I haven't really thought this through thoroughly; it is likely too much of a logistical nightmare to work, but would be a good thing to do anyway. Someone with a very wide online audience (I don't know who), OR a highly advertised group, should start managing an "arguments" page for various issues. I'd like to see marijuana legalization as one of the issues. In other words, this person or group would be responsible for writing down the initial arguments from both sides. Anybody can then respond to those arguments, but on a separate page. People can then vote up (no down voting, as then people from one side would just vote down the other sides arguments) the responses they think are best. The person or group managing the page would then select what they felt was the best response (the group would have to be unbiased, or at least attempt to be, and actually select representative arguments). The manager would then add the response to the page. So, if you start out with: Pro Legalization: - Less violence at the border, since drug cartels would no longer be able to profit from drug sale - (Best counter argument (I just made this up as an example)): Drug cartels wouldn't be paying taxes, and so would just drop their prices. They would make less money, but still a lot - (Best counter-counter argument): It would still have a net effect of lowering violence - Marijuana is safer than some other legal drugs, such as alcohol ... and so on, and then a pro-prohibition side, with their arguments. Over time, the best arguments and counter arguments would be selected by the managers and put onto the page, and people can still discuss and vote on stuff. This would only work with a pretty wide audience though, from both sides. Anyway, eventually you get down to where all the reasonable arguments have been made. Anything based on research claims or whatnot would need to be cited. People could then read over all the arguments, look at any cited evidence, arguments about the validity of cited evidence and so forth. Perhaps people could actually learn this way I'm sure there are at least some reasonable arguments out there for keeping marijuana illegal. I think there are many reasons to legalize it. Having a widely read page with the main arguments for and against, with their evidence, if any, would really help I think. The reason I think this would be better than the short debates on the news and talk shows and such is that this way, the evidence can actually be seen, and the time could be taken to fully flesh out arguments. If the prohibitionists say "marijuana makes you violent" then instead of having to just say "no it doesn't" we could post evidence and studies showing that marijuana doesn't make you violent. Anyway, just a thought...
Great idea, start an Internet war. Jk but I have thought if ideas similar where the truth should be readily available to the public, alot of individuals will agree and disagree. So if it's solely based on peoples beliefs/opinions it won't help that much. People need logical thinking and research from a good source where they can find out what has been scientifically proven or unproven, it's easy to spread propaganda(take above the influence for example), but it is not easy to take away someones wrong idea and allow them to accept something else. Sorry it just sort if seems like it would be a disaster for our side. Someone should sponsor pro-cannabis ads on tv, radio, Internet... Actually I think norml was trying to raise funds for something like that Shit, I apologize fir not reading your post in it's entirety, it seems like a good idea if it's all supported by real facts and not the 'logic' people think is right(aka their opinion without proof)