You’re going to start reading this and think it’s political; it’s not. Then you’re going to keep reading and think it’s about pot.
It is.
This was written weeks ago and held at bay because I wasn't sure it was kosher for a site that, right or wrong, is now largely seen as a Daddy blog.
Read on at your discretion.
I spent a good part of the evening at The Socialist's house on Wednesday. For those of you who question his rather unusual nickname, it's simply his professed political belief. I've known the guy since '93 and roomed with him for a year or so. Great guy, good friend, groomsman at my wedding. Self professed left-wing, non-violent Socialist, tho’ I think he’s mainly just a left of center Democrat.
It takes all kinds, as they say.
Inevitably we went through the usual political rigamarole. Let me see . . Bush is a moron, but paradoxically he's a moron that orchestrated the largest, most complex conspiracy in history (Iraq) to drive up the price of oil. And don't even get him started on Cheney, etc etc.
Socialist put more thought into all of this then I'm letting on, as he is an intelligent and thoughtful man, but by and large it was the same stuff you hear nightly from sports anchor turned respected(?) political commentator Keith Olbermann.
Naturally, I debated him point by point, largely referencing the works of my own political gurus, John Madden and the late Harry Carey, and by the end he was screaming and waving his arms and professing that I was just 'too smart' of a man to actually believe what I was saying, God *(&*(& it.
So, a pretty typical get together for the two of us.
And then wouldn't you know it, we came across something we both agreed upon.
I mentioned a customer of mine who sat down and told me about how he spent the mid-'90's engaged, while in the military, in the identification and destruction of marijuana fields in Texas. It seems his unit would fly around, spot a field, then dispatch raider teams to confiscate and destroy the plants and arrest the growers, in many cases old Willie Nelson wanna-be's.
Here's my opinion: what a [redacted] ridiculous waste of my tax money.
Yes, I know. The government can do whatever it sees fit to do with my dollars, being a constitutionally elected body and all. Lord knows there are plenty of people reading this who, contrary to me, despise the idea of one red cent heading to Baghdad. There's enough bitter little pills out there for all of us to share.
But . .
You can argue about the validity and effectiveness of the overall war on drugs all you want, but concede this: the 'war' against Marijuana isn't just lost, it's been lost for so long and so overwhelmingly that you have to wonder how we even remember where the front lines are anymore.
Claiming the result hasn't already been decided is no more logical than wondering if Ross and Rachael will ever get back together, or standing outside Rome and announcing you'll turn back Atilla any day now.
It's OVER.
You might not like the stuff, or approve of it. I’m not saying you have to, because this isn‘t an issue of what vice you personally enjoy or detest. I don’t drink (and frankly, am a bit contemptuous of those who do in excess) but I don’t advocate a return to prohibition; it isn’t practical.
I think the world as a whole would agree marijuana has no place in the hands of minors. I would rather it not be allowed in public places, other than perhaps designated bars. I'd prefer that you don't pilot my plane with a doobie in your shirt pocket, if you don’t mind.
But I do not believe, nor does anyone I know believe (even the most ardent anti-weed advocate) that it is addictive, physically dangerous* or on par with meth, coke, or crack.
In my opinion, alcohol has ruined the health and relationships of more people than marijuana ever could, from drunk driving to broken marriages and more. I have encountered many a drunk fool who's turned violent. In my experience, the worst that will happen with an intoxicated pothead is that the potato chips vanish too quickly.
- If something relatively benign penetrates your culture to the extent that it becomes a common denominator of most (tho' certainly not all) people across multiple generations
- if its nicknames and its terminology, and the methods of its use, all become part of the national consciousness;
- if most places have de-criminalized personal use;
- if you can go to a party of normal, middle aged overweight bookeepers and know that there is a strong likelihood that every single person in the room tried it at some point in their life
Then its time to give up the ghost and legalize it.
Prohibition, right or wrong, failed. This is nothing more than more of the same.
Ah, but I'm too flippant you say, too quick to minimize its risks and effects? I honestly don't think so, and I think neutral researchsupports my position, but either way legalization is the only feasible solution. Certainly the vain and costly method of criminalization isn’t doing the job.
[Ironically, I think national legalization would temporarily drive up the price of illegal weed, as the government would probably do it's darndest at first to pay lip service to the notion while regulating it right back onto the black market - low THC levels, no purchase with a prior criminal record, only approved sellers, extraordinarily high taxation, etc. Only with time would things level off]
Legalize it, but tax it (taking care not to re-create the example I make above). In theory, put the tax revenue and the money saved on law enforcement and incarceration aside for drug education and rehabilitation programs, if that suits your wishes, and more aggressive attacks on harmful street drugs.
{I am, however, a realist. For every dime diverted to those projects, no matter what is promised, another 90 cents will go to defense, pork barrel projects, and Bridges to Nowhere.}
What about the slippery slope argument? Does legalizing marijuana imply that somewhere down the line we’ll do the same for meth or coke? I doubt it, unless those drugs suddenly lose their addictive and destructive nature. Apples to apples folks.
So there you have it, another reason why Dan S. will never get elected to public office. Let me know your thoughts.
* lung cancer from heavy long term use being the exception
Not on AOL/AIM/? Comment here
