Cultivation of the weed has been an ecological disaster unchanged by legalization. Used to be more sympathetic to the legalization crowd. But it tends to come from the self-indulgent. On the other hand, Puritanism doesn't seem to work either.
I think I might also be a little more persuaded to listen to the Pot legalization crowd if they could find a convincing speaker in favor of it who wasn't either a college student or leftover hippie.
I'm interested in finding out what the "ecological disaster" has been. I don't see pot as being any worse than alcohol, so why not regulate it? Yeah, Puritanism isn't working, so why do we keep trying it?
(Disclaimer: I have never smoked and will never smoke, even though I have been places where it is legal.)
Nathan, my husband is a Federal employee and has been involved in some of the clean-up necessary after mega-growers have been discovered in our local National Forests. Here are some of the realities of life in the "emerald triangle":
Drug cartels, mostly from Mexico, ship people to this area to work in the grows, and they are virtual prisoners, in danger of losing their lives if the process goes awry. They clear all native vegetation to the ground, tend tens of thousands of plants in each grow, and armed guards are posted. You can get shot at if you take a hike in the woods. Legalization in one state would do nothing to ameliorate this problem.
The mega-growers apply massive amounts of fertilizers that alter the forest soil so that it no longer supports native vegetation. They divert whole streams into irrigation ponds – thus further harming our fishery. They wire their “nursery” buildings so haphazardly that they often burn down from electrical fires, also increasing the risk of wildland fires. They spill the diesel fuel that runs their generators all over the place, contaminating the soil. They leave an unbelievable amount of trash in their camps, including human excrement. It’s an environmental nightmare.
Like you, I've never smoked and never will. I'm ok with someone being able to grow a couple of plants for personal use. Prop 19 was not the way to go.
Ah, it seems this is another example of the problem of half-baked legalization: the inability to regulate supply in any meaningful way. Since the growers are already criminals, they have no incentive to meet any sort of ecological standards. They are constantly at risk of being put out of business and going to jail: one more regulation won't make a difference. But if they have a choice between legal, responsible and irresponsible growing, why would they intentionally endanger their business by being irresponsible? Legalizing demand but not supply is a recipe for continued crime, as has already been demonstrated in Amsterdam.
A map of innocent people killed by law enforcement waging the drug war in this country. If these were abortions, everyone here would readily admit that there was no justification for the loss of innocent life, regardless of how dire the mothers' circumstances were. But since these innocent lives were lost "for a good cause", like preventing college kids from loafing around uselessly in their dorm rooms, we all just look the other way and make proportionalistic justifications for why it's okay. But think how many more innocent lives would be lost if we did nothing!
I have no idea how many lives are lost because of people abusing marijuana, but I know there's no good reason that an obviously immoral policy of enforcing drug prohibitions that ruin and end lives with nothing to show for it should continue.
Cultivation of the weed has been an ecological disaster unchanged by legalization. Used to be more sympathetic to the legalization crowd. But it tends to come from the self-indulgent. On the other hand, Puritanism doesn't seem to work either.
ReplyDeleteI think I might also be a little more persuaded to listen to the Pot legalization crowd if they could find a convincing speaker in favor of it who wasn't either a college student or leftover hippie.
ReplyDeleteArcher
ReplyDeleteLOL! You do have a point.
I'm interested in finding out what the "ecological disaster" has been. I don't see pot as being any worse than alcohol, so why not regulate it? Yeah, Puritanism isn't working, so why do we keep trying it?
ReplyDelete(Disclaimer: I have never smoked and will never smoke, even though I have been places where it is legal.)
Nathan,
ReplyDeletemy husband is a Federal employee and has been involved in some of the clean-up necessary after mega-growers have been discovered in our local National Forests. Here are some of the realities of life in the "emerald triangle":
Drug cartels, mostly from Mexico, ship people to this area to work in the grows, and they are virtual prisoners, in danger of losing their lives if the process goes awry. They clear all native vegetation to the ground, tend tens of thousands of plants in each grow, and armed guards are posted. You can get shot at if you take a hike in the woods. Legalization in one state would do nothing to ameliorate this problem.
The mega-growers apply massive amounts of fertilizers that alter the forest soil so that it no longer supports native vegetation. They divert whole streams into irrigation ponds – thus further harming our fishery. They wire their “nursery” buildings so haphazardly that they often burn down from electrical fires, also increasing the risk of wildland fires. They spill the diesel fuel that runs their generators all over the place, contaminating the soil. They leave an unbelievable amount of trash in their camps, including human excrement. It’s an environmental nightmare.
Like you, I've never smoked and never will. I'm ok with someone being able to grow a couple of plants for personal use. Prop 19 was not the way to go.
Ah, it seems this is another example of the problem of half-baked legalization: the inability to regulate supply in any meaningful way. Since the growers are already criminals, they have no incentive to meet any sort of ecological standards. They are constantly at risk of being put out of business and going to jail: one more regulation won't make a difference. But if they have a choice between legal, responsible and irresponsible growing, why would they intentionally endanger their business by being irresponsible? Legalizing demand but not supply is a recipe for continued crime, as has already been demonstrated in Amsterdam.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cato.org/raidmap/index.php?type=1
ReplyDeleteA map of innocent people killed by law enforcement waging the drug war in this country. If these were abortions, everyone here would readily admit that there was no justification for the loss of innocent life, regardless of how dire the mothers' circumstances were. But since these innocent lives were lost "for a good cause", like preventing college kids from loafing around uselessly in their dorm rooms, we all just look the other way and make proportionalistic justifications for why it's okay. But think how many more innocent lives would be lost if we did nothing!
I have no idea how many lives are lost because of people abusing marijuana, but I know there's no good reason that an obviously immoral policy of enforcing drug prohibitions that ruin and end lives with nothing to show for it should continue.