Marijuana is not a Gateway drug. If somebody is in a self destructive spiral marijuana may well be a stop along the highway, but the whole concept of ‘gateway’ drugs is absurd.
If anything is a gateway drug it is beer - very few people try pot before beer or other alcohols. But again, the concept of a gateway - that leads to worse things - is absurd. I have known many people who were in a self-destructive spiral that happened to smoke pot (among other things). I have known vastly more people who smoke pot on occasion and can’t be bothered/aren’t interested in most other drugs.
But can we please abandon the concept of a ‘gateway’ drug. It is propaganda and it makes no sense after even a cursory amount of consideration.
In places where alcohol is illegal, in effect “dry counties”, it is a gateway drug. You have to go through illegal ‘channels’ to purchase it, and those ‘channels’ include cocaine, heroin, etc.
Cannabis has to suffer the same stigma as any other illegal narcotic, simply because the market for it is law-enforcement…
@iquitos46 That is utter bullshit. How would controlling weed (a drug) differ from controlling alcohol (a drug)? Regulate and tax producers. Prosecute illegal sale/production. Even people growing their own weed contribute every time they do a grow as there are inputs that exist outside of hard work and sunshine and those are taxed.
People who repeat that tired trope have clearly not considered the situation clearly since there are already many drugs that are regulated by big business and sold for profit. On first hearing, it sounds reasonable (“Why wouldn’t the 1% do that?? They’re evil!”) but it really isn’t reasonable since we already successfully sell tobacco, alcohol, stimulants and pharmaceuticals.
Precisely. If it were true that the only reason pot is illegal is because big business wants to suppress it because they can’t make it exclusive, then a dozen different companies wouldn’t be selling aspirin. Or cola flavored soda, or paper.
Why do we cheer liberals when they act exactly like Bill O’Reilly? Even though I generally support marijuana legalization, Blumenauer’s line of questioning is a playbook of Fox news-style tactics. Botticelli, on the other hand, seems to be trying to answer as directly as he can without falling into the spin machine.
What? Blumenauer ask a few direct questions that rely on the statistics. Divide the number of people who use a drug by the number of people reporting adverse reactions and have OD’d and such. The drug with the bigger number is more harmful. What’s crazy stupid is that Botticelli couldn’t even say “I don’t know” or “they’re equally addictive and dangerous” (bullshit) or “I’d lose my job if I made a distinction.” If he were less of a coward, he’d be able to. If he wasn’t a coward, but instead honestly didn’t know, he has no place doing drug policy. Yes Blumenauer got his rant on, like a lot of Republican reps and senators do. But the key fact here is that he didn’t start out asking leading or loaded questions. He started out asking a very simple, straightforward question with has statistics to back it up. And was handed a pile of shit and told it was an answer. I’m pretty sure you’d be angry too, if your job was to be a policymaker and the experts first, couldn’t answer a straightforward question with evidence, and secondly couldn’t even equivocate by explaining why the answer is complex.
It’s garbage, and Botticelli knows it. It would seem he’s grown lazy and complacent in his stupid and poorly qualified job. If the DEA actually cared about public health they’d stop imprisoning massive amounts of people and look into working on harm reduction, like what the entire developed world does except for us and Singapore.
Actually it was racial hysteria and the idea that black men might be luring white women to sleep with them.
Botticelli is trying to give canned talking points and evade rather than answer the question. The format of Congressional hearings is not the same as a talk show. The members don’t have to give any time for replies at all.
O’Reilly talks down facts that respond to his question when they don’t agree with the view he is pushing.
You cannot save a seed from the bottom of a beer can. plant it and wait a few months to get more beer. How do you regulate ready to consume self-replicating product? While there is money to be made growing and selling super-premium cannabis, by far the highest volume will be non-monitized self-grown ditch weed, which most people will find is “good enough” for them.
There’s a lot of 1%ers who could make lots of bucks off weed. Unfortunately, there are other 1%ers currently profiting off weed being kept illegal, and it turns out, the second group of 1%ers is more politically active and wealthier than the first lot of 1%ers.
Not everyone has the space, skill or patience to grow their own stuff. There will always be a market, and it would be better for society if that market were properly regulated as a legal market.
Because you can grow more than enough marijuana for private use in clay pots scattered through your home. You can grow enough to sell to your entire neighborhood in a greenhouse.
You can’t legally run a distillery in your home. You can legally brew beer in your home but good luck growing the hops, barley, malt, and brewer’s yeast to supply yourself let alone your neighbors.
