Pointing out the existence of a worse legal poison is not a very good argument for the legalisation of another one. Perhaps it should not be used at all.
Another argument is the incredible damage that drug prohibition has done to our society. Millions of drug users have been criminalised and/or jailed just because they wanted to alter their state of mind. Drugs on the street are often tainted with adulterants. Violent drug cartels have wreaked absolute havoc on entire countries.
The war on drugs does not work, so let's take a fresh approach.
I hate to be the one to break this to you, but it is very likely that your teenage kids already have access through someone to marijuana [0], regardless of its legal status in your state.
The question you need to ask yourself isn't whether or not your teenage kids - soon to become independent adults - will try weed. The question is, do you want them to be educated about potential harms and get ID'd until they turn 21, or risk them getting an illegal product that isn't tested from a violence-ridden cartel (that doesn't check IDs, by the way)?
I highly recommend that you educate yourself about this drug, as I'm not sure of what scale of harmfulness cannabis can be classified as a "hard drug" [1]. The New York Times' 2014 editorial board's writeup on this issue is thoroughly documented and excellent [2].
Your teenage kids probably already know whom they could talk to if they wanted to buy marijuana. I'm pretty sure I did in the affluent US public school I went to. I was never interested, so maybe I'm wrong about one or two of the folks, but I knew at least 8 people whom I thought would be able to get me some.
People get addicted to drugs mainly because they self-medicate for anxiety or depression, that's what you should really worry about actually, concerning your children.
@Archio I hate to break it to you, but I was a teenager myself in to the so distant past and I am fully aware of the opportunities available. My point is that I don't want my kids being turned into stoners and that the law should be on MY side, not the guy pushing drugs on them.
You appear to be saying that you had the opportunity to use cannabis when growing up, and managed to refrain from turning in to a stoner. That's how I read this comment - my apologies if I have misunderstood you.
I am going to assume that you grew up in a country where alcohol was available to teenagers, to a greater or lesser extent. And yet you also - presumably - managed to avoid turning in to a raging alcoholic.
Despite the availability of drugs and alcohol, you managed to avoid becoming a slave to either of them.
The mere availability of drugs (of any kind) will not immediately turn your children in to stoners, alcoholics and junkies. The causes of addiction are deeper than that.
As you said, you know what it is like to be a teenager. Teenagers experiment with various things that adults would prefer they avoided. Given that fact, let me ask you this:
Assume your children are going to drink underage (it is statistically likely that they will). Would you prefer them to drink a) a bottle of beer that an older friend purchased on their behalf, or b) a jar of moonshine, which was homemade without any quality control, and might contain adulterants?
This is not a rhetorical question, or a snarky one - I'm genuinely curious as to which you would prefer.
> My point is that I don't want my kids being turned into stoners and that the law should be on MY side, not the guy pushing drugs on them.
You seem to be saying that your children will be turned in to stoners if cannabis is easily available to them. Given that alcohol will be available to them, do you worry that they will turn in to alcoholics?
If not, why not?
If so, are you also campaigning to return to the days of alcohol prohibition?
Are you worried about your kids becoming alcoholics? Or obese sugar addicts? Or chainsmokers? It seems that society has been increasingly successful at regulating those vices, both in the legal sense of the word "regulation" and in the broader sense - by being able to openly study and debate the drawbacks/merits of various "vices", we've been able to come to honest consensuses on each issue that even a teenager can respect.
If weed is forbidden/taboo, there's a good chance that your child will come across a successful/popular/intelligent peer that completely discredits everything you've ever told them about "stoners". My fiance is in medical school at a highly selective school and from interacting with a lot of her peers socially I've been again amazed at how many regular smokers are highly intelligent, driven and successful. Once it's truly out in the open, these successes can have a lot more context and we'll truly be able to study and discuss what truth there is to the stoner stereotype.
>I don't want my kids being turned into stoners [and] the law should be on MY side
Should it? It isn't on your side if they want to (as consenting adults): ride a motorcycle, drink alcohol, go heliskiing, visit a strip club, buy condoms, or go bungie jumping, for example.
Should all potentially harmful activities of any kind be criminalized as well, because you have kids and the law should be on your side?
@hnpedant I'm afraid your comment is full of logical fallacies, and I'm not going to point them out to you, suffice to say that no, that is not what I am saying.
GordonS> "Millions of drug users have been criminalised"
Well yes, they are criminals who have broken the law. Your argument is defeatist; drug prohibition works quite well in places like Japan and Singapore.
Do you honestly think that drug prohibition is working WELL in this country?
The current POTUS smoked cannabis regularly in his youth. Can you imagine how his career might have turned out differently if he was stuck in prison for a few months or years, because hey he's a criminal and he's broken the law? Which would have done more harm there, the drug or the criminal charges?
