War on Drugs has Failed... and in Other News the Sky is Blue

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The black market would continue to rise because "legal" drugs wouls have to be at least as taxed as tobacco, but on the other hand it would be harder to prosecute black market dealers than it is now.

I have to disagree there. Prices should be based on a range of things with harm caused being one. Something like cannabis which is only proven to cause harm when smoked with tobacco (so no proven harm from the cannabis) should be taxed much lighter than tobacco. The only argument I can think of against taxing more similar to standard products is to avoid people just smoking all day but when alcohol is so cheap anyway for a few liters of cider why should we encourage people to drink over smoke. Certainly the stoner whilst probably not particularly useful retains a lot more self control than the drunk and is far less likely to cause problems. Combine this with the fact that making weed cheaper than tobacco would remove 95% of the reason people combine tobacco with cannabis (my use of tobacco would drop dramatically)

Tobacco, Alcohol, even foods/drinks with too much sugar, salt or fat can be far worse for you than Cannabis so I don't see why they should be cheaper... consider the strain these things cause on medical services.

I would also argue some of the other light drugs are far less harmful to the individual and society as a whole than the items I listed above...

Maybe it is just me because I am hardly ever around the stuff but does anyone else find the smell of alcohol revolting ?

I think that smoking Cannabis is obviously harmful in the same way as smoking tobacco, inhaling any fumes like that is basically carcenogenic and it still has tar in it to cause you all those nasty lung problems, then you have the mental problems.

So, I think it should be taxed as heavily as tobacco.

[Idaho]

I think that smoking Cannabis is obviously harmful in the same way as smoking tobacco, inhaling any fumes like that is basically carcenogenic and it still has tar in it to cause you all those nasty lung problems, then you have the mental problems.

So, I think it should be taxed as heavily as tobacco.

You don't have to smoke it. You can eat it, or vapourise it. Then you only have the mental issues, not the lung problems.

[Ice]

You don't have to smoke it. You can eat it, or vapourise it. Then you only have the mental issues, not the lung problems.

It hasn't been shown to cause lung cancer. In a sweet sense of irony, it has actually been shown to have anti carcenigenic properties. If anyone wants to see the studies, I'll find them; just let me know. I'm getting the sense that a lot of people go off of talking points and never really look into the issue at hand.