Censoring Ads to Legalize Pot

In California, a series of 30-second TV commercials have been produced to suggest a viable way to improve the state's budget crisis: legalize it.


But according to Stop the Drug War, several TV stations in the state -- including some in Los Angeles and San Francisco, where no small amount of weed gets smoked daily -- either pulled the ads or rejected them outright.


Created by the Marijuana Policy Project, the ads feature a middle-aged woman, who looks more like a church organist than a pothead, describing how she is a marijuana user, and that she supports the taxation of her relaxant of choice because, as she says, "Taxes from California's marijuana industry could pay the salaries of 20,000 teachers. Isn't it time?"


Comments (2)

Though not a user myself I have often questioned the war against marijuana. It is clearly a never ending losing battle for the taxpayer - much longer than Viet Nam and Iraq combined - and has also cost the lives of many law enforcement personnel. It has no doubt created some criminal organizations and its trafficking has strengthened others. Imagine the impact to the level of drug-related violence in the US and in Latin America if marijuana were decriminalized. Our border would likely then be more secure, also a cost benefit to taxpayers.

What we would need to do is make sure that marijuana were sold only from government-run stores, similarly to how liquor is sold in Canada. That would tightly control the market, you could require ID for purchase (similar to liquor sales), and would help ensure public safety (commercial stores and warehouses wouldn't become targets). Also, if getting marijuana were as easy as getting beer, drug dealers lose a major source of revenue.

There are lots of stories out there about marijuana being a gateway drug; not sure if that's a medical fact or just an anti-drug campaign scare tactic. Anything that relaxes you and lowers your inhibitions I suppose has the potential to increase the likelihood that you might try something else, even if that likelihood remains extremely remote, e.g. from 1 in a million chances to 2 in a million chances means it "doubles the likelihood." Scary? No. I like stout beer, but refuse to try milk stout, even after one or two stouts, despite how relaxed I am.

"Medical marijuana" has been getting a lot of press. It seems odd to me that with myriad conditions that lead to horrendous pain and / or loss of appetite that marijuana can currently be prescribed in only one or two situations. If marijuana's legitimate medical use has been recognized it seems a shame that we don't allow it to be used in more cases in which it might bring relief.

Making marijuana illegal hasn't prevented it from being a huge part of our society; instead, it just means that we spend enormous amounts of money pretending that it doesn't exist and funding drug lords with one hand while we fight them with the other. The film makes a good point. Let's use that same money instead to farm and sell, then fund education and healthcare.

Twenty some years ago the same argument was used to legalize gambling. Now we have legal gambling in almost every state, and our schools still need more money. Everyone seems to have forgotten that school funding was the argument used to bring gambling in in the first place. Unfortunately those who gamble the most are those who can least afford to lose.


While marijuana can probably bring relief to some with chronic diseases those who will suffer from legalization are the kids who will try it, like it, and go on to "bigger and better." Pot sellers will find something else to sell when they have to pay taxes on marijuana. For some people there will always be the "rush" of doing something illegal . Making pot legal will just ratchet up the ante.


What has happened with codeine and morphine? I believe they were once drugs that were illegal but are now used as medicine. Couldn't the same procedure be used with marijuana?

Leave a comment