Quote Originally Posted by zihowie
Hello and thanks for the time and patience need to read and reply.


In my, and your efforts as well, to try and persuade or help people see the light that marijuana is not the devil has only left me frustrated and relenting. I feel that its pointless trying to inform and educate people who have never smoked pot or those with alternative legal medications. You all know this, but their pre-conceived ideas from the government, literatures supporting anti-drug, and commercial ads on addiction only add to their false factual basis, concerning any debate on the controversial topic.
Im sure many of you have this same problem, but to be more specific I am talking of my family. Most of which have never toked up and their only means of evidence is the media. I'm an adult now, so I will live my life the way I want to and that means smoking marijuana, medically. I feel it improves my quality of life and gets me through the day,week, etc. Simply, I will be who I am regardless of what they say against my lifestyle (to the point of addict, and dopey dopehead).

What bothers me is that when I try and shed light on the other end of the spectrum, Im only wasting my breathe. I am constantly combated with false facts and told MARIJUANA WILL DESTROY YOU!! I think when I present factual basis and its refuted, how will millions of others change their brainwashed mind? I cant see it happening unless all the southern baptist and people over 30 catch the plague. Im only kidding and to not acknowledge, so would defeat the entire purpose of this post and my struggle. Many of this board and our efforts to change laws are over 30 with much wisdom, but to deny the fact the opposition is composed of mid to late aged adults would be well, dumb. Any thoughts/suggestions?

For now I have decided to stay out of politics and just let them win the argument. Ill consider it a victory in my books, keeping my mouth shut, and not stooping to their level. Even though my argument is educated and factual
I would suggest watching "The Union":

http://boards.cannabis.com/music-roo...ting-high.html

http://boards.cannabis.com/activism/...ull-video.html

Consider the circumstances under which Marijuana was initially prohibited: it was a relatively unknown quantity in 1937. Very few people knew what Marijuana was - and virtually no one was actually familiar with its effects. Into this climate came sensational reports and misleading claims that described a dangerous, psychosis inducing, horribly addictive drug. Any reasonable individual presented with this information - and lacking any actual knowledge to counter it - would fully support prohibition. The fictional drug they were being told about makes meth sound tame.

Contrast this with the climate today:

Most people are familiar with the effects of Marijuana - the claims made in the past wouldn't fly today. Try telling someone about kids getting high on this dangerous drug and slaughtering their whole families - would anyone believe you? Of course not! None of the original arguments for prohibition could be made today without causing a backlash.

So what arguments are being made today? "Smoking Weed Supports Terrorism!!", "Weed Is A Gateway Drug!!" - Isn't it interesting that these aren't arguments against Marijuana per say, but arguments against prohibition which becomes clear with just a moment's thought. If black market money is the concern - then eliminate the black market by legalizing and regulating the product. Eliminate the black market flow of money and you eliminate the 'supporting terrorism' argument. The 'gateway drug' argument is likewise an argument against prohibition, not an argument against Marijuana. If you want to buy a popular and widely accepted product which is prohibited - then you are forced into the black market. The fact that you can likely purchase LSD, Mushrooms, Coke, and whatever else through the same market is not a product of Marijuana, it is a product of prohibition.

So - we see that the original arguments made for prohibition were false and can't be made today because they depended on a climate of ignorance that no longer exists.

We also see that the arguments being made today are self defeating because they really argue against prohibition, not against the drug itself.

Finally, let's look at the media climate that exists today: Social media such as Digg, Reddit, etc. These sites create a meritocracy of ideas and allow people to share information and expand discussion very quickly. Blunt assertions won't fly for long if they aren't factually based - and downright lies tend to not only be quickly debunked but quickly condemned generating widespread outrage - and resulting in suspicion and distaste for their source.

I find it interesting that I can't seem to find any of the anti-marijuana TV ads which our tax money has paid for online anywhere. Why is that? Could it be that the DEA knows damn well that if they allowed their words to go on record that they would be used against them? If an ad just airs on TV and then goes away - then how do we document their claims and force them to justify using debunked and disproved arguments in their propaganda? Wouldn't it be interesting to assemble an archive of official taxpayer funded anti-marijuana advertisements and fact-check each one - citing peer reviewed study after peer reviewed study? Wouldn't it be interesting to show the public that their own tax dollars are being used to lie to them? How do you think most Americans would feel about that?

Now - we have a generation that grew up under some pretty scary anti-pot propaganda that is heading toward retirement. These are the people that were told that Marijuana was a horribly addictive drug that causes brain damage and psychosis. We have younger generations from their thirties on down that know that Marijuana is certainly not a dangerous drug which merits prohibition.

Decriminalization will occur eventually - Legalization SHOULD occur eventually, although it may take longer (which is ironic all things considered).

The question is, how much damage are we as a society prepared to allow prohibition to do to our fellow citizens before we demand an end to it?