can hemp legalization be an option to help the deficit, with savings in law enforcement, courts, jails...?
459408
Enforcing laws against pot cost the US billions every year. This is just in direct costs.  Lets face it, smoking weed harms fewer people each year than rubber bathtub toys. Long term risks are lung cancer and chronic financial problems. \n\nLegalized pot would reduce cancer risks. It would keep billions of dollars that flow out of the US into the US. It would create jobs, taxes and provide cash crops that are not even related to smoking hemp. More so a blanket pardon for any weed related charges that did not involve violence would free up thousands of prison beds. The DEA budget could be slashed and all the money spent on marajuana erradication programs could be instantly ended. \n\nIndirectly the jobs created would have a major positive impact on the economy. Many now untaxable incomes would be taxed. It would most importantly reduce usage of heavier drugs and reduce crime. Many teens wind up being persecuted over weed. A drug proven safe to them through personal and secondary expereince. After seeing all of the Gov lies about weed why would somebody believe what the Gov says about Crack, a drug that really is dangerous. They do not and try it. That Marajuana is ilegal teachs a basic dispresect of law. It places people in posisitions that they are crimanals because they smoke weed. Once on that side of the line why not indulge in other activities? \n\nPeople die because Marajuana laws not because they smoke it. They die in drug deals gone bad. They die because somebody thinks they did or might turn them in to law enforcement. They die trying to avoid capture. They die in jails and prisons. Most of these people were pot legalized would never be in such a situation. While Marajuana use would go up, harder drug use would actually go down. \n\nIn answer to a previous question. The primary reasons weed is still illegal is that it would damage the anti-smoking campaign and provide compitition to the multi-billion dollar alchohol industry. Many of the anti-smoking laws would be rolled back as weed smokers would join with tobbacco smokers to get smoking re-allowed in many public places. Pot bars would open and some who otherwise drank alchohol would switch to weed. \n\nI personally am strongly in favor of legalizing weed. I smoked it when I was younger. Almost everybody I know did and some people I know have smoked weed for 30 years or more without any real ill effect. Except for being broke and law enforcement issues I know of nobody who has suffered ill effects from smoking weed. Something I cannot say about many legal industries such as chocolate manufactuers, brewers and dozens of others.
251341
Yes.  The government wastes huge amounts of money on enforcement, a great many lives are disrupted by their contact with the criminal "justice" system, and their families thrown into chaos.  All this for something which ought to be a personal decision of adults, and a parental decision for children, just like other herbal remedies.  \n\nI don't like taxes generally, but if the tax were no larger in proportion to that on tobacco, it would be no less fair than taxing alcohol and tobacco.  It would then stabilize a market which is currently based on an underworld versus an authoritarian control system, both sides of which have the effect of jacking up the price.  \n\nAnd you can tell the Supreme Court has to reach really hard when they use the interstate commerce clause, and cite parallels with wheat price control cases, in order to maintain federal control over what should be a state matter.\n\nPlease note that it would still be illegal to operate a vehicle while intoxicated.  Marijuana is considerably less dangerous in that regard than alcohol.  One's concentration can actually be improved on grass; it can only be dulled by alcohol.  But most pot smokers agree that driving a car while high is not something they want to do.  If you need to in an emergency, you can probably do better than someone who is drinking, but it will ruin your high.  Of course, the emergency that made it necessary to drive would probably also ruin it.\n\nDon't forget that just because it becomes legal, there is no reason to suppose that everyone will start smoking all the time, or that those who smoke will stay high all the time.  People who live under secure enough conditions that they have no paranoia about getting arrested generally do not smoke all the time anyway, unless for control of chronic pain.  The high is reduced if you don't get to contrast it with being straight some of the time.  I think for most people it would just be a better way to unwind when they come home from work than a cocktail.
66928
It's great fot drug smugglers and dealers, and it's good for the law-enforcement industry (and it IS an industry).\n\nApart from that, it's largely ineffective.  \n\nLegalization would drive prices down; taxation would regulate usage and fund treatment for  addicts.  And just think of all the prison cells vacated for violent criminals!
929635
well a cop once told me they needed drug laws so they can hasve reasonable excuse to bust in \nseems like with terror legislation nowwe can afford to relax on those choosing to self medicate with a plant the war has made equal to the price of gold ,a weed that costs nothing to grow yourself\na politition told me once that paper money is made from hemp fibre ,so the law  is so people cant make thier own money ,i just had to laugh but he was serious ,but we have plastic money and they dont make that plastic from hermp but petrol ,time to ban petro chemical? yea right\na lawyer once told me 20 out of 12 plead guilty and apparently dopers keep the prison ers quiete so that wioont change ,we have legal aid here the average volenteer lawyer on duty makes 300 ,per guilty plea on a good day of comunity service he makes 6000 ,the govt makes 18,000 ,so what those 2/3 rds of lawyers going to do for money ,lawyers wont help ,drug laws all they know ,\ndrug law works by precident ,ie a higher court ruled it thus its now law ,the preceedents have been made on all grounds of apeal a long time ago ,that deems a plant a drug ,despite it clearly beingf a compound of chemicals 1600 plus a single drug thc ,\nthe precedent has deemed a plant ,ie legally a fungable despite clearly being whilst attatched to the ground thus part of the land ie a fixture , thus only allowed to be made a fungable by the tennents permission\nthe farce goes on and on the injustice rolls on we had a drug war to demonise drug use brought aboput because petro chemical users wanted to bankrupt and take over the hemp fibre and oil marketts ,it used the fbi and hoover ,via the hurst chain to make dupoint brothers rich enough to make the nuclear bomd ,to allow the murder of our planit ans eventuall sponser and paymasyer of those oil rich shieks who buy our weopons of mutual destraction\nso good luck ,it will never happen.
736693
I agree. I don't smoke marijuana but think it should be legalized. Think of how much money the government would save/make.\n1 The government spends loads of money to try and prevent people from using marijuana. With advertisements and all.\n2 the government has to spend tax money to build new prison's, because so many people get arrested for possession.\n3 Government could tax it similar to how they tax tobacco and alcohol, so they could potentially make Millions maybe even more.\n4 police could spend time actually helping people rather than trying to bust people for smoking a little marijuana every now and then.\n5 could create new jobs and stimulate the economy with people buying and selling.
251713
I don't think so.  there's too many people and businesses that would oppose it.  However, I do think that medicinal progress and industrial use of hemp will make small progress over the next 100 years, useage of herb for recreational purposes won't be legal and probably shouldn't be.
140239
The main argument against legalization is that there would be a lot of cops on the unemployment line, not to mention prison guards, probation officers, etc., etc., etc.\n\nThe arguments in favor of legalization are more profound.  They have to do with the fundamental rights of individuals to decide for themselves what they will or will not inhale, eat, or even inject.  If we ended the drug war today, most addicts (here referring to hard drugs; addiction is almost impossible in regard to marajuana) would be at the doctor's office getting help tomorrow morning early.  The drugs they crave would be less expensive that way, because the black market is even more expensive than not having health insurance!  They could also get help to quit if they were so inclined, and probably get a good bit of pressure to be so inclined.  Their families and friends would no longer have to fear that they will be arrested, put in jail, lose their jobs, lose custody of their children, and beg for money for bail, a lawyer, etc.\n\nAs to marijuana, it is a useful medicinal herb, as you probably know by now.  It is also considerably less dangerous as a recreational drug than alcohol, which is legal.  And we already have laws in place that people are not supposed to drive a car under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, so we would not need to change that.
1166223
Most definitely.\n\nI don't use it as a drug and wouldn't, if it were legalized, but it would open the doors to a lot of opportunities.\n\nOne of the reasons hemp isn't allowed as a crop in the USA is because, obviously, it's a product of the canibus (marijuana) plant.  Hemp has so many positive aspects about it, from clothing, paper, and rope manufacturing, to a possible product for formenting ethanol, to even directly fueling organic power plants.  Since it doesn't decarbonize the soil (it actually improves the soil it's grown in and requires little to no fertilizer), it's better than cotton and corn as a crop and produces far greater volumes of usable material in the same amount of land.  It's a sort of wonder-plant.\n\nBut, since we can't grow it without also having "pot", we should just get over it and legalize the stuff.  If it were legalized, the government could tax it, generating increased revenue (for the US instead of the cartels), and employ FDA to regulate it, making purer and safer products that are inevitably widely used anyway.  Plus, it would decrease the amount of court-system flow, freeing up more legal system resources to focus on truly necessary law enforcement / punishment.\n\nStudies have also shown that "weed"-use is far less harmful than alcohol, and has also shown that users are far less likely to become violent, which (alcohol) is the primary contributor to domestic abuse and sexual offenses everywhere, along with street violence, and countless other crimes.\n\nHowever, it is still a person/mind-altering drug that needs to be taken seriously.  Any use of a substance that inhibits normal thought-processes and physical functionality is bad and needs control / responsibility / accountability.  Plus, "pot" does cause neurological damage among other significant physical problems (less than alcohol, keep in mind).\n\nI do not see it as a "gateway drug".  But, it is a drug.
1020062
I think it's a good idea also, but many of the people blocking legislation for it are against it for moral grounds.  If it's legalized, then the government is saying that it's okay and so forth.  There are places in the US where it's legalized, and you know what?  Those places aren't dying of moral blah blah blah. :)\n\nPeople are going to do it anyway.  Might as well make it safer for both parties.
772305
Making something illegal does not make it go away, it only financially strengthens the criminals that are willing to risk selling them for a hyper inflated profit.  IOW, instead of 3 bucks/pack, it'll be about 50bucks/pack, and those who smoke will have to deal with a criminal underground network inorder to get them.  \n\nJails will end up with more people, the cops will waste MORE time busting people, courts will be backed up even MORE, and good people will lose their homes, their jobs, and their freedoms.  \n\nVices shouldn't be made illegal.  They should be taxed and regulated so that the government can prosper off other people's wants.  We have the right to do whatever we want to our bodies, including damaging it.  \n\nWhy not outlaw Bungee jumping, sky diving, driving, flying, or anything else that someone might can hurt themselves with?
257019
yes i believe that it should since there is no proof of it doing harm. Umlike drinking and driving there are very few if any proven pot related accidents or deaths due to much consumption. Also it can be good ofr medicanl purposes that have been medicaly proven. Here is some food for thought. If the governmant leagalized it and packaked/Sold it as they tobbaco industry does cigarettes do you think we would have the financial deficit that we are in? Also have you ever heard of second hand marijuana smoke having the harmful impct that cigarettes do? As far as it bieng a "gateway' drug that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard! You make the choices you make cos you want to not because well it started w....People need to take responsabilty for their actions and choices not cop outs!
410983
If you're really talking about Hemp (NOT POT).\n\nIt may be illegal now, But.......\n\nState legislation, negotiations with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), federal lawsuits, Congressional legislation — action on industrial hemp is happening on all fronts. There's never been a more exciting time to be involved in the movement to help industrial hemp farming make a comeback as an engine of the U.S. economy.\n\nNorth Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson is prepared to be the first state official to issue regulations implementing a law that allows commercial industrial hemp farming. Johnson organized a meeting for himself and agriculture commissioners from West Virginia, Massachusetts and Wisconsin, last month with Joseph Rannazzisi, a top DEA official, and other agency representatives to discuss his plans. \n\nDEA officials told Johnson that growers, processors and importers of hemp seed would have to be separately licensed, and that the DEA would have to establish quotas for industrial hemp production and processing. \n\nIn the past, the DEA has refused to acknowledge the difference between industrial hemp and marijuana. The sole researcher who obtained a DEA permit to research industrial hemp (in Hawaii) was required to secure his crop with cyclone fencing and security guards as if it were marijuana. No one has ever obtained a DEA permit to grow industrial hemp commercially. \n\nRoger Johnson has gone further than any other state official in his work to make hemp farming a reality for North Dakota. He introduced and passed a pro-hemp resolution at NASDA, the association of state agriculture departments, and now is leading the effort to make North Dakota the first state to plant a commercial hemp crop. If Johnson is successful, he will have blazed a trail for all US farmers back to hemp farming.
348899
I think it should be legal...well it already is in some states. But just think how much money the US can make off of selling that stuff. Perhaps the president might be able to get out of his trillion dollar debt. Alochol is worse than weed. If they want to make something illegal that should be it.
317261
If the government can figure a way to tax marijuana, they will legalize it, charge about $10 bucks a joint, so High School students can use their lunch money to get high and stop shootings in their schools, beating up fags, and raping girls; cause then it would be a "don't worry, be happy attitude", and nobody would feel hate, just love and peace.\nI vote YES, what the heck, give it a try, see if things don't improve in our country. Dealers would be out of a job, so they wouldn't be to happy. I say we legalize all illegal drugs, put all the DRUG LORDS out of business, cut down on crime; People only want what they can't have, if it were not illegal, the urgency would dissipate.
977904
No it's probably time for a rational review of drug laws. But don't count on our politicians to propose changes. They can't be seen as "soft on crime". Better to build more jails and get reelected than to solve our society's problems.
654471
The only reason that marihuana is not legal is because of the lumber lobby and the cotton lobby.  If marihana were to be legalized the hemp industry would put the lumber companies and the cotton companies out of business.  The drug itself is non addictive, you cant overdose, and its so widely accepted that you cant even get anyone prosecuted for possessing it, if they take it to jury trial.  I dont use marihuana but I strongly feel it should be legalized.  The government could mandate the amount of THC in each cigarette and tax the sales.  It would be a HUGE increase in revenue and and even BIGGER savings in trying to defeat it..besides its been my experience that dealing with someone high on marihuana is a non violent situation.  All they want to do is relax and enjoy life, not like Meth heads and Coke heads...they are the violent and unpredictable....
61612
First off if they did, then the DEA would have to be disbanded and that won't happen.\nSecond and probably more important, drugs is a big business here, money is shoveled hand over fist under a lot of tables and behind closed doors.\nIt has been reported a few years ago, the government actually paid someone in Columbia from a slush fund over $50 million to grow Mary Jane and import it elsewhere of their choosing. It was if the interested party had outside interests.\nActually how true this is is anyone's guess, but I wouldn't put it past someone in upper heiravhy to do it.\nAnother reason it won't happen ... packaging.  It would have to be run just like a regular tobacco plant.  This means artificial additives will be added. Filters placed on them to reduce actual flaor, and the pricing alone would be out of sight.\nTen packs per carton would fall somewhere between 150-500 per carton and not everyone has that kind of money to shell out, though most of that cost would fall to taxes, roughly 80%.\nThose are my thoughts on why it wouldn't happen and there is one more.\nParents would get their bowels in an uproar over the easy availability! LOL