Hello DOUG.

02 Jan 04 15:55, you wrote to me:

 MG>> IMO, pot is far less addictive and far less physically damaging than
 MG>> alcohol is, and it causes /way/ less grief for others. How many people
 MG>> get into accidents because they're high on pot? Very few, because if
 MG>> they're not too paranoid to drive, they tend to crawl along well under
 MG>> the speed limit, being extra cautious. Compare that to the recklessness
 MG>> that alcohol tends to cause in people's behaviours.

 DP> True.  However, I would still not like to see stoned drivers on the
 DP> road.  Reaction time is important.

Of course, you'd prefer it if no one was ever impaired on the road at any
time, and we should all encourage everyone to act responsibly; however if
people are going to drive impaired, I'd feel much safer if they were
impaired on pot than if they were impaired on alcohol.

 DP> I recall reading about behaviours that cop eyeball in order to
 DP> determine whether a driver is likely drunk:  wild, careening cars is one,
 DP> and extremely slow drivers is another.

Their training is not just geared towards drunk drivers...

 MG>> It makes no sense to me that such a dangerous drug as alcohol is legal
 MG>> in this country and yet pot is not. Yes, it should be legalized and
 MG>> taxed; it will take the trade out of the hands of the criminals and make
 MG>> money for the government, which can then be put to good use helping
 MG>> people with problems from far more addictive drugs.

 DP> Couldn't have said it better myself.

What concerns me the most about the BC raids is the mention that the pot
being dealt was being exchanged for cocaine. Cocaine is one of the most
damaging and addictive drugs around, and causes a lot of grief to a lot of
people. Again, were pot legalized, it would have been highly unlikely that
such an exchange would occur.


--- GoldED/W32 3.0.1