Debate between Ron Paul and Stephen Baldwin about the Legalization of Marijuana

BEHAR: Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps finally spoke out publicly about the *** photo seen around the world. Here's what he told Matt Lauer on "The Today Show." (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MICHAEL PHELPS: We were just celebrating, honestly. It was a small group, and we were just sitting around celebrating. MATT LAUER: I have to ask you, were you smoking pot? PHELPS: It was a bad mistake. We all know what you and I are talking about. It was a stupid mistake, bad judgment. (END VIDEO CLIP) BEHAR: Should marijuana be legalized? We'll debate the pros and cons right now. In the anti-legalization camp is actor Stephen Baldwin. And on the pro side is Congressman from Texas Ron Paul. He was a presidential candidate, and Paul has sponsored hemp related legislation. Gentlemen, round one. OK, what's your reaction to the ho-haw over the Phelps photo--Ron? REP. RON PAUL, (R) TEXAS: I'm sorry, over the what? BEHAR: Over the photo, the Michael Phelps photo. What was your reaction to all of that? What happened with Michael Phelps? He basically lost a lot of his endorsements. PAUL: The whole thing is a mess, it's outrageous. I think we're getting carried away with the whole war on drugs. That's how silly the whole thing gets. Drugs are very dangerous, but there's a lot of things that are very dangerous. The question is who should regulate danger? Should we assume responsibility for ourselves, or should the government take care of us? And I don't believe in the nanny state. If you do have regulations and laws, they should be at the state level, not at the federal level. We didn't even have a federal law up until 1937. And here we are, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars in a very unsuccessful attempt to regulate drugs. And you have all these weird examples. That's one example that you mentioned. What about a sick person dying with cancer goes out and uses marijuana when it is legalized in a particular state like California, and the Feds come in and arrest him. There's so much violation there of common decency and the constitution. And it makes no sense. The drug war is a total failure, and the federal drug war ought to be revisited, and, for the most part, gotten rid of. BEHAR: Steven Baldwin, hi. You're against legalizing marijuana. Why? STEPHEN BALDWIN, ACTOR: It's a little bit ironic. I can see why Jimmy wanted to rush out of there so quickly. Here you're looking at an actor that has starred in two very popular marijuana films "Half Baked" and "Bio-dome." And here I am bringing a faith-based, conservative perspective to this issue. And, obviously joy, there's a lot of common sense that needs to be included in this conversation. It's a very simple reality. Marijuana leads to doing worse things. That's just a fact. I don't care what anybody says, what the debate it. When you smoke marijuana at a young age, it will usually lead to alcohol abuse and harder drugs. So right there, that's one reason why it should not be legalized. BEHAR: We have heard for years, that it's a gate way drug. What do you say to that, Congressman Paul. PAUL: I think that's silly. Probably the most addictive drug in the country, in the world is nicotine. And nobody talks about nicotine being a gateway drug. So there's no sense to that. And besides, it's not nearly as addictive as alcohol. So if you're a consistent person and you think the government should be regulating personal behavior, you have to be for prohibition of alcohol. And when you look back and throughout history and what happened to that, that was a total disaster. It created Al Capones. And right now, there's so much violence today not because people use drugs, but because they're illegal. You know the people who benefit the most by all these laws? These are the drug cartels. They lobbied to keep these laws in place, because they can't exist without them. You don't have the Al Capones now because you don't have the prohibition of alcohol. Prohibition is what is bad. And this does not mean we endorse personal behavior that is not beneficial. It just means who regulates personal behavior. And it shouldn't be the state. It has -- there's no benefits to it. Just like regulating church behavior or religious behavior of any sort. So I see no purpose in doing this. BEHAR: OK, Steven, we'll get back to you when we return. OK, more Baldwin versus Paul. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BEHAR: OK, we're back. Stephen, let me ask you a question. Congressman Paul brought up the whole idea of medical marijuana. What is your response to that? People have glaucoma, they're nauseous from anti-cancer drugs. What do you say to that? BALDWIN: Well, again, you know, there is, you know, not a whole lot of research to back up the fact that there aren't alternatives even to that. There's lots of pain relieving practices that people can study. So, I must say, to be honest with you, Joy, when, in fact, there are people for those reasons that do have success with it, then if prescribed under a controlled situation, then yes, obviously that makes a lot of sense. But back to Mr. Paul's statement about the addictive aspects of smoking cigarettes. Obviously, if I smoke a cigarette, I'm not going to get into my vehicle and be impaired potentially to damage someone else's life. If we legalize marijuana, there's no question the number of deaths related to people being impaired under the influence of marijuana is going to increase. The question is, just to be able to tax it, is it worth it? That's the question. BEHAR: OK, Ron, what do you say to that? PAUL: I understand there's a few people who smoke marijuana already. And how many times have you seen somebody arrested for driving under the influence of marijuana? I mean, I've never even heard of it. Driving under the influence of alcohol, that is dangerous. But people shouldn't do that, and they should be responsible. But you can't get more people smoking marijuana. It's just that what is so bad is the war on marijuana, putting people in prison, they can be caught using drugs for the third time, never committing a violent act, and putting them in prison for life. And yet rapists and murderers can get out. And you think of all that expenses, you're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars that gets spent on this, and people who usually get sent to prison for nonviolent drug use come out as violent criminals. So it makes no sense at all to pursue this method, because marijuana is not going to increase car accidents, let me tell you. That is not the case. BEHAR: I would think that it's hard to detect if you're high on marijuana when you're pulled over by police. There's no breathalyzer test. So how would we know what affect it has? (CROSSTALK) BALDWIN: Well, that's -- go ahead, Mr. Paul. Go ahead, Ron. PAUL: Well, that's a possibility, but even under today's circumstances, nobody gets arrested for it. And the alcohol is a real culprit and the real problem. And yet we have people in Washington, D.C. who drink a lot of alcohol, let me tell you. Because of political reasons, they're scared to death to even to vote to legalize the growing of hemp. Hemp has nothing to do with smoking marijuana. And because of this obsession on the drug war, we can't grow hemp in this country. We send the help growing up to Canada, and then we buy the products that we make from hemp. So we export our jobs to Canada. Hemp is a good product that we prohibit from being used. And it was legal up until even after World War II we were allowed to raise hemp in this country. This is how hysterical this war on drugs has gotten. So the sooner we come to this realization someday--actually I'm optimistic on this. I think this country is going to wake up like they did in the 30s and say prohibition didn't work. Alcohol is a horror. It's made things worse. It has caused a lot of crime and violence. It's about time we just do this, get rid of the prohibition. Let the regulation go back to the state. Regulate it like alcohol. And would the real regulation come from the individual and also from the family and the parents and the community. That's what prevents drug use, not some federal thug coming in with guns and arresting some kid, and throwing him for prison for life. That makes no sense whatsoever. BEHAR: Are you saying that there are a lot of alcoholics in congress? Is that what I heard you say? PAUL: No, I didn't say that. I said there's a lot of -- I said there's a lot of people in Congress who drink a lot of alcohol. And they won't vote to legalize hemp. BALDWIN: I have a question. PAUL: They won't let us raise hemp because they're afraid of the political consequences. BEHAR: Is there any drug you would not legalize. I just want one more question to Ron, to the congressman. Is there any drug you would not-do you want to legalize all drugs, *** included? PAUL: I want to go back to a previous time prior to 1937 when the states did the regulating. And I don't advocate giving marijuana to 10-year-olds walking into a store. But, you know, the kids now can get more marijuana with all these laws easier than they can get alcohol. So the states have every right to regulate and legalize and allow people to use these things. BEHAR: We're running out of time. Stephen, I'm going to give you the last word before we go. BALDWIN: I'm just curious, Joy. Do you think there's a lot of marijuana smoking Ron Paul supporters? I'm just wondering. BEHAR: Have you ever smoked a joint, Ron? Congressman Paul, have you ever smoked a joint? PAUL: This is the truth, and most people believe what I say. I have never seen anybody smoke marijuana, and I have never been in the same room with that. BEHAR: I've got to go. OK, thank you very much. (CROSSTALK) PAUL: To me, it's the issue of freedom of choice.