Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
420
If I know anything about Ricochet members, it’s that you love your weed. Half of you are probably baked right now. I can’t attend a member meetup without tripping over at least a dozen bongs and hookahs. (I don’t know how Peter Robinson gets the smell out of his fair-trade hemp poncho.)
So, happy 4/20, man. For that tiny minority of non-weedheads on Ricochet, today’s the unofficial holiday for marijuana and those who love it. The date is a reference to 4:20, which was the time of day a group of smokers called The Waldos would blaze up in 1971:
The Waldos designated the Louis Pasteur statue on the grounds of San Rafael High School as their meeting place, and 4:20 p.m. as their meeting time. The Waldos referred to this plan with the phrase “4:20 Louis.” Multiple failed attempts to find the crop eventually shortened their phrase to simply “4:20”, which ultimately evolved into a codeword that the teens used to mean marijuana-smoking in general. Mike Edison says that Steven Hager of High Times was responsible for taking the story about the Waldos to “mind-boggling, cult like extremes” and “suppressing” all other stories about the origin of the term.
Hager wrote “Stoner Smart or Stoner Stupid?” in which he called for 4:20 p.m. to be the socially accepted hour of the day to consume cannabis. He attributes the early spread of the phrase to Grateful Dead followers, who were also linked to the city of San Rafael.
Lots of Grateful Dead fans like drugs? I learn something new every day.
Marijuana is now having a larger impact on American culture due to the legalization efforts in Colorado, Washington state, and the District of Columbia. Prominent politicians in both parties are calling for the easing of restrictions and, at the very least, a decriminalization of cannabis.
Wired magazine put together an interesting video on the state of marijuana in the U.S:
I’ve never been a fan of weed and traditionally cared little about its legalization. I don’t smoke and none of my friends did either (that I knew of), so why bother changing the law? Booze is already legal; do we really need another substance to lower productivity in this lousy economy?
Admittedly, much of my opposition to weed was a cultural thing. I hate Phish concerts, dreadlocks on white guys, and Seth Rogen movies. And don’t get me started on the stomach-churning smell. Sorry hippies, but if you want to escape reality for a few hours, down a tumbler of scotch since that’s my drug of choice.
As I’ve gotten more libertarian over the years, I realized I was a big, fat hypocrite on the issue. I don’t use tobacco, eat kale or listen to Maroon 5, but I don’t want any of them outlawed except Maroon 5. Who am I to use the power of the state against people who like to smoke weed?
What does Ricochet think about the stuff? Should it be legalized, decriminalized or kept completely illegal? Has your viewpoint changed over the past few years?
Published in General
These are arguments against weed being legalized that I hadn’t considered. Much to ponder now.
Can we do that with alcohol too?
Im completely with you. I used to have the ‘live and let live’ approach. I did a bit of pot myself (of course!).
But anyone who says pot is a harmless drug is talking out of their posterior cavity. In high school, I saw it fry the brain of one friend of mine, and kick start the mulching of anothers’.
I remember when I decided to stop smoking it. I was living with 3 guys who had a steady stream of the true ‘organic stuff’. BC pot, though not hydroponic as I was aware. Anyway I got into the habit with them of smoking it every night for about a month. But then my general non-high reality started to alter slightly but noticeably. Talking and thinking slower, staring into space more. I’ve always taken pride in my brain and here suddenly I began to think it was at risk (paranoia perhaps, another symptom?). My family also has a history of schizophrenia and I thought I might be getting a little too close to the cliff-edge. I stopped. I felt like an outcast for a few weeks as I had to decline the polite society of the pot circle outside the house. But i decided I wasn’t missing much and no one stopped talking to me.
Really it’s bad stuff. Im only 27 but I will take the fuddy-duddy grey-flannel suit opinion that it leads to harder stuff. I see the meth zombies wondering around my city and I imagine they all must have started on pot ‘cos it opens your mind man!’ I feel my city is less safe as a result.
Decriminalisation I don’t think will solve any problems. It’s a problem of culture. I think culturally and morally we are too soft on drugs. Asian countries are infamously merciless on dealers (and even users caught with too much). I no longer find myself recoiling in moral horror at that. I get angry at western tourists who holiday in these tough jurisdictions and think they can just choof away (or smuggle) in defiance of the local laws and think their passports will save them. Maybe WE in the west are the ones who have strayed too far from the norm.
I like this kind of idea. Make it legal, but if you screw up while on it, like a DUI or whatever offense, you can’t have it anymore. The idea being that the citizen is assumed to be able to handle drug X, until he shows that he can’t, then his legal possession right is forfeited. If you can be a high functioning addict, then you’re OK to continue.
Those are two really good reasons to legalize. Much better than any reasons to keep it illegal.
In answer to the OP’s questions: for legalization, have been since I read an editorial by Spiro Agnew in the WSJ laying out the case some time in the late 80s.
And who, or what, is maroon 5?
Its a gateway drug to bad music. Just say no. :)
This strikes me as a false equivalence. I’m ignorant on how many pot brownies one has to consume to get high, but you could eat an entire rum cake without getting a buzz – at least the rum cake recipe I use. Maybe your recipe is rummier?
No, I’m fully aware people would still make brownies. It’s just that homemade brownies (cookies, candies, chocolate bars) wouldn’t have commercial wrappers making them look like something daddy picked up at the 7-eleven.
What people do with a legal product once they get it home is their business (apart from distributing it to minors). But part of the rationale for legalizing pot was to place standards on its production, labeling and sale, so you don’t have to smoke it to know what’s in it (Hey, Nancy! New tagline for ya’!). I think it unwise to let products containing a mind-altering drug to be sold in the guise of something normally benign, like a brownie.
Other than cases involving interstate commerce, the federal government should get out of the pot regulation business, and let the laboratories of democracy figure out the right policies. I personally think it is a vice (that means a bad thing to you potheads) and policy should be tailored as such. Let’s try taxes and regulations, mainly to keep it out of the hands of minors, treat those who have demonstrated that they cannot handle it, and to give consumers accurate information on what they are ingesting. Don’t make it a civil right, like the California legalization proponents tried to do a few years ago. Let the criminal justice system, employers and even landlords require drug testing.
Just legalize it, define intoxication for it, make working while under the influence a fineable offense with no recourse and get it over with. Raising children while intoxicated puts you at risk of losing the kids. Driving while stoned gets you jail time.
Selling or giving drugs to minors gets you the death penalty.
Do the same for every drug. Drain the illegal money right out of it. Jail people for bad behavior not harmless pleasure.
If adults can handle drugs , treat them like adults. If they behave in a way that endangers others, that’s what laws are for.
Name me a substance ( other than anthrax or plutonium or similar WMD components) that adults should be arrested for just possessing.
I insist.
I don’t know, “Causing stoners to suddenly lose all interest in politics” is well up there on my list.
Here’s the problem, man:
Alcohol is legal. So now you’re going to deny benefits for something legal. Smoking cigarettes increases respiratory illnesses, lowering productivity. You want to test for that too? Frankly, it bugs the hell out of me when people on public assistance buy cigarettes (especially in NY where they’re north of 10 bucks a pack).
You end up with a nanny slippery slope on this very quickly.
Ideally, it should be legal even if its use should generally be discouraged, because we value limited government. We understand that our neighbors would like to make their own exceptions to freedom. Sure, you can outlaw your pet peeve (weed); and they will outlaw or tax the heck out of theirs (coffee / soda / SUVs / hard toys / podcasts).
Practically, our politicians, bureaucrats, and lawyers would terrorize a legal market. It would be distorted, extorted, nonsensical, and generally a nightmare. How does that sound to you anti-legalization folks?
The number of people imprisoned over this (in my opinion) minor offense is not sufficient reason to legalize because we also have the option of changing the punishments to be equally minor.
Like Edmund Burke, I’m more interested in positive freedom (freedom to) than in negative freedom (freedom from). But shouldn’t proponents of limited government favor non-legal methods of deterrence?
Some scattered observations:
No, stoners don’t typically toke as many joints as smokers do cigarettes. But cigarettes are filtered. And it’s the tar, not the nicotine, that harms cigarette smokers.
Cartels would be affected by legalization; but not as much as many think, and only gradually. Legal supplies wouldn’t immediately satisfy the demand. Despite major consumption populations in the US going legal, we haven’t read about the cartels suffering yet. Cartels are essentially in the business of illegal activities. Remove one product line and they will invest more in another, like sex trafficking.
There are varieties of weed, just like there are varieties of tea and of beer. It stinks, Jon? You might have been smelling “skunk” weed, a popular type because of its bargain price. The “Christmas tree” type smells better. Back in my (border state) high school days, I learned of over a dozen kinds of marijuana.
Weed is sometimes laced with other drugs. LSD is a common additive. Others, like fermaldehyde, can be deadly. That is irrelevant to legalization, because additives are neither necessary nor normal.
Legalization of hemp is a separate issue. The plant has many uses aside from getting high.
Marijuana alters brain chemistry. It is dangerous for a small number of people wirh genetic inclinations to psychological disorders. The effects of excessive use are no worse than alcoholism. Whether or not it is legalized, it is riskier for minors (whose brains are still developing).
There are people who toke only occassionally, just as there are people who only drink alcohol occasionally. Calling it a gateway drug is like calling sweet potatoes a gateway to donuts and pies. We can content ourselves to advising moderate and responsible consumption.
Each drug merits separate consideration. I would legalize pot but not most other illicit drugs. LSD, heroine, and cocaine, for example, all commonly pose threats to non-users. A person experiencing a bad trip or a superman high can be dangerous. (Incidentally, read a book called The Day of St Anthony’s Fire for a horrifying true story of a town gone mad off LSD-contaminated bread.)
You can tell I grew up by a big city.
Regarding 420.
Aaron, sweet potatoes? I’ m not so sure. First, you have have a “baked” sweet potato with roast chicken for dinner, then you remember your grandmother used to make sweet potato casserole with marshmallows on top back in the 50’s while listening to Miles Davis. Before you know it, you’re “yamming” in root cellars with the other “tubers” strung out on sweet potato-pecan cupcakes and looking for recipes in old issues of Southern Living.
Not so Fred. The difference between drugs/alcohol and cigarettes is that the loss of productivity with the former is acute. It’s immediate and severe.
Don’t worry about slipperiness because they aren’t on the same slope.
“Sweet potato casserole with marshmallows on top…”
Oh wowwww, maaannnnn. Kewl.
Cite some sources for “cigarettes increase respiratory illnesses, lowering productivity” please.
When Mr. C started his career, he, and nearly everyone he worked with was hopped up on nicotine and caffeine. They had to be some of the most productive people on the planet.
And you can thank your nuke-free cold-warrior rear-end for their work! ;-)
The claim that “ZERO people die from Marijuana overdoses” is somewhat inaccurate. There have been reported cases in Colorado of users having psychotic episodes and committing suicide or homicide. The number of cases is small, but greater than zero.
Perhaps we should. I wouldn’t object to it.
This is a nanny slippery slope, quite frankly, that I don’t mind being on. You’re talking about state benefits. I think it would be a perfectly legitimate juxtaposition to see a full nanny state for people on state benefits, and free-market liberty for those who choose to keep the government out of their lives. No cigarettes if you’re on public assistance, either.
Here’s the thing. You’re asking for my money to live your life. Fine, I’ll give it to you, and you can life life the way I think you should. If you’re on welfare, maybe I’ll say you can’t have cable TV; maybe you should have a curfew; required haircut and good personal hygiene. If you ask to be a ward of the state, you should have a nanny.
Okay. Two things:
1. If someone has a psychotic episode, and somehow death occurs, that’s not an overdose. If a co-ed drinks so much that she gets alcohol poisoning and dies from it, that’s an overdose. You literally cannot smoke so much marijuana that you would die from it.
2. Please cite your Colorado cases! We’ve had a couple of years worth of scare stories now (and decades more before) that, upon examination, are not what they are popularly reported to be.
I figured this was self-evident, but here you go:
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/10/3/233.full
That’s a study from the BMJ, it’s conclusion:
The problem comes because you’re sanctioning people at that point for what are legal activities.
The other thing is: It’s a waste of damn money. Whenever they test for drugs, welfare recipients have lower rates than the general public.
There are things you can do to lower welfare dependency, drug testing, while emotionally satisfying, is a waste of resources.
Lacing marijuana with other stuff is only really a problem if you don’t know its there. But if marijuana were sold legally, then purchasers would know better what they’re buying.
A couple of things here.
The Day of St. Anthony’s Fire was ergot poisoning, not LSD.
Second, people need to use LSD responsibly. If you’re going to trip, you should have someone to guide the trip if anything goes wrong. (This sounds stupid, but its common in the LSD user community.)
As far as a person’s danger to themselves and other while on LSD, heroine, or cocaine (or anything else), please see alcohol.
If you want to ban something for the negative externalities it imposes on others, alcohol dwarfs any drug you can come up with. Especially suicide! A third of suicides happen when someone is drunk on alcohol!
AND YES millions of American adults are able to responsibly handle alcohol without negatives to themselves or others.
Fred – You’re actually making a case FOR increased regulation. Just because people buy marijuana legally it doesn’t mean that they know what they’re getting.
As for the two high profile murder/suicides that have taken place in Colorado I don’t think the tox screens have been released. But both involve marijuana edibles. The murder victim called 911 and reported that her husband ate laced candies and was starting to act strangely but the cops got there too late. The family of the suicide victim reported the same.
Awesome. Please provide links!
As to me demanding more regulation, I’m more than willing to let the market sort out labeling issues.
From CBS, coverage of both.