What would we do with tequila then!?!

I’m on the fence about this one.

On one hand marijuana poses no greater public health risk then nicotine or alcohol and it doesn’t share the same addictive properties as heroin and LSD. Also the government could tax it like they do cigarettes.

But on the other hand parents are trying to keep drugs away from their kids with a whip and a chair it doesn’t help them out if we legalize marijuana. Not to mention it’s a gateway drug.

Motley is actually echoing prohibitionist propaganda. Prohibition is kind of a social experiment which started in the US with the Harrison Act of narcotics (1914) and is not currently working. I’d ask Motley whether she thinks our current policies on drug use or abuse is actually putting our children off buying them. I do not think it does. Many people will argue against depenalization movements, as Motley does, saying drugs would be everywhere in case we made them legal, that we already have a problem with alcohol, so there is no need to add another substance to the list, that kids would have access to it and that it would be the end of our civilization. The thing is though, drugs are everywhere now as we speak, with prohibicionism got cheaper and cheaper, they already are in the list, for it is every other person taking them, kids do actually have plenty of access to them (and not to the very nice and clean pharmaceutical ones, but the nasty ones which in most of the case they cut with sheer poison) and now there is a social trend out there which make people who take certain drugs fashionable. When I come to think of it, the whole of it feels pretty much like the end of the civilisation to me. They say certain drugs are in the controlled substances list because of social health issues, but I do not think they have any “control” over the mater. Because of toxicity or other diseases associated to use patterns under prohibition, people also dye to infections which could have been prevented with just clean utensils. I think it is precisely our current policies on substances of abuse which is actually putting citizens in high risk and not drugs in its self.
I find it funny Motley is comparing LSD to Heroin and other addictive substances as LSD has been placed at the bottom of the Lancet Report’s list as the less addictive substance included in the Controlled Substances Act. It is also the less harmful to the body one. Depenalization of substances does not necessarily mean advocacy for violence or a well spread infection amongst our citizens, for it is this particular issue we mean to overcome by the means of more sensible policies. We should not legalize drugs because there are addicts and it is a health issue (not a criminal one), but just to make up for violence (for it is rife now), and maybe once they are legal, just maybe, we can start looking into addiction in a different way. Now, as we speak, it is like we cannot do much about it. People speak confused thoughts and it is currently courts of laws pushing treatment down on users. Here I can only see politicians killing people due to some moral background, and I do not like it. It really feels like the Spanish Inquisition and its witch hunter program. It is only down to individual to say what they do with their civil liberties, and yes, it is true, people also make bad decisions at times, but it is down to the family, not the state, to see to the problem. We simply have not the moral authority to pass law on virtue or morality and Democracy means you tolerate people you do not like when your personal freedom is not at risk. From the skin inwards begins my own jurisdiction, I am King in my land.

It should be done.

Regardless of any harm that it may possibly cause,
the right to mismanage one’s own affairs is called freedom.

Besides, man, the benefits way outweigh the harms.

I know a girl who had a head injury and for the rest of her life, very frequently, two nerves in her neck get pinched. Have you ever hit a nerve? It freaking hurts. Imagine two of them getting pinched for long periods of time. When this happens, she can either take 4 motrin, which tend to mess her up and not help much, or she can get high, which she enjoys and has no ill effects.

The only reason I’d be against it is because if the gov’t can figure out a way to tax it, then I’ll have to start paying way more.