1. In a prison, the only way to deal with the environment is through the internal world. As soon as there is injustice on a large scale, there will be more violence. When people will feel less threatened, there will be less crime. Otherwise one prison is replaced with another, and again. Society attempts to free itself from age-old bondage. Drugs and violence, crime and corruption, and so on, are inevitably part of a kind of protest, and a symptom.

---

2. continued re: Stinson's response: The marijuana comparison is where it gets a bit unclear- as he lumps (non-toxic, non-addictive) marijuana with addictive drugs like heroin, meth, and crack. Any substance can be used or abused, but Stinson's abrasive and condescending demeanor and blatant misinformation is appalling. And the comparison of rape laws to drug laws?? Brutal sexual and physical assault vs. ingesting a substance by choice? Main differences- victim vs. no victim, violence against another person vs. freedom of choice to later one's perception and have new experiences.

---

3. Stinson's claim that someone drinking wine with dinner is not the same as someone doing other drugs every day is laughable in that he implies that this is what Sullum is stating. No matter the substance, daily use resulting in tolerance, withdrawal, and negative impact on one's functioning is abuse-addiction. Drinking a glass of wine with dinner is not comparable to doing meth daily.. but neither is drinking a glass of wine with dinner comparable to drinking a liter of Jack Daniels daily. But he plays on the legal= good, healthy, acceptable, vs. illegal= deadly, addictive, and unable to be utlized safely.

---

4. Furthermore, I don't think that most people actually have the desire to use these substances, and those who do tend to do so despite the laws.. and what is so wrong with experimenting with substances anyway? Everyone does it- whether caffeine, cocaine, painkillers, alcohol.. Substances should be subject to thorough review and research, and such judgments based on the actual risks and benefits.

---

5. To #16- the way I envision legalization, there would be limits to advertising. These products would not be advertised like cigarettes and alcohol and it would be safer to legalize because one could enforce an age requirement, and also there could be a requirement for information on proper dosing, risks, and benefits of a substance, such as a required test before being sold the product, or a leaflet similar to a prescription medication leaflet.

---

6. Making marijuana legal would have positive impacts in at least two ways- first, as a medication, and second, as an alternative to alcohol, it would greatly decrease the risks of overdose and addiction (none of which are associated with marijuana). Notice how we use "alcohol poisoning," "hangover," and "alcoholism" to denote the damaging effects of alcohol, to separate it from addiction/OD, but that is what is happening. Our government tells us that marijuana is just as "bad" as heroin, "worse" than cocaine (schedule 1 vs. 2), and has no medical applications. This is untrue.

---

7. Humans always have and always will use mind altering substances. If factual information was available, if the purity and dosage were known, if one didn't have to associate with criminals or spend exorbitant amounts of money to get a drug, the problems would be greatly decreased. Notice how the problems associated with heroin use disappear when the user is transitioned to opioid maintenance with suboxone, methadone, or even prescription heroin!!

---

8. Regarding #15. No one is saying that because alcohol is harmful and legal, other drugs should be too. What is being said is this- these drugs are still being used despite their illegal status. Drugs which can already be harmful are even moreso because of the stigma and social and legal issues surrounding it. And drugs which are not usually harmful are harmful because of the laws (ie. putting someone in jail for marijuana is clearly an unnatural consequence for a victimless crime and harms that person far more than marijuana itself ever could. So if drugs were legalized, they could be regulated to reduce (not eliminate) harm.

---

9. Unfortunately, CC Stimson's statements illustrate the extent immature understanding of the complex social, economic, political, cultural and biological factors of drug use & drug abuse. All scientific evidence confirms that marijuana does not cause symptoms of physical addiction (not born out in the DEA drug scheduling), unlike cigarettes and alcohol. We must ask what are our government's motives for maintaining MJ's illegal status: 1. precedent and 2. capitalism. Once people question their government's policies, who knows where we could go from there.....democracy, freedom, equality, justice?

---

10. > Heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and > marijuana are illegal because they are > dangerous, addictive, destructive drugs > that ruin lives. Everyone -- or at least anyone under 50 -- knows that mariuana is NOT addicative, or that it's NOT more dangerous and destructive than alcohol. > there is the issue of morality We cannot ignore the huge threat to our society that comes from people like you, focused on forcing your personal ideas of morality on everyone else. Stuart http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/

---