The legalization of Marijuana is an on going conversation and for the most part I have gotten quite sick of the debate because, despite your view, things are not going to change.  They may sway to the right some years and to the left others, but it’s like Gay marriage, we are so stuck in our beliefs that we often don’t think rationally about such complex political issues.  But this morning I was listening to a radio program in Southern California regarding the recent raids of Marijuana clubs in San Francisco by the DEA even though California State Law prohibits the sale and distribution of pot for medical uses.  And why has this raid made the headline news, because our self proclaimed in-haler Obama proclaimed that conducting these types of raids was a waste of tax dollars.  I am not here to advocate one way or the other, but to start I will give you some statistics from 2007.  Everyday, well at least in 2007, 36 people were killed in an alcohol related crash, in that same day 700 were injured in an alcohol related crash.  400,000 people die each year from Tobacco related deaths.  And here’s the most shocking of all, 0, yes 0 die from Marijuana.  This all from the Center of Disease Control and Prevention.   Anyway, the author of Freakonomics, Stephen J Dubner, wrote an interesting take on the whole, “why is alcohol and cigarettes legal, but not pot?” debate that consumes so many of us.  Below is an excerpt, but to get the full monty check out the article.  Personally, I see no harm in the legalization of Marijuana except obesity…

“I have a favorite thought exercise: look at an issue that’s important, complex, and interesting — something like healthcare, education, or electoral politics — and pretend that you could rebuild the system from scratch, without the convoluted histories and incentives that currently exist.

What would the new system look like? How differently would you think about key issues if there were no precedent or blueprint?

So here’s an example. Pretend that humankind made it all the way to the 21st century without alcohol or marijuana. (Perhaps this would not have been possible?) Now pretend that alcohol and marijuana are simultaneously discovered, and think about what kind of laws would be put in place, if any, to govern their use.

My guess is that the alcohol laws might be tougher than they are now and that the marijuana laws might be more lenient — but, again, I am only guessing.

The alcohol vs. marijuana question is so speculative as to be nearly useless beyond a thought experiment. So we assembled a group of folks with expertise in this area and asked them a much more targeted pair of questions:

Should marijuana be legalized in the U.S.? Why or why not?

You will find that their replies routinely contradict one another, even on statements of fact. This is a limitation of nearly any debate of this sort, and while these contradictions illustrate what makes the issue a potent one, you may also be frustrated (as I was) by them.

That said, there is a lot of good and thoughtful information and argument in the following answers, and I thank everyone for participating.”

See the full article…