Dan Savage | Marijuana | News | Washington

BigGayDeal.com

Dan Savage Explains Why You Should Support Legal Pot: VIDEO

SAVAGENORML

Activist, author and defender of the little guy Dan Savage today posted a video in which he explains why you, the American voter, should join Washington State and Colorado in supporting legalizing recreational marijuana.

Listen to what he has to say AFTER THE JUMP.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. alcohol is legal, and many choose not to drink.

    owning guns is legal, and many choose to never own a gun.

    legalizing cannabis will do one thing - remove the Criminal Element and connection to those who use cannabis.

    not everyone enjoys the way cannabis use makes them feel, just as many don't enjoy the way alcohol makes them feel (*raises hand*).

    self-control? you might like how in a world of people still dying of starvation we have westerners who literally EAT themselves into an early grave?

    if people can enjoy a glass of wine or two and not become alcoholics then why not extend the same understanding to cannabis users?

    great men like robert altman, for example.

    again, as i've said, the only people opposed to its legalization are the people who don't have a freakin' clue what they're talking about.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 10, 2013 3:06:10 PM


  2. "I'm saying we shouldn't legalize it precisely because we DO know what the effect will be on the dumber people."

    No, that's not what you asked in the post before. You asked: "would the legalization of pot (which we should assume would lead to more pot-users overall) lead to the same benign results in others who are NOT smart, creative, and pillars of society?"

    You asked IF it would, then in your next post you said we DO know it would. My point is, dumb before, dumb after.

    Posted by: BETTY | Jan 10, 2013 3:16:40 PM


  3. "I'm saying we shouldn't legalize it precisely because we DO know what the effect will be on the dumber people."

    No, that's not what you asked in the post before. You asked: "would the legalization of pot (which we should assume would lead to more pot-users overall) lead to the same benign results in others who are NOT smart, creative, and pillars of society?"

    You asked IF it would, then in your next post you said we DO know it would. My point is, dumb before, dumb after.

    Posted by: BETTY | Jan 10, 2013 3:16:42 PM


  4. I have smoked pot about ever three days for 30 years. At worst it makes me groggy after fours hours (so I sleep).

    As I am a full-time all-the-time professional artist I note that while it can get me busy when I'm feeling uninspired it can also contribute to a certain margin of over-the-top enthusiasm resulting in work that is somewhat too extreme. Still, the "rush" of weed is exceedingly enjoyable, highly "creative" and always a dance prod. I rarely use it socially, finding it best for a quiet working atmosphere. I never use it in the out-of-doors where I find the senses are already filled. But for the quiet, grim day when "the sky is the color of prison sheets" it is an imcomparable restorative.

    Betty is a c**t. Mary is sensible but should smoke weed.

    Posted by: UFFDA | Jan 10, 2013 3:20:25 PM


  5. Betty knows what she's talking about.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 10, 2013 3:26:37 PM


  6. Mary, et al, how's that "War On Drugs" working out for you? Has this aggressive campaign of criminalization done ANYTHING other than swell our prison population, which is already one of the largest in the world?

    It's no different than prohibition, which made created a criminal underclass of otherwise law abiding citizens. Further, it just creates a black market, the funds from which are used to support much more dangerous and damaging criminal activities including terrorism.

    In short it's nothing but pearl-clutching bullsh*t that creates far more problems than it solves.

    Posted by: Caliban | Jan 10, 2013 3:28:37 PM


  7. Really UFFDA? You are calling me a c*nt after you JUST said this about Dan Savage:

    "And the expression "sh*t load" are crude and uncalled for, offputting to those you want to reach. Being a sleaze is something you can't help, but putting it on display is a choice. Make a better one and this otherwise valuable ad will have a broader impact."

    UFFDA: replace "sh*t load" with "c*nt" and take your own advice you hypocrite. You are just mad because I dared to pointed out your buffoonery and you JUST proved it again!

    Posted by: BETTY | Jan 10, 2013 3:34:23 PM


  8. and don't forget, Caliban, the US has privatized prisons. meaning, prisons run for profit. meaning, there are wealthy people whose wealth depends on having people locked up in prisons.

    throw 'em in jail for cannabis-related crimes. give them a criminal record meaning they can never get anything other than a minimum-wage paying job (a minimum wage which people cannot live off of, to boot), this creates a culture where people find desperate measures to survive and feed themselves and their families, oh.....and then make sure that they can get easy access guns.


    and the last thing Big Pharma wants is people having access to cheap and effective cannabis when they would prefer folks pay top-dollar for chemicals, which have higher and more destructive addictive properties.

    remove the criminal element and you take the power away from drug lords, gangs, and terror cells.

    private-growers will remain.

    simply put - there are no intelligent reasons to keep cannabis illegal, nor to keep from farming THC-free hemp.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 10, 2013 3:36:06 PM


  9. Paul R

    admittedly you have to digest more than you would have to smoke, but for me it is like clock work.

    I eat it straight :-P no need for brownie buffer, and a nice mellow build for 2 hours till it hits in full

    Posted by: Moz's | Jan 10, 2013 3:50:18 PM


  10. Here are the details about the study of long-term pot smoking in young people which so many on here seem to want to ignore. So much for the Left pursuing policies based on reason and science.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19372456

    It causes irreversible damage to intelligence and social functioning. Regular use as a teenager will cause someone to move from the 50% percentile in intelligence to below the 30% percentile.

    Posted by: Petes | Jan 10, 2013 3:57:29 PM


  11. Petes, were you homeschooled?

    put up a study showing how long-term effects of alcohol use, when consumed by youth, does no harm.

    seriously. what an asinine study.

    legalizing cannabis doesn't mean that children get to use it. duh.

    "The effect was only noticed in those who started smoking cannabis as adolescents"

    see also: booze.

    nice try, but ya FAILED blanche. ya FAILED.

    :D

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 10, 2013 4:05:47 PM


  12. The U.S. government did a length study in the 1950s into the late 1960s on the deleterious and obvious effects of continuous pot-smoking. They used Jamaican workers as their study group. What they found was that there is NO long-term negative effects from pot-smoking and that, in fact, it has positive effects on one's mood, capacity to work long hours at difficult labour, and one's health. Needless to say, the report was suppressed because it didn't fit into the nascent "war against drugs" narrative that was being foisted onto the American public by the Nixon administration in the early 1970s.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Jan 10, 2013 4:15:31 PM


  13. Well, PeteS, YOU seem to be ignoring the statistics about actual pot use in the US population. In fact the last 3 American PRESIDENTS have admitted to smoking pot so clearly, to quote Brother-Boy, "It ain't a-workin'!"

    It's EXACTLY the same as Prohibition. You can either legalize the market for marijuana, enabling us to tax and better regulate it, or you create a black market that funds drug cartels which also supply far more dangerous substances and puts more guns on the streets. Either way the market for pot is there and there's every indication it will always BE there. Sooner or later you have to accept reality and deal with it.

    Posted by: Caliban | Jan 10, 2013 4:25:40 PM


  14. If making pot is supposed to make people less intelligent then how come it's only ever unintelligent people who insist on keeping it illegal?

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Jan 10, 2013 4:30:30 PM


  15. Actually, contrary to some posters, it's not at all unusual for violent criminals to have smoked weed just prior to their activities, just as it's normal for many violent criminals to be just high on one thing or another when they commit their crimes and violence. Substance use and abuse is by far the norm among most violent sociopathic criminals. That said, weed is no worse than alcohol, and alcohol abuse does cause mega problems. Plus, illegal weed helps subsidize violent organized criminal gangs who rely on illegal vices to make $. It's preferable they legalize it and tax it. And too many people have been hurt, turned over to the criminal justice system, had their lives ruined, by our so-called drug war.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jan 10, 2013 4:36:18 PM


  16. LittleKiwi -- Please cite a peer-reviewed study showing that a couple of drinks a week from the age of 16 lead to a fall in intelligence from the 50th to 30th percentile. I'd be more interested in seeing some data then hearing more of your hackneyed drag routine.

    Posted by: Petes | Jan 10, 2013 4:59:12 PM


  17. "It is such a special study that I'm fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains."

    That's right from your link, Pete. We set age limits for alcohol and cigarettes too. Have you got anything else?

    Posted by: PDX_Guy | Jan 10, 2013 6:10:41 PM


  18. Too crude and lewd for me Danny boy. And can't you devote your attention to one cause at a time? Now you have to confuse the straights into thinking gay rights = exactly what they thought it did before - the right to party, drink, drug, sleep around and spread disease.

    Thanks for nothing. Feh.

    Posted by: Tom | Jan 10, 2013 6:18:12 PM


  19. Who cares what people do in their private lives? If they aren't driving or committing crimes, does it really concern you? It's sort of like being gay. If someone is walking down the street on acid and isn't bothering anyone, why would I care?

    Posted by: Paul R | Jan 10, 2013 6:31:28 PM


  20. Tom, you raise an interesting point. And I had almost raised this same point myself today (i.e. that Dan Savage working on the pro-pot legalization issue might cause harm by contributing to the hedonistic stereotype of gay men.) But then this argument would involve gay icons/spokespersons never taking any stand on a non-gay-related issue. I've started to see how unrealistic it is to ask someone to live this way. And gay rights is progressing at such a fast pace, that I'm not sure the hedonistic stereotype will prevent progress anymore.

    Interesting that you're taking the view that I would normally take. And I'm taking the view that Ernie normally takes. How things can change in a few months!

    Posted by: Mary | Jan 10, 2013 6:31:30 PM


  21. "Mary is sensible but should smoke weed."

    Uffda, be careful what you wish for. Would I still be sensible if I was on a marijuana high? A liberal man such as yourself might get high and end up sounding like a 1960's hippie. But a right-wing woman might get high and end up sounding like something far worse........the ghost of Sarah Palin. Imagine the whole Tea Party as one big Pot Party? Social conservatives often sound stoned when they are perfectly sober (accusing Obama of being a Kenyan, calling anyone they don't like a marxist, seeing conspiracies everywhere.)

    Now you see why I'm reluctant?

    Posted by: Mary | Jan 10, 2013 6:45:29 PM


  22. I"f someone is walking down the street on acid and isn't bothering anyone, why would I care?"

    Not all dangers are overt, Paul. Drugs can effect one abilities as a parent, worker, or citizen. Often we don't see the danger until the damage is irreparable. It's in society's best interests to do what will minimize the number of people who take drugs unnecessarily.

    Posted by: Mary | Jan 10, 2013 6:56:17 PM


  23. Mary: let's ban booze and cigarettes because they also affect one's abilities as a parent, worker, or citizen. Btw, we put controls on the consumption of booze i.e. at work, in public (public intoxication, drinking in licensed areas), heck we even put controls on smoking. Wouldn't those same rules would apply to pot smoking? Nobody is suggest a pot free-for-all just because it is legal!

    Posted by: BETTY | Jan 10, 2013 7:04:45 PM


  24. *Wouldn't those same rules apply to pot smoking? Nobody is suggesting a pot free-for-all just because it is legal!

    Fixes my mistakes. lol

    Posted by: BETTY | Jan 10, 2013 7:06:41 PM


  25. @LITTLEKIWI

    RE: Vaporizers

    Any recommendations? There are so many brands out there and they can be pretty expensive.

    Thx. :)

    Posted by: Marc C | Jan 10, 2013 7:22:41 PM


  26. « | 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «'Lincoln,' 'Les Mis' Lead 2013 Oscar Nominations: COMPLETE LIST« «