By The Right Scoop


Steven Crowder has outdone himself again and put together a short video on the truth about legalizing Marijuana. It’s fantastic but you’ll have to watch to see where he lands on it and why:

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

    I haven’t the slightest interest in smoking pot, but I’m not aware of any reason to treat it differently than alcohol. If the claims regarding the effects of marijuana use made by the one lady in the video can be reasonably confirmed, then it may not be appropriate to compare it to alcohol.

    Nevertheless, the mere fact that consumption of any particular good, whether it’s pot or cheeseburgers or a Big Gulp, is deleterious to one’s health cannot, by itself, be sufficient grounds for criminalization in the U.S.

    • keyesforpres

      Apparently you didn’t watch the whole video where it went on to explain that legalizing it meant MORE people used it and crime went up.

      • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

        Apparently you are stoned.

        • keyesforpres

          Watch the last half of the video.

          • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

            Once was enough.

            Apparently, you assume ignorance in those with whom you disagree. Yet, in fact, disagreement with you may be an indication one is better informed or better able to reason.

            @librtifirst well and thoroughly understood and elaborated the very point I made. Whether or not reading his (or her) comment above might aid in your comprehension, I cannot say.

            • keyesforpres

              Oh really? I’m the one who assumed ignorance? I’m not the one who name called sweetie.

              • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

                I’m the one who assumed ignorance?

                Are you denying it? Your false claim that I “apparently… didn’t watch the whole video” remains right there for the world to see.

                I’m not the one who name called sweetie.

                LOL! What did you just call me?

                I stand more firmly than ever behind my original assessment of your state of mind.

                • keyesforpres

                  Yes, your comment made you appear that you had not watched the last part of the video. Nothing to get uptight about.

                  Yes, accusing me of being stoned was uncalled for. Never been stoned in my life.

                  Was not aware that “sweetie” was name calling. Accusing someone of being stoned? Yeah, that’s name calling.

        • targetdestroyed01

          keyesforpres is correct and thanks to them. And you On The Mark would know that if you followed his advice. Apparently you are an idiot even without drugs.

          So easily checked. Just watch the endof the video half-wit! Geeezzz some people are just born to be stupid. TD01

          • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

            Easy you too targetdestroyed01 please keep the personal attacks out of it. Thank you.

        • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

          Easy please On The Mark.

          • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

            That was a joke and a darn good one, too! Perhaps more importantly, it was no more rude or insulting than the accusation of willful ignorance (albeit of an irrelevant point), to which I was responding.

            I know moderating isn’t easy. I’m only a little disappointed.

            • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

              I know I’ve never had any problem with you On The Mark. I just didn’t want things to get heated. thanks. :-)

            • Rightstuff1

              OK. I’ve read all the comments. As I see it we have a political correctness problem here, pure and simple. Political Correctness is the perfect tool of the Left. Smoking is punished and punished hard by the Fed Government. Why? because it causes nasty illnesses and is damaging to one’s health. The same people who want to tax smoking out of existence because of its harmful effects want to push Marijuana. Think that through. Marijuana is a vile vile substance with vastly more toxicity than “normal” cigarettes.

              So we have high school kids that are pushed a line such as “smoking is harmful but its ok to “smoke” Marijuana”. Contradiction? Ya think? Smoking Marijuana during pregnancy? How that that one?

              Think about homosexual sex. There no more dangerous sexual activity that a young adult can be launched into than this segment of society. Sexual diseases abound, promiscuity is rampant and death occurs on average in early 40’s and yet this pushed as natural, normal and healthy.

              The way I approach this is that legalization of drugs, beginning with marijuana, and pushing homosexuality etc. is all part of an evil tapestry woven to undermine and destroy our culture. Once the Left have the culture they will control the country. This last election was another long step along that hideous road to serfdom.

              • http://profile.yahoo.com/PZUUHJY23W5IPP7UINFMIH3BEU Ken

                wow you sound a bit paranoid have you been taking some of big pharma’s “legal” drugs?

      • shield1

        Crime may well go down, at least serious violent crime would… the Cartels would have less money to fund their murders and corruption of officials… yes in the USA.

        • NCHokie02

          Cartel violence in the US is no where near as high as it is in Mexico and rather rare actually. The cartels exist to do one thing, make money. If they start killing people on the US side of the border they know they law enforcement will crack down hard. In mexico they own that side of the border and have people inside the police so they can do what they want. They don’t want to hurt their profit and what little of it does get caught coming across or in border towns, many many times that amount gets through free and clear.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

            Cartels aren’t a problem in the US? See, here is America’s problem. We don’t get that our open borders are doing us no good. Law enforcement might want to crack down on the cartel gangs, but our government doesn’t want to enforce the law against illegals of which cartels go among to get in so they can spread their black market here. This same government has no problem arresting marijuana users.
            Anybody on the border will tell you we have a problem with them.

            • NCHokie02

              I didn’t say cartels aren’t a problem. I said they don’t commit large amounts of violence on the US side of the border because the police presence would become insane if they amped up the violence.

              I agree that the free flow of illegals across the border is a problem as well and greatly contributes to the drug flow into the states.

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

              Exactly!

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          Yeah because the Mob just evaporated when Prohibition was amended….

          Those that commit crimes aren’t suddenly going to go legitimate and pay taxes and put up with regulations, etc. That is a scenario that only works in the movies.

        • keyesforpres

          You think the cartels would quit selling drugs? NOT. They’d just have more customers if it was legalized. They know no other life. They would not quit what they are doing.

          • JimNEPA2_0

            I predict that drug cartels will

            a.) Sell drugs with phony tax stamps (assuming the gov’t sticks tax stamps on it like they used to do with alcohol)
            b.) Sell drugs that have been altered to be even more powerful than the legal stuff
            c.) A combination of both a.) and b.)

      • http://www.facebook.com/rick.rsh Rick4Burke

        Prohibition on anything is bad, we’ve tried it with alcohol remember?

        • keyesforpres

          Did you watch the video? It explains very well the difference between Prohibition and legalizing hard drugs.

        • JimNEPA2_0

          Nobody ever got drunk from simply standing next to someone who was drinking.

    • stage9

      The negative effects of marijuana have been well documented for many, many years. The problem is, today we only hear ONE SIDE of every story — the LIBERAL SIDE.

      The same is true with counterfeit marriage, promiscuity, teen sex, abortion, and alcohol use. But how often do you hear the negative effects of these behaviors? NEVER! Why? It’s simple!

      Communist Goals (1963)

      25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

      26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

      There is a marxist agenda to dismantle US culture. Liberals have been working it for decades, and we still refuse to acknowledge that they are the enemy within. Legalizing drugs is just ONE MORE brick ripped from the wall of decency that separates us from total degeneracy.

      • CalCoolidge

        In liberal claptrap, there are negative effects from everrything. Your mere existence is a strain on the ecosystem. Pass laws against everything that anyone can deem has “negative effects,” and then you’ll know what tyranny is.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          You actually almost hit a bulls eye. there are only negative effects on everything in existence if it can be exploited and manipulated people to separate them form their money in the name of social engineering.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

        Back in the 20s, liberal activists were part of the coalition that prohibited alcohol use.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        Brought to us by the Frankfurt School of Germany. Bolstered by people like George Bernard Shaw and many other so called deep thinkers.

    • http://twitter.com/volgeek Tim Jaggers

      There are reasons to treat it differently than alcohol. Regular, moderate consumption of alcohol has been shown to have benefits in reducing the risk of cardio-vascular disease.. There are no positive benefits from regular, moderate use of pot, in fact the opposite has been show to be true. Even the very act of smoking to has been shown to be harmful to the human body. One side effect of pot usage that was not touched on was that chronic usage damages your brain’s ability to learn.

      You consume pot for one purpose – to get stoned. The same is not true of alcohol, you can have a beer or glass of wine because you like the taste and suffer any significant cognitive impairments (other than a decrease in your reaction time making operating a car a very bad idea).

      • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

        Connor Says:
        June 4, 2011 at 1:56 pm

        I suffer from severe migraines and marijuana treats the pain considerably. I also suffered from minor tourettes syndrome, suffered as in past tense because daily marijuana usage has completely eradicated the symptoms. To refer to someone who smokes weed as a criminal is truly one of the most ridiculous fabrications of modern-day society.

        Not all people think so. My brother smokes pot, and has few gran mall seizures because of it. The medications that they put him on do not work well long term, and have to be periodically changed and tweaked to keep him from having serious seizures.

        • keyesforpres

          Why smoke it? It comes in pill form for medical purposes.

          • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

            I watched a video of how it is done in Denver. They have pills, drinks, foods, and all kinds of stuff. It is all regulated and inspected. I guess you never know what can be done until the market figures it out.

    • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

      The primary issue is weather or not we should have government telling us what we can eat, drink, smoke, etc., or whether we want to have liberty to do as we wish on a personal level, and when it does not harm others who personally object.

      If you want government to regulate these things, then you have the government that you want. Obama Care is the epitome of what will happen. We live in a socialist country that mandates health insurance, retirement plans, and many other things. If you like SS, then you are a socialist. It is that simple. “Social” Security!

      If you do not like socialism, then you must advocate for abolishing, or phasing out, all of the socialist programs. You must also advocate for getting rid of the current tax code. You must advocate for all welfare, including food stamps, to be abolished. You must advocate for getting rid of most federal regulatory agencies who spread the wealth, and enforce the socialism.

      If you are not a socialist, then you cannot say that government should tell us what is best for us, or mandate or abolish anything through the use of force and “for our own good”. You should never say “it is best for society” when dealing with these issues as the law is concerned. If you do, then you are a socialist.

      Own up to it, or change your perspectives and opinions to reflect that which you say you are.

      I don’t want your welfare, and I don’t want you telling me what I can do on my own property, or in my own house.

      The secondary issue here is that this video does not delve into both sides of the argument, nor does it actually show any scientific data, from either perspective. I would be interested to know what Crowder’s personal experiences are concerning this issue. I have had long term pot heads in my family, and alcoholics. I have had a unique opportunity in that I have been able to gauge the effects of both, independently, and from a medical perspective as well.

      When my brother was 18 he had a doctor tell him not to drink alcohol, because it would set off his epileptic seizures. He told him to smoke pot if he had to do something, because it helps the nervous system. This was almost thirty years ago, before medical marijuana was approved.

      I have an uncle who is an alcoholic. His body is dependent on the alcohol, and his body has been ravaged by it. His liver is shot, and his body is withering away. His mind is so gone that he can’t even carry on a reasonable conversation. A doctor told my aunt that the “alcoholic” does not mature emotionally beyond the point that he becomes an alcoholic. My uncle is essentially an eighteen year old mentally. This is not the case with marijuana.

      A friend’s father, who is the same age as my uncle, smokes pot daily, and has since he was a teenager. He has progressed emotionally, and is still capable of critical, and reasonable thought. He still holds a job and his body has not been ravaged by marijuana.

      Lets use some economic common sense here. Since marijuana has become legal, the price has dropped, and it is being produced locally for those who use it. Does this benefit the drug cartels? The price has dropped severely, even in the black market. If marijuana was legalized nationally, would the drug cartels be able to profit from it coming across the border, and would as many people die on the border? (no) How many cigarette cartels are there?

      If we got rid of our socialist welfare system, how well would the drug market do?

      Those who agree with socialism, seem to also agree that we should not be able to make our own personal lifestyle choices. Socialists create the need for controlling our choices by redistributing the wealth, then saying that the cost to society is too high.

      Isn’t this supposed to be a free country? It is not, and those who advocate for controlling everything on this level are the ones who have taken this country right down the crap hole.

      • unseen1

        SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

        Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer! Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.

        thomas paine

      • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

        Well done!

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        “The primary issue is weather or not we should have government telling us what we can eat, drink, smoke, etc., or whether we want to have liberty to do as we wish on a personal level, and when it does not harm others who personally object. ”

        See that is the problem. It does harm others and society as a whole. sometimes it isn’t about what is good for the individual but what is good for the masses.

        Interestingly enough I never hear those arguing for legalization talk about suffering the consequences completely on their own with no financial help, including insurance. The moral relativism on the subject crept into our society the minute we started considering addiction of any kind a disease instead of the human failing that it is.

        You consider it a choice but unfortunately it is a choice that we all have to bear the burden of…and m’dear that is the difference. We know for an absolute fact the deleterious effects on society and civilization of drug abuse of any kind. If no man is an island than no singular person is affected by it alone.

        • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

          I totally understand that concept. If we want to go back to being a free country, then we need the option of opting out of the social systems. Until then, there will always be a reason to restrict our liberties. Government does not sit still, it either progresses in its tyranny, or gets cut down. We haven’t cut down their tyranny for a long time.

          Let me opt out, then I will live and die according to my own choices. Socialists can’t leave anyone alone. They want to use the force of government to make everyone a slave of the system.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

            What you are suggesting will never work. We cannot have separate laws for separate people. That is like having a country within a country. Furthermore the socialists would run out of other people’s money real quick and just then take yours as has happened repeatedly. Are you ready to form an army, pick up a gun, and defend your right to opt out? What you are proposing is a nice fantasy but I agree with you on socialists except they don’t want slavery to the system. They want to enslave YOU to THEM. We ought to substitute the word ‘parasite’ for the word ‘socialist’ since it is more appropriate.

            • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

              I know that it will never happen, but since most of society thinks that we live in a free country, it is a good point to make. “Since we are a free country, then I should be able to opt out of the systems”.

              Even conservatives say “social security is an insurance plan, not socialism”. Yeah, it is a mandated tax for an insurance plan that is bankrupt, and which government uses to fund is socialism.

              • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                Good point!!!

      • keyesforpres

        We want what our Founders founded….ordered liberty….not hard drugs. Hard drugs make people useless. I spent a number of years in a ski resort town and worked and lived with potheads…many were useless and the ones I lived with were thieves. Couldn’t keep ANY food in the apt. Not even in my room. They would come in and steal it. Stole my last roll of tp and stole the light bulb out of our hall light fixture to use in their room upstairs.

        You will find many folks on welfare use hard drugs….including pot. It makes folks useless and in turn we have bigger gov’t.

        Our Founders did not mean that anything goes. Obamacare is tyranny. Not legalizing hard drugs is not tyranny.

        • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

          I agree with most of what you said. I have known useless potheads as well. Useless people are going to be useless whether pot is legal or not. As long as we have a socialist system, we will continue to breed uselessness. It is now generational a couple of times over. We are literally breeding it.

          As long as government is willing to bail out bad behavior, we will get more of it. It will grow exponentially. You know the old saying “when you subsidize something, you get more of it”.

          Our government is subsidizing uselessness, and the illegal drug business. I think that we should be able to agree that the welfare state needs to go a way, and if it did, nobody would care about pot being legal or illegal because people don’t personally tend to support bad behavior out of their own pockets, and everyone else would have to work for a living. Being a drug addict would not be conducive to survival at that point. Those who use drugs for recreation would still have to function the next day for work, for the most part.

          I would love to see all drugs go away, it just won’t happen. Rather than prosecuting a drug war that has made no progress, we should cut off the funding for the drug cartels and dealers first. (at least the government funding)

    • conservativecanadian1

      So you disagree with the medical professional. Are you a physician with a specialty in psychiatry?

      • http://onthemark1.blogspot.com/ On The Mark

        So you disagree with the medical professional.

        Can you substantiate that claim?

        Are you a physician with a specialty in psychiatry?

        Yes, I am.

        LOL!

        Do I need to be a doctor in order to disagree with those doctors who claim that an unborn child is just a clump of tissue? Or is it sufficient that I agree with other doctors who hold an opposing view?
        Do I need to be a psychiatrist in order to disagree with those psychiatrists who claim that repulsion to heterosexuality is normal and healthy? Or is it sufficient that I agree with other psychiatrists who hold an opposing view?
        Do I need to be a biologist, geologist, or astrophysicist in order to disagree with Richard Dawkins’s fantastical lie that Evolutionism is scientifically sound? Or is it sufficient that I agree with those biologists, etc. who hold an opposing view?

        An interest in a second opinion hardly constitutes disagreement.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

        Does a degree make what you say gospel? What about those scientists who demand that global warming and evolution are undisputed facts that are beyond question?
        Sometimes they, too, have their quirks and agendas.

        • conservativecanadian1

          The difference is that there are probably the same number of scientists who dispute global warming.

          I don’t think you’ll find very many doctors that will side with the pro-weed argument because the medical facts are there and cannot be disputed.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

            Actually it’s so-called “consensus” on global warming. The scientific community has been politicized by the left. There are alternative voices out there though disputing it. And there are doctors who wouldn’t say weed’s the blight on humanity.

    • Susitna

      Furthermore who is going to take care of people with deteriorated brains and/or drug induced psychosis? Obamacare???

  • sDee

    Every single person he interviewed will vote for bigger government and dependency.

    Throw reason out the window because there is not much more to it than that.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      Including the doctor I guess.

  • PNWShan

    Excellent job, Steven! I live in Washington state, which just legalized marijuana, and I wish this video, especially the doctor interview, had been available. We needed something to counter the “harmless” claim.

    • Patriot077

      They had an agressive campaign. Plus it’s hard to get anything that makes good sense passed in this state :(

      Medical marijuana really bugs me because I know for a fact that it is available in pill form already.

    • badbadlibs

      Howdy neighbor. The level of intelligence of the Washington State voter, (King County dwellers), has fallen to a level so low, I never thought it possible.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        That applies to society in general really. And I never thought that possible either. Really I shouldn’t be astounded because it all adds up to laziness in deed and in thinking. It will always be easier to be lazy.

  • stage9

    “It’s a plant.”

    “You mean it’s natural?”

    “Ya-aa”

    “So’s uranium.”

    LOL!

    • nibblesyble

      I know…so funny!

    • badbadlibs

      So is tobacco. You didn’t hear the liberal lunatics screaming how natural that is. Hypocrites, every one of them.

    • unseen1

      think it would have been better if he said so is tobacco.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CKFGTNEKQQCXQZHLQ7EM72Q37E Michael Bittner

    Marijuana also raises your blood pressure to the moon…trust me….it’s HARMFUL! Take it from someone who had a heart attack after smoking it.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      I wouldn’t know firsthand, but isn’t it supposed to calm you down?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        The drug effect is supposed to but remember you are still inhaling toxins.

  • sjmom

    Many years ago I knew someone whose brain was fried on pot and he was in such a state he could not even tell time. Therefore, nobody will ever tell me it is not harmful.

    • stage9

      Yes, but he became President anyway!

      • sjmom

        Believe it or not there’s more than one dufus. This was a real shame; don’t know whatever happened to him.

      • SineWaveII

        LOL

    • Patriot077

      Gosh, I was just going to write nearly the same story. I worked with this guy that did pot – I was only 21 at the time and he was a bit younger than me. A really nice kid from what appeared to be a good family. But I would give him his work orders and instructions and he wouldn’t be out of my office before he came back to ask me to tell him again. One day he told me sometimes he couldn’t remember his own name. That was almost 40 years ago and I’ve often wondered what became of him.

      • WordsFailMe

        He was elected to congress in Florida

        • Patriot077

          More like one of those bathsalt guys we’ve been hearing about!

        • BikerHoop

          Yeah, he had a sex change and changed his name to Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

      • Conniption Fitz

        Mayor of DC? Gov of California?

        • Patriot077

          I kinda think he wouldn’t have recognized the word “politics” either :)

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          Well Moonbeam was known for two things…pot smoking and communism.

    • Landscaper

      Depending on your age here, there was pot laced with PCB in the 70’s that would do great long time harm. The high schoolers I knew that smoked a lot of weed were just silly and stupid at the time. I still know some to this time. Some are fine productive professionals and a few are hard core liberals now. I guess the latter are still high, silly and stupid.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        Remember all of the cannibalism this summer in Florida that was initially blamed on Bath Salts? It was actually pot that caused that.

        • keyesforpres

          Was it really??

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

            Yes. Verified in news accounts.

            • keyesforpres

              Was it laced with something?

              • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                Ya know I don’t know but the articles didn’t refer to the pot being laced. I do know much stronger pot gets grown now and in numerous forms. It’s big business in Oregon. I also wonder if it was the pot in combination with the Bath Salts.

        • Landscaper

          I strongly doubt that pot,weed whatever they call it these days caused that unless it was doctored with a stronger drug. Pot heads are lazy, stupid people who can’t get off the sofa. My nephew is a pot smoker. Gets a award for lack of effort.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

            Check out the news stories. Pot is being grown in ever increasing potency. You can doubt away but it is verifiable.

            • Landscaper

              Laurel, I really don’t give a crap about pot smokers. Never smoked it and don’t plan on starting. Maybe you should mind your own business and leave these dumbass_s alone to screw up their brains.

              • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                Did you really just post that stupid statement to me? Do you consider that intelligent?

                • Landscaper

                  My intent was not to say something intelligent to someone who it would be lost on. It’s plain and simple, mind your own business Nosey Nellie. Do you understand that “stupid” statement?

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  I am minding my own business and it is apparent you having nothing left to argue with so you stoop as low as you go. It appears in a battle of wits you are unarmed.

                  BTW…society is my business since I live in it and pay for it. You ought to change your name to Obama since you seem to want to impose your will on the masses whether they like it or not and no debate required.

                • Landscaper

                  How is bugging me minding your own business. Lady you are a nut. Look up {trite} in websters. If you are married, I feel bad for that poor man. Society is not your business. Most likey your neighbors avoid you and you have no friends. I would hazard a guess you are over weight, unattractive and your social life consist of a computer and walmart.Seems to me you want to impose your will on the masses. See your ass in a mirror for that masses issue. Debating you is not a task. It’s fun to insult stupid. Want more, keep writing moron.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  So is that your attempt to bully me? Is that all you have?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      I know someone like that now. Luckily he is Native American who gets a lot of casino money so he has a caretaker. He has been legally declared mental retarded.

  • Watchman74

    If I recall marijuana was one of the biggest cash crops for organized crime. It’s also the stepping stone onto harder drugs.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      And FDR started the practice of prohibiting it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst
      • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

        I can post just as many if not more links about the negative effects of pot. Reality is it is like Gay Marriage in that if we open it up to gays then we open up all forms of deviancy because we have to have equal application of the law. Same with pot. We legalize it under ‘it is my body and big govt. can’t tell me what to do’ then we legalize all drugs under the same guise.

        • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

          I totally agree, yet I advocate for legalization of all drugs. If someone wants to destroy their lives with drugs, which they will do whether it is legal or not, then let them pay the cost and suffer the consequences. We have to end socialism in conjunction with legalization. Drugies won’t be able to support themselves, and therefor drug problems with decrease, and so will crime due to the fact that it is not illegal anymore. $20B a year would be saved on the drug war.

          The bible says that we should not enable people in their sin. Parents who let their children live in the basement while playing video games and smoking pot until they are forty years old are just as culpible as government is for funding the drug problem.

          The proliferation of moral behavior requires liberty. Social bailouts will always proliferate immoral behavior. Welfare funds the majority of drug use and the cartels and dealers who supply the drugs.

          • keyesforpres

            Legalize it and MORE people will try it and get addicted. Many people commit violent crimes while they are under the influence. It isn’t just about stealing to get money for drugs, it’s about being whacked out.

            Again, drugs users can’t hold jobs and require welfare.

            A proliferation of moral behavior requires turning back to our Judeo-Christian roots and turning away from hard drugs. That would get us back to ordered liberty.

            • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

              I totally agree about getting back to our Christian roots as being the solution. As you said “drug users can’t hold jobs and require welfare”. Cut off the welfare, because it is not a Christian principle to force some to pay for others who do nothing for it.

          • badbadlibs

            Liberty as you’ve described is chaos. There must be certain restraints put upon citizens of every country. God has the 10 Commandments, not a free for all.
            I appreciate your underlying beliefs, but to sanction anything that brings such destruction to lives isn’t anything the “Bible” says.
            Martin Luther King said, “Laws don’t change the heart, they constrain the heartless”. A society that allows any mind altering substance to go unchecked is doomed.
            Peace.

            • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

              I don’t view everything that is legal as being sanctioned by government, or anyone else. Only a totalitarian government can be blamed for sanctioning every behavior, because they control it all.

              Legalizing drugs is a death nail if we are going to continue to fund the drug use, and bail out the people who use.

              • badbadlibs

                I long for the days when moral behavior wasn’t a multiple choice option. ;)
                We, as a society seemed to know right from wrong with much less instruction and regulations.
                It’s the slippery slope populated with frogs.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  Now that’s what I call “slick”.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  I just saw this video:

                  Our government pushes more deadly drugs than anyone else in society. This is the kind of government we get when we allow them to control these things. I know all about these drugs, and they are very destructive. Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors are a scourge on society, and the schools and social systems push them like they are the answer to all problems.

                  This is also reality. Government is pushing for mandates.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

            I would be a little more in agreement with legalization if socialism associated with it were ended…but it is pie in the sky to think it will ever end. That is just not a realistic scenario.

            Drug legalization puts society in danger as a whole. One need only look at history and current behavior in countries that have legalization.

            And if the proliferation of moral behavior only required liberty then we would have no need for government or any criminal penal code what so ever. You presume that everyone sees the world the way you do as well as has a moral code. They don’t.

            And why is it you seem to not have a care in the world for the innocent that will become victims of the resultant crime if legalization happens? Yeah you can say ‘drop the social programs’ and eventually drug usage will go down…maybe…but until that happens many will become victims in the process. Who are you to volunteer them for victim status?

            What you seek is chaos at best and totalitarian at worst since that is what is required to achieve your scenario.

            • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

              Liberty does not guarantee morality, it simply creates an environment that is more condusive to it. The bible says that we should work and not be idle. Our liberties are infringed upon when someone takes our money to support others. Those “others” don’t work for their survival which breeds immorality and corruption. Those who work for a living, but get taxed to death to pay for the free loaders start cheating to survive, because they think that they have to. When people are allowed the liberty to fail, without a bailout, they learn and change for the better.

              If drug use was being reduced due to its abolition, and the drug war, I might tend to side with you. The fact that it has increased steadily for many decades with abolition in place is just proof that it will never be solved with laws, and it will continue to be a problem.

              Government creating more and more laws that the people cannot or will not obey is what leads to totalitarianism. If you want to use the law to regulate all behaviors, then you are asking for an authoritarian society, which will lead to totalitarianism.

              Prior to abolition of drugs and alcohol, society wasn’t filled with drug adicts and alcoholics. Cocain, marijuana, paoti, alcohol, etc. have been around for a long time.

              Our society moved away from its Christian values when we became a socialist society. Drug use became a major problem due to the socialism. The socialism will take us into totalitarianism.

              I advocate for liberty because it is anti socialist, and I am anti socialist because it is morally degenerative. Moral degeneration causes government to become totalitarian.

              I simply want liberty, and so in the name of not being a hypocrite, I have to advocate for things that can cause harm, but look for ways to reverse the harm. It is all theoretical, and will not happen, as you say. I know where the world is going via my bible, and liberty will not prevail.

              • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                No liberty does not guarantee morality hence the use and meaning of very similar word known as ‘libertine’. While you may think it creates an environment more conducive to morality there is no evidence of that, but there is plenty of evidence in world history to the contrary. That is why the one who always establishes order out of chaos is followed and becomes the leader. If liberty created a more conducive society there would never ever be any chaos to begin with. If liberty created a conducive society the American Revolution would have never been fought. Liberty can be a natural state but as our FF’s said it cannot succeed without morality. What is moral about drug abuse? How will drug abuse ensure liberty?

                Drug use has increased due to the breakdown of society and the advent of moral relativism. Even as little as thirty years ago someone like you would not be arguing the position you are. It would be unthinkable. It wouldn’t ever occur to you.

                There are different paths to totalitarianism. Ask Egypt. Ask Libya. Ask Afghanistan. Soon you will be able to ask Syria. Would you like me to expand this list? Chaos will also lead to totalitarianism. It is inevitable. Man naturally gravitates to order because in that order they get a measure of security.

                Liberty is not now nor ever been the antithesis to socialism. Having liberty doesn’t mean we eschew laws and toss by the wayside an ordered and just society. Why not give people the liberty to murder and everyone just protect themselves?

                Liberty simply cannot prevail without a moral and just society. Advocating for immorality in the name of liberty won’t get us anywhere. We have government because we will always have a population that doesn’t agree on what is moral and just. Do we have too much government? On that score I agree with you. I look at liberty and government like Goldilocks and the Three Bears…it has to be just right. Problem is what I define as just right for myself may not be defined as just right for you by you.

                BTW…drug legalization is nothing new. All of these drugs, including marijuana, were at one time legal. Opium trade was big business! Society came to the conclusion that they should be illegal. Ask yourself why.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  Human behavior is a complex thing, isn’t it? Not even the best phsychologist can explain it all.

                  There is no such thing as total liberty. Only God has total liberty. We would have to be omnipotent to have that. There is not such thing as total tyranny, because our minds are our own and death can liberate us. Totalitarianism is just the effort to control everything.

                  I think that what we have to determine is what the size of government should be, and the more laws we have, the bigger government we are going to have. Government only has one tool, and that is force. The size of government will determine the amount of force that is used, as all government is force, and will become tyrannical if allowed.

                  I don’t want anarchy, which means that I believe in having a legal structure, and enforcement of it. I also believe that the government which governs least is the government which governs best.

                  I think that most conservatives want a much smaller government, but I don’t think that we are going to get it. Debating how to manage big government is really a mute point, or secondary issue.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  By the way, just thought I would mention that Judge Napolitano has a new book out about how and when socialism really got its start in the US. He is doing a lot of interviews about it on all the networks. You can find many of them on youtube if you are interested in hearing his take on it.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  I don’t think you and I are very far apart. I have read Napolitano and know of his new book. Personally I can refute most of what he says and many others have. I think he is right on some things but on most things his Libertarian bent gets rejected. He also cherry picks his facts. I’m not picking on Napolitano per se just saying there is a reason he doesn’t seem to keep as much traction as he should. I will Youtube his interviews though and take a listen. Can’t hurt, might help. As to when socialism got it’s start in this country I can tell you that. I can also point to certain points that really gave it flight coupled with thinking that really amounts to nothing more than a fad and a ‘more is better’ mentality that is endemic to human nature.

                  I agree with you about government governing the least governs the best. Drugs were once legal and that caused chaos in society. What did society do? Demanded order for the good of society. What is the purpose of government? That is the real question here. Our government has gone way beyond that purpose but I think drugs are not a part of that equation. The whole point to government is to have a well ordered society that ensures it’s continuance. Drugs undermine that.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  I can respect your views, because you have an informed defense of them.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  Right back at you!

  • 401_Unauthorised

    i have never pot done and i agree crowder with completellyy, say pot to NO kids11111111111

    • stage9

      LOL!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/E47ZGJHEDGAKTU5R3547YCOPQQ LoneBear

      LMAO

  • http://www.facebook.com/chester.simms.1 Chester Simms

    Such a hue and cry over what I consider a crutch for the weak-minded.

  • m0r0

    That’s funny, you don’t look jewish! Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

  • sDee

    “The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That’s why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd.

    Eighty percent of the people who call themselves Democrats don’t have a clue as to political reality. What amazes me is that you could take a group of people who are hard workers and convince them that they should support social programs that were the exact opposite of their own personal convictions. Put a little fear here and there and you can get people to vote any way you want.

    The voter is basically dumb and lazy. The reason I became a Democratic operative instead of a Republican was because there were more Democrats that didn’t have a clue than there were Republicans.

    Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth. If you’re smart enough, truth is what you make the voter think it is. That’s why I’m a Democrat. I can make the Democratic voters think whatever I want them to.”
    James Carville

    http://clashdaily.com/2012/11/james-carville-says-80-of-democrats-are-politically-clueless/#ixzz2DMWXStWo

    • http://profiles.google.com/ajtelles Art Telles

      What’s Carville smokin’?…

      Excellent quote, sDee.

      What does Carville intend to say to rebut Pravda (truth)?

      Pravda – Nov. 19, 2012
      >> http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-11-2012/122849-obama_soviet_mistake-0/

      “… Bye, bye Miss American Pie.
      The Communists have won in America with Obama … .”

      “Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term
      by an illiterate society … .”

      “He is a Communist without question
      promoting the Communist Manifesto
      without calling it so.”

      “President Vladimir Putin could never have imagined
      anyone so ignorant or so willing to destroy their people like Obama
      much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama.”

      – – – – – – – – – –

      Victoria Jackson –

      There’s a Communist Living in the White House
      >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWi182CMJY8

      Art

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      We should quote that more often. Reveals their thinking perfectly.

  • Sober_Thinking

    As one who has lost two friends to Marijuana abuse, I am staunchly against it.

    In those states: Watch the use of it increase dramatically. Watch car accidents increase in those states. Watch the crime rates climb. Watch apptitude scores drop. Watch pregnancies increase. Watch all the changes that occur in those states including state wealth and jobless numbers.

    Marijuana is a gateway drug and it’s all downhill from there. Ask the parents of my two dead friends.

    • Patriot077

      Good post. I feel fortunate that I haven’t been personally touched by it. A friend in high school started dating a guy that smoked it and in our senior year she went from being an honor student to nearly failing to graduate. I’ve never forgotten how quickly she descended.

      • sybilll

        That is SO true. I grew up in the ’70s, tried it, and it wasn’t for me. My friends that went on to indulge never attended college, and ended up in menial jobs. It has been repeated in my daughter’s generation. She admits to partaking and not caring for it. She graduated college Magna Cum Laude last year, yet of her friends that continued their pot smoking habit, all but one are making their living off tips in bars or restaurants. The only one that lucked out is the son of a successful business owner and Capitalist. There is a lesson to be learned here, folks.

  • johngalt30

    If your stupid, lazy and unmotivated before you smoke pot your going to be stupid, lazy and unmotivated after you smoke pot. So I’m not sure where people get this “it ruins lives” thing. There are plenty of lawyers, doctors, computer scientists, engineers, etc, etc that smoke pot on a weekly basis. I’d say that the 80k+ people that die from alcohol annually and 400k+ that die from tobacco annually are much more worthy causes to tackle (and somehow those substances are not part of the marxist agenda to take over america??).

    If its controlled and regulated like alcohol then the purchasing of it will require an ID. Now that doesn’t stop kids from getting alcohol, but I’d much rather kids smoke a joint and listen to some music in their mom’s basement than get a bottle of liquor and get hammered drunk at a party. That one bottle could probably kill a 17yr old on its own. It would take 1500 joints smoked simultaneously in 20 minutes to kill you, because you’d suffocate ;)

    The Constitutional argument for legalization is the best one, but it’s certainly not the only one. If you’re really THAT worried about a green leafy plant, be a better parent.

    • keyesforpres

      LOL, apparently you haven’t spent any time around potheads. I have and they are useless BECAUSE of all the pot use. It ruins the brain dude.

      • KenInMontana

        I have spent time around both “potheads” and alcoholics, for anyone to say either does more heinous damage than the other is just flat out ignorant of the truth.

        • badbadlibs

          So, what the doctor on the video had to say was wrong?

          • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

            Studies have been done, but don’t make main stream media most of the time. Many studies are not reputable, and I am talking about both sides of the argument. Government studies are often forced toward a conclusion, and independent studies are often bias as well.

            The bottom line is that unless you have done both extensively enough to know the difference for yourself, you probably won’t have an accurate opinion. One thing that I have noticed is that many who will have a couple of beers every day, but never smoked pot every day, will often have firm opinion of pot.

            My personal experience is that pot is better than alcohol. I have done both to a large degree, but am not interested in either today. I found alcohol to be more debilitating, and it threw off my equilibrium, whereas pot did not. Alcohol makes you pee a lot, not pot. When I drank daily, it became more addictive. When I smoked pot daily, I didn’t crave it as much as alcohol. No real desire for pot unless stress levels were high. Smoking is the same way. I got a DUII when I was eighteen and decided not to drink liquor anymore, so I switched to recreating with pot more. Alcohol made me more willing to fight. Pot chilled me out. Alcohol put me in a daze the next day and made me irritable. Pot had a slight effect of being in a daze, but was very minimal. The effects wore off faster with pot.

            To each his own, but at least have something to back up an opinion, and be willing to voice it from experience, or let it alone. Pot, alcohol, whatever. One being legal and the other being illegal is hypocrisy in my opinion. The lesser evil in proven in statistics.

            • badbadlibs

              Where I live the law just passed. My children are grown and don’t use drugs of any nature, however, I have grandchildren who will now be exposed to a drug, now legalized, that alters the mind. I have concerns.
              Just this morning on our local news, a study done in New Zeland took a person from the age of 13 thru 38 and found his IQ dropped by 8 points, and those points can never be recovered.
              Hypocrisy, stupidity, I don’t really care what it’s called, it’s a dangerous substance and our society will foot the bill, pushing us all down further.

              • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                Those who educate their children will have children who have an advantage in society. Moral behavior has the advantage in a free society, because there are no bailouts in a free society. No bailouts equals moral behavior to survive.

                Fluoride also reduces IQ.

                • badbadlibs

                  It’s another slippery slope this country has begun, state by state. It won’t be long before it’s declared legal everywhere.
                  Too many people have lived their lives as frogs.

                • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

                  I know what you mean. Oregon has a whole lot of ex-Califormians who seem to want to bring their state with them.

                • badbadlibs

                  What didn’t land in Oregon came up further north. Was. state is infested. I long for the days when Ronald Reagan actually won this state…twice!

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

                They would have gotten exposed to the pressure to use it rather it was legal or not. Just because it wasn’t legal before didn’t mean people didn’t do it. It’s up to you to educate your kids to not partake it.

                • keyesforpres

                  You know something Alex, one of the main reasons I never tried it was because it was illegal. More people will do it if it’s legalized. There is a reason the left is pushing this.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

                  Most people nowadays don’t care if it’s legal or not, they’ll do it anyways. There’s even a factor of “thrill” some people will get where it not being legal would make them want to try it more.

                • keyesforpres

                  Alex, at some point we have to draw the line. If we don’t the left will just keep pushing. For example, most of us don’t care what two consenting adults do behind closed doors, but we are against gay marriage. Mainly because it will lead to polygamy. More people will try it if you legalize it and if it becomes legal does that mean they can smoke it in public…around babies? Smokers are very inconsiderate, no matter what they smoke. You want that around your kids? You want folks walking down the street smoking joints? That is what is going to happen if you legalize it.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

                  You bring up some good points, but you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke it in public around kids. Like you can’t drunk except in certain settings like a bar or your house.

        • keyesforpres

          Well of course, if one abuses alcohol it is just as deadly. However, one can drink moderately and lead productive lives. I’ve never met a pothead that was productive.

    • badbadlibs

      Do you have any problem with the green plant known as tobacco?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

        Hint: Their name’s John Galt. Chances are maybe on a personal level, but not on a regulatory one.

  • PVG

    I say urine tests for unemployment and welfare. That’ll go over like voter ID. Great video.

    • IwjwI

      I say urine tests for ALL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/ODSG4THJW3SRGYHSQ7KHU32U5Q 3D 81

    Making the dumb even dumber.

  • tshtsh

    Looks like it stunned their growth (probably brain cells) too.

  • targetdestroyed01

    God Bless You Steven Crowder!!! Keep up the good work my friend. The truth will set us free. Or, if not, we can always beat the idiots who are destroying the country over the head with it as they take us to hell. There is some small but very real comfort in that.

    Well done. Keep going. TD01

  • semihardrock

    The more stupid they keep the children through Public Government Education (est 1970’s) and now legalizing marijuana…..

    The more Progressives can brainwash the idiots into keeping them in power by voting for the United States of Communism using “word play” and silly stupid slogans.

    • colliemum

      Exactly.

      It looks as if the socialists have now added ‘Brave New World’ to their operational manual.

  • http://twitter.com/ember_george Ember George

    We need to flood the net with this. Kudos Crowder!

  • http://twitter.com/WaiGuoGuizi 学中文的美国男人

    If we agree that big gulps should be legalized, why not marijuana?

    Sure, it CAN do harm to people. So can big gulps, so will cigarettes, and so can alcohol. But shouldn’t we have the choice to take that risk to ourselves if we want to?

    • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

      We can’t allow freedom of choice because our neighbor has to pay for our food, medical care, etc. If they pay for it, then they have the right to tell us what we can and can’t do. That is the argument. I am a Christian, but don’t agree with many Christians on this. Those who would use the moral argument to advocate for government force in keeping us from harming ourselves with consumables are those who advocate for a theocracy. I don’t want a theocracy, because we might just switch over to Islam rather than Christianity some day.

      Socialists don’t want to be called socialists, and theocrats don’t want to be called such. Both want policies that warrant calling them what they are.

      • keyesforpres

        It harms others when many folks become useless and can’t hold jobs.

        • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

          Yep. No welfare, and drug use goes down eighty percent or more.

        • http://twitter.com/WaiGuoGuizi 学中文的美国男人

          Why don’t we ban big gulps then? Big gulps contribute to obesity and skyrocketing healthcare costs. It seems you are arguing more against the welfare state rather than against people making choices.

          • keyesforpres

            Because people that drink Big Gulps can hold jobs and aren’t robbing folks for his next Big Gulp fix.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

    Come on. We’ve got a fiscal crisis that’s only going to get worse, scandals after scandals of a corrupt administration, permanent Obamacare, Americans dead in Benghazi, Islamists creeping into countries trying to establish Sharia, a violent border, the leadership of both parties conspiring against taxpayers, and so many important things going on and all Stephen Crowder can talk about is how much he supports the federal government on cracking down on people smoking marijuana? Which makes cartels rich and costs us millions and which Obama supports despite his past history?
    I’ve watched a lot of Crowder’s videos on Youtube and sometimes he’s right, but other times he can show a real Bloomberg instinct.

    • Steven Crowder

      Actually, Alex… it’s not all I can talk about. I’ve been doing a video every week for months. This just happens to be one of them. How about finding one of those to enjoy (since there are hundreds of them) instead of playing Mr. Critic.

      • badbadlibs

        I live in one of those states that just legalized marijuana. I appreciate all the light that can be shed on it’s dangers. Thanks for the good work!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

        Okay. I’ve been impressed with how good some of your videos are. They aren’t usually on this site, but I see them on YouTube.
        People are supposed to voice their opinion when they don’t see eye to eye on the premise of something.

      • http://www.facebook.com/paul.christian.942 librtifirst

        I enjoy most of your videos Steven. I don’t agree with some of the anti-pot sentiments or “facts”, but you did a good job of pointing out other things, such as hypocrisy in some people’s logic.

      • tinlizzieowner

        We criminalize ‘smoking’ tobacco in public and at the same time we DE-criminalize ‘smoking’ a known intoxicant in public. Where did all the ‘2nd hand smoke’ folks go?
        Thank you for including the college professor, a text book poster child for the combined effect of drugs and liberalism.
        PS, I love your work. ;-)

      • stage9

        LOL! Dude, you rock!

      • keyesforpres

        Thanks for all you do Steven. I lived in a ski resort town for a number of years and most of my co-workers were potheads. Couldn’t get through the day without a bong hit. I saw what it did to them and society in general. They had a very parasitic mindset.

  • badbadlibs

    If you want to know how damaging marijuana is, I give you the example of BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      Who supports locking up marijuana users moreso than Bush.

      • badbadlibs

        What Palin said doesn’t change my mind of the dangers of marijuana and it’s legalization.

      • keyesforpres

        Alex, none of us is saying go after people who smoke a joint in their own home. The video does point out that very few people are in jail for pot anyway.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

          What’s to be advocated instead? That’s the status quo.
          She used to smoke it back when it was legal in the state before her corrupt RINO predecessor illegalized it. She’s definitely productive.

          • keyesforpres

            “That’s the status quo”. What does that mean?

            That’s great your pot smoking friend is productive. It still should not be legalized.

  • fiznart

    So it does affect your brain – especially when you start smoking early. They want to legalize this stuff to create more liberal democrats. A fast track to creating a communism/socialism society …

  • shield1

    Legalization is the lesser, by far, of two factual elements: The Cartels main source of income comes from pot. This would put a hurt on them. A little education would. like it did with smoking, lessen the legal use.
    Cartels kill people, corrupt police and elected officials, and force their will by intimidation. This is a far far greater threat than an initial small increase of pot use.
    IMHO

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      I agree completely. Politicians are good soldiers on the war against pot, but refuse to enforce the laws against illegal immigration. Our priorities are skewed.

    • keyesforpres

      Cartels aren’t going to stop smuggling drugs into this country if it’s legalized.

  • Rob_Bryant

    Oh Crowder, you silly Jew, you! haha That guy at the very end was crazy throughout the vid. Unfortunately, I know some folks that think like him : /

    • tinlizzieowner

      And the bulk of them are in our educational system. I had a college professor in the early 70’s that sounded just like him.

  • PFFV

    I respectfully disagree with Mr. Crowder for the first time. Pot should be legal, it is harmless compared to Booze. He used many of the government hysteria talking points from back in the 70’s I noticed. No professional proponents of the drug of course right? It’s all about control and the Government wants it all!

  • http://twitter.com/RedEsquid Red Esquid

    Amusing little video; and it does make a good point – marijuana is an intoxicant, stoned people are known to make some rather stupid decisions. And it is psycho-active, maybe not the best stuff for someone not so stable.

    So a real discussion should be had on just how to deal with this stuff, cause simply trying to jail people is clearly not working. I know people who use pot medically, and who do get considerable benefit from it. I know lots of people who use it recreationally, in the same way I use a glass of wine. And who are as responsible about not driving stoned as I am about not driving drunk.

    The use of tobacco has dropped with simple education and recognition of the harms involved, and without criminalization. Perhaps the same approach to limiting pot would make sense?

  • tinlizzieowner

    OK, just for fun, let’s say that smoking pot becomes legal nationwide tomorrow. Do you think that you will be able to grow your own and maybe sell it to your friends? If you do, you’re incredibly naive. If it’s legal, a distribution network will soon follow and naturally, the government will tax and regulate that network, much in the same way cigarettes are taxed and regulated right now. Growing your own will be no more legal than it is to make your own booze and trying to sell it. The overwhelming majority of those who smoke pot don’t grow their own, they buy it and where does the bulk of that pot originate from? The Mexican Cartels. The Cartels will become the Budweiser and the American Tobacco Co. of the Marijuana industry.
    Think not? Think again. ;-)

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      Then explain why the number one source of income for terrorists is bootlegging cigarettes.

      • tinlizzieowner

        Well, I never considered north easterners terrorists but if you say so. They come down here to Florida to buy our $3.00 a pack cigarettes and ‘bootleg’ them back up north to their $6.00 a pack states.
        Oh and just for the record, terrorist cigarette bootlegging has little to do with the cigarettes and everything to do with the taxes on cigarettes. Like I said above, if pot is legalized, there will be national and state taxes on it. So, in that respect, you are correct to conclude that there will become a crime family/terrorist industry business in the bootlegging of Marijuana from the lower taxed states like Florida and Texas to the higher taxed states like NY and Mass.
        By the way, I smoked, grew and sold pot for 2 decades, before I finally grew up. I used to drink too, 41 years ago.
        ;-) ;-)

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          Ya know I see where you are going but you need to come out of your anecdotal bubble. ME funds terrorism through cigarette bootlegging. That is a sad but true fact.

          As to people suddenly becoming legitimate, that is patently absurd. Crime syndicates aren’t suddenly going to cut into their profits by paying taxes and regulations and going legal. Pie in the sky nonsense and there is no evidence to back it up. As I said earlier Al Capone went to Alcatraz for tax evasion and not bootlegging or really anything else. the lawless very rarely suddenly find morality and become lawful.

          Excuse the snark it really isn’t aimed at you tinlizzieowner. Thanks for the response as well.

          • tinlizzieowner

            The supply of (legal) pot is going to have to come from somewhere. In fact, I’d like to know where the supply of medical Marijuana is coming from right at the moment. I’ll back up and concede that the Cartels aren’t going to become Budweiser or the American Tobacco Co. but that front organizations, loosely tied to the Cartels and legally licensed and regulated to operate in the US will be doing the supplying. Look into the history of Joseph Kennedy Sr. This is what I’m talking about.
            “After Prohibition ended in 1933, Kennedy consolidated an even larger fortune when he traveled to Scotland with FDR’s son, James Roosevelt, to buy distribution rights
            for Scotch whisky. His company, Somerset Importers, became the exclusive American agent for Gordon’s Gin and Dewar’s Scotch. In addition, Kennedy purchased spirits-importation rights from Schenley Industries, a firm in Canada.”
            (wikipedia)
            Was what he did legal? Absolutely. Was he involved in the illegal liquor trade before the end of prohibition? It would be incredibly naive to think he wasn’t. See, where I’m coming from?
            I appreciate your intelligent discourse too. Though I’m not for the legalization of Marijuana, I’m not for the status quo either because I’m virtually certain the government is going to be up to it’s arm pits in this, either way.

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

              Problem is Kennedy was the exception not the rule…and he didn’t quit his illegal practices altogether. Kennedy had a much bigger prize in mind and that was politics so really he isn’t an apt comparison.

              • tinlizzieowner

                Trying to make a small point in a much bigger argument is becoming laborious. You win.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  Was it ever about winning?

                  As I pointed out on another post all of these drugs were once legal and made illegal by society.

                  Why?

                  BTW…do you know what happens with pot dispensed legally currently? It is sold illegally to minors.

                • tinlizzieowner

                  As for the ‘why’, moralistic values, just like Prohibition. I don’t know how old you are, have you ever seen the movie ‘Reefer Madness’? (1937)

                  Quite coincidentally, in 1937 the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration crafted the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, the first US national law making cannabis possession illegal via an unpayable tax on the drug.
                  Now, back to where I started. The national legalization of pot (as things stand right now), would be a big, fat, can of worms.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  I have seen it. Our society is ruled by moralistic values. Pot is no different. You obey traffic laws because running a red light could kill someone and that would be immoral. You don’t murder because that is immoral. Same with theft, it also is immoral.

                  Yeah it would be a big fat can of worms indeed!

                • tinlizzieowner

                  My intent from the beginning was to focus on the logistics rather than the moral implications of legalizing pot. Personally, I couldn’t care less if somebody smokes pot, I did it myself for many, many years. I know what pot can do ‘for’ you and I know what it can do ‘to’ you. The most significant thing I noticed when I quit, was that I wasn’t spending $400 a month on the best ‘buds’ money can buy. Not that long ago, I gave away my 40 year old, one of a kind, deer antler pipe, to a kid I work with and I told him, “You take care of this thing, it’s got a hundred thousand smiles on it”.
                  ;-) ;-)
                  I’m sure we wil speak again on more current topics on this site but I’m going to let this one go.
                  DJH

  • colliemum

    These same arguments about legalising marijuana have been made over here in the UK as well.
    The debate has died down a bit after it was shown that the socialists who are all for it belong to a generation which started smoking pot later than the teenies of today,and that they smoked stuff which was way less potent than what is on the market at present. And it’s this much more potent stuff which affects the development of the brain.

    But there’s one argument on which all those who want to legalise marijuana won’t ever answer. Ask if they’re against smoking … yesss, sure they are. Ask how marijuana is ingested … it’s smoked, innit? So if they want to legalise marijuana, they must scrap all tobacco-related prohibitions, right? Right? And that’s gotta be ok even though marijuana smokers are developing lung cancer much earlier, innit?

    Ah … end of debate …

  • JimNEPA2_0

    That cigarette that guy in front of you is puffing on behind the wheel: Marlboro or marijuana? Better hang back or take a detour.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      Where I live it is marijuana.

  • NCHokie02

    Now if NYC can legalize pot so in the same city big gulps are banned yet pot is legal….that would a fine work of liberalism to see

    • GreenBeretWay

      We already have a bunch of freeloaders wandering around detoxing off Big Gulps,Twinkies and salt.What’s next? A bunch of stoned freeloaders. I guess they want a bunch of Jello heads to hand more free crap to.

      You notice he asks a bunch of stoners to give an expert opinion about being stoned?
      That’s similar to asking a bunch of convicts if they deserve to be in jail.
      Hope you had a good Thanksgiving.Mine was nice but I think the Turkey may have been high.One of those free range organic birds running around eating only God knows what. Haha

      • Rshill7

        So, I’m sitting in my living room just now and I hear cars blowing their horns outside, and a line of them at a halt. I look ahead a little and see the reason…ten wild turkeys crossing the road. Yesterday it was deer.

        I was wondering why they crossed the road and it occurred to me that they just wanted to get to other side.

        Here’s my opinion: If the choice is between drinking “Wild Turkey” or smoking duh weed, choose duh weed. I’ve tried both and there is no comparison. Hard liquor is much worse IMO.

        • GreenBeretWay

          Wild turkeys and deer? I don’t think I would be blowing a horn.I’d be out there blowing holes in those mothers. Fill the freezer with munchies.

          Liquor or duh weed? One get’s me stupid the other gets me a few years pounding rocks into sand.For now I’ll stick with the drunk birds.

          • NCHokie02

            plus the rare breed is quite tasty, especially with a decent cigar

      • NCHokie02

        I did notice that.

        Hope your Thanksgiving was good as well. Fried a turkey for the first time and we’ve found our new method of cooking turkey. It’s way shorter and tastes 100 times better. I got lucky and got sucked up to the big bldg up here. yeah…..ha. Hope all is well on your end.

        • GreenBeretWay

          Be careful not to overfill the cooker. It kinda pisses off the neighbors when you start burning down the neighborhood. Deep fry while you can.It will probably be outlawed by next Thanksgiving. Big building.Good for you.Are you happy?

          • NCHokie02

            I didn’t. The pot I used actually had fill lines on it for the appropriate size turkey. Turned out great. I agree if the left has their way that will be too unhealthy for you, but I’ll probably be allowed to spark a bowl while I’m discarding my oil. Thats completely fine.

            The big bldg is what it is. Nothing exciting, pushing paper around. Lot of civillians and ca people around. Not too many long tabbers which takes away from at least entertaining conversation. Shouldn’t be up there too long though, no more than a year I hope.

            • GreenBeretWay

              A year? Man that can feel like a lifetime. Have you ever tried to get on out at SWCS?

              At least you can have fun making the cherries life’s miserable.

              It might be fun Swicking em around.

              • NCHokie02

                Ha ha ha…I know. i haven’t but I’ll get locked in over there. I’m applying for that NDU masters program next year over at SWC so hopefully I get that and can get out. In the meantime this job is an “intern” job to finishing ILE and getting back to group really.

                • MeanGreenBeret

                  Awesome.

                  Desk jockey job would drive me crazy.I couldn’t do it.

                  The school doesn’t want to let you go once they get a hold of you. You would get locked in.They like to put you out to pasture over there.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA!

  • Myptofvu

    His point about legalizing it wont reduce crime is lame. For one his example is not even one of legalizing and two there is a big diff in the crime of murder vs buying some Pot legally then redistributing it. The drug smuggling arena is rife with murders and other heinous crimes, properly legalizing contraban would reduce those crimes. However it won’t be legalized properly because the Gov will tax the hell out of it so you will still have the Blackmarket element as long as they can provide it cheaper or of better quality. I am not saying whether I am for or against the issue but what I am for is realizing that a blackmarket is an indicator that you are doing something wrong and needs to be looked at under that light. If there wasn’t something wrong with your model a blackmarket wouldnt exist.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      Baloney. Black market often is an indicator that taxes and regulations as well as government oversight are to be avoided since they tend to eat into the bottom line. then to add insult to injury the dope heads have to pay taxes on it to boot.

      Remember Al Capone didn’t go to Alcatraz for smuggling. He went for tax evasion.

      • Myptofvu

        but Rum running was not due to tax avoidance it was due to prohibition. They couldnt get Capone on anything else so they settled for taxes.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          Take a look at mob history through the ages…most are gotten on tax evasion even now with RICO in place.

          • alphadoc

            Laurel I enjoyed reading your intelligent comments. I’m the psychiatrist in the video and wish Steven could have had the space to include our discussions about psych symptoms other than psychosis. Mood disorders, anxiety disorders and cognitive disorders arise from pot use, not to mention pot use fueling cross-addiction. The prefrontal cortex, AKA the executive brain, is severely impaired by cannabis. The deficits are evident on neuropsych testing and in functional MRI’s of the brain. Because pot is a depot drug, the impairment is chronic and use is heavy enough, permanent.
            Less than 0.01 percent of physicians are pro or neutral about “medical” use, because docs know that cannabis actually contains 400 different chemicals and 80 identifiable metabolites is not a medicine.

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

              Thank you. this is an issue that I will not cave on. Not now, not ever.

  • Yazz55

    Lemmee see if I understand this correctly…

    Ok for the govt to make a certain size soft drink cup illegal. Because its size can be harmful to ya.

    But not ok to make marijuana illegal. And that don’t cause no harm.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      The government and the likes of Bloomberg would delight in cracking down on both of them. And does. Eric Holder agrees with you on marijuana.

  • ryanomaniac

    I have no problem with marijuana. None at all. I think its absolutely ridiculous to argue against it when liquor is legal. A substance that has ruined millions of lives for thousands of years. I despise alcohol. I hate it actually. Pot isn’t even addictive. Can you find stats on marijuana deaths and the deaths its caused. No.

    My wife works for one of the highest end doctor’s in Dallas. They do pain management for Dallas Cowboys, Dallas Mavericks and Texas Rangers. He essays he doesn’t even test for it. They test for all other drugs. This whole issue is stupid.

    Drinkers run red lights….pot smokers stop at green one’s.

  • http://twitter.com/ptracwinter Patrick Winter

    The argument of alcohol being just as bad as pot and it is legal is silly. Is that the basis for every political argument nowadays? Two wrongs make a right? People in this culture have just simply checked out. That said, i never would drink alcohol or smoke weed. People who do these things are flirting with addiction and dependency and possibly ruining their entire lives. All of this stuff is bad, bad, stuff. The government most certainly wants the legalization of pot so it can become another huge revenue source, via taxation just like Cigarettes are.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

      The government doesn’t want to legalize pot. The government and Obama agrees with you that it should be prosecuted and spends resources cracking down on pot.

      I don’t know if you’re saying that we should try Prohibition towards alcohol again.

  • Sandra123456

    Smoke pot and enjoy your brain tumor. Smoke tobacco and enjoy your lung cancer.

    • medicinewomantwo

      Don’t smoke either and live.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Reagangirl Marjorie Snyder

    Steven, if the culture fully adopts the legalization of pot, it will not require a nuclear event to take us back to the stone age. No pun intended. Pot is the gateway drug to irreversible, national decline.

  • wmath44

    Hey ex professor, you look stupid.

  • DavidScottMasiwchuk

    You would think Steve told people child molesters are good guys by the hate he is getting for this. It is common sense that something that gets you high is not good for you….that falls under the category as DUH! Yet the fact that these kids are so ignorant about this is disturbing.

  • wraith67

    There’s a fun (but serious) article called “everything causes cancer” and it looks at all the things that we eat, cook and encounter that can (and have) caused cancer in humans and rats. So when Crowder goes to the doc who wants to cite some “potential” problem with schizos (because theirs soooo many of them) maybe having an onset early – it ranks right up there with the propaganda that pot is harmless.

    Another problem with this is his statement that it’s something that’s engaged in by a minority while at the same time having a hard time finding somebody that hasn’t toked up. I was a teenager in the 80s, a LOT of people tried pot and if it was the doomsday gateway drug that the antis say it is, the US would have crashed and burned by 1990.

    More seriously, you don’t see gangbangers having shootouts over Jim Beam “turf”, legalization would cut down on a lot of that. The NARCO lords are rich because the stuff is illegal (and so therefore profitable to smuggle) and what are we up to now 40,000 dead Mexicans? I can’t go to certain parts of my state (Arizona) because I don’t want to run into armed traffickers strolling across the border by the squad. Add to that the criminal garbage pulled by ATF and DEA (oops, wrong house, sorry Mr. Smith got shot)…

    Just legalize it. All of it. Darwin will take his cut, but that might be good for the gene pool.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YUWCPI26RHBS5AB5SYGFSML6FQ yahoo-YUWCPI26RHBS5AB5SYGFSML6FQ

    Big gulp Vs Marijuana – wow. Let me take a stab at this – I support the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana, but not the “big gulp”.
    Pepsi-cola (and other soft drink manufacturers) introduced the larger sizes to sell more – but specifically because people will buy more ounces, but not more drinks. Much to the health detriment of our society.
    Marijuana was made demonized by the government due to racial motivation, again to the detriment of our society in terms of criminalizing someone caught with it ever after due to records retention of law enforcement/government.
    Maybe both are bad for you. So is too much water. Common sense needs to be used with all things, and I prefer to be the judge of my own common sense as long as it doesnt affect others.
    I think the physicians opinions are just that. Its hard to have, at this time, an honest long term view as all modern results have been skewed by the government.
    But on personal bias, knowing what it does to the individual is as varied as the issues – its never the same consistently. However to allow substances and not others is biased and if researched for the motivations as of today can be seen to be either politically or monetarily devised. seemingly not for individual freedoms or rights.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      What a load of crap. Dope has a deleterious effect on society as has been proven repeatedly. It is not a victimless crime and it is not some government conspiracy…and drinking Big Gulp isn’t either. Pepsi/Coke didn’t force people to buy and drink those Big Gulps. They wanted them and the market provided it.

      Not everyone has common sense as evidenced by your post and society at large needs a bit of protection from boneheads like you that read one book on a given topic that they picked to support their preconceived notions then go on to consider it the end all be all authority on a subject.

      And really the comment on the physicians opinions is priceless. You don’t like their opinions so you discount them immediately despite the fact they have education and science behind those opinions. So if you get cancer are you going to discount the oncologist’s opinion as well?

      Your whole government conspiracy-big business conspiracy-paranoid post that has no critical thinking skills what so ever makes the case TO NOT LEGALIZE DOPE.

      And Pollan is a charlatan and there are suckers born every minute that fall for people like him.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YUWCPI26RHBS5AB5SYGFSML6FQ yahoo-YUWCPI26RHBS5AB5SYGFSML6FQ

    by the way, my source on the big gulp was Omnivores Dilemma by Michael Pollan – a very enlightening book, and my sources on marijuana are the various internet places as well as personal experience – I do not like alcohol because it doesnt like me – marijuana does :-)

  • stevenbiot

    I disagree with Crowder. Relaxing drug laws decreases black market crime. Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek stated this, also. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLsCC0LZxkY

    • stage9

      Black market crime vs a drug induced citizenry. Hmmm…choices choices.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      You are totally misinterpreting that video. And so what if you weren’t? Milton Friedman and Hayek were not all knowing gods right about every single thing or topic they ever gave an opinion on.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

      So what is more important…A stoned non productive populace or decreasing black market crime? What is the bigger threat to society and civilization in general?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

        The violent criminals that kill people.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          And what makes them do violence? Are you also saying we as a country and people aren’t capable of walking and chewing bubblegum? We can’t focus on more than one thing?

          BALONEY.

          So far all you are doing is attempting to justify personal bad behavior.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZSKETECBAFDEAUOUML4ICTKLAA Alex

            Do you think the government should make all bad behavior illegal? Good luck with that! You just admitted in your previous post you’d rather have it illegal even though that increases black market crime.

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

              Uh no. You need to read a little better and I’m done with this thread.

              Get over yourself.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

        Decreasing black market crime is more important, because there’s no evidence from existing sources that legalizing marijuana will lead to a “stoned non productive populace”. No country that legalized their pot has gone down the highway to hell, and any evidence to the contrary is nonexistent.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

          Au contraire. There is plenty of evidence and denial is not a river in Egypt. Take a look at the stats that come out of Sweden, The Netherlands, etc.

          Simply because you say there is no evidence and bury your head in the sand doesn’t make it so.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

            I find it interesting that you mention “stats” and then don’t offer any. Unless you consider 2% marijuana abuse (and that might be pushing it up a bit higher than what’s justified) in Europe and Australia COMBINED to be “the highway to hell”, marijuana legalization hasn’t really affected Europe in a hugely negative way. Are there negatives? Of course, using drugs is stupid and ridiculous — but let’s stop pretending the world will end if people can roll up a joint in their spare time.

            Want more stats? Sure thing:
            1) As already mentioned, estimates from Europe and Australia also find rates of marijuana abuse and dependence in the general population between 1 percent and 2 percent. This relatively small group accounts for a considerable share of total consumption.
            2) A study by Rosalie Pacula, Jamie Chriqui, and Janna King examined several states where marijuana had been decriminalized by reducing the penalties for simple possession. They found that living in a decriminalized state increases use among high school students but by only 2%. Other studies have found either no increases among juveniles or as much as 4% increase.
            3) On a national level, a recent report by Jon Gettman estimated that national criminal justice expenditures for enforcing marijuana laws is $7.6 billion per year with $3.7 billion being allocated to police, $853 million to the courts, and $3.1 billion to corrections. If the number of arrests for marijuana in a given jurisdiction reflects 10% of the total arrests, it is argued that the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana would produce a 10% drop or savings in the total law enforcement costs. At present, the nation is spending $12.1 billion in police and court costs and another $16.9 billion in corrections costs. Go ahead and do the math.

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

              Are you incapable of googling the stats out of those country’s with legalized drugs??? Really?! What has happened to Sweden, Netherlands, etc societies since legalization of drugs? Do you even know? You said evidence is non existent but that is a blatant lie you tell yourself to justify your stupidity.

              Like all good druggies that don’t care about civilization you will spin, twist, contort and be just plain ridiculous to deny the truth.

              And if you are going to post stats, post the sources. Plus your stats don’t even begin to refute the science behind pot.

              Good grief the dope advocates make me laugh with their ridiculousness. You guys give dogs and bones a run for their money. Their is tons of history about what happened to moral relativistic non productive drug hazed societies. Learn it.

              What is ironic is your total lack of ethics. You yourself proclaim drug abuse bad but then go on to advocate something bad for society. STUNNING! That right there is where moral relativism crosses the line from stupid into evil.

              • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

                I don’t need to offer stats for a claim I didn’t make. You’re the one making the claim, so back it up. That’s why I did with my claim, so the ball is officially in your court. You’re saying I’m either lying or ignorant — be my guest and prove it.

                Moral relativism has virtually nothing to do with any of this. I’ve always believed drug usage to be morally wrong, but civil government has no philosophical, moral, or theological grounds to tell me, you, or anyone else what we can or can’t put in our bodies. If we infringe on the rights of other folks, then that’s another story — beyond that, civil government has no role to play. I’m advocating freedom here. Liberty doesn’t always look pretty or do what we want it to do, but it’s always worth it in the end. I’ll be the first to say that people have a right to smoke marijuana in the privacy of their own home, and I’ll also be the first to say that they’re idiots if they act on that freedom. There’s no hypocrisy there. The only one being hypocritical in the long run is yourself.

                The American Founders didn’t fight the Revolution so we could be putting people in jail for this nonsense — heck, Washington, Jefferson, and Hancock would all be behind bars today, since Washington grew hemp at Mount Vernon, Jefferson smoked it, and Hancock distributed/smuggled it.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  Are you still talking?! Now you are inventing things as well. What never ceases to amaze me is just how vociferous and downright nasty pot heads get while arguing for the legalization of a seemingly ‘harmless’ drug. If it is so harmless why does it need regulation?

                  And your history needs some serious work…but you keep contorting it and yourself in an effort to justify your shortcomings.

                  There are tons and tons of stats but somehow I get the inkling that even if I did post them it wouldn’t matter since the facts in the video didn’t seem to matter either.

                  Go smoke another one brotha’ since you need to chill out and it’s too late for your brain anyway.

                • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

                  I find it interesting (and not a least bit humorous) that you use the terms “vociferous”, “nasty”, “too late for your brain”, etc when you speak of my posts…..when you’re the one using them, not me.

                  LAUREL: “There are tons and tons of stats”

                  That’s probably the third time I’ve heard that. So where are they?

                  LAUREL: “…..the facts in the video didn’t seem to matter either.”

                  Actually, Crowder made some good points. I’m making a different point about states’ rights and the role of civil government in the whole affair. Even Crowder himself said in the video that civil government not having a say in what we can or can’t put in our bodies was a good point to make and one worth debating.

                  LAUREL: “And your history needs some serious work…”

                  I would ask for evidence, but that hasn’t worked yet…..
                  Oh, and I’m a history major, so I don’t say these things lightly.

                  LAUREL: “Now you are inventing things as well.”

                  Prove it. Or is that too much to ask?

                  For the record, I have never used drugs, pot, alcohol, cigars, cigarettes, or even had a cup of coffee (can’t stand the taste). Can you say the same? I await your retraction of the term “pot head” with glee.

                  LAUREL: “…..and it’s too late for your brain anyway.”

                  I’ll remember that after I graduate college with two degrees (Political Science and History).

                  FOR ANYONE READING THIS THREAD: Avoiding the topic (like Laurel has done), resorting to name-calling (like Laurel has done), refusing to answer questions (like Laurel has done), and claiming to have but refusing to show evidence to back up points (like Laurel has done) are all clear signs of someone losing a debate (or so I remember from debate class back in high school).
                  I will leave Ms. Laurel with one last question: Where in the Constitution (or anywhere else, for that matter) does civil government have ANY right to dictate to anyone what they can or can’t place in their own bodies in the privacy of their own homes? THAT is the ultimate question.

                • http://profile.yahoo.com/44F4AB4VSCTOCHBMBG4ZWWD5OU Laurel

                  Jared this thread is old, yes the stats are out there but it is pointless to retrieve them for a rabid pot smoker who thinks he knows better than the rest of the world. There are stats. There are articles. Studies. Tons and tons of information but you are not interested in being informed and educated to both sides of an issue. You are interested in one up-manship that really is pointless.

                  It isn’t about the constitution exactly per se but it is about the fabric that makes a cohesive and productive society. You know that. I asked earlier…What is the purpose of government? And what you may think it is the ultimate question really isn’t. The ultimate question is…Is it good for or beneficial to society and civilization overall? Where in the constitution does it say we can’t drink and drive?

                  Now I haven’t avoided any topic or resorted to any name calling. I don’t really care what you major in. My daughter is a historian…not a student. Would you like my resume? Does it matter? What you are is a person that has to justify your bad behavior and moral relativism with personal slights and insults devoid of reality.

                  Oh and Jared…I am a very active member of the Mount Vernon Historical Society as well as other historical charities aimed at preserving our history. Yes your history could use some work. So much of what you know just isn’t so. But you keep letting those leftist agenda driven profs manipulate and lie to you. After all they have been doing it for decades and decades so you wouldn’t be an exception. Let the culture control you as well since that is just so intelligent and worthy of a history major. Ironically you bring up the behavior of others without ever critically thinking or examining whether that behavior was good or justified. Let’s say your history is correct and the Founding Father’s did indeed do dope…SO? Since when are the Founding Fathers perfect beings to be emulated in every way and manner? If that were the case we would still have slavery. I could give you a list of things that would be entirely different if we are to copy FF’s exactly. My dear please try and learn some critical thinking skills. Also if your history is indeed correct look up the Scotus rulings on drugs. Not just the outcome…actually read the opinions and the arguments put forth by both sides.

                  As to your personal habits…what did you say…oh yeah..”PROVE IT!”

                  Now you may respond but since you are not informed of both sides of the issue and refuse to get that way, I will not respond back. So rant, rave, swear, do what you like. It will fall on deaf ears. What I am not going to do is clog up this blog with literally thousands of stats on subject where the information is readily and easily accessible.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

    Legalizing marijuana is part of decentralizing government as a whole. I personally don’t use marijuana, never will, but the government has pretty much no right telling us what we can put in our bodies.