Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Really? With Seth Dawson
I can't help but piggyback on this item, because of the hilarity of Evan's post with the embedded SNL skit. So I don't get a plagiarism suit, please bear in mind that the entire concept comes from Seth Myer's SNL skit.
As Washington State ponders decriminalization of marijuana possession (an action I always find somewhat bemusing - why not the distribution and/or cultivation of a small amount - wherever is this non-criminal cannabis to come from?), Seth Dawson leads the opposition to such a measure.
Why? According to the Associated Press State & Local Wire, released on February 11, 2009 Wednesday at 2:09 AM GMT, it's because... wait for it...
"[T]he bill drew fire from anti-drug forces who argue marijuana is a gateway drug that can lead users to more serious drug abuse ... Seth Dawson of the Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention ... said decriminalizing marijuana would send the wrong message to teenagers, and could lead to an increase in the number of marijuana users who get hooked on harder drugs."
Gateway Theory? Really, Seth Dawson? Because the last time I checked, 'Gateway Theory' was demonstrated as false (at least, according to the Journal of Psychiatry, Institute of Health, and the RAND studies). I mean, really, can't we come up with something based in reality instead?
I mean, really, because forgive me if I'm wrong, but alcohol is legal and isn't being cited as needing to be criminalized to prevent the wrong message to teenagers. You cited that cocaine abusers shared a trait of having past marijuana use. What about alcohol? In fact, the combination of cocaine and alcohol is so common, they've even done extensive studies on cocaethylene, a substance that exclusively forms when cocaine and alcohol are co-administered.
Really, and while we're at it, Seth, you want to talk about the latter half of your association's description? Namely, the violence prevention part? Because last time I checked, alcohol is much more associated with violence than cannabis is. I mean, really, how many jokes are there about someone hitting the bong and then beating their significant other, or their children? Swap the bong hit for either cheap beer or cheaper bourbon, and suddenly we've got the makings of a best selling comedy book entitled "1,000 Jokes You Don't Tell in Polite Company," --really.
So if you want to forward more junk theory, Seth Dawson, really, let's try this one on for size: without court-referred substance abuse cases for marijuana, the enforced treatment centers that fund your budget will shrink to nothing. You're only interested in keeping cannabis illegal because you're just another money-grubber on the state rolls trying to protect your interests at the costs of citizens' liberty and tax money. How's that for junk theory? I mean really!
[Please insert as much sarcastic humor as possible into this post, it's meant as comedy, but sometimes that doesn't translate well into plain text.]
|
As Washington State ponders decriminalization of marijuana possession (an action I always find somewhat bemusing - why not the distribution and/or cultivation of a small amount - wherever is this non-criminal cannabis to come from?), Seth Dawson leads the opposition to such a measure.
Why? According to the Associated Press State & Local Wire, released on February 11, 2009 Wednesday at 2:09 AM GMT, it's because... wait for it...
"[T]he bill drew fire from anti-drug forces who argue marijuana is a gateway drug that can lead users to more serious drug abuse ... Seth Dawson of the Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention ... said decriminalizing marijuana would send the wrong message to teenagers, and could lead to an increase in the number of marijuana users who get hooked on harder drugs."
Gateway Theory? Really, Seth Dawson? Because the last time I checked, 'Gateway Theory' was demonstrated as false (at least, according to the Journal of Psychiatry, Institute of Health, and the RAND studies). I mean, really, can't we come up with something based in reality instead?
I mean, really, because forgive me if I'm wrong, but alcohol is legal and isn't being cited as needing to be criminalized to prevent the wrong message to teenagers. You cited that cocaine abusers shared a trait of having past marijuana use. What about alcohol? In fact, the combination of cocaine and alcohol is so common, they've even done extensive studies on cocaethylene, a substance that exclusively forms when cocaine and alcohol are co-administered.
Really, and while we're at it, Seth, you want to talk about the latter half of your association's description? Namely, the violence prevention part? Because last time I checked, alcohol is much more associated with violence than cannabis is. I mean, really, how many jokes are there about someone hitting the bong and then beating their significant other, or their children? Swap the bong hit for either cheap beer or cheaper bourbon, and suddenly we've got the makings of a best selling comedy book entitled "1,000 Jokes You Don't Tell in Polite Company," --really.
So if you want to forward more junk theory, Seth Dawson, really, let's try this one on for size: without court-referred substance abuse cases for marijuana, the enforced treatment centers that fund your budget will shrink to nothing. You're only interested in keeping cannabis illegal because you're just another money-grubber on the state rolls trying to protect your interests at the costs of citizens' liberty and tax money. How's that for junk theory? I mean really!
[Please insert as much sarcastic humor as possible into this post, it's meant as comedy, but sometimes that doesn't translate well into plain text.]
<< Home




del.icio.us