What should the legal status of marijuana be in the United States?
What should the legal status of marijuana (cannabis) be in the United States in your opinion?
A) 100% legal for recreational and/or medicinal use. Although there might be age restrictions for possessing marijuana put in place, marijuana users would be free from prosecution for possession of cannabis in any amount large or small. Also, marijuana would no longer be classified as a schedule 1 (considered dangerous) narcotic by law enforcement agencies.
B) Decriminalized. Recreational use of marijuana is tolerated but only to a certain degree. This is a situation where possession would be limited to certain amounts and most charges of marijuana possession would fall under misdemeanor charges, rather than felony charges. Also, marijuana would no longer be classified as a schedule 1 (considered dangerous) narcotic by law enforcement agencies. Medicinal use, in the case of decriminalization, would most likely be legal and acceptable if the users follow legal limitations and/or guidelines. Decriminalization would basically mean reviewing and updating our current laws to make marijuana use more acceptable than it is currently on a state and/or federal level.
C) Legal for medical use only. In this situation people could have the right to use marijuana for medical reasons only (with a prescription from a licensed medical practitioner, of course). Recreational use of marijuana would fall under the same laws that exist now on a state and federal level. Marijuana would remain classified as a schedule 1 narcotic by U.S. law enforcement agencies.
D) Marijuana laws should be more severe. In this case, not only would marijuana remain a schedule 1 drug but existing laws would become more severe for those who use marijuana both medicinally as well as for recreation.
Please submit your opinion on this issue. Please include your age and location and whether or not you yourself are a recreational user, medical user, and/or both as well as how frequently you use marijuana, if at all.
Thanks for your opinions.
I think Option A should be the legal status.
I live in California which is currently in a financial fiasco, and perhaps marijuana is our golden ticket out of debt. I think we should legalize, let people grow it, sell it, and tax it like we do anything else. Treat it like we do tobacco products. Restrict it’s legal use to people 18 or older when in public, and/or those with legitimate Doctor authorized medicinal needs.
As of now, businesses are permitted to submit their employees for drug screenings, including tests that search for traces of weed use. This might be a complication. If weed is legalized, do private businesses still maintain their right to hire/fire based on weed use like they currently do?
The cigarette comparison would say "No, they can’t discriminate against recreational marijuana users, just like they can’t discriminate against cigarette smokers."
Then again, since weed does exact some influence on the user, you could use the alcohol comparison, and say that business do have the right to hire/fire based on employees "state" while in the work place. Just like a business can fire you for coming to work inebriated, they can fire you for coming to work stoned.
At the very least, Option B, weed should at least be decriminalized. It doesn’t hurt anyone (seriously, I’d love some real examples that are not embellished of stoners hurting anyone). By doing so, we could stop spending a good portion of the money wasted on the "war on drugs". Not only would we save money, but the new taxes would bring in revenue. People wouldn’t be fined thousands of dollars or imprisoned because they simply got high in their own home.
I would like to hear a compelling reason not to legalize/decriminalize weed based on objective face, rather than subjective opinion. "I don’t like stoners" is not a valid enough reason to make something illegal.
November 12th, 2009 at 11:27 am
A) People are never going to stop using it just because it is illegal. They will just get caught and make them feel worse. I think it is each persons own choice what they want to do with their life. I don’t think people should stop talking about the dangers of using it though. It is useful and does have effect on those who care. People who use it probably already know but they are good for people who don’t use it to know.
References :
November 12th, 2009 at 11:44 am
A
References :
November 12th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
we’re never going to colonize space until we can establish a penal colony on the moon and that wont happen as long as there is still room in the existing prisons and jails… we need MORE crimminals, not less… lets toughen up those laws
References :
November 12th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I think Option A should be the legal status.
I live in California which is currently in a financial fiasco, and perhaps marijuana is our golden ticket out of debt. I think we should legalize, let people grow it, sell it, and tax it like we do anything else. Treat it like we do tobacco products. Restrict it’s legal use to people 18 or older when in public, and/or those with legitimate Doctor authorized medicinal needs.
As of now, businesses are permitted to submit their employees for drug screenings, including tests that search for traces of weed use. This might be a complication. If weed is legalized, do private businesses still maintain their right to hire/fire based on weed use like they currently do?
The cigarette comparison would say "No, they can’t discriminate against recreational marijuana users, just like they can’t discriminate against cigarette smokers."
Then again, since weed does exact some influence on the user, you could use the alcohol comparison, and say that business do have the right to hire/fire based on employees "state" while in the work place. Just like a business can fire you for coming to work inebriated, they can fire you for coming to work stoned.
At the very least, Option B, weed should at least be decriminalized. It doesn’t hurt anyone (seriously, I’d love some real examples that are not embellished of stoners hurting anyone). By doing so, we could stop spending a good portion of the money wasted on the "war on drugs". Not only would we save money, but the new taxes would bring in revenue. People wouldn’t be fined thousands of dollars or imprisoned because they simply got high in their own home.
I would like to hear a compelling reason not to legalize/decriminalize weed based on objective face, rather than subjective opinion. "I don’t like stoners" is not a valid enough reason to make something illegal.
References :