It's funny: you seem to comprehend that MSM editors favor anti-pot stories and slant their reporting against them, but apparently that's just because you like pot. Whereas, if it is something you don't like, such as this one breed of dog, then you are as free to ignore objective research as Tom Carr does. You ignore the fact that MSM editors like to publicize pit pull attacks over attacks by other dog breeds.

Same thing with your news clippings against straight parents and youth pastors.

My point is not that you're wrong in your overall goal. It's that your tactics suck. If you sink to Rush Limbaugh's level to attack your enemies, you become Rush Limbaugh.

Present evidence that "many" reporters for these organizations use marijuana "safely and responsibly." Otherwise, out-of-the-blue accusations like this merely take us away from your core points: that Ms. Murphy failed to obtain any coverage of Mr. Carr's opposing viewpoint, and that marijuana is far from the "gateway drug" Mr. Carr implied it to be. I fear that going the extra step to label "many" of those reporters as pot users (responsible or otherwise) takes away from your clout in defending Dominic Holden's viewpoint. Ms. Murphy had a largely one-sided story, and marijuana isn't a gateway drug. Period. Enough said. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

Plus, we all know (but never acknowledge) the truth that Seattle's really an impossible city in which to find and buy pot. I imagine it's easier to buy pot in the White House, for God's sake.

Oh, by the way- elenchos is totally right. In this particular and narrowly defined context. Nice blog, e.

With "Democrats" like him, who needs Republicans?

If they refuse to answer, report that.
Make it fun, do a survey of stranger writers, too,
__ pot
__ hash
__blow, non crack, in the nose
__crack
__ acid
__shrooms
__ speed
___ horse
___MDM

__ x
___ a.n.
__ alcohol
____ drunk > 2 a week.

Is he speaking from ignorance or knowledge of pot?

One amusing point, however, came when he was pontificating on the "extremely small" number of people arrested for pot in Seattle. Councilman McIver, displaying a great wit and even better timing, responded "it's not so small if you're the one being arrested." This drew a laugh from virtually all members of the council.

My sense was they were tolerating Carr like a crazy uncle at xmas.

And, yeah, I've about had it with current and ex-druggies who shill for the drug war...including some in both the City and County prosecutor's office.

The Stranger wants everyone else to practice journalistic objectivity -- as long as it doesn't have to. How hypocritical can you get, Dan?

I will agree that in the US the chronic doesn't appear to be a "gateway drug" but in Germany it clearly is with somewhere in the 70% range admitting to using other drugs (next step on their ladder seems to be Meth) and with over 90% of meth users admitting to starting with pot and graduating to meth.

Now, I've tried mary jane but she really didn't do much for me. The only drug that has worked for me, in fact, is good old alcohol BUT..... most of my friends are hard-core pot heads. At the same time, however, they all do other stuff if its availability arises.

While I am rambling my point is that pot IS a gateway drug at least in some areas. And given that most regular pot users in the US (that I know) also use other drugs I'm not sure we can rule it out as a gateway.

When it all is said and done I do not oppose legalization of marijuana but I do think that most regular users are in denial.

Let's see, bf said I should dumb it down....

If you smoke MJ regularly and want to see it legalized, convince me first that you don't regularly frequent the Sno Cha or the Snobox!

Oh, and by the way, MJ is illegal FEDERALLY! If you want to change that don't put your energy into state legislation, put the same effort into electing FEDERAL officials who will change the law.

One more item... I have a lot of former Straight Edge friends who have gone on to "have their fun" but I don't have a single pot smoker friend who went on to be clean and sober.

It is a drug. That doesn't mean it is bad, but that doesn't mean it is harmless either!

Alas, I think he may have done better to send a deputy on this one since he was going to get burned one way or the other. If he hadn't said this law interferes, he'd run upside the Feds - no city attorney who wants to do a good job for his/her city would ever want to be seen as a "bad" guy from the perspective of the Feds.

We clearly need a national "change the drug laws" debate and a new government in Washington.

I love Dan's insistence that EVERYONE IN THE WORLD (or at least the vast majority) is doing it.

And many still occasionally toke or snort.

It's total bullshit hypocrisy for all of them to get away with maintaining a system in which thousands of other people, mainly African Americans, rot in jail and see their life destroyed because they had the bad luck to get caught. In other words, they couldn't do blow in a nice big house in Kennebunkport or on a cigarette boat but were doing drugs in the street.

They loxe voting rights (hurting more Democrats, naturally), it's a jobs program for jail guards and cops and courts, it costs $$$$, it destroys neighborhoods with resultant violence.

Until the media makes them all come out, we can't have an honest drug law discussion. We can't have change.

If you're going to do it, please present us with some facts and have some attribution.

Otherwise, you're doing exactly what you're arguing against, and that's disappointing to me.

And also - you're MSM whether you choose to believe so or not.

and when anyone says "marijuana never did anything for me", i just tune out.

Oh, except for rebellious youth who will do the opposite of what they're told. Save the children! Do your part! Have sex, smoke pot, or even be an uptight republican and let your kids rebel as they will.

Doesn't anyone else know someone who grew up with promiscous or drug using parents whose kids are super straight laced? The most conservative woman I've ever met is named Maryjane.

My guess is KUOW was already planning on doing a follow-up piece.

To those who have been arguing that pot is a gateway drug: Have you ever actually looked at the behavioral survey data? Overwhelmingly people try alcohol before marijuana. And a huge percentage of them try tobacco prior to alcohol. And these days, many kids use prescription drugs stolen from the medicine chest before trying pot. So as someone else noted, pot may be a precursor to other illicit drugs, but it is hardly the gateway drug.

Have you considered my previous point that alcohol or nicotine are the gateway drugs to pot and other drugs?

Or that, since pot is so stigmatized and harshly punished that, once someone tries it and sees it is relatively harmless, they think that the dangers of all the other drugs must be lies too? Or that, hell, I've already broken the law, might as well try the next thing?