Stream Your Event | Partners | Speakers CART ITEMS: - | CHECKOUT

Marijuana Economics

Watch Full Video | free previews

Commonwealth Club of California

Commonwealth Club

Info
Bio
Chapters
Preview
Zoom In

What Is the True Cost of Marijuana Legalization?

04 min 54 sec

Add to Profile

Chief of the El Cerrito Police Department Scott Kirkland debates with marijuana advocates Eugene Schoenfeld and Richard Lee about the costs and benefits of legalization.

Kirkland argues that the tax revenue generated by legalized marijuana would be offset by the increased public health costs.
Reefer Madness: The High Cost of Fighting Drugs

04 min 37 sec

Add to Profile

Psychiatrist Dr. Eugene Schoenfeld debates Police Chief Scott Kirkland over potential savings from legalizing marijuana. Schoenfeld argues that in addition to several other benefits, legalizing marijuana would save the legal system time and money, while Kirkland suggests that any proposed savings are likely exaggerated.
The ‘Forbidden Fruit’ Appeal of Drugs

01 min 32 sec

Add to Profile

Scott Kirkland, Dr. Eugene Schoenfeld, and Richard Lee debate the root causes of substance abuse. Kirkland suggests that the media plays a large part in glorifying drug use, while Schoenfeld and Lee counter that legalizing marijuana would reduce its "forbidden fruit" appeal.
Watch Full Program

01 hr 03 min 32 sec

Add to Profile

There are 62 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.

Previous FORAtv comments:

Page 3 of 7

Last »

thinkforyourself

Posted: 12.28.09, 02:19 PM

What Mr. Kirk fails to realize is that people addicted to tobacco smoke as much as 1 pack of cigarettes a day. do the math. thats easily 560 cigarettes a month. so yes, Marijuana is more cancerous then tobacco BUT people who smoke pot do NOT smoke 20 joints a day. so in the long run, people do not inhale as many cancer causing carcinogens as they would with tobacco.

cannalady

Posted: 11.23.09, 06:51 AM

"legalizing cocaine, or even place marijuana and cocaine in the same group is just ignorrance at its best" ^ This. Get your facts together and visit http://cannabisseedsnow.com

orge

Posted: 10.26.09, 09:17 AM

Godisabuddhist...is your definition of 'should be made legal' is based solely on if its processed or not? I'm sorry but that is terrible logic. That is like someone not liking Trix cereal because the "fruit" has been processed. Marijuana is illegal currently because it is deemed to dangerous for open consumption (and i guess one could argue shady business dealings with drug cartels..but thats pure speculation). Marijuana being treated or not is not a valid argument.

GodIsABuddhist

Posted: 10.26.09, 06:20 AM

There is a very easy way to separate Marijuana from other drugs that it has ignorantly been grouped with. Marijuana is the natural product of the cannibas plant. It is a flower/bud. The plant is harvested, dried (cured) and clipped. That is all. There is no further processing or addition of addictive and harmful substances like with your precious tobacco. Cocaine and heroin are NOT natural products of their plant. You cannot grow a cocoa leaf and extract cocaine out of it. Tons of plants must be processed chemically and physically to extract out a tiny amount of desired product. Heroin is NOT a natural product of the opium plant. It must be processsed chemically and physically from opium to become heroin. Marijuana has also been shown to have beneficial medicinal uses while the other two, though used as medicinal products, tend to result in more harm than good to the patient. And if there was no medicinal benefit to marijuana/THC then why would the pharmaceutical market produce a lab-made version of THC in pill form? So bottom line - Marijuana - natural, not processed or treated = ok to legalize Cocaine / Heroin - not natural, very much processed and treated = not ok Now of course the argument's biggest hole - opium is a natural product. BUT it is further processed from its goo state to a solid. So loophole potentially closed. Thank you for your time.

ConservativeChristian

Posted: 10.25.09, 04:54 PM

And WHY is a law enforcement officer even part of this discussion when what we're talking about is whether or not cannabis is good or bad for a person's health? This is the equivalent of having law enforcement throwing in their opinion as to whether or not oregano or parsley should be illegal. Of course LE wants popular commodities illegal because it garners them billions of dollars in tax money that gives them jobs. There would be a lot of police officers, DEA, special forces, detectives, lawyers, judges, prison guards and other prison-related employees who would be out of work. The opinion of a law enforcement officer is useless and biased in this discussion and should never have been part of it. His opinions are interesting, though, as much of what he says contradicts the pro-prohibition stance that he takes. Time for Americans to wise up. We'll be a better country when cannabis is legalized, taxed and regulated. God made cannabis. God made us. It is our life right to choose what we put in our bodies, not the choice of politicians, police officers, judges, or anyone else. Period.

President Obama

Posted: 10.15.09, 11:33 AM

Kirkland's fallacy is that he lumps marijuana abuse with the abuse of all other illegal substances in order to argue that marijuana abuse costs taxpayers money. But He is a Chief of Police so naturally, he would say anything to keep marijuana illegal. Probable 60% (I'm Guessing) of his quota arrests are for un-armed nonviolent citizens with small amounts of marijuana on them.

berticus25

Posted: 10.15.09, 10:28 AM

I am certainly for legalizing cannabis, and other illicit substances. But to focus just on cannabis, it is illegal because of racist prejudices, unjustified fears, and political opportunism. First, when cannabis was coming around to being made illegal there was a fear associated with it coming from the new influx of Mexican immigrants and other minorities who brought it with them to the United States. This sort of tactic has been used with other substances recently and before cannabis, i.e. opium(Chinese), crack/cocaine(African Americans). There were also false claims made about cannabis leading to the loss of moral character, going insane, and cannabis leading to homosexual activity and aberrant sexual behavior. At the congressional hearings in the 30's there was only one expert/doctor testifying on cannabis and its medical benefits (which have been known since around 2737 B.C.. The status as a legal substance creates criminals and creates an environment that fosters criminal activity. Most people who do drugs or smoke cannabis are everyday working people, lawyers, doctors, teachers, but they are turned into criminals if they want to buy some pot. Secondly, the majority of people who do drugs are not addicts, this seems to be highly misunderstood, and a relatively small amount of the population does substances that are more addictive such as heroin and cocaine, and an even smaller amount even become addicted to those substances. If cannabis were legalized it would take away much if not most of the profits from the cartels. People would KNOW what they were smoking if it was being distributed by licensed distributors versus a dealer on the streets or someone you rarely know. Most overdoses with other substances involve people not knowing what they were taking (in terms of purity, potency, and additives). This would also have a drastic effect on our prison system, reducing mass amounts of the incarcerated for possession crimes. Most drug arrests are for marijuana offenses, in 2005 88% of marijuana arrests were for possession, and in 2005 more than 1.6 million drug arrests occurred, is that the priority our law enforcement should have? Lastly, and briefly a few extra points because I've typed so much and bored people to death. Due to the status of some drugs as illegal, doctors are unable to use them for medicinal benefits (for those that are known). One example, recently it has been shown that small doses of heroin in heroin addicts have helped ween people off the drug, instead of using other substances. Policies such as this have been used in Switzerland with success, and recently in the U.K., not to mention curbing the transfer of diseases through syringes. The U.S. Budget for fighting the war on drugs is around 14-15 billion (really closer to 20 billion), the cartels and the illicit drug market make a few hundred billion off the sale of narcotics, is 14-15 billion going to make a dent, and in the history of drug wars, nearly a century, has it made any kind of dent?

orge

Posted: 10.09.09, 08:05 AM

Point 1: Do not insult me. I am a intelligent person and you have no right to ridicule me and compare me to Nazi sympathizers. You should read more about 1940's Germany before you insult and belittle a generation of people. Is there issues with the 9/11 story, yes. Are there underhanded reasons for keeping most major narcotics illegal, probably. Point 2: "it take a multi-million dollar corporation to produce alcohol products but anyone can grow cannabus" - wrong Self-breweries and mirco-breweries are a big deal these days..anyone can produce their own alcohol. Did you not watch the video? The whole point was to make a business out of cannabis. Not everyone can grow cannabis, at least in a useful volume. Just like any other form of gardening it takes a lot of effort and time. Point 3: What false or erroneous evidence did I put forth? I asked you for empirical evidence.... Point 4: Did you read any of the past three pages of posts? Maybe you should see the debate that happen before you appeared to get a better understanding of my opinion.

nightlight

Posted: 10.08.09, 11:14 PM

As for myself, I am not saying that the government is evil but that the right wingers that always supports the corporations and profiteers no matter what is, and since this government runs on money and the corporations have the money and they donate to those that suppot there objectives,it is only reasonable to see how things will get out of hand and as far as imperical evidence, I can tell you that it is all around. Take, for example, it take a multi-million dollar corporation to produce alcohol products but anyone can grow cannabus so how can the capitolist cornor the market or the government control it to make maney, or tax it, but by having it ileagle it can be controlled by punitive actions and the profiteers can make profit from the very process of enforcement as I have already stated above. As far as conspiracy movies I would say that Clancy could not have a better plot. I would say that orge would not see a conspiracy if it was slapping him across the face and probably still does not accept that the lead-up to the Iraq war was a conspiracy and would not accept that there was a conspiracy in 1941 Germany. Some people are incredibly blind and deaf to what is happening all around them even though it is blantly obvious. People like orge are like the German population that readly believed what the hate mongering propaganda of the time put out without giving it much thought till it effected them personally. Orge has the mind set of Chief Scott Kirkland putting forth false and erroneous evidence that within a fair and open debate can not stand on it's own marits. I am by no means against capitolism or profit but when they control the government on so many fronts it gets to a point that it has to be stopped and talking about it is the first step in countering it, even if it means being subject to slander by those that support the tyranny.

orge

Posted: 10.08.09, 08:46 AM

It seems to me that travis and nightlight have been watching a lot of conspiracy movies...lol. It is easy to say the government is evil and trying to hold back our "rightful liberties", but that does nothing to solve the problems at hand. Also nightlight, do you any empirical evidence for your claims. What proof do you have that alcohol brings in so much money and pot would not? Furthermore, have you ever smoked up? Its pretty hard to do much of anything while blazed lol... But honestly, blaming the government (as it seems you two are doing) is counter-intuitive and progress the discussion none.

Page 3 of 7

Last »

Watch Commonwealth Club of California

$99.95/Year

Unlimited access to all programs

Watch Marijuana Economics

$4.95

30 Days Unlimited Viewing