alcohol, cannabis is extremely benign and has proved effective in alleviating the symptoms of various unpleasant medical conditions. The fact it's currently banned means not enough research is carried out into the potentially beneficial effects of cannabis.

I never bought into the idea that taking cannabis will lead young people into trying hard drugs, but the drug's illegal status is more likely to place youngsters in contact with criminals and therefore more susceptible to bad influence; not just my opinion but also that of the police forces, the members of which are almost unanimous in wanting cannabis possession to be made legal.

@tonym,

I posted above that I did not vote for legalizing pot in my state because I thought it sent the wrong message to our youth. That message includes not only the harmful physical affects of smoking anything at all, but of using drugs (including alcohol) as a temporary escape to coping with reality (i.e., procrastination). For older folks trying to mitigate pain of terminal diseases (medical pot) I think the use is justified if that is the patient's choice.

I agree with Tony - I have long "joked" that alcohol should be illegal and replaced by pot.  People get drunk, belligerent, and come home and beat their wives,  A guy on pot would be more inclined to say, "I'd like to kick your @ss, but I'm not getting off this couch...can you bring me those chocolate chip cookies please?"

Some people are going to be unable to handle responsible use of substances, be it alcohol, weed, or prescription pain killers.

And Prohibition in America - yeah, that worked out real well...but it DID make Joe Kennedy rich.

Tonym is spot on.

Marijuana use is already widespread, long-term harmful effects seem largely absent, beneficial effects abound and it represents a significant potential source of tax income. 

The current problem users have is trying to fit the type of marijuana and the dosage to the ailment. ATM it's trial and error. Research is needed to fully understand the effects of the various cocktails of cannabinoids of the different strains. The best way to research it is to legalize it for recreational use, as this provides a much larger user base (study population) than legalization for medical purposes. 

I'm confident that long-term research will show that, like alcohol, moderate consumption of pot lowers the risk of certain diseases, in the case of pot, most likely mental disorders. The body is well equipped with cannabinoid receptors. Now why would that be?

100% on the mark tonym

Especially the point that says how can we have legal alcohol & tobacco industries turning billions & filling the treasury coffers & parallel to that cannabis is illegal, even small personal use amounts,  it just does not make sense.  

Your point about obnoxious aggressive drunks is what every member of Joe Public is liable to face any time (of day) is well made.  I would add the heartache of alcohol addiction, the effects on families, long term health/death,  then add the cost of the whole process to the tax payer.  Then similar for tobacco addiction.

I would also add that long term & heavy use of cannabis is (IMO) also liable to do the same respiratory damage as tobacco & also heighten the possible risk of mental changes or degradation.   

But to confess, I have smoked (& eaten) more cannabis (& other stuff) than I care to admit during the 1960’s & later when working in parts of Mid East & Caribean thru 70’s & 80’s. 

I agree totally tonym’s point on the morning after effects.   I for sure did feel far fitter & was far more able to do my job after a night in Amsterdam coffee shops than where my colleagues who were running at 50% with their booze hangovers. 

Which leads me to my point,  the OP question is “Denver Colorado” .   So what's  the big deal with Colorado going legal.  It’s the 2nd US state with full legalisation as it happens, other states have various decriminalized cannabis possession.

And finally it makes me ask what about the coffee shops of not just Amsterdam but most of the large towns of all of Holland, they've been around for years