Nicotine and caffeine are two of most abused drugs on the planet, weed doesn't even come close. Because they are mainstream drugs nobody thinks twice about the abuse aspect.
out of all the things that could be said in response to this, I think the single most compelling reason why some drugs need to be in a 'different category' (of perception, approach, accessibility, warning, etc) is the concept of something being
mood altering. And before someone just jokes about what a bad mood they're in until they have their coffee (or nicotine), I'm serious. Some drugs alter your whole personality. As in, you take the drug, you immediately change. Everyone can tell. You're different. Your speech, your thoughts, you're a different version of you - very different.
Nicotine is just addictive with pretty much zero other effects (especially if all you do is use straight nicotine, like me who buys Rogue pouches).
I agree with you about being abused - they are both abused in the sense of being far over-done beyond any remotely possible benefit and also being used with little to no regard for the addiction aspect, but you have to think of the consequences. I can abuse drinking water in the same way, but what's the harm? Having to pee every few minutes.
The other big difference is how they affect people outside the user. Drinking caffeine, taking nicotine, and yes I'll include marijuana in this category, they are in a certain "affects other people" category....usually pretty low, except when marijuana is not used responsibly.
However, fentanyl for example, is virtually impossible to use responsibly for anyone with a normal human brain. Meth seems to be difficult for most people to use responsibly for many reasons as well.
I do agree that not everything makes sense, legally, the way we have it. I would think that marijuana should have been legal years ago, and I also think alcohol should be restricted even more than it is. I think those two should converge in similar restrictions, maybe 25 yr and up.
Other drug laws I think are terrible too. For example, in AZ, simple meth possession (not intent to distribute), gets minimum 1.5 years hard time with no judge discretion allowed. That's ridiculous! First offense and no criminal record, it doesn't matter. Get caught with a crumb the size of a grain of rice, a year and a half in prison. With the current focus on "racial justice", nobody will ever talk about this (which is why you may have never heard of it), but for all you hear about Crack (and therefore african americans) having gotten the short end of the stick for years, in my state it's actually meth that's treated as the kingpin of all drugs. The punishment for possession is extremely harsh, mostly affecting Caucasian users.
Imagine being sent to a state prison for possessing $10 of meth for your first time ever. What do they think
that's going to do to the person? Get them clean or something? If I was sent to prison and my life as I knew it came to an end for 1.5 years, my first thought would be, "How do I get ahold of that stuff inside, cuz it's the only way I'm getting through this!" And I'm pretty sure most people would think the same.
In my opinion there should be close to zero punishment for simple possession......forced rehab is a totally different story, that should be done......and save the 1.5 years for the guy with 20 grams.
