7
   

Time to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana

 
 
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 10:17 am
Commentary: Time to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana

Comments By Bob Ray Sanders | Fort Worth Star-Telegram

For many years I had in my possession four medical prescriptions, issued in 1926, for different patients with various ailments.

No matter what the "illness," the doctors' prescribed remedy printed on the official government form was the same: Whiskey.

This was during "prohibition," that 13-year period in American history when the "manufacture, sale or transportation of intoxicating liquors" was forbidden under the 18th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment, ratified in 1919, went into effect in 1920.

Under the National Prohibition Act of 1919 (also known as the Volstead Act), there were a couple of exceptions. Alcohol could be obtained for medical reasons with a physician's prescription, and the clergy were allowed to secure wine for the sacrament.

So, in addition to a lot of people becoming ill during this period, there was a significant rise in the number of preachers who were administering communion to a growing number of worshipers.

Hallelujah, and pass the holy wine.

I recently was reminded of my 84-year-old whiskey prescriptions as I heard reports on National Public Radio about how individual states are dealing with medical-marijuana laws.

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia have adopted laws that permit, to varying degrees, the sale and use of the long-outlawed drug to treat various medical problems. California, which became the first state to adopt such legislation in 1996, has the most liberal rules, while New Mexico — requiring marijuana dispensaries to be nonprofit — has the most restrictive, according to NPR.

There is a November ballot initiative in California calling for the full legalization of marijuana, which, if passed, would put a halt to some local governments trying to crack down on the proliferation of dispensaries.

I don't know whether we should legalize marijuana, but it is time for this country to begin a serious discussion on the subject.

In the last 30 years, we've made significant progress in decriminalizing the drug. With the increase in prohibition-like subterfuge of medically prescribing it for real or fake illnesses, this country should deal with the matter straight-up. Just stop the games and the yearly legislative maneuverings.

Understand, I'm not a drug user, so this isn't about me except as a taxpayer who realizes the billions of dollars spent on the unrealistic attempts to police those who do partake of the herb. The toll on our treasuries, law enforcement and individuals seems too great.

I vividly remember the 1972 case of a 19-year-old Fort Worth college student who was given a 25-year-sentence for the possession of one marijuana cigarette, which he maintained was given to him by an undercover police officer who also persuaded him to "try it."

That's a long time in the joint for possessing one "joint." Imagine the cost to the state and to the young man and his family.

Yes, we've come a ways since then. In fact, just three years ago the Texas Legislature passed a law allowing local police to issue a citation for possession of 4 ounces or less of marijuana rather than arrest, jail and prosecute the offender. At that time, the director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C., estimated that major cities in Texas would save a $1 million a year, as each marijuana arrest cost state taxpayers $2,000.

In a country that repealed prohibition 76 years ago, and one that has never seriously considered banning the sale of cigarettes or other tobacco products, it seems ridiculous to continue the charade of enforcing outdated marijuana laws. Many experts say alcohol and tobacco are far more harmful.

I really don't know, which is why I think it's time to do more study and have much more discussion.

On the surface, though, it seems more reasonable — and a lot less expensive — if we simply legalize the drug, regulate it and tax it.

Such a move would reduce the number of police officers assigned for enforcement, eliminate a huge number of prison beds allocated for drug offenders and add dollars to the public coffers.

Let's stop wasting time and money, y'all, and start talking.

ABOUT THE WRITER

Bob Ray Sanders is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Readers may write to him at: 400 W. 7th Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, or via e-mail at [email protected].



  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 7 • Views: 1,937 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 10:32 am
hey don't bogart that joint Cool

definitely time, i'd much rather smoke a joint now and again than have a drink
0 Replies
 
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 10:36 am
Prohibition creates criminality , drug enforcement is more destructive than the drugs they oppose...Its political and down right stupid to think you can control the supply of drugs. Yes its time ...
0 Replies
 
Pangloss
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 11:18 am
The insane thing is that Marijuana is still listed as a schedule 1 substance by federal law, meaning that it has ZERO medical use. This is just plain wrong, as patients with numerous health issues, from depression and anxiety to cancer, are seeing benefit from marijuana. I'm sure the pharmaceutical companies see this drug as a huge threat, and will be/are lobbying to keep it illegal.

Also, once legalized, the "regulating and taxing" part would not come so easily here, which I'm sure the government is well aware of. It's hard to regulate and tax something that can easily be grown, in large quantity, in one's own backyard.
0 Replies
 
sometime sun
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 11:34 am
Is this just about medicinally positive drugs?
Because if you were to legalise all drugs would not crime go down?

What drugs do you absolutely believe must ALWAYS be illegal?
Pangloss
 
  2  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 11:40 am
@sometime sun,
sometime sun wrote:

What drugs do you absolutely believe must ALWAYS be illegal?


Aedes made a good point on the old forum about the need to regulate antibiotics. If these drugs were available OTC, people would use them like vitamins, popping them at the first sign of any cold or illness, which would lead to widespread antibiotic-resistant bacteria problems. Keeping them controlled is a public health priority. Recreational drugs wouldn't have an effect like this though, so I support legalizing them.
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 11:43 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
It's time to legalize (restricted legalization similar to alcohol), regulate and tax all drugs.
0 Replies
 
sometime sun
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 11:47 am
@Pangloss,
I have nothing further to add but had to let it be shown I absolutely agree with you.

(tried the Coltrane and had a wonderful afternoon easy, try 'Miles Davis et John Coltrane- So what' so glad you have stayed)
0 Replies
 
A Lyn Fei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 12:39 pm
I believe there is one good argument to legalizing marijuana: good old American freedom values. It should be a personal choice to smoke or not, just as it's a personal choice to drink or smoke cigarettes or cigars. However, answer me this:
How would you stop people from driving under the influence of pot? There is no known test that could prove someone is high immediately on the side of a road.
Pangloss
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 12:48 pm
@A Lyn Fei,
A Lyn Fei wrote:

There is no known test that could prove someone is high immediately on the side of a road.


A standard roadside sobriety test will indicate if someone is impaired, not necessarily from alcohol, but from any substance.

Beyond this, there are saliva tests that can be done pretty quickly to detect for drugs. The problem is that THC is always present at a decent level in the blood of a regular pot smoker, so it would be difficult to distinguish between someone who smoked maybe last night and someone who just smoked.
sometime sun
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 01:46 pm
@Pangloss,
It was tested against alcohol and marijuana users and was found that, of course, alcohol gave the sense of abandonment and weed gave the sense of over cautiousness.

I don't understand why an overly cautious person is seen as a bad driver?
why, because it is generally normal for all drivers ,intoxicated or not, to be uncautious regularly, else no one would get any where fast fast fast, so the overly cautious go against this avant guard attitude and flow and will cause jams against the norm of taking your life in your own hands and spinning the wheel.

I do not presently drive any motor vehicle,
although after the summer I plan to learn the motorcycle,
even more dangerous than a car,
We'll see.
Pangloss
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 01:51 pm
@sometime sun,
sometime sun wrote:

I don't understand why an overly cautious person is seen as a bad driver?
why, because it is generally normal for all drivers ,intoxicated or not, to be uncautious regularly, else no one would get any where fast fast fast, so the overly cautious go against this avant guard attitude and flow and will cause jams against the norm of taking your life in your own hands and spinning the wheel.


In my experience, stoned drivers are much much better than drunk drivers, and possibly better than sober drivers. Usually they creep along at 5-10mph under the speed limit, stop completely at stop signs, and hit up a McDonald's every few miles to satisfy the munchies and stay alert...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Time to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 12:00:16