[greatdebate]

i just wanted to kn ow , seeing as alcohol is a proper drug - and a very damaging drug aswell - why do the govermetn decide that ok for that drug to be legal and not others - personnaly i have never seen anyone stoned beat up there wife or get into a fight , i know you goan say for money - but they could make more money just off pot , and no its not a gateway drug - cigarrettes are a gateway drug , alchol is a gateway drug - nobody starts on pot - so why do the goverment think its ok to ban one and not the others , they are fighting a lossing war , which will go on as long as people want it

[xoxAngel_Kxox]

It is for money. Alcohol doesn't cause symptoms until the user has drunk a fair amount. You can say the same of caffeine being a drug if you wanted to.

The government can simply say it's upto the user to make sure they don't drink too much..

If you have a look at the price it costs to *make* alcohol, and then compare it with the amount they sell it for, you would be able to understand why they don't stop.

[creative_]

You're so right I am studying pharmacology and I have always found it extremely weird to see that alcohol is legal and generally not considered a drug, and at the same time see that benzos (who activate the SAME receptor in the brain as alcohol) are considered highly addictive and require a prescription. Funny law-makers.

[Libtolu]

(Original post by greatdebate)
i just wanted to kn ow , seeing as alcohol is a proper drug - and a very damaging drug aswell - why do the govermetn decide that ok for that drug to be legal and not others - personnaly i have never seen anyone stoned beat up there wife or get into a fight , i know you goan say for money - but they could make more money just off pot , and no its not a gateway drug - cigarrettes are a gateway drug , alchol is a gateway drug - nobody starts on pot - so why do the goverment think its ok to ban one and not the others , they are fighting a lossing war , which will go on as long as people want it

alcohol has been a big part of a culture for 1000 years if it was only just discovered it would be illegal but it wasn't so it isn't and we've seen from the prohibition in america that banning it doesn't work.

Pot shouldn't be illegal imo. and i have never hit anyone whilst drunk so you're violence point makes no sense to me most fights would have happened even if people weren;t drunk but when people aren't drinking they're not being tossed together in small rooms (clubs or pubs) so they wouldn't have the opportunity to fight.

[RemadE]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSxJs0WQhGk

[ChrisBan]

There would probably be an uprising if they even considered it. Anyway, theres that old argument that people put forward relating to the revenue it generates.... quite an easy revenue generator for government coffers

[js374]

Banning it would penalise the majority of people in this country. Sure some people overdose on it but think:
No more pubs
No more quiet drinks with friends
No more champagne to celebrate an event
No wine with food ever again (this last one almost made me cry)

The day the government bans alcohol is the day the entire country rises up. It would be like the end of V for Vendetta.

[Blueflare]

Alcohol is embedded as part of our culture.

Even if all drugs were legalised I doubt that you'd see people smoking a crack pipe at a fancy restaurant instead of drinking wine.

I know it's illogical, but that's just how it is. We have a totally different social relationship with alcohol than with other drugs.

[RoadWarrior]

If drugs were legalised, the government could make a hell of a lot of money from them.. much more than it would cost the NHS according to a couple of programmes I've seen.

[Oasis Jnr]

it's obviosly because of the money. alcohol are a necessity and people will continue to buy it despite the rise in the price. if they were to abolish alcohol, then the government would be losing millions each year. also alcohol can be seen as a benefit if you drink wine once a week according to a journal i read last year

[theths]

Because they tax it to death, like they do with cigarettes, even though both are proven to be more harmful than a few things which are actually illegal
e.g. ecstasy causes the same number of deaths per year as horseriding
if they taxed something like, ketchup for example, everyone's just going to switch to tomato relish or whatever
what's a nicotine addict going to do about a 50p increase in the price of a 20 pack? **** all.
all in the elasticities baby


on the other hand, alcohol and cigarettes only kill you after a lifetime of drinking/smoking (unless you're phenomenally stupid/unlucky), whereas drugs can kill in the first time you ever take them

[Haychee]

On the other hand many argue that people can drink alcohol not to intoxicate themselves (they do it because it tastes good not because they want to get pissed)

But with a drug like marijuana every one who does it, does it to get baked.

So there is a difference.

[Bilco]

Because they make a fortune on the tax. And they remember prohibition and that didn't work to well.

[Karl-fresher2be]

Money Money Money

[Shook]

(Original post by Oasis Jnr)
alcohol are a necessity

No it's not...

[cec200]

(Original post by Haychee)
On the other hand many argue that people can drink alcohol not to intoxicate themselves (they do it because it tastes good not because they want to get pissed)

But with a drug like marijuana every one who does it, does it to get baked.

So there is a difference.

this is actually the first thing i've ever heard a legit reason for why weed is illegal and alcohol not, albeit a small one, i mean i still don't agree with it but finally someone has some kind of a reason.

[Predictably unpredictable]

(Original post by theths)
Because they tax it to death, like they do with cigarettes, even though both are proven to be more harmful than a few things which are actually illegal
e.g. ecstasy causes the same number of deaths per year as horseriding
if they taxed something like, ketchup for example, everyone's just going to switch to tomato relish or whatever
what's a nicotine addict going to do about a 50p increase in the price of a 20 pack? **** all.
all in the elasticities baby


on the other hand, alcohol and cigarettes only kill you after a lifetime of drinking/smoking (unless you're phenomenally stupid/unlucky), whereas drugs can kill in the first time you ever take them

This...and


i personally believe that they wouldnt want to legalize weed as people would just get really stoned and not go to work (more people that is), if your stoned you dont really want to go out shopping for food or for materialistic objects (which is bad for the economy)..

just thought id throw that out there

[Oasis Jnr]

(Original post by Shook)
No it's not...

soz that was a bit generalised... i mean people who drink alcohol often. these people will see alcohol as a necessity and the gov. depends on em'

[Paul Bartram]

I carn't imagine old men sitting round in a village pub smoking pot.

Alcohol is something everyone can enjoy, it's only the minority who use it as a drug.

[cec200]

(Original post by Predictably unpredictable)
This...and


i personally believe that they wouldnt want to legalize weed as people would just get really stoned and not go to work (more people that is), if your stoned you dont really want to go out shopping for food or for materialistic objects (which is bad for the economy)..

just thought id throw that out there

In holland where weed is legal less weed is smoked there than in a lot of europe, including england. People who smoke weed now will just inject more money into the economy as they are paying tax on the weed they buy. People buying less food and not going work is a stupid arguement if they don't work how will they buy weed and if they dont buy food what will they do to survive/ cure munchies. Legalizing weed is unlikely to make more people smoke it, in fact it will probably change the mindset of future generations who might smoke it now as it's illegal to look cool.