The Golden Age me would have died on this hill, but after seeing first-hand the damage legalizing it does to an area, I have to think you might be right.
If both weed and alcohol were discovered today, and you had enough political capital to get one banned but not the other, which would you opt for?
There wouldn't be the long tradition of whiskey making, not the loser hippies. Just the drug itself.
That's my standard. I'd much rather be on public transport with some giggly idiots who might order some maccas than some drunks. Far safer. And I think society would be better off as well.
Alcohol is objectively worse than marijuana, but you can't put either cat back in the bag. People are going to get drunk and get high no matter what you legislate, so the answer is ban neither. Or, more realistically, the politicians pick whichever course makes them the most money.
Just to give you an example, Arizona auctioned off the first dispensary permits. So the guys with the plan and the capital and the political clout to jump through local hoops got to open up and rake in literal cash like Pablo Escobar.
Let's say you live in a city that has three types of crime only. You have in a year; 30 murders, 100 assaults, and 420 weed related crime. You then legalize weed and in the next year you have; 35 murders, 140 assaults and 0 weed related crimes. The lying media, being the activists that they are say that crimes have dropped by two thirds, but in reality the types of crime that you actually care about the numbers for have gone up a quarter.
The Golden Age me would have died on this hill, but after seeing first-hand the damage legalizing it does to an area, I have to think you might be right.
Plenty of respectable people are (still) for legalization. We're talking about probably more than half of adults in the US, so take your pick.
If both weed and alcohol were discovered today, and you had enough political capital to get one banned but not the other, which would you opt for?
There wouldn't be the long tradition of whiskey making, not the loser hippies. Just the drug itself.
That's my standard. I'd much rather be on public transport with some giggly idiots who might order some maccas than some drunks. Far safer. And I think society would be better off as well.
Alcohol is objectively worse than marijuana, but you can't put either cat back in the bag. People are going to get drunk and get high no matter what you legislate, so the answer is ban neither. Or, more realistically, the politicians pick whichever course makes them the most money.
Just to give you an example, Arizona auctioned off the first dispensary permits. So the guys with the plan and the capital and the political clout to jump through local hoops got to open up and rake in literal cash like Pablo Escobar.
What damage? Lower crime rates?
If you legalize murder, the amount of people arrested for murder drops to zero.
And how does that relate to smoking weed?
Let's say you live in a city that has three types of crime only. You have in a year; 30 murders, 100 assaults, and 420 weed related crime. You then legalize weed and in the next year you have; 35 murders, 140 assaults and 0 weed related crimes. The lying media, being the activists that they are say that crimes have dropped by two thirds, but in reality the types of crime that you actually care about the numbers for have gone up a quarter.
Drug addicts everywhere.
Yeah all those strung out weed smokers going around buying fast food are a real problem lol
Hardcore drug addicts flock to these areas because they know, at the very least, they'll be able to get pot.