why the goverment doesn't want legalize marijuana?
402459
because their scared we are going to look and act like Snopp Dogg. lol
52019
why the heck would they want to legalize it in the first place? If they were doing it for the medicinal value, you'd still need a prescription for it and recreational use would still be illegal, besides, there are a whole lot of drugs out there which are more effective.\nIf it were legal for recreational use, that would just result in increased consumption and more fatal traffic accidents, etc. Nothing good would come from it.
1134454
Should Governments Legalize and Tax Marijuana?\nExamining a Recent Study on Legalization\nThe war on drugs is an expensive battle, as a great deal of resources go into catching those who buy or sell illegal drugs on the black market, prosecuting them in court, and housing them in jail. These costs seem particularly exorbitant when dealing with the drug marijuana, as it is widely used, and is likely no more harmful than currently legal drugs such as tobacco and alcohol. There's another cost to the war on drugs, however, which is the revenue lost by governments who cannot collect taxes on illegal drugs. In a recent study for the Fraser Institute, Economist Stephen T. Easton attempted to calculate how much tax revenue the Canadian government could gain by legalizing marijuana. \nThe study estimates that the average price of 0.5 grams (a unit) of marijuana sold for $8.60 on the street, while its cost of production was only $1.70. In a free market, a $6.90 profit for a unit of marijuana would not last for long. Entrepreneurs noticing the great profits to be made in the marijuana market would start their own grow operations, increasing the supply of marijuana on the street, which would cause the street price of the drug to fall to a level much closer to the cost of production. Of course, this doesn't happen because the product is illegal; the prospect of jail time deters many entrepreneurs and the occasional drug bust ensures that the supply stays relatively low. We can consider much of this $6.90 per unit of marijuana profit a risk-premium for participating in the underground economy. Unfortunately, this risk premium is making a lot of criminals, many of whom have ties to organized crime, very wealthy. \n\nStephen T. Easton argues that if marijuana was legalized, we could transfer these excess profits caused by the risk-premium from these grow operations to the government: \n\nIf we substitute a tax on marijuana cigarettes equal to the difference between the local production cost and the street price people currently pay--that is, transfer the revenue from the current producers and marketers (many of whom work with organized crime) to the government, leaving all other marketing and transportation issues aside we would have revenue of (say) $7 per [unit]. If you could collect on every cigarette and ignore the transportation, marketing, and advertising costs, this comes to over $2 billion on Canadian sales and substantially more from an export tax, and you forego the costs of enforcement and deploy your policing assets elsewhere. \nOne interesting thing to note from such a scheme is that the street price of marijuana stays exactly the same, so the quantity demanded should remain the same as the price is unchanged. However, it's quite likely that the demand for marijuana would change from legalization. We saw that there was a risk in selling marijuana, but since drug laws often target both the buyer and the seller, there is also a risk (albeit smaller) to the consumer interested in buying marijuana. Legalization would eliminate this risk, causing the demand to rise. This is a mixed bag from a public policy standpoint: Increased marijuana use can have ill effects on the health of the population but the increased sales bring in more revenue for the government. However, if legalized, governments can control how much marijuana is consumed by increasing or decreasing the taxes on the product. There is a limit to this, however, as setting taxes too high will cause marijuana growers to sell on the black market to avoid excessive taxation. \nWhen considering legalizing marijuana, there are many economic, health, and social issues we must analyze. One economic study will not be the basis of Canada's public policy decisions, but Easton's research does conclusively show that there are economic benefits in the legalization of marijuana. With governments scrambling to find new sources of revenue to pay for important social obje
784813
That is a good question that I don't have an answer for, but will probably be pondering for the next few days. I just wanted to say your question is the reason weed is illegal--because it does make intelligent people think. The govt would rather we drink beer and stay fat and stupid.
977188
Marijuana was legal when Prohibition went into affect and saw a rise in popularity as people sought an alternative  for the alcohol they couldn't get anymore. Two factors combined to make Marijuana illegal, one, the liquor industry that didn't want competition and the other was the bureaucracy set up to suppress alcohol found itself out of business once alcohol became legal again. When has any bureaucracy ever dismantled voluntarily? They just created a new boogie-man to suppress.
720841
Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.\n\nThe actual story shows a much different picture. Those who voted on the legal fate of this plant never had the facts, but were dependent on information supplied by those who had a specific agenda to deceive lawmakers. You'll see below that the very first federal vote to prohibit marijuana was based entirely on a documented lie on the floor of the Senate.\n\nYou'll also see that the history of marijuana's criminalization is filled with: \n\nRacism \nFear \nProtection of Corporate Profits \nYellow Journalism \nIgnorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators \nPersonal Career Advancement and Greed \nThese are the actual reasons marijuana is illegal.\n\nThe Mexican Connection\n\nIn the early 1900s, the western states developed significant tensions regarding the influx of Mexican-Americans. The revolution in Mexico in 1910 spilled over the border, with General Pershing's army clashing with bandit Pancho Villa. Later in that decade, bad feelings developed between the small farmer and the large farms that used cheaper Mexican labor. Then, the depression came and increased tensions, as jobs and welfare resources became scarce.\n\nOne of the "differences" seized upon during this time was the fact that many Mexicans smoked marijuana and had brought the plant with them.\n\nHowever, the first state law outlawing marijuana did so not because of Mexicans using the drug. Oddly enough, it was because of Mormons using it. Mormons who traveled to Mexico in 1910 came back to Salt Lake City with marijuana. The church was not pleased and ruled against use of the drug. Since the state of Utah automatically enshrined church doctrine into law, the first state marijuana prohibition was established in 1915. (Today, Senator Orrin Hatch serves as the prohibition arm of this heavily church-influenced state.)\n\nOther states quickly followed suit with marijuana prohibition laws, including Wyoming (1915), Texas (1919), Iowa (1923), Nevada (1923), Oregon (1923), Washington (1923), Arkansas (1923), and Nebraska (1927). These laws tended to be specifically targeted against the Mexican-American population.\n\nWhen Montana outlawed marijuana in 1927, the Butte Montana Standard reported a legislator's comment: "When some beet field peon takes a few traces of this stuff... he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico, so he starts out to execute all his political enemies." In Texas, a senator said on the floor of the Senate: "All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff [marijuana] is what makes them crazy."\n\nJazz and Assassins\n\nIn the eastern states, the "problem" was attributed to a combination of Latin Americans and black jazz musicians. Marijuana and jazz traveled from New Orleans to Chicago, and then to Harlem, where marijuana became an indispensable part of the music scene, even entering the language of the black hits of the time (Louis Armstrong's "Muggles", Cab Calloway's "That Funny Reefer Man", Fats Waller's "Viper's Drag").\n\nAgain, racism was part of the charge against marijuana, as newspapers in 1934 editorialized: "Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice." \n\nTwo other fear-tactic rumors started to spread: one, that Mexicans, Blacks and other foreigners were snaring white children with marijuana; and two, the story of the "assassins." Early stories of Marco Polo had told of "hasheesh-eaters" or hashashin, from which derived the term "assassin." In the original stories, these professional killers were given large doses of hashish and brought to the ruler's garden (to give them a glimps
722877
The reason why hemp is illegal is not because of any residual psychedelic properties it might have (even the government recognizes you would get sick before you had smoked enough hemp to get high), but because if it were legal it would make the ban on marijuana completely unenforceable.\n\nThe leaves of both the marijuana and the hemp plants are completely indistinguishable by any means other than testing in a laboratory. They cannot be told apart by any visual or sensory means (smell, taste, etc). As such, if a person were carrying what looked like marijana leaves dried and crushed up for smoking, a police officer would have NO ability to express reasonable suspicion or probable cause that the leaves were not from a hemp plant, and could not then have the authority to seize and test any such product. The fact that hemp leaves dried and crushed for smoking would be useless would not matter to a judge.\n\nI fully believe that marijuana, like dental cocaine, has some legitimate medicinal value, and that hemp can produce some economic gain for small farmers and businessmen. I am not saying your petition is without merit. However, I think it is important that you realize why the government is so adamant about maintaining the ban on marijuana and hemp together, and that a lot of people who have employment that requires trust between themselves and the government (ie- having some sort of license or permit from a state or federal government entity) will not be in a position to sign such a petition.
144051
you cant win a war on drugs when there isnt one.the goverment supplies the drugs so there is no war
985944
The question of the marijuana laws has been addressed by numerous major government commissions over the years. In order to understand why it is illegal, I recommend you read the short history of the marijuana laws at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm \n\nSee also "Why marijuana was outlawed" at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_outlawed.htm\n\nIn short, it was outlawed for two major reasons. In the southwestern states it was outlawed because of racial prejudice against Mexican immigrants. In the northeastern states it was outlawed because of the fear that heroin addiction would lead to the use of marijuana -- exactly the opposite of the modern "gateway" myth.\n\nEvery major government commission report on the laws in the last 100 years has concluded that the marijuana laws were the result of ignorance and nonsense. They all found that there was no justification for making marijuana illegal and that the prohibition laws do more harm than good. You can find summaries of their conclusions, with links to the full text of the studies, at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/studies.htm
27874
because way back in the day, cotton plantations (among others) realised they would face some very serious competition if your government allowed hemp (the male variation of the marijuana plant) to be grown, seeing as its cheaper, more durable and just plain better than cotton. They lobbied the government hard and as they provided huge donations to both political parties got their way. Since then there has been lots of ill-informed religious right spackwads to keep it illegal free of charge.
1045398
Mostly fear. And ignorance. \n\nThe medical community and people who decide what is legal and illegal still consider marijuana to be a gateway drug. They think it is  bad for you. \n\nWhile I agree with you about it should be legal, it isn't. \n\nYou can it taken off the list of illegal drugs and work to make it legal, but until it is legal, don't break the law and risk going to jail. Instead, work to get it made legal. \n\nIt is legal for medical use in Oregon and California and all over the west coast. \n\nWork to get it legalized.
3205
Ron's answer is right on: the government has a monopoly on legalized force. This is a libertarian perspective, and libertarianism is recognized as the best system of government yet devised.
859465
Pot became illegal after the end of Prohibition.  The government needed a job for all those Prohibition Officers.  Instead of disbanning the department, they choose to go after other personal demons.\n\nI read a very interesting article, back when the Fed's decided to criminalize marijuana, many, many doctors petitioned the government to not do it.   Even way back then, some docs knew of the medicinal qualities of pot.  Of course, after the government pulled some heavy handed tactics, the docs shut up.\n\nJust because you personally don't like it, or use it, should not mean that I don't have the right to.  I don't like perfume, should I petition Congress to outlaw it?\n\nDue to our ridiculous Prohibition on pot & other drugs, it is now easier for our young people to buy drugs, than beer.  Ask any teen you know, they will tell you the same thing.\n\nIMHO, the federal government will NEVER de-criminalize pot, they have way too many people on the payroll that they won't fire or transfer to other departments.  The "war on drugs" is futile, and big business, no way would our government voluntarily shrink it's size.
1060501
Originally weed was made illegal because it was a threat to the oil companies.  Hemp was such a useful commodity, that Shell oil actually helped in creating propaganda films(such as Reefer Madness) to lump it as part of a hardcore drug culture.  It helped to stop research and use of a natural material that was an actual threat to the oil barons.  Why government doesn't decriminalize it now is years of negative campaigning that is still hard to shake.  Hell, look at Clinton's first appointed surgeon general.  She came out publicly about pot's positive effect medically.  She already was female and black, so you know conservative America wasn't ready to hear that from her, of all people.  She was gone within a year.
947545
I've thought about this for years and as a daily user I do NOT want legalization.  \n\nIn order to legalize, there would have to be laws passed and you know what that means.  There would be deals and regulations and restrictions and licensing.  My pals think it would be oh so great but they don't realize that to legalize we would have to give ALL the control to the fed.  \nThe laws wouldn't pass without a return so look for taxes.  Big taxes.  I expect prices would probably quadruple.  Look at the percent of tax on tobacco and alcohol and you will see what I mean.  Also in order to pass there would have to be government control.  This means the government would license growers, wholesalers and retailers just as they do alcohol.  You aren't going to be able to grow your own any more than you can make your own alcohol (except in small, personal use quantities).  The penalties for illegal growing and distribution then have to be INCREASED.  This protects the tobacco growers (who because of declining business would take over the industry.  They already have everything in place, all they need is seeds and a trade name. (oh wait a minute they have ALREADY taken out the trade names Panama Red etc and are owned by tobacco companies!  How convenient!)  Now the regulation part comes in and the amount of thc per gram of product will have to be regulated.  (if you disagree you don't know my government!).  Expect the quality to drop significantly.  There would be limits (and taxes) on whoever SELLS and how they sell and to whom.  Of course a legal age limit to buy so you younger users will have to find somebody to buy for you and they will likely be commiting a felony.  Look for liquor stores to fill this void and to be the only retailers.\n\nSo now what have you got?  High priced low powered legal pot and EXTREMELY high priced pot on the black market that will sent you to prison for growing, possessing, selling or smoking.\n\nI'll just stick with the status quo thanks, which seems to be a defacto decriminalization that pretty much leaves most of us alone and leaves the control of the indusrty in the hands of the people who are growers, smugglers, wholsalers retailers and end users.  I trust any one of them to do business with more than the fed.  Thanks for reading my opinion :)
605014
Marijuana is illegal for political reasons. It has nothing to do with safety.
710726
Yes I believe it should be legalized, because in relation to other drugs that are currently legal, the deleterious effects of marijuana simply don’t compare. I think the distribution of it should be controlled as to where it can be smoked, and who is licensed to sell it.