by Stevie Chay Vaughan on November 25, 2012

Following recent developments in America's collective social consciousness, partcularly in regards to realizing that certain shit that exists probably shouldn't, New York Times columnist Timothy Egan wrote a pretty compelling argument about how weed, which actually doesn't make anyone sprout horns, and has no correlation to a dog's ability to drive a car, should undoubtedly be legalized. After a solid introduction discussing the zeitgeist and the general goings-on regarding the war on drugs, debatably useful enforcement policies, and gang violence, he discusses why the Obama Administration, which has previously threatened to interfere with injunctions really shouldn't. He then proceeds to lay out the argument with three primary points–hypocrisy, taxing and regulations, and the impetus to lead. Each of the paragraphs below represent slivers of each of his points. 

Hypocrisy. Popular culture and the sports-industrial complex would collapse without all the legal drugs that promise to extend erections, reduce inhibitions and keep people awake all night. I’m talking to you, Viagra, alcohol and high-potency energy drinks…Of course, just because well-marketed, potentially hazardous potions are legal is no argument to bring pot onto retail shelves. But it’s hard to make a case for fairness when one person’s method of relaxation is cause for arrest while another’s lands him on a Monday night football ad.

Tax and Regulate. With pot out of the black market, states can have a serious discussion about use and abuse. The model is the campaign against drunk driving, which has made tremendous strides and saved countless lives at a time when alcohol is easier to get than ever before. Education, without one-sided moralizing, works.

Lead. That’s what transformative presidents do. From his years as a community organizer — and a young man whose own recreational drug use could have made him just another number in lockup — Obama knows well that racial minorities are disproportionately jailed for these crimes.

As you may recall, Barack enjoyed the ganja quite a bit in his youth. And while the first two points have been pretty well established for awhile now (but are gaining significant steam), the third one, as Myles Tanzer of Gawker points out, is pretty new. And it's a solid one. Given the fact that second term Presidents don't have to give as much of a shit as to not piss people off, it'll be really interesting to see how this develops.  

Also, 3D movies. 

[H/T: Gawker]

Post a Comment

Your email is kept private. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>