Yes, people who make uninformed decisions based off propaganda ads or can't make their own minds up for themselves, not seeking the real truth or doing their own research, are stupid.

Not to mention I've yet to see a "good" or "legitimate" reason for keeping the current laws. Tell me exactly what has worked in the last near century that the drugs have been illegal, or what headway has been accomplished in the "war on drugs". Or would you care to go back to your best friend google and look up just how much has been wasted?

Legitimate reasons, heh. Don't be a stupid.

If stuff like salvia divinorum, tobacco, and alcohol are legal, there is no legitimate reason that marijuana should be illegal as well. Really, I challenge you to find a good reason that something healthier (relatively of course) that millions and millions of people have used over thousands of years responsibly, as well as something that there have been 0 deaths as a result of primary use, should be illegal.

To be fair, I wasnt arguing that I had a fair / legitimate reason for weed to be legal or illegal. (also i thought salvia was only legal in some states?)

Anyway my main point was that saying "They dont get it so they are stupid" isnt the best way to make progress on a subject. I'm not talking about the 'uninformed' people who trust propaganda ads by the way.

If there are politicians in office who formerly were hippies or whatever, but now they keep it banned... why? "They're stupid" is a terrible reason. It's 3am right now so I'm not going to go to my "best friend google' and look it up. Are they keeping it banned because "WRAA ITS BAD 4 U" or are there other reasons? Thats what I'm saying.

Well, I have some sympathy with politicians. Of course it would be nice if policy was based on science, various governments have commissioned various studies that all come back negative for the proposed dangers of marijuana.

The current 'hot topic' is the fear that marijuana causes mental illness, but the only evidence here is correlation (but as we've seen from the MMR scandal, that's all the tabloids need) so it isn't clear whether marijuana causes mental illness or whether the mentally ill are just more likely to use marijuana.

If politicians legislated based soley on the studies they commission, it would make a lot of people very happy (such as myself and most of you guys too, I imagine). But it would be a pretty tough sell to a whole lot of other people.
"Because science says so!" may well be a compelling argument for us, but there are a significant number of people that generally distrust or disbelieve science. This is the real danger, the organised campaign to undermine science and make religious nonsense equally acceptable. This is why sensible legislation is so hard to pass, and it's only getting harder, not easier.

Here's a little bit of a history lesson for you then:

"America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law "ordering" all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other "must grow" laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp -- try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements - rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage growth.

The United States Census of 1850 counted 8,327 hemp "plantations" (minimum 2,000-acre farm) growing cannabis hemp for cloth, canvas and even the cordage used for baling cotton.

Again, racism was part of the charge against marijuana, as newspapers in 1934 editorialized: "Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."

Two other fear-tactic rumors started to spread: one, that Mexicans, Blacks and other foreigners were snaring white children with marijuana; and two, the story of the "assassins." Early stories of Marco Polo had told of "hasheesh-eaters" or hashashin, from which derived the term "assassin." In the original stories, these professional killers were given large doses of hashish and brought to the ruler's garden (to give them a glimpse of the paradise that awaited them upon successful completion of their mission). Then, after the effects of the drug disappeared, the assassin would fulfill his ruler's wishes with cool, calculating loyalty.

By the 1930s, the story had changed. Dr. A. E. Fossier wrote in the 1931 New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal: "Under the influence of hashish those fanatics would madly rush at their enemies, and ruthlessly massacre every one within their grasp." Within a very short time, marijuana started being linked to violent behavior.


If you want it summed up: MJ is only illegal because of racism in the early 20th century. There were no studies done, no scientific basis, and up until this point even doctors could prescribe MJ for a plethora of reasons, and did so freely. Your first 2 drafts of the declaration of independence was written on hemp for Christ's sake. And it only remains illegal because the pharmacological and tobacco companies would lose BILLIONS if it were made so. And every single politician knows this. Including, unfortunately, Obama.



IMO, the last 10 thousand years of its use without people going bonkers from it is enough evidence for me. I've yet to see any study of the crazy hippies from the 70's that experimented with MJ and other hardcore drugs, that have made it into positions of extreme importance, like oh I don't know, PRESIDENT, do anything other than remain sane. I'm fairly certain a great deal of our parents that grew up in the 60's and 70's did a lot of experimentation with drugs, and I'm fairly certain a lot of us grew up pretty good and didn't have any abnormal issues with them. And I agree with your post completely.

No, racism wasn't the reason. It's what they used for their propaganda. The real reason was an economic one. Media tycoon Hearst is the one who spread the propaganda.

Here's the story: (I looked this up on the internet, but I have this in a book)

In the late 1800's hemp production slipped due to a lack of processing technology; paper production began using cheaper trees and cotton. From 1901 to 1937, the U.S. Department of Agriculture repeatedly predicted that once machinery capable of harvesting, stripping, and separating hemp fiber was engineered, hemp production would again be America's number one cash crop.

Then, in a February 1938 article entitled New Billion Dollar Crop, Popular Mechanics magazine reported on the new hemp harvesting technology being developed by International Harvester. But some people had plans to make this plant illegal for farmers to cultivate.

Who made the hemp crop illegal?

Three men, Henry J. Anslinger, Lammont DuPont, and William Randolph Hearst, made growing hemp illegal. Anslinger was the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. DuPont and Hearst were the owners of the largest chemical company and newspaper, respectively.

Why would these men want hemp made illegal?

Trees had become the number one paper source during this time. hearst, in addition to owning a nationwide chain of newspapers, also owned every bit of timber used to make them. The new threat of cheap hemp meant that trees would no longer be the cheapest source of paper. DuPont had patented the process for producing synthetic nylon from oil and coal as well as a new improved sulfate process to make paper from wood pulp. If DuPont would have had to compete against environmentally-friendly hemp products, his business would have suffered.

How did they make hemp illegal?

Hearst began printing outlandish stories with headlines such as "Marijuana goads user to blood lust" and "Hotel clerk identifies Marijuana smoker as gunman". He also took advantage of the country's prejudice against blacks and immigrants by printing that marijuana-crazed negroes were raping white women and by painting pictures of lazy, pot-smoking Mexicans. DuPont's banker Andrew Mellon happened to be Secretary of the Treasury under Herbert Hoover. Mellon also had a nephew-in-law, Henry Anslinger, who had the Marijuana Tax Law of 1937 passed. When asked what this meant for industrial hemp farmers, Anslinger flatly declared "They can continue to raise hemp just as they have always done it. It makes very fine cordage and this legislation exempts the mature stalk when it is grown for hemp purposes." However, due to the overall similarity in appearance between hemp and marijuana, the entire Cannabis family was made illegal. Hemp made a brief resurgence during World War II after Japan cut of supplies for raw fibers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture released the short film Hemp For Victory encouraging all farmers to grow hemp for the war effort. However, it went back to its illegal standing after the war.

You are correct in your post, but Racism did play a major factor in its being made illegal and kept illegal for some time. If I remember correctly even, Anslinger was the head of the racism and made a lot of the remarks, but I can't recall one hundred percent.

EDIT: Here's two quotes directly from his mouth:

"Colored students at the Univ. of Minn. partying with (white) female students, smoking [marijuana] and getting their sympathy with stories of racial persecution. Result: pregnancy"

"Two Negros took a girl fourteen years old and kept her for two days under the influence of hemp. Upon recovery she was found to be suffering from syphilis."

Maybe, but the war on drugs was started when they were still young.