Mikee

But none of those people are currently productive members of society even though drugs are illegal. Why should the standard be that all of them have to suddenly get better? If any of them become productive, it's a gain.

I went to school with some druggies. Their pot use was never detected, but they smoked a joint every day during lunch.

I recall one student coming to school intoxicated, he was cauth immediately, because of the odor, and a couple of dances where people were caught with alcohol or under the influence-same reason.

Pot use is easier to disguise, and while I am not so convinced the teachers will be toking up during the day, I worry about the people driving the buses-who are in general alone in a bus except for the kids for the majority of the day.

I sort of sit somewhere on the fence with this issue-I think part of it is that while it would certainly reduce money spent on the war on drugs, I am not so convinced you won't see a black market (teens or people seeking to get around the taxes), also pot is pretty easy to grow and produce for personal use, while ciggarrette's aren't as easy-I don't know it is an apt expectation.

Also, you factor in addiction and under the influence issues, and you may end up with problems on the other end.

I could go for legalization under some circumstances-

1. There is some kind of reliable quick test to test for those under the influence.

2. Those who become addicted don't get to apply for and receive disability if the disability is addiction related (and I mean addiction to any substance not just legal pot). If a person chooses to use these substances, they should fully assume all responsibility related to using them.

3. Employers in sensitive areas-being in charge of children/impaired people, operating machinery, directing air traffic etc-or private employers in general should be able to blanket fire anyone caught using the substance. There shouldn't be a "but it is legal" excuse. There are just some jobs where I don't think drug use is ideal, and if a person isn't willing to forego the pot to work in that job, then they need to find a job where it doesn't matter.

That said, I think decriminalization is what appeals to me on a lot of levels-sure there isn't a massive tax break, but possession for personal use shouldn't result in a criminal record either.

For those same reasons, merely sharing the halls with the stoners in the social woodwork is not going to harm your daughter. I understand your objections to the effect of drug use on the social/educational/moral environment of the school, even if I don't share most of it. However, those concerns alone do not warrant suspicionless drug testing. But as a society we have to find consensus on the appropriate uses and limits on drug testing (and consequences of getting caught). It can be a tool for good OR evil. And I am not ruling school out of bounds by any means.

But I have an option, I plan to shell out the $8k+ a year for my child's entire education(yeah, I know, it will climb exponentially). It won't be a parochial or evangelical school per se, but at least their values system is closer to my own.

I'd be interested to know what formative experience with intoxicating substances brought you to your astonishing position.

And if there is, I want government funded tests 3 times a day at schools.

Wow. Just, wow.

Fersboo, what really matters is the impairment, not the intoxicant.

TJIT, I'll ask the question again, is their an equivalent between the BAC(alcohol) for pot? And if there is, I want government funded tests 3 times a day at schools.

Bad idea. Baaaaad idea.

I modified your post a little bit. It helps put your concerns into perspective.

Wonderful, to achieve a lower overall tax burden by legalizing beer and taxing it, I just have to accept that the teachers will be drinking beer in the lounge between classes. The fire station’s on-duty staff relax with a beer while grilling a steak 10 minutes before an alarm comes in. A lonely highway trooper on an isolated road drinks some beer and gets drunk right before engaging in a high-speed pursuit with a bunch of rowdy teenagers.

We could have a new excuse in court, “I sorry judge, but I was drunk out of my gourd, man this beer was the best, and I didn’t know what I was doing”. Can you imagine how business negotiations will be with drunk Americans on one side and stodgy Japanese on the other?

Me, me, me. What feels good to me is the only thing important. If I feel like getting drunk and ignoring my responsibilities, so what.

Fersboo, what really matters is the impairment, not the intoxicant.

I would also support this for tobacco and alcohol.

What about food? Career choice? Heredity?

I agree with your policy ideas. If people want to legalize pot they, the user, should feel the full impact from its use. Thus users should not be able to sue the manufacturers or retailers, they should recieve no government or insurance funded medical care on the adverse impacts, there should be no government or insurance funded rehab, and strict liability should apply for all actions that occur from its use. I would also support this for tobacco and alcohol.