(I should probably note that I've never smoked pot.)

The US was built with the money from Tobacco, not Marijuana.

So we can't criminalize Tobacco any more than Columbia can do away with cocaine or Afghanistan can out opium. Personally, I think that marijuana use is probably harmful, as is most drug use, but isn't worth the cost in criminalizing it.

You are kidding, right? Marijuana cultivation is one of the largest cash crops in the US (there is some question as to whether or not it is the largest, but there is no disputing the fact that it is in the top five.)

> The US was built with the money from Tobacco, not Marijuana.

The US was built with money from tobacco, sugar, and slavery. Not really a great mix for us to be crowing about. BTW, when you see period documents that talk about "hemp" and how all colonial settlers should be encouraged to grow this valuable crop you are reading an exhortation from the government to grow marijuana (we don't grow the same varietals now, but it is the same plant...)

Maybe, but are Marijuana growers as dependent on their crop as Tobacco growers? Do they have as powerful a lobby? Are they as heavily taxed?

I've read that period documentation. "Hemp" is not marijuana as we know it today and it was grown for rope, not as a drug. It never did catch on though, the climate wasn't very good for it.

Good point I read some place that the reason people originally wanted to out law marijuana was in order to make it illegal to grow hemp which was competing with their cotton crop. So really this all just started out as a government enforced monopoly to please some corporate fat cats.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1

BTW, your link is fixed. ------------------------

Edit: That article emphasized my point.

Which isn't that one is good or the other is bad, but the relationship of either to our economy is different. While production of marijuana is increasing, most of it is controlled and distributed by groups that are considered foreign, like the Mexican mob for example. In fact, a great deal of it is grown by recent immigrants whose families are being held hostage in their home countries.

Needless to say this could change in light of legalization, but it's current stature is what plays a key role right now. As it stands, the people who get rich off of marijuana aren't Americans.

So while legalization of Marijuana may benefit society monetarily, there is no particular interest group that stands to get rich or on which the government already depends. This was even more true at the time of the original criminalization. It's a matter of why, not whether. I've stated elsewhere that I believe marijuana ought to be legal and I'm stating here why it isn't and tobacco is.

I mentioned small tobacco farmers for a different reason. Taxes, restrictions and lawsuits against tobacco increase everyday and everyday small tobacco farmers loose ground to larger tobacco firms which can deal more efficiently with the restrictions. As the restrictions increase, small tobacco will go out of business and if criminalize, the larger firms will give way to cartels every bit as troublesome as the Mexican mob. Legalize either and their's no guarantee that either will come back as a wholesome industry. (Given prohibition, it seems likely, but isn't a given.)

So those that oppose one and support the other aren't necessarily hypocrites so much as tunnel visioned. Which is all I really have to say.

Marijuana has a long history too. If it were legalized, the industry would be taxed just like tobacco. If tobacco was outlawed there would be underground tobacco farmers just like we have today with weed.

It's silly to say tobacco is good because the farmers are good people who had parents who did the same thing. Their crop kills thousands of people. Weed kills no one. I'm for legalization of both, but by the numbers tobacco is the one we should be worried about.

That's good, because I didn't say that. I said that it's legal because tobacco farmers are a more established part of the economy; that it's legal for historical reasons.

Marijuana has a long history too. If it were legalized, the industry would be taxed just like tobacco.

If Marijuana were allowed to establish itself as an open industry, sure. But it hasn't, or rather, it hadn't at the time of the first drug laws against it. Which is the whole point. I don't know why you're having trouble with this.

Their crop kills thousands of people. Weed kills no one.

BS, smoking weed has the exact same effects on your health as smoking tobacco and plenty of people have died smoking weed.In terms of danger they are around the same. The difference in numbers has more to do with relative popularity and the openness people have with their habits.

Good, because I didn't say that.