Comment: You said pot smokers kill

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: You try to use these examples (see in situ)

You said pot smokers kill

You said pot smokers kill people. I smoked pot from age 16-35, at times quite a lot. I'm 52 now. I've had a professional job since I was 19. And I NEVER killed anyone. In fact, only one person I've known who got high killed anyone and he had much bigger problems than his pot habit. And I've known many pot smokers. Do I want it legal? Yes. My youngest of 3 just graduated HS #3 in his class. Did I teach them pot is good for them? No, I didn't. I can also tell you that I've quit without ANY problem multiple times. (It's not addictive.) And when I used alcohol daily for a few months when I was depressed years ago, my doctor identified alcohol related health problems. I've never had pot related health problems. You are using a lot of assumptions in your reasoning that just aren't true.

Yes, it's true. Pot smokers kill people. So do drinkers. So do people on prescription medications. So do people who take no drugs at all. If that's your measuring stick, then alcohol should be illegal, too. Are you advocating for that? A more logical way to make the point I think you're trying to make is that pot smokers are more likely to kill people than people who take no drugs at all. And I'll concede that point to you. At the same time, because of alcohol's effects, I can guarantee that measured against non drug users, alcohol users kill more people than pot users do. And car drivers kill more people than non-drivers.

In each case, the problem isn't the activity. It's the harm caused to others. If I smoked pot in my house or in my yard, why should that be a problem if I'm not harming anyone else (and harming myself less than alcohol, which is legal)? If I'm driving down the road and crash into nobody, why should you or anyone else care if I'm drunk or high? OTOH, what if I get in my car and crash into you? Should I be locked up for that? Sure. So whether I am high or drunk or impaired in any way is irrelevant to whether you have cause against me or not. Now of course, being drunk or high behind the wheel is irresponsible and I'd support any judge giving a harsher punishment as of a result of an accident caused by the impaired individual. But if there's no accident--no one's been harmed--then there's no issue to be resolved, is there?