>> If nicotine is addictive, then so is marijuana, the effects of which are stronger.
Nicotine is physically addictive. Marijuana is not.
>> But the funny thing about addiction is that by definition, addiction IS demand. In fact, it's the most extreme kind. How are you going to control demand when you say, "Oh yeah, all of this is legal, have at it?"
Again, I don't advocate no regulation of harmful, addictive substances like opiates or nicotine or alcohol or marijuana. I favor some regulation of all.
The DEA website says this:
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:
heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote
Please tell me you do not believe marijuana is any way as dangerous as heroin. Because if you believe that you are living on another planet. Peyote is not a dangerous drug, I don't care who you are. And no one on the planet ever got addicted to LSD.
Unfortunately, these represent the basis for law enforcement's perspective. Heroin is dangerous but users of it are sick people who need treatment. Instead, they get run through the system and are back on the street killing themselves in days. And if they get sick enough, they may well take the life of another in order to feed the drug habit. Which would not have happened had they been mandated into a treatment facility offering substitution or other treatment modalities with appropriate counseling. |
