I can answer that thoroughly for you.
The argumentation on that is based on the assumtion, or at least make the impression that taking marihuana leads to (or is the cause of/causal to) being criminal.
That argumentation is scientifically probably not correct.
just because there is a link or correlation (as in: if one is much then the other is likely too) that does not imply that one thing is the reason for another.
For example: Studies find that mood and weather are connected. The better the wether is, the better the mood of the people.
That could imply that the weather is the cause for the upswing in mood (which it probably is). However this could also mean that the weather gets better,
becausethe mood of the people changes to good.
While you believe that this is not so, there are shamanistic beliefs that say otherwise.
Out of this argument alone you cannot prove either causality.
Just because one thing is correlated to another thing it doesnt mean that they are casual to another.
Another example: Studies show that Intelligence is correlated to having a higher income. While I think we can asume that intelligence leads to making better decisions, foresight and technical skill and those in turn lead to a higher income, it is not clever to assume that intelligence has a direct causal link to income.
In this example we see the effect of so called moderating variables (like technical skill, Decisiontaking ability, foresight) which are probably more directly (more causally) connected to income.
And the final bit of information we can also see there: Not every intelligent person is rich (or wants to be rich). If you see that on an individual level (which I would do in looking at crimes) it means that although intelligence is connected to income you do not have to be rich because you are intelligent, altho maybe the chance is statistically higher. This is the same as if you take canabis doesnt mean you are a criminal although the chance may statistically be higher.
Btw. If you eat bread, the chance is statistically higher that you are a murderer then if you dont eat bread (just as an extrem example of the same argument).
Now let us look at the problem at hand.
Canabis is a drug. This drug is readily available to basically everyone who wants it, even if it is illegal.
It lowers the inhibitions of the user, which can make people do stupid things more easily. However weed (as it is commonly phrased) does usually not enhance, but rather subdue violence in the users.
That is why a lot of crimes done while being high are stupid things and not generally violent things (inhibition is lower).
(sauce:
http://books.google.com/books?id=mO0CTJCZsiQC&q=6%20million#v=onepage&q=delinquency&f=false )
Now if we look at who distributes and who profits form marihuana at the moment, we obviously see a problem. Drug cartels, Drug dealers and other illegal organisations are profiting massively out of this.
We can probably all agree that this is a bad thing.
That could not be the case if marihuana was made legal (like alcohol or tobacco).
To the whole inter drug compare arguments (Marihauana is not as bad as alcohol or even tobacco (studies claim)):
Maybe. That doesnt change the fact that it still can have some negative effects, especially if used too regularly just like alcohol and tobacco.
Theres not much harm in drinking a beer once in a while. Same as it is probably not if you smoke half a joint every other month (you can quote many beneficial effect of marihuanna studies here)
Still. Marihuana is a drug. And it can be abused. And generally speaking most people are better of not using it (just like alcohol or tobacco, (or white sugar...)). And we can probably agree to that too.
The question that we are facing is: is it good to legalise marihuana - just like alcohol or tobacco.
Well since it is readily available for everyone allready AND since the people who make money out of this are mostly criminals my answer to that question is a complete "yes obviously".
Legalising marihuana would be a pain in the ass for drug cartels. It would give the government an additional source of income and most important it would be much less difficult to enforce a good distribution of those drugs.
It would also take away the "exitement" of doing something against the law. Because then pot use would just be taking some other drug. And that is getting less popular with people.
The alternative would be not legalising marihuana. Which would mean its still there for everybodys usage (without
anylimitations, but the money it costs). And the drug cartels making a big time money out of it.
Now the real question is not IF you legalise it. It becomes the question of how you legalise it.
That is a question i personally cannot answer. It involves rules of import and distribution. Who can buy it and at what age. How long cant you drive after smoking a legal joint and so on. Theres many questions to be considered.
But better you consider those questions then to naively say: "well its a drug. Drugs are no good. So we keep it banned."
which is also by all means a correct reasoning. However that reasoning doesnt help. It makes things worse.
Dont make things worse. thats stupid.
This post was edited by Hooo on Jul 20 2016 01:22am