The District of Columbia is poised to completely legalize pot, which will be the most ringing of government endorsements of societally destructive personal conduct, in a malfunctioning culture that should not be placed at further risk. This overwhelmingly black, poor, educationally-challenged and struggling population needs competent, trustworthy leadership and an injection of values. It is a community, after all, that idolized the late Marion Barry, a mayor who smoked crack on the job, and never apologized for it. It’s not surprising that the adults in the District would tell the young African-Americans that it’s cool to spend their your money to get stupid, to avoid clear thought rather than practice it.
Every March 1, I watch this old clip (below) from Saturday Night Live (it’s not on YouTube, so I can only link to it) , featuring the great, and thanks to recreational drugs, late John Belushi. It unfailingly makes me laugh out loud. It also makes me furious that a talent like this gave himself so little time to entertain us, because he killed himself with an insatiable appetite for illegal drugs.
For me, March 1 is “Remember What Drugs Cost Society Day.” Those arguing for our government placing a societal seal of approval on these costs have yet to persuade me that it is ethical, wise or even sane to not just accept them, but to multiply them by a number unknown.
Here’s John Belushi (1949-1982), enlightening us about March around the world.
Ethics Alarms 
Jesus, 33 years old. How sad. I’m watching my nephew, 19 years old, unsuccessfully battle a heroin problem. It began when him and his sister were barely teenagers, and my sister and brother-in-law were debating whether or not they should let them grow pot in the house. I guess my sister, because of our strict upbringing, had a tendency to err to the side of ridiculous when it came to rules and discipline. I warned them repeatedly that they would regret having this permissive attitude. He tried heroin a few months ago, and within a few weeks, got caught with his friends breaking into a business. I told her to let them lock him up, but of course she had to shield him from consequences. She finally had to kick him out, because he was stealing everything that wasn’t bolted down to the floor. Last I heard, he was finally persuaded to go to a detox/rehab again, but I haven’t gotten a text back from my sister in a while. I can only assume she doesn’t want to tell me that things have gotten worse.
I agree that the state should not subsidize recreational drug use.
Just saw a junk science study on why marijuana was less dangerous than alcohol. The criteria…how many people died from alcohol poisoning versus overdoses on marijuana.
Good money says they all smoked pot. So disgusting when they do that sort of sleight of hand. Aside from that, they fail to tell people that brain damage is very hard to ascertain, both because we lack the scientific resolution to pinpoint anything but gross abnormalities and symptoms, and because, like hearing loss, you need to do long-term longitudinal studies that include the pre-morbid condition with massive samples. To the best of my knowledge, this hasn’t been done yet.
I’m sure it’s less dangerous than alcohol, and so what? Alcohol is deadly, ruins millions of lives yearly, and is a scourge of civilization. So by all means, lets add another destructive legal drug, because there’s a worse one. The ultimate #22, “It’s not the worst thing” rationalization—if you review my various debates on the subject, this is the favorite argument of the opposition, and it is idiotic.
The :”worst thing rationalization” is actually legitimate when we do tolerate worse things.
How so? That means the tolerance is unavoidable or wrong, not that the thing that isn’t as bad should be tolerated.
This bit always makes me laugh too. Great post and perspective. Belushi came in like a lion but didn’t make it out of March ’82.
How does the District “legalize” weed? It is essentially a ward of Congress, and Marijuana is still a federally controlled substance!
That is a very great point. There have been arguments that a general prohibition of weed is beyond congress’s Article I powers, but applying the ban in D.C. is within the general police power the Constitution enumerates over the District.
(This also means that United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) and United states v. Morrisson, 529 U.S. 598 (2000), are not applicable in the District because the statutes in question have independent justification in Congress’s police power over the district.)
It is interesting to note that in the case of Alcohol prohibition, congress had passed an amendment to the constitution, and repealed that amendment to end prohibition, but the prohibition of drugs did not. It’s very easy to argue that the Federal Government was not granted the authority to prohibit anything based on the constitution, and that amendment was necessary, the alternative is arguing that the constitution does somehow grant that authority. And if that authority IS granted, why did congress enact the 18th Amendment?
An amendment was necessary in case some judge decided to make up a constitutional right to drink alcohol.
Well, interestingly enough, I don’t think the Amendment was solely pursued because the Progressives felt the Constitution denied the Federal Government the power to ban alcohol. I think they were just so hell-bent on getting their way, that they wanted to make it part of the Constitution instead of just a law.
Hell, the Amendment reads AS a law on the people not a law on the government or states or a definition of the powers available/not available to the nation or states. Which is what the Constitution is supposed to do.
Just chalk it up as one more lesson that the Progressives don’t know how the Constitution works or what it is for AND how far they are willing to go to get what they want.
In that case they picked a fight they couldn’t win.
Worth re-reading:
“The District of Columbia is poised to completely legalize pot, which will be the most ringing of government endorsements of societally destructive personal conduct, in a malfunctioning culture that should not be placed at further risk. This overwhelmingly black, poor, educationally-challenged and struggling population needs competent, trustworthy leadership and an injection of values. It is a community, after all, that idolized the late Marion Barry, a mayor who smoked crack on the job, and never apologized for it. It’s not surprising that the adults in the District would tell the young African-Americans that it’s cool to spend their your money to get stupid, to avoid clear thought rather than practice it.”
Absolutely.
You know, Jack, saying things like this will get you in trouble. You’ll be called a racist. Why do you want to put all these young black males into jail? The only solution to people going to jail is to decriminalize everything. Come on, get real. It’s all good.
Pingback: The Tyranny of the Well-Meaning - Windypundit
Whiskey is good for you, the government says so.
All the studies on the long-term effects of marijuana show lowered intelligence and increases in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. All the studies wiped those effects away with ‘sociological factors’. The researchers explain that pot users are overwhelmingly poor and dark skinned and poor and dark skinned people are stupid and have a variety of mental disorders, so you can’t show that marijuana has any deleterious effects. Washington DC is the perfect place for pot because composed almost exclusively of ‘sociological factors’, so anything bad that happens can’t be because of the marijuana.
What other type of research would be allowed to characterize minority groups and the poor in such a manner in today’s society?