Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
UN Drug Office Can't Explain Lower Marijuana Use in Holland
ukcia.org — Antonio-Maria Costa, Executive Director of UN Office on Drugs and Crime is seen here avoiding answering a question about the cannabis policy in Holland. The question was quite simple - how does Mr Costa explain the relatively low levels of cannabis use in Holland, given his claims that easy availability would lead to higher levels of use?
MrBabyMan- 1195 diggs
- digg it
- nahsrocketeer75, on 04/01/2008, -3/+44That's because the answer is as obvious as his face.
- gcnaddict, on 04/01/2008, -3/+2What is it?
- bdawg123, on 04/01/2008, -0/+10Not so much an answer but an observation - the ready availability of marijuana does not lead to its widespread use which is what proponents of prohibition are incorrectly arguing. Someone else can try and answer why that is but the fact of the matter is that one the basic tenets of prohibition has been proven false by direct example.
- gcnaddict, on 04/01/2008, -2/+2That's not my question though. I'm asking for the cause of the lower marijuana rate of use.
- kamisama, on 04/01/2008, -0/+3Well if you tell a kid that he can't do a certain thing, you can bet he goes out and does it anyway. Now if you simply would have told it nothing, chances are he might not even think about doing it. It's a bit the same principle with cannabis. Making it publically available kind of spoils the fun factor for a lot or people, because it's no longer illegal to do. That's why people loose interest for it. I'm sure if you would look back at Dutch statistics, if you look at the usage when the first cannabis shops sold their goods, the usage will have probably gone up for a short while, then start mellowing out to a point where they are right now, that the levels of abuse are drastically lowered.
- gcnaddict, on 04/01/2008, -2/+2That's not my question though. I'm asking for the cause of the lower marijuana rate of use.
- bdawg123, on 04/01/2008, -0/+10Not so much an answer but an observation - the ready availability of marijuana does not lead to its widespread use which is what proponents of prohibition are incorrectly arguing. Someone else can try and answer why that is but the fact of the matter is that one the basic tenets of prohibition has been proven false by direct example.
- gcnaddict, on 04/01/2008, -3/+2What is it?
- theYevvin, on 04/01/2008, -4/+53This continued idiocy pisses me. I wake up everyday and can't believe the ***** I hear coming out of people's mouths. I would do something about it if I wasn't so high right now.
Hungry. Happy. Sleepy.- robbiemuffin, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5"I wake up everyday" I have the same problem
hungry. hungry. hippo!- jackyyll, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1I could fix that for you.
- robbiemuffin, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1all of holland is whispering in your ear, telling you "dooo it! you know you want to"
- jackyyll, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1I could fix that for you.
- robbiemuffin, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5"I wake up everyday" I have the same problem
- isewise, on 04/01/2008, -2/+13Direct to youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe208nLLEwk- leftnutz, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8Wow. A Non Rick Roll that's on topic on April Fools day.
- Murdats, on 04/01/2008, -1/+4thats the joke
- kevyn, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1has the world gone mad?
- leexy, on 04/01/2008, -0/+15"We are not a debating society". That line scares me a lot.
- leftnutz, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8Wow. A Non Rick Roll that's on topic on April Fools day.
- ejpusa, on 04/01/2008, -5/+37ummm, ok the dutch are at the top of math and verbal skills, control probably 1/4 of the worlds economy through dutch hold companies, amazing living standards, etc.
Yipes! What's wrong! :-)- chris9902, on 04/01/2008, -1/+13It's like some sort of super Alien race.
- bosssmiley, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7You have the Dutch pegged.
- nedev, on 04/01/2008, -1/+28Plus we've got these nifty wooden shoes.
- jambox, on 04/01/2008, -5/+1And cuckoo clocks! Oh no, that's someone else.
- elpohl, on 04/01/2008, -0/+11And we can have sex everywhere, even in parks! - Though we can't pee in public yet :(
- dagamore, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Guess you have not been to Amsterdamn they have "piss stands" all along the canals. Granted their is a metal/plastic blocking the world from seeing your junk, but you can still piss right along the streets/canals.
- nekt, on 04/01/2008, -21/+1Amazing living conditions? Compared to what? Nearly the entire nation lives in either flats or row houses - even the filthy rich live in duplexes. It is not bad but it is by no means amazing. Wanna start a band? Good luck finding a place to play. Wanna sing in the shower? Your 25 neighbors will hear. Population density does effect living standards. Oh and no ***** taco bell.
- skoober, on 04/01/2008, -0/+11someone needs a visit from the happy fairy
- nekt, on 04/01/2008, -14/+0Nothing to do with being upset. I'm loving the nice dutch day right now. Lets just not act like the living conditions in Holland are any better then any other place in europa - and not even close to St Louis Missouri =).
- Zaggynl, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Hey nekt, not everyone has the 500 000+ euro to spare for a farmhouse in the middle of nowhere.
Besides, the free or semi-free (WEP lol) ain't bad. (although stealing neighbours internets is illegal now isn't it?)- nekt, on 04/01/2008, -1/+0Thats my point. In places with less pop density it takes a quarter of that to get a single structure home.
- emjaymj, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1There's a lot more that goes into a standard of living then what kind of home one lives in. As long as things are clean, you honestly think it makes a difference whether or not your home is connected to someone else's? Only on the most superficial of levels.
Of course, living in denser areas you are much more likely to be in proximity to everything you may need - like, for instance, a proper hospital. The main issues with dense urban centers are traffic and pollution. But these problems have been helped by, among other things, Amsterdam being the most bicycle-friendly city in Europe and possibly the world, with more bikes estimated to be owned in the city than there are people. Chalking up whether or not you can sing in the shower to living standards is beyond laughable, even ignoring the fact that there are still rural areas.
- emjaymj, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1There's a lot more that goes into a standard of living then what kind of home one lives in. As long as things are clean, you honestly think it makes a difference whether or not your home is connected to someone else's? Only on the most superficial of levels.
- nekt, on 04/01/2008, -1/+0Thats my point. In places with less pop density it takes a quarter of that to get a single structure home.
- Boreras, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1living standards is something more broad than just a house. It includes health care, National Product, etc. And I disagree with your whole 'everyone in crappy houses' idea. While I guess the Netherlands is less sub-urbanized than most American cities, but, in my experience, the same goes for the rest of (the rich part of) Europe. Oh, and like, say, Japan.
Holland is a very small country, Americans would consider Holland as one big city (Randstad, 50 % of Hollands Inhabitants). The acres that surround this 'city' are filled with highways, farms and other small cities / villages. Holland is extremely urbanized. What a surprise, is it not?, that Holland is 25th on the list of population density, and 6th if you only count countries with at least 1 million inhabitants.- Glass_Onion, on 04/01/2008, -1/+1Holland is quite possibly a very small country due to the simple fact it's not a country.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1My neighbors happen to like my singing.
- brufleth, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6That's sort of what I figured. Maybe the Dutch are just happier and don't have as much interest in self medicating. It isn't like I crave a smoke because I'm particularly in love with my life situation. For many at least it is a form of escapism.
- Zaggynl, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2Yay Dutch o/
Nederland ftw!
- chris9902, on 04/01/2008, -1/+13It's like some sort of super Alien race.
- nwoantibody, on 04/01/2008, -3/+31Just like your 2nd amendment being violated will not reduce the amount of criminality in your neighborhood. Folks, you don't protect your people, you think these ***** will? Every time they lobby to make stupid ***** like having 3g of weed a reason for your teenagers to go to jail for years.
- jambox, on 04/01/2008, -1/+10Well said! They say they want to protect children, but all they really want to do is bang them up. Especially if they're black.
- omnithought, on 04/01/2008, -1/+85"If'n we legalize it, everyone'll go crazy smokin' it!"
Yeah, for about a week. Then once it sinks in that it's legal, everything will mellow out, we'll have solved overcrowding in prisons, and the national debt will begin to plummet as all that previously illegal drug money flows from the underground to the above-ground economy.- mikephimikephi, on 04/01/2008, -1/+4Somehow I don't think the 'national debt will begin to plummet'.
Unless revenue from Marijuana taxation added several hundred billion dollars to the economy.- Excen, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6Direct taxes on the smokable product itself would amount to billions, not to mention the taxes on the purchase of secondary equipment required to set up the grow operations and the processing facilities, as well as the secondary-effects on the economy generated by the large amounts of readily-usable non-smokable biomass in addition as the compounding effects the legitimated dollars circulating through the economy. In addition, how many of the 60% of all incarcerated Americans are in the slammer because of marijuana? It is entirely feasible that the legalization of the industrial cultivation of the Cannabis plant could drastically cut the national debt.
- mikephimikephi, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2I know billions of dollars sounds like alot of money, but you have to keep it in perspective.
If the Government were to save a couple billion on no longer incarcerating a certain number of people,
and generate a couple billion from taxes, etc. This would have an insignificant effect on the National Debt as 'omnithought' suggested above.- Spuy767, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4Except your "Couple of Billion" estimate is an epic fail. Last I read, California alone spent something like 12 billion dollars on drug user incarceration, about 70% of which was spent of marijuana USERS, not dealers. That's 8.4 billion dollars. Multiply that by the entire country, and throw in the tax revenue on an easy to grow product, and you've got quite a bit of spare income.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1Billions of dollars is a lot of money no matter what the perspective. Just because you are trillions of dollars in the hole is no reason to scoff at a few billion you could save. We got trillions of dollars of debt by wasting a few billion every year.
- ElAssoWipo, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2You could also nationalize it and your government will profit from every single aspect of it.
Or, meet them half way like they do for alcohol in Quebec, Canada. They have a government body that regulates and sells all alcohol. It's a milk cow. They always make a huge surplus. There is no effect on the producers or suppliers, they sell to the society of alcohols for whatever price, the society adds a markup and sells it. And that's all there is to it.
A huge portion of the money is used on alcoholism prevention and treatment of alcoholics. The rest is used as federal funds.
Private businesses can still sell alcohol too, they just have to get it from the society of alcohol. But of course, there's a wholesale price. The more you buy, the cheaper it costs.
- mikephimikephi, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2I know billions of dollars sounds like alot of money, but you have to keep it in perspective.
- jambox, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4You might be surprised. Not hundreds of billions, but certainly billions. ANy idea how much the US government gets in alcohol duty?
- mithrasinvictus, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8you should also factor in all the enforcement costs of the war on weed.
- curtisag, on 04/01/2008, -2/+2How can you tax something that can be so easily grown in your backyard? That's one of the reasons for the original ban on Marijuana. You can't grow tobacco in your back yard that easily, so tobacco is a good source of tax income. Don't get me wrong, I want it to be legalized, I just don't see it happening in the next 20 years.
- sugarhigh4242, on 04/01/2008, -0/+0Even if growing was legal, I still think we'd see a whole new economy of "hash spots", essentially bars for weed. Given how many bars there are in the city, the revenue from taxes would be staggering. But that is secondary in my opinion to the savings in law enforcement.
- Sophistifunk, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4I can grow the ***** outta some tomatoes, too... Yet I still pay for 'em.
Besides, it's illegal to grow weed like it's illegal to grow tobacco - yet way more people grow weed, because they can't go down to the 7-11 and pick up a pack of "winnie greens". - jackyyll, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Do you realize how ***** lazy people are? They'd much rather spend a little money on weed than grow it themselves.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1You can record and burn your own CD in your bedroom, but it probably won't be as good as the stuff you can go buy at the store.
- sugarhigh4242, on 04/01/2008, -0/+0Even if growing was legal, I still think we'd see a whole new economy of "hash spots", essentially bars for weed. Given how many bars there are in the city, the revenue from taxes would be staggering. But that is secondary in my opinion to the savings in law enforcement.
- Excen, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6Direct taxes on the smokable product itself would amount to billions, not to mention the taxes on the purchase of secondary equipment required to set up the grow operations and the processing facilities, as well as the secondary-effects on the economy generated by the large amounts of readily-usable non-smokable biomass in addition as the compounding effects the legitimated dollars circulating through the economy. In addition, how many of the 60% of all incarcerated Americans are in the slammer because of marijuana? It is entirely feasible that the legalization of the industrial cultivation of the Cannabis plant could drastically cut the national debt.
- mikephimikephi, on 04/01/2008, -1/+4Somehow I don't think the 'national debt will begin to plummet'.
- Cymrubeats, on 04/01/2008, -1/+43as with most drugs, it's not the fact it's illegal that stops me smoking weed (i used to, for years...many years, and stopping was a friggin breeze, akin to stopping biting your fingernails or someshuch minor habit,) it's the fact i don't want to (any more,) and legality wouldn't change my mind, just as legality wouldn't change the minds of most people who simply don't want to do it in the first place.
There's no good reason for keeping it illegal, and many reasons for making it otherwise, and sure, the economy is one, but in particular, taking the control out of the criminals hands (albeit putting in the hands of more civilised criminals :P .)- VoiceofPower, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8To stop biting your nails is a hell of a lot harder. >:/
- aladrin, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7I agree. I won't the illegal aspect means nothing to me, but the fact that I prefer my head to be completely clear stops me from doing any drugs whatsoever, legal or not. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
This reminds me a of story I recently saw on here that said children who were raised to drink tiny amounts of alcohol at special occasions aren't nearly as likely to be alcoholics as those who don't get their first sip until they can drink all they want. The same kind of principle applies here... Ban them from it, and they'll be irresponsible with it because they don't know -how- to be responsible. Teach them about it in a controlled environment and they won't be nearly as likely to abuse it.
I'm still totally against drugs and will probably always lecture my friends about the use of any mind-altering substances, but I'm also totally against any laws against them.- sodade, on 04/01/2008, -1/+5Sometimes when I am high and perfectly focused on one thing - whether it is doing something like mountainbiking or playing pinball, or thinking about something like how to solve a problem - I am capable of achieving a state of mental clarity that far exceeds a sober norm. Maybe you should spend your energy focusing on how YOU can be a better person than lecturing your friends on how YOU think they can be better.
- DrIce926, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1nvm
- Boreras, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5I'm Dutch and the only drug I've used is acid (4 times). The effects of most drugs are simply not interesting. LSD, however, is. Not too long ago there was this article on digg about the guy who won (shared) the Nobel Price for Biology for the double helix structure of DNA. He was on LSD when he 'discovered' all that. LSD opens a lot of thoughts. LSD is a fairly safe drug. Only the hallucinations and mind-opening, uhm 'thoughts', can cause one to become psychotic, depressed, schizophrenic etc., but only if one is inclined to become so beforehand. And bad trips are really really really bad(never had one though).
LSD is illegal in Holland though. It probably would end up being an unorganized Brave New World if it wasn't.
- treelovinhippie, on 04/01/2008, -18/+7Legalisation makes it more difficult to obtain marijuana (esp for underagers). Duh.
- ...---..., on 04/01/2008, -0/+8What?? What teenager doesn't know where to get pot? They have a much harder time getting alcohol than pot.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Comprehend much?
Legalisation makes it MORE difficult to obtain marijuana. You appear to agree with him by mentioning that it is harder for teenagers to get alcohol.
His point is that if marijuana were sold in stores to people of a certain age, like alcohol, it would be HARDER for kids to get it. - ...---..., on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Oh - yeah - I see. Nvm...
But you didn't need the the condescending "comprehend much?" - especially from a fellow deadhead.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Comprehend much?
- richbleak, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Read his comment again everyone. He is agreeing that it is more difficult to get alcohol than pot because of the nature of the transaction involved in getting each. Someone selling weed isn't checking ID's. Also, there is no underground market for alcohol because it isn't profitable enough for people selling illegally.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Actually, there is an underground market for alcohol. It started Nascar. It still goes on in rural Southwest Virginia, Kentucky and other places.
However, it isn't to sell to kids, it is to sell to bar owners and other big movers of alcohol.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Actually, there is an underground market for alcohol. It started Nascar. It still goes on in rural Southwest Virginia, Kentucky and other places.
- ...---..., on 04/01/2008, -0/+8What?? What teenager doesn't know where to get pot? They have a much harder time getting alcohol than pot.
- hiPpymIck, on 04/01/2008, -2/+17the message at the end about emailing him..
"ask Mr Costa this question again at
antonio.maria.costa@unodc.org
(cc us at tasz@tasz.hu)"- mindracer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1sent!
- holotone, on 04/01/2008, -1/+2-----------
Mr. Costa,
I was saddened to see a recent video of your refusal to answer a direct, honest, and relevant question regarding cannabis policy in the Netherlands, and it's relation to your decisions regarding cannabis policy worldwide - As you were not willing to address this question the first, second, or third time around, perhaps the fourth will be a charm:
How do you explain the relatively low levels of cannabis use in Holland, given your claims that easy availability would lead to higher levels of use?
As the answer to this question is absolutely central to your claim, I anticipate your prompt and concise response.
---------------
Sent!
- smacksaw, on 04/01/2008, -18/+5April Fools?
- secondwheel2, on 04/01/2008, -20/+18No the reason it is low in Holland is because people can control themselves. If it was legal in America, do you seriously think we would be this responsible with weed?
- chris9902, on 04/01/2008, -1/+41in a country where you can buy a gun before you can drink? hmmm, no.
- cygnus2112, on 04/01/2008, -9/+5Because it's all those legal gun owners who are out killing people.
As with alcohol and drugs, the people who have the tendency to acquire guns illegally and use them illegally care nothing about laws anyway. - CatsAreGods, on 04/01/2008, -1/+2I would think it would be better to have a gun before drinking, than a drink before gunning. Or whatever.
- Spuy767, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1I second that.
- cygnus2112, on 04/01/2008, -9/+5Because it's all those legal gun owners who are out killing people.
- cygnus2112, on 04/01/2008, -1/+11It used to be very legal. It was only made illegal in 1937. Apparently, I read all about the problems with that darn marijuana throughout American history.
- vtnerd, on 04/01/2008, -1/+3Yes.
- dstz, on 04/01/2008, -2/+17As a French, knowing a few Dutch people, I refuse to believe you when you imply that Americans are utterly stupid. No, there is no reason why a logical, rational, honest, normalization would do less good to an American as it does to an European.
The terrible hypocrisy and cynicism that is the prohibition of cannabis has to stop. - bearsandbulls, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8
People getting high instead of drunk? The Horror!- flashback99, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7Check this out - Portugese police turned a blind eye to england fans smoking up in portugal a few years ago: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jun/11/drugsanda ...
"We won't be hiding behind doors waiting for someone to smoke a joint. We have to use common sense. If people are smoking but not kicking each other, not beating each other, and not making a problem, why on earth would an officer go and ask 'Is that cannabis?'
"If you are quietly smoking and a police officer is 10 metres away, what's the big risk in your behaviour? I'm not going to tap you on the shoulder and ask 'What are you smoking?' if you are posing no menace to others. Our priority is alcohol"
- flashback99, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7Check this out - Portugese police turned a blind eye to england fans smoking up in portugal a few years ago: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jun/11/drugsanda ...
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Do you really think that if they legalized HEROIN, that all of the sudden, everybody would be doing it??
Ask yourself this question: If they legalized Heroin tomorrow, would I want to try it?
Granted, most americans are stupid, but only in terms of being a dumbed-down culture of entertainment and consumption. They actually have a relatively decent sense of what is good or bad for themselves, overall.
- chris9902, on 04/01/2008, -1/+41in a country where you can buy a gun before you can drink? hmmm, no.
- VIrus9, on 04/01/2008, -3/+26What I don't get is how the guys says they're trying to solve problems and in the next breath says that decriminalization is not up for debate. How do they expect to solve anything if they won't discuss a policy that has been shown to work?
- kuantan97, on 04/01/2008, -0/+15Simple- they are parasites and their jobs depend on criminalization.
- bearsandbulls, on 04/01/2008, -0/+10They are trying to solve how to get their agenda pushed.
- AndrewDB, on 04/01/2008, -5/+13It's legal there. When it's legal, the appeal to use something is diminished.
It's like you love to drink and smoke when you're younger because it gives you a feeling you're rebellious. When you're 18, or 21, drinking and smoking loses all the massive appeal it had unless you're addicted to it.
Simple really.- VoiceofPower, on 04/01/2008, -1/+4Actually, I think drinking and smoking (but mostly drinking) becomes more a social thing when you grow older. When 16 (legal drinking age in The Netherlands) a lot of people drink just because they can, and many go too far atleast once or twice. By the time they're 21 they drink with friends when going out or on parties, but not as much or fast as before. Because if you become drunk you become asocial, which isn't the point of drinking anymore.
Smoking weed isn't so much a social thing (and is actually looked down upon), so that's probably one reason why most people give up on it eventually.- flashback99, on 04/01/2008, -1/+7Please don't tell me smoking weed is not social. Have you smoked before, or are you just chatting rubbish?
- stack3r, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4Rofl not much a social thing ..
Its more social than alcohol, and no body gets bashed or raped when their stoned cause people that are stoned are still in control of their decisions and body... - PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Smoking pot is very social. Abusing it is not. But then, abusing any substance tends to make the abuser antisocial.
- aladrin, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1There's some of that, sure. But that's not the whole story. Life is rarely so simple.
- VoiceofPower, on 04/01/2008, -1/+4Actually, I think drinking and smoking (but mostly drinking) becomes more a social thing when you grow older. When 16 (legal drinking age in The Netherlands) a lot of people drink just because they can, and many go too far atleast once or twice. By the time they're 21 they drink with friends when going out or on parties, but not as much or fast as before. Because if you become drunk you become asocial, which isn't the point of drinking anymore.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/01/2008, -18/+4First off. the UN can't explain *****. Second, everyone who gives them stats is a hired liar. Third, why the hell is it up to the UN to explain that??? Also what this articles main message is is that if you take away the mystery from drugs and encourage self-control people will act better. Unfortunately thats *****, we will always need laws. And this is coming from someone who smokes a lot of pot. I'm not saying that it would be wrong to legalize pot but article writers shouldn't write ***** articles with hidden agendas.
- nedev, on 04/01/2008, -2/+10The website says WEBSITE OF UK LEGALIZE CANNABIS CAMPAIGNS. If it's supposed to be a hidden agenda they're not trying very hard.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/01/2008, -11/+1They are with their headlines and that's all stoners read anyways.
- theMADone, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5f*ck off and comment on something you understand, like playdoh.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/01/2008, -11/+1They are with their headlines and that's all stoners read anyways.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1The UN needs to explain why the Dutch have a lower rate of usage because they claim the contrary to be true when trying to justify their 1961 Single Convention on Narcotics which in part bans the recreational use of marijuana. Don't you think that a governing body that passes a rule should have to show that their reasons for doing so are real?
- nedev, on 04/01/2008, -2/+10The website says WEBSITE OF UK LEGALIZE CANNABIS CAMPAIGNS. If it's supposed to be a hidden agenda they're not trying very hard.
- rsek, on 04/01/2008, -19/+4everyone is doin cokes there, so marijuana is not intresting anymore for the 'junks'
- Akufen, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5Coke is done everywhere and Holland is by no means a frontrunner. Besides your argument bases itself on the stepping stone theory which has been proven to be hogwash.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2Nah, the gateway drug theory isn't hogwash, they just stopped when they found the substance they wished to demonize.
Mother's milk and baby formula are the true gateway drugs! Everyone who has ever used a hard drug has consumed one or the other.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2Nah, the gateway drug theory isn't hogwash, they just stopped when they found the substance they wished to demonize.
- Akufen, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5Coke is done everywhere and Holland is by no means a frontrunner. Besides your argument bases itself on the stepping stone theory which has been proven to be hogwash.
- Dajestar, on 04/01/2008, -1/+22Een gelukkige weed roker is geen onruststoker!
- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+23"A happy smoker is not a troublemaker" (Dutch proverb)
- Zaggynl, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2Eensch.
Als ik meerook met wiet-rokende vrienden krijg ik wel schijtneigingen -.-- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2"I concur!
When I [inhale the secondhand smoke from/smoke along with] friends that smoke weed I get the urge to poop -.-"
(translation is slightly less explicit than original :p)
- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2"I concur!
- ggfobster, on 04/01/2008, -5/+7UN obfuscation. UN shouldn't take sides in the drug war.
- insanebrain, on 04/01/2008, -3/+20It's very simple why the softdrugs policy works in Holland. If you allow it to be used, it becomes normal and you can talk about it. It the same effect as to stupid no-sex-before-marriage stuff. Kids aren't allowed to do it, so parents don't talk about it. The will have sex anyways. The same goes for a joint. If your parents talk about it with you, it becomes less secret, so it becomes more normal, and you know what you are doing.
Suppresion never worked. Teaching is always the better way to go with it. Where does this 'stupid' supress-and-don't-teach mentality comes from with Americans ???- kirwoodd, on 04/01/2008, -1/+5Dunno
Ask the european that was running that UN meeting with his head up is ass.
Its not an issue with "Americans" its an issue with people.
- blunted, on 04/01/2008, -0/+3puritanism.
- alfitzhugh, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2seconded
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2It comes from the desire to profit.
Just consider all the people who benefit financially by making marijuana illegal -- Cops, prison guards, Corrections Corporation of America (private prisons), attorneys, treatment centers, interdiction forces, politicians (vote for me, or your kids will be killed by drugs), pharmaceutical companies, etc, etc, etc.
- kirwoodd, on 04/01/2008, -1/+5Dunno
- Berkana, on 04/01/2008, -8/+3The reason is that in Holland, marijuana has to compete with prostitution. Mystery solved.
- waspbr, on 04/01/2008, -1/+1Funny thing that in the US it is legal for people to have sex with each other (porn industry) but illegal for one person to pay another to have sex with him/her.
go figure
- waspbr, on 04/01/2008, -1/+1Funny thing that in the US it is legal for people to have sex with each other (porn industry) but illegal for one person to pay another to have sex with him/her.
- NikoKun, on 04/01/2008, -0/+8Duh, after decriminalization/legalization, age restrictions are set up, and it becomes a bit harder for kids to get it. In the long term, this drops teen use rates, and the general overall use rates come down a little after it just becomes more of a normal thing.
Prohibitionists are scared silly by this, reality is against them.- Rotzooi, on 04/01/2008, -2/+3Yeah, in the same way it's so hard for American teenagers to get their hands on alcohol...
- InfeImmo, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5Meh.. personally, when I was a teenager (in America), I was able to obtain marijuana before I found a way to obtain alcohol..
- NikoKun, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4Current statistics show that Marijuana is easier for kids to get, than Alcohol.
Which just shows something is wrong, when the illegal one, is what kids have more access too.
- curtisag, on 04/01/2008, -1/+3Throw a few seeds in your back yard and you'll magically have your own weed very rapidly.
- Rotzooi, on 04/01/2008, -2/+3Yeah, in the same way it's so hard for American teenagers to get their hands on alcohol...
- Rutje, on 04/01/2008, -2/+11Simple: If it isn't forbidden, it isn't fun anymore....
- godzillaWax, on 04/01/2008, -0/+44As an american living in amstedam, I can attest that the majority of the people you see here smoking are tourists. The Dutch are caricatured as pot smoking hippies, but the truth is above all else they are practical. Their approach to pot is the same as their approach to prostitution - if people are going to do it anyway, we may as well keep an eye on it (and tax it).
Making something available in a controlled environment is quite the opposite of abusing it.- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+18So true. I've won my share of bets based on this.
Tourist: "All the Dutch smoke weed. All the time!"
Me: "No, we don't."
Tourist: "What about that guy over there?"
Me: "American. Wanna bet?"
This works about nine times out of ten; some of the smokers are Spanish...
Same works for prostitution and English tourists...
- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+18So true. I've won my share of bets based on this.
- Ferre1, on 04/01/2008, -4/+2Here's why he drug war is "holy":
http://digg.com/world_news/Europe_and_the_mumbling ... - saltmiser, on 04/01/2008, -7/+2april fools? :P
- waspbr, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2no, fool
- a6n28f, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1I pity the fool.
- dstz, on 04/01/2008, -2/+4"The terrible hypocrisy and cynicism that is the prohibition of cannabis has to stop."
Says I before going for my daily one hour jog, which precedes my online day work, which precedes a few hours of calisthenics and weight lifting. See a pattern there? well, it's that I'm smoking Cannabis all day long.- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2So true.
People are caught up with the propoganda images of burned out teenagers sitting in their mom's basement smoking weed and doing nothing. Granted, those types exist.
But not many people realize that many highly functional contributors to society smoke pot. Some do it socially. Some do it only when going to concerts or for special occassions. Some even smoke it regularly, even so much as being constantly high throughout the day. Lawyers, Politicians, Chemists, Biologists, Stock Brokers, Business owners, Mid-level managers, even Police Officers.
30% of the population has smoked pot. 100 million people in the US have smoked marijuana.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2So true.
- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -2/+15We need cannabis prohibition to continue worldwide.
We must continue to send children to jail, to make the world safer for our children.
No wait, that doesn't make sense, let me try again.
We must continue to send parents to jail to make the world better for their children!
Actually that doesn't sound too good either. Hm..- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7I have this sneaking suspicion people are reading the above posts first line and digging me down because of it ...
People, I'm being sarcastic and using irony!- BrapAllgood, on 04/01/2008, -1/+1Think of the number of stoners reading it, tho.... Always consider your audience. :)
WHOAH! It's actually 4:19! Gimme a minnit.- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Point taken - anyone skimming is going to be too incensed after that first line to read any further >_
- BrapAllgood, on 04/01/2008, -1/+1Think of the number of stoners reading it, tho.... Always consider your audience. :)
- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7I have this sneaking suspicion people are reading the above posts first line and digging me down because of it ...
- Ultra99, on 04/01/2008, -0/+7It's simple - if you legalize it, the "forbidden fruit" factor disappears, along with all the sensationalist BS mythology, hype and anti-hype. People will then use/not use depending on the merits of the thing itself, not the bogus glamour/hype of walking on the wild side etc.
It would become like any other commodity - people would go nuts at first, then gradually get bored of it and things would normalize. Sure there'd always be a certain amount of abusers, just like there is with alcohol, cigarettes and junk food etc. But for the most part, people would just get along with their lives after the novelty is gone. That's exactly the way it is in Holland.- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4..and unlike alcohol, nobody will be dying from an overdose.
- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -0/+4..and unlike alcohol, nobody will be dying from an overdose.
- jdouglass46, on 04/01/2008, -1/+8the bottom line is weed is a beautiful thing. Who in their right mind wouldn't rather hang out with a weed head as opposed to a damn drunk???
- brstilson, on 04/01/2008, -0/+23"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair
- curtisag, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2A wise man indeed.
- Imaginatron, on 04/01/2008, -4/+2Alcohol is legal, so now we have have drunk driving. Does Holland have stoned driving problems?
- user5124, on 04/01/2008, -2/+11You mean like people driving too carefully?
- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -2/+6Your reasoning is flawed and your question is grammatically incorrect and irrelevant, but I'm still going to give you a short answer. No.
- paulsmith288, on 04/01/2008, -1/+7No. Holland actually has a usable public transport system.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1When alcohol was illegal, we still had drunk driving problems. The only difference is that cars only went up to 50 mph back then.
- bentman78, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2Legalize it and tax it.
If he thinks everyone will go crazy with it, well when most I know turn 21 they don't drink alcohol as often.
Why it's even banned is beyond me... - lee1199, on 04/01/2008, -3/+6The right wingers hate to think anyone might be enjoying themselves.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Other than themselves.
Trust me, the people who rail the most against something are probably the most guilty of doing just that, or something else that they have a subconscious guilt about.
"I think thou dost protest too much"
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Other than themselves.
- NSResponder, on 04/01/2008, -0/+5What the apparatchik doesn't want to admit, is that prohibition serves no purpose at all with regard to reducing the problem of drug abuse. The purpose of prohibition is the convenience of governments; with prohibition in place, they effectively get universal criminalization, which empowers them to arrest and imprison any dissident. Whether or not the individual actually has any drugs on them, a government agent can claim that they did, and most of the public will believe it.
-jcr - flipdoubt, on 04/01/2008, -0/+14IMO, I find it to be a national embarrassment that in 2008, it's still illegal to smoke a joint in the United States, yet alcohol & cigarettes are hoisted on us at every turn, & cause countless numbers of deaths each year. We spend billions of dollars hunting down & locking up non-violent drug offenders, while the government continues to enforce "mandatory minimums", stripping judges of their power to JUDGE! While rapists & violent criminals often do far less time and are not, (to my knowledge) subject to these mandatory minimum sentences. It's all about the bottom line here in the good ol' US of A, that and fear... fear of what we don't understand, & our blind acceptance of what we're told by our media and government. Obviously, this is a subject I'm very passionate about, and I'm not even talking about the debate over medicinal use & protection for medicinal users, (a no-brainer in my book). I'm talking about having the FREEDOM, (something this country constantly touts as it's greatest attribute) to do with my body what I choose to do. Isn't it MY body? Don't I OWN my body, for godsake?? Don't we ALL? Well, no... no we don't. Not as long as it's against the law to consume something, anything, that naturally grows on this big blue planet. De-Criminalize NOW! JUST SAY KNOW!
- WilliamDavis, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6"FREEDOM, (something this country constantly touts as it's greatest attribute)"
The biggest lie of them all.
- WilliamDavis, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6"FREEDOM, (something this country constantly touts as it's greatest attribute)"
- jellygraph, on 04/01/2008, -0/+3I am embarrassed that Antonio-Maria Costa is a fellow European.
- xthroughmyeyesx, on 04/01/2008, -6/+2...April Fools?..
- anti-net, on 04/01/2008, -0/+2Well UN Drug Office can't explain it but I can - Its like tourist attractions, the locals never go to them but outsiders do. They just don't care for it much, its nothing new
Also in NL they treat drug problems as an illness, not a crime - isaaccs, on 04/01/2008, -7/+4Constitutional right to posses a gun by US citizens= Thousands of innocent citizens killed directly every year in the country.
Illegal possession of marijuana by US citizens= Zero innocent citizens killed directly, ever. Not counting those caused by the war, 'course.
Our government really has its priorities straight when it comes to protecting its citizens.- thanakar, on 04/01/2008, -4/+5What in the hell are you talking about. Don't blame the constitutional right to bear arms on the deaths, put the blame where it belongs, on the idiots owning the guns. The ones that just leave a gun lying around so their curious kid can kill themselves with it. Education is what is needed here, not retraction of gun policy.
- BECoole, on 04/01/2008, -8/+1"Illegal possession of marijuana by US citizens= Zero innocent citizens killed"
Except for the MJ intoxicated drivers killing themselves and the people who get cancer from MJ.- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2Other than propoganda, have you ever heard of someone causing a car accident resulting in death, while on Marijuana?
I would also say that attributing cancer with Marijuana is a dubious claim (hehehe, he said doobey) - BECoole, on 04/02/2008, -1/+1You need to talk to a State Patrolman sometime.
Do you really believe that you can inhale smoke deeply into your lungs on a regular basis without doing damage? Seriously?- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -1/+1For about the millionth time, pot smoking does not cause cancer.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...- BECoole, on 04/05/2008, -0/+1For about the billionth time, pot smoking does cause cancer.
http://erj.ersjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/31 ...
- BECoole, on 04/05/2008, -0/+1For about the billionth time, pot smoking does cause cancer.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -1/+1For about the millionth time, pot smoking does not cause cancer.
- Phrag, on 04/03/2008, -1/+1Possession of marijuana is not the same as driving while intoxicated. No one is trying to get DUI/DWI legalized. We are trying to stop the wasteful punishment of responsible marijuana users.
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2Other than propoganda, have you ever heard of someone causing a car accident resulting in death, while on Marijuana?
- sigg14, on 04/01/2008, -2/+3more children die in school sports related deaths each year than by gunshots. get your facts straight son
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1McDonald's kills more people each year than guns.
- JointVenture, on 04/01/2008, -0/+3I think they successfully made it mainstream by legalizing it.
America should do the same. - thanakar, on 04/01/2008, -5/+1What about other drugs like heroine? When I was in holland it was not uncommon to see users freebasing heroine on the city buses!
- sigg14, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1you don't freebase heroin
- PhilLesh69, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1He meant mainlining, but he only knows what he's seen on crime shows and ONDCP anti-drug commercials.
- sigg14, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1you don't freebase heroin
- lukasvermeer, on 04/01/2008, -0/+6It is briefly mentioned in the clip that the city of Maastricht is planning to move coffee-shops out of the city. It is suggested that this is proof that legalization is bad. I could not disagree more.
Maastricht is close to the border (like, right next to it). The reason the city wants to move the coffee-shops is the vast amounts of drug 'tourists' coming to the town from other countries that have less liberal drug policies. This drug 'tourism' is what is the problem, not the liberal policy (at least, from our point of view :p).
I think it is also worth noting that we have relatively low levels of cannabis use _despite_ all these drug 'tourists' from other countries. - BECoole, on 04/01/2008, -7/+1Because people see the waste results of marihuana use.
- mindlessknight, on 04/01/2008, -1/+2haha. this issue is so arbitrary...but i do believe that the legalization of cannabis (as with most drugs) was a result of people who were self-righteous bastards with too much power and an inability to see past such trite differences in people.. :/
but seriously, aren't there more important issues to which we could be giving our attention?- Textzilla, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1No.
- TomPhoolery, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1MDMA is the answer.
- sndream, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1For course Antonio-Maria can explain the answer, he's not dumb, he just don't want to.
There's only 2 logical possible solution.
1) Prohibition of cannabis doesn't work.
2) Unlike Holland, other countries are overrun with sub human that lack self control but are too dumb/wimpy to find that drug dealer creepy right around the corner. - YankeesSuck, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Actually, if it's anything like I remember, it's because people generally use hashish over there.
- Textzilla, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1I'm fairly certain hashish use is synonymous with cannabis use (thus included in the same statistics), and from video footage and reports I've seen of coffee shops in Holland, hashish is offered alongside marijuana in these shops.
- alfitzhugh, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Anyone who knows history in the US will realize we cannot evar legalize marihuana because the Negroes and the Chinese will go on wild rampages raping our white womens.
- coustoe, on 04/01/2008, -2/+1Its Relative.
Holland has the highest use in all of Europe
But Compared to the US it is slighter lower, which isnt saying much.
When will you guys stop submitting these articles, I think this is the 1000 one saying the same thing.- NSResponder, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2"Holland has the highest use in all of Europe"
Nope. Watch the video. Use is LOWER in the Netherlands than in the surrounding countries, that's the point of the man's question.
-jcr
- NSResponder, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2"Holland has the highest use in all of Europe"
- shdwsclan, on 04/01/2008, -1/+0If its taboo, then people will do it anyways, but if its legal, then people wont care that much.....
In america, its like 20% and slowly falling.
In other, less developed parts of the world like korea or japan, its around 70-80% - nepidae, on 04/01/2008, -1/+0Maybe its because I lived 15 minutes outside of Amsterdam but people in The Netherlands smoked a _lot_. I know that some of my teachers smoked too.
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by