Why is it illegal to get high?

[JFrankA]

Mostly because any politician who attempts to decriminalize drugs -- even just marijuana, or even just to lower sentences, -- immediately gets tarred by his next election opponent as "soft on crime", usually with devastating results.

I have to agree with this. The way the policial scene is here in the US, anything said could be made into "tar". So saying something like "let's legalize marijuana" would really make the candidate's opponet's dance with joy.

That said, my opinion on "its illegal to get high" is that it should be illegal to get high cause if you're using, specially a black market kind of drug, it means that you bought it, and if you bought it, you've paid for it to someone who's breaking the no traffic laws. So, in the end, you're actually paying for the drug making, the bullets, the raping, the stealing, the kidnaping. That's why I do not respect people who do drugs

I understand that position, but correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like the reason getting high is illegal is because illegal drugs are illegal. Isn't that a circular arguement?

What about people who are getting high on legal drugs? What if pot and the rest were legal? That pretty much cancels your reason why someone would get arrested when they are high.

 

[Modified]

It's not. Virtually all Federal, State, and local laws address sale, transfer, possession, or possession with intent to deliver controlled substances. Driving while impaired is the only law I can think of that addresses the act of getting high.

Does that mean that if someone else shoots you up and doesn't charge for it, you are in the clear? Or does possession include "in your bloodstream"?

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Why is it illegal to get high?

Because the government wants you to remain low.

 

[linusrichard]

It's not. Virtually all Federal, State, and local laws address sale, transfer, possession, or possession with intent to deliver controlled substances. Driving while impaired is the only law I can think of that addresses the act of getting high.

I don't feel like researching 50 states, but I can tell you that use of marijuana is against the law in Michigan.

 

[fishbait]

I don't feel like researching 50 states, but I can tell you that use of marijuana is against the law in Michigan.

You are correct. It is a 90 day misdemeanor. In response to criticism of harsh possession laws, this statute was enacted to allow judges wider discretion in sentencing first time offenders and to dispose of possession cases through plea bargaining down to a lessor offense.

 

[linusrichard]

You are correct. It is a 90 day misdemeanor. In response to criticism of harsh possession laws, this statute was enacted to allow judges wider discretion in sentencing first time offenders and to dispose of possession cases through plea bargaining down to a lessor offense.

That's usually how it's used, yes. But I have seen people charged with use as well. (They have a hard time getting a plea bargain.)

Michigan (and I know this is not only Michigan, but again, I'm not going to do a 50-state survey) has another tool for first time offenders. MCL 333.7411, or "7411," as it's called, allows a judge to hold onto a guilty plea, and, without entering the conviction, order probation. If the probation is successfully completed, the charge will be dismissed.

 

[JFrankA]

But why is it illegal?

I mean, I understand driving while drunk or high is illegal. I understand smoking pot in a public place, such as a store or an office, being illegal. But why everywhere?

Why can't it be regulated like alcohol?

 

[Mark6]

But why is it illegal?

I mean, I understand driving while drunk or high is illegal. I understand smoking pot in a public place, such as a store or an office, being illegal. But why everywhere?

JFrankA, you are looking for rational reasons. Give it up. There are no rational reasons, only emotional ones plus political inertia.

 

[Mark Felt]

But why is it illegal?

I mean, I understand driving while drunk or high is illegal. I understand smoking pot in a public place, such as a store or an office, being illegal. But why everywhere?

Why can't it be regulated like alcohol?

Because anyone who advocates it seriously will either be so firmly entrenched in their electorate that they can't be voted out because of it showing them as being "soft on crime" (and are thus firmly in the minority), or aren't, and can, and know this, and thus won't champion it. Or... maybe they will, and great; but we still won't have a majority, and the advocate will get voted out, and we still won't have a majority, and the cycle will repeat.

 

[JFrankA]

JFrankA, you are looking for rational reasons. Give it up. There are no rational reasons, only emotional ones plus political inertia.

Because anyone who advocates it seriously will either be so firmly entrenched in their electorate that they can't be voted out because of it showing them as being "soft on crime" (and are thus firmly in the minority), or aren't, and can, and know this, and thus won't champion it. Or... maybe they will, and great; but we still won't have a majority, and the advocate will get voted out, and we still won't have a majority, and the cycle will repeat.

I agree with both of you.

I was just trying to see if there WAS a rational reason. I just wanted to see if there was something I missed. Seems to me that I haven't.

 

[Alex Libman]

Because the government owns you and can decide what you do with your body for its own profit. How dare you question the government! The government is infallible! Obey!


(That said, it doesn't mean I advocate getting high or any other vice. Stay away from it for your own reasons, not government prohibition!)

 

[Francesca R]

Let me preface this with the fact that I don't do any illegal drugs at all. I drink alcohol rarely. I don't smoke, I don't even drink coffee.

Why (did you preface this with that)?

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Expansion of government power.

 

[quarky]

here's a paranoid reason: cheap prison labor. we need lots of people in jail, and lots more to round up when we need to.

 

[MrAdam]

I hate to be the odd-ball here. But I think most laws against (most) drugs are rather logical. Considering the addictive and highly destructive properties of certain drugs (heroin and crystal meth to name a few) Enforcing laws against getting high off crystal meth is a good idea! Some substances that are actively policed off the streets are severely detrimental to ones health. If there were no regulation of drugs I don't think America would be as productive as it is today (to say the least).

Of course this then brings on the question of education. If people know what is right from wrong they wont do the wrong(usually). Just as I don't actively seek heroin in my city because I know the effects of the drug. Though that may be an entirely different subject altogether.

In reality there will be un-educated poor people who will do the drugs that ruin their lives and, because of their addictive properties, get hooked on drugs that are near constant revenues for drug dealers.

So I guess we come to the catch-22 of better educating people on the effects of drugs, or making drugs illegal because the public can't handle access to things they simply don't fully understand.

Obviously our education system isn't doing too well at successfully accomplishing it's goal in it's own sector, and that once a year health class where kids learn about drugs (amongst other things) isn't really cutting it. Kids will be the youthful, foolish, and daring individuals they are. And the more disconnected the parents are from the children (such as the case of a broken home) the more chances of said children to part-take in illegal activities, and possibly skip that ever-so informative health class. So with these mischievous spawns we have a group of potential dealers, and addicts (in this case only addicts). At this point the decision to enforce education has failed and the drugs that are (in a theoretical sense) legal will be used to the point of extreme detrimental abuse.

But as I guess you can go right along and say that we just need to improve our education system. So maybe when we have a majority of educated persons will we not still get those who may use the detrimental properties of a drug to commit suicide? Of course this is theoretical as well because the thought of an entire well educated society is as obscure as the thought of an entirely peaceful one. Also some could argue that one should have the right to end his own life, just as he has the right to ruin it.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Come to think of it, I think the real reason drugs are illegal is because the truth is we're hooked into the Matrix and the drugs are the only gateway out. The cops arre governed by the Sentinels and the system creates a mindset of justifications of why it should be illegal but deep down we're into some deep ****, Neo.

 

[quarky]

Mr. Adam, welcome to this non-existent place. Please consider that well-educated rich kids are quite prone to drug abuse. I honestly think that the illegality of drugs is a lot of the draw, to some people.

I'm glad that some things are illegal and that we have a criminal element. The notion of a totally law-abiding populace is frightening to me.

Other than people rotting in jail because they had an ounce of pot, the most annoying part of the war on drugs, to me, is the way in which all illegal drugs are more or less lumped together...and always with an eye towards potential addiction.

Illegal drugs are usually the best drugs. They should be tools; used for appropriate jobs, but we aren't educated to see them that way. If for some reason, perhaps dealing with a temporary disaster, you must stay awake and productive for 24 hours, well, meth-amphetamine is the tool. For extreme temporary pain, heroin is superior (and less toxic) than morphine. For emotional trauma, a well set-up session with mdma is priceless.

For people that are lost and about to give up, an illegal psychedelic journey can be a life-saver. For ar artist that is stalled out, an occasional toke of pot can illuminate some new avenues.

Instead, all of it gets dumped in the trash bin...because of the idea (or the reality) of the lowest common factor. We are all worse off because of this. And illegal drugs remain the world's largest business concern.

 

[JFrankA]

Why (did you preface this with that)?

I hope I wasn't being superior or something. I'm sorry if I came off like that, it wasn't my intent. The reason I prefaced my posting was because I didn't want a "What dude? The police took your stash?" type of response. That's all.

 

[Cainkane1]

Its against the law to get high because dopers assault and murder people. meth will do that, Crack cocain will do that, PCP will do that. Alcohol will do that. Pot doesn't (as far as I know) cause violent behaviour although in my case it causes panic disorder.

I was once stalked and harrassed by a crack smoker and I had to call the police. Also one of the most miserable times I have ever spent in my life were when I had to put up with my roommates brother who was on PCP every other day. I've always associated getting high on dope with criminal activity. The drugs such as pot merely cause a person to waste a lot of time.

 

[John Bentley]

In Alabama, the drug laws are billed as a public safety issue, and I think there is some truth in that. If you are driving erratically, a policeman can pull you over and give you a breathalyzer test for alchohol that gives a pretty accurate result of the amount of alchohol in your blood at that moment. There is no similar test for any other drug. So how can you be prosecuted for driving while under the influence of drugs other than alchohol? You are a menace to public safety if you are high and driving, yet I can't prove what drug you were high on when you were pulled over.

Now expand that to airline pilots, crane operators, etc.

Also expand that to the workplace. Firing someone without a proven cause is costly to employers because their unemployment compensation rates go up. So how do you prove that you fired a guy for being high at work? In Alabama it is illegal to do a drug test on just one employee. All employees must be tested. And then the same consequences must apply to all. That means any employee, regardless of his efficiency or work record would have to be fired if he/she came up positive. So how do I fire just one employee for being high without being able to prove it?

I know you're going to say "But what about just toking a little weed in my own home?" That's fine by me, but who's going to keep you from then going out in your car or going to work, etc?

Bottom line, develop a quick and accurate test for drugs similar to the ease and efficiency of the breathalyzer and I'd be behind you to legalize drugs. That is, as long as I can then fire you if you show up high at your job