Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
[COLOR=black]1) You can't test it to see how stoned is too stoned for driving.
|
There are already devices that can detect if someone has consumed more than the legal limit of alcohol for driving. I think it's reasonable to assume that the same type of technology would be available in a relatively short manner. Once legalized, there will be many, many entrepreneurs and companies scrambling to come up with the patent for it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schneed10
3) It will be sold all over the place, increasing accessibility to youth who otherwise would be deterred. I know you guys were all able to score it, but believe it or not, there are a number of kids out there who were always a bit too afraid of getting caught by the cops.
|
This gets back to parental responsibilities. Are the kids who are deterred by trying to acquire it really worried about being busted, or dare I say that some kids understand the dangers, and stay away based on their own well being? We will always have the problem of keeping kids away from drugs, tobacco, and alcohol regardless of the substances' legal status. The real difference will be the removal of the criminal stigma attached to marijuana. Once it is common and easily attainable, you'd be surprised what can happen to its mystique.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schneed10
4) Ciggarrettes and booze already have enough of a deleterious affect on our society. Tobacco increases the cost of healthcare for us all dramatically. More cancer, more heart disease, more emphysema equals higher cost of care. We all pay for it in health premiums. Alcohol results in rehab treatments, liver problems, fights, drunk driving deaths, gun accidents, all of which cost lives and money. We'll never be able to go back and ban these, which our society would be better off without - boon to standard of living notwithstanding. Why add another substance to the list?
|
So we should criminalize any activity that leads to an increase in the cost of healthcare? Would you agree that people with larger families can also affect the overall cost of medical coverage? A family of three for instance, wouldn't contribute as much to a rise in healthcare as would a family of five right? So would you propose legislation regulating how many children a couple can have?