A bad law is like bad pot

People have been getting high on marijuana for thousands of years. Yet every new generation seems to think it invented the drug.

Actually, mine did.

Beatnik Eric (Big Daddy) Nord, “The King of North Beach,” introduced me to weed on a tour of San Francisco jazz spots and coffeehouses when I was a San Jose State Spartan Daily reporter a half-century ago.

Through the 1960s and into the ‘70s, a bunch of us would occasionally toke up “recreationally,” often griping about the Vietnam War or “Tricky Dick” Nixon.

Sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll, and all that. No tweeting.

But most of us got over it, at least the drugs.

For me, it started one night at a party when we ran out of grass and I volunteered to replenish the supply. I stepped into my Austin Healey 3000 roadster and sped down the freeway at around 90 mph, oblivious to the fact that the highway had not yet opened or even been completed. Miraculously, I hit the brake just short of a flimsy barrier perched atop a 40-foot chasm.

A couple years later, my editor at The Times sent me to Oregon to write about that state’s new marijuana decriminalization law, which California soon copied. While up there, besides taking some hits with old friends, I talked to doctors, professors and judges about weed. And they convinced me that, among other dangers, the drug could result in memory loss.

Maybe that’s why, to this day, I still can’t remember then-Gov. Jerry Brown raising taxes, as Meg Whitman insists he did. Never mind. Different subject.

Anyway, I came to realize that pot basically is bad stuff and probably should never be completely legalized — particularly in a world where there’s already too much bad stuff that can be ingested legally.

OK, so alcohol and tobacco are legal. That’s no reason to add a third poison to the checkout counter.

But don’t take my word for the venomous nature of dope.

I went to my favorite bookstore in Mendocino — in the Emerald Triangle of California pot cultivation — and picked up some pro-marijuana books. One was “The Marijuana Chef Cookbook,” written by a “S.T. Oner” and published by Green Candy Press of San Francisco.

Some stoner-beware excerpts:

Marijuana “can cause paranoia and distortion of time [and] may lead to a sense of being out of control....

“It can be safely said that repeated long-term use of the drug will have lasting effects on a person’s brain and respiratory system.... Some people definitely ‘wig out’ while on the drug....

“The smoke from a joint contains three times more tar than a standard cigarette, and five times more carbon monoxide.... Marijuana smoking is definitely not ‘healthy.’ ”

True, the writer is pushing potheads to get off joints and use the book’s recipes for muffins, pancakes, brownies and soups. But the cautions are clear.

Incidentally, why was the cannabis lobby allowed to label getting high on weed “recreation”? It’s a shameful abuse of English.

Recreation? Always thought that was about some healthful physical endeavor. Tennis. Fishing. Hiking. But sucking on a joint? Driving stoned?

You drink booze, you get drunk. Or maybe you’re “just a social drinker.” But you’re never a recreationist.

Time to mention Proposition 19.

Bankrolled primarily by a wealthy pot entrepreneur, Richard Lee of Oakland, the ballot initiative would permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial cultivation and retail sales of marijuana. And it would permit all Californians at least 21 to possess up to an ounce and to grow their own in 25-square-foot patches.

Currently in California, selling marijuana for non-medicinal use is a felony. But there’s no real definition of “medicinal” need. Anyone with some cash can obtain a medical card from an unprincipled doctor. That means anyone who really wants to smoke dope can do it legally already without Prop. 19.

Even without a medical card, an adult can possess up to one ounce and be tagged only with a fine. No jail time.

And although backers argue Prop. 19 would save taxpayers big bucks by calling off the war on nonviolent pot smokers, the truth is that a truce was essentially declared decades ago. Fewer than 1% of inmates in state prison have been sentenced for marijuana crimes of any kind, including growing and selling, according to prison data.

Prop. 19 can’t deliver what it promises. It’s a fraud.

It touts tax revenue for struggling state and local governments. But no specific marijuana tax is imposed by the proposition. It also pitches regulation. But there’s none of that specified in the measure either.

Alcohol and tobacco are regulated uniformly statewide. But under Prop. 19, each city and county — 536 entities — could decree their own marijuana rules and taxes. It would be chaos. The Legislature could enact a statewide regulatory system, but it already can and has refused.

There’s also the fact that marijuana still would be an illegal drug under federal law. U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder has pledged vigorous enforcement. More chaos. The feds have tolerated medicinal use, but they draw the line there.

Under Prop. 19, it could be illegal for employers to conduct drug tests. They might have to allow workers to toke joints on the job.

The more voters learn about the measure, the less they like it, polls find.

A new Los Angeles Times/USC poll shows Prop. 19 trailing among likely voters: yes 39%, no 51%. People in their teens and 20s support it. The older voters get, the more they oppose the idea.

Like a fine red wine, one’s understanding of marijuana can improve with age.

george.skelton@latimes.com