Nickname: Bill

Review: Pot use is a gateway drug, but not because of politics, reefer madness, the Bible or anything else. It's because some people have addictive personalities, due to chemical imbalance, and others don't. Why else can some people drink a lot in college, sober up and go on with life, while others are life long alcoholics? I have now had two friends with addiction problems. Both started with pot. One moved on to meth, then heroin, and is now dead. The other has now wasted 40 years drunk and a hevy pot smoker, alienated his kid, 3 wives, friends, coworkers, and family. He is 60 and has no savings and lives in a tiny room. His daughter won't even speak to him anymore. Everyone who loves him is disapointed & angry. He doesn't understand what the problem is. People who have chemical dependency problems don't know it until they get involved with a chemical and become dependent. People aren't born with a "future drug addict" sign on their forehead.

Date reviewed: Aug 30, 2006 5:26 PM

Nickname: Slider

Review: Two small points: 1) If high schoolers are having any trouble getting pot, well, I've got bright purple skin. 2) One of the few ways to change a law is to break it, over and over again, until it becomes absurd. Check and check, the drug use in the U.S. is out of control, especially in regards to smoking pot, as are the laws against it. I'm not a pot smoker, but I do believe that people have the right to smoke if they want, and believe that pot (this is an old argument) is a lot less damaging then alcohol and is not a "gateway drug" as some have assurted. In high school I smoked, on the average of seven blunts a day, and maintained a 3.76 gpa, I continued onto the University of Michigan where I double majored in Eletrical Engineering and Japanese. All the while holding a 65 hour a week job at the top commercial real estate firm in Ann Arbor and holding a portfolio worth over $40 million. I don't think pot has anything to do with my success, or for that matter, my lack of failure.

Date reviewed: Aug 30, 2006 8:32 AM

Nickname: Pablo

Review: I'm happy with the way things are!

Date reviewed: Aug 20, 2006 7:34 AM

Nickname: Judge Mental

Review: "Drugs! A massive and complicated problem. Any answers?" "They shouldn't take them!" "Thanks for that... Anyone got anything constructive to say?"

Date reviewed: Aug 20, 2006 7:32 AM

Nickname: plotinus

Review: There is no drug war! There is only another hyped action to get higher appropriations for the Drug Enforcement complex. All we have to show for last 50 years efforts is more drugs and more inmates.

Date reviewed: Aug 16, 2006 7:51 AM

Nickname: Bill Stewart

Review: Clean needles are one of the anti-prohibitionists' best technologies in the drug war. They help drug users deal with the other problems in their lives while avoiding AIDS, hepatitis and other blood-transmitted diseases and other infections. If the prohibitionists cared about public health instead of culture wars, they'd be distributing them also. But nicotine addicts like Bill Bennett had other agendas.

Date reviewed: Aug 12, 2006 6:09 AM

Nickname: Rev.Steven B.Thompson

Review: Cannabis should not be linked with crystal meth. Cannabis is created by God and sacred to many of us, while meth is created by man. Cannabis prohibition was foretold in the Bible. Prohibition of this miracle plant should never have happened and prohibition needs to end now!

Date reviewed: Aug 12, 2006 5:28 AM

Nickname: Bill Stewart

Review: The drug war is an immoral attack on America's people. There's no moral difference between pot and whiskey, or between a junkie and a drunkard, but fighting a "war" against it leads to violence, police corruption, gangs, and funding for international terrorists and local organized crime. The U.S. gave our allies, the Taliban, $43 million for their suppression of poppy growing. Now it's back to being the main industry in Afghanistan. The free-market price of medical opiates would let you be a maintenance-level junkie for about $1 a day, and even Rush Limbaugh quantities are cheaper than cigarettes if you don't have to buy it under the table. So junkies could hold down jobs instead of living on the streets, stealing for a living, and passing around AIDS and hepatitis. Drugs have dangers. So does alcohol-- but the way to deal with a public health problem is as a health problem, not as an excuse for wars and bigger prisons.

Date reviewed: Aug 12, 2006 4:07 AM

Nickname: www.november.org

Review: Implicit in this article is the belief that prohibition is an effective way to regulate risky substances. One would think that an analytical publication like Business Week would look at the economic dimensions of prohibition. Lacking that, I recommend Amazon or B&N for Kenneth D. Rose's "American Women and the Repeal of Prohibition" and David Kyvig's "Repealing National Prohibition." Also see Dr. Clark Warburton's 1932 book, "The Economic Results of Prohibition."

Date reviewed: Aug 11, 2006 9:31 PM

Nickname: Tom

Review: It's not a war on drugs. It's clearly a war on the Constitution, and the American citizens' right to make their own decisions without government supervision. And in the end, it's a war on our right to privacy. The alleged war on drugs has been going on for more than 30 years, without notable success against drugs. However, our constitutional rights are clearly victims of the war. Big Brother continues to watch us.

Date reviewed: Aug 11, 2006 8:33 PM