NationStates Jolt Archive

Who thinks Marijuana has legitmate medical uses and who thinks it has no use but to get people high?

what is and is not a legit medical use can be debated and whether or not using it just for the intoxicating effects should be legal is also debatable. What we want to know is how many people think it should be a legitmate medical drug and want only to debate and decide what is and is not a legit. medical use and the method of dispensation.

I'm of the opinion that marijuana should be legalized for a good number of reasons, but I also believe that this is more of a national issue which doesn't seem to require NSUN intervention.

I think all drugs should be legalised for medical and recreational use, except those that can trigger hallucinations without warning at any time in a long period after use (e.g. LSD).

Ben, thats basically every Class A and most Class B drugs. Drug users have had it too good!

I think that too many socialist Governments are concerned with rehabilitating the 'poor' drug users instead of teaching them a lesson. You have seen the effects of people who use cannabis at our school. The memory loss is just one. It has been linked to Sxizophrenia and other mental related diseases and plenty more connections with other diseases of the mind (such as homosexuality) are being investigated.

The solution?

Cannabis users should be taken straight to trial, and the sentence should range from 18 years in a solitary confinement prison to death by hanging. Fuck all pot-heads!

The United States of Bulgandaria's Parliament states that Medical Marijuana is outlawed in our country. We do not want the minds of our citizens to be damaged by a drug that only gives a few hours of use but causes permanent damage.

The Nation of Idle Hands feels very strongly that any drug that can give a person releif from a devastating disease should be legal for them to use. This does not mean that it should be legal for any person with a hangnail, and it should only be used under a doctors supervision.

The Holy Republic of Kitulania recognises the painkilling and sedative effects of marijuana, and acknowledges it's use for medical purposes.

The Republic of Sheilanagig feels that we should legalize marijuana for medicinal use and recreational use. Either that, or make alcohol illegal. It's a losing battle to criminalize marijuana or alcohol. People will grow the marijuana or smuggle it, or they will distill the alcohol or smuggle it. The best way to cut the drug and alcohol abuse problem and make medical marijuana available as an option is to legalize.

People are more willing to come forward for treatment when they know that it will not open them up to criminal proceedings, and our prisons here were full of people who were incarcerated for marijuana related crimes. The only people who were truly doing well with it illegal were the smugglers and the dealers, and the corrupt officials who were bribed to allow them to carry on with their business. Also, people here don't seem to be abusing drugs at the rate that they used to. Teenagers aren't starting, because with it legal, it soon loses its appeal.

There are sick people who would benefit from this therapy, and we feel that they should have access to it.

The official standing of Sellinia: we follow the lead of the motherland, where semi-legalisation of Cannabis and other softdrugs have lead to some of the lowest drugs usage rates among teens in the western world. We not only seek to make it available for Medical use, but intend to give everyone (from age 18+) persmission to smoke it in designated area's. ;)

the dsh would rather the side effects could be reduced before legalising Cannabis.

Having said that, Hirota has effectively decriminalised Cannabis in the last 5 years, with generally benefical results.

Ben, thats basically every Class A and most Class B drugs. Drug users have had it too good!

I think that too many socialist Governments are concerned with rehabilitating the 'poor' drug users instead of teaching them a lesson. You have seen the effects of people who use cannabis at our school. The memory loss is just one. It has been linked to Sxizophrenia and other mental related diseases and plenty more connections with other diseases of the mind (such as homosexuality) are being investigated.

The solution?

Cannabis users should be taken straight to trial, and the sentence should range from 18 years in a solitary confinement prison to death by hanging. f--- all pot-heads!

I do know what I mean when I say all drugs. But I am a firm believer in the individual's sovereignty over his/her body. With drugs, the government should ensure that all citizens know the potential damage they could do themselves by using drugs, should discourage use with heavy but not unreasonable taxes and big warnings on the packaging and adverts, and should provide rehab for those who want to turn their lives around, but the state should not enforce any prohibition of these things except to stop sale to under 18s. It's completely illogical for the state to punish adults for making a conscious, informed decision simply because that decision harms the one making it.

Yes i have seen the effects of cannabis use, and for the most part, those who I know who used to or still do use cannabis on a semi-regular basis are fine. As far as I can see, it has only has serious impacts on a minority.

Please don't refer to homosexuality as a disease.

Your "solution" is idiocy. It's stupid to punish people for victimless crimes, and just plain evil to use such drastic measures.

History has shown that prohibition only leads to the growth of organised crime, and with it all the real evils committed by these gangs, and even with these costs it doesn't actually prevent the use of the banned substance. Aside from the philosophical point of whether it is right to punish victimless crimes, legalising drugs cuts out a vast chunk of funding from organised crime and terrorism, thus also saving money on police, intelligence, and defence funding.

The memory loss is just one. It has been linked to Sxizophrenia and other mental related diseases and plenty more connections with other diseases of the mind (such as homosexuality) are being investigated.


Homosexuality is NOT a disease of the mind, it is genetic and should be accepted, The American Psychology Association and the American Psychiatric Association say it should be accepted. STOP YOUR HATE!

Who thinks Marijuana has legitmate medical uses and who thinks it has no use but to get people high?


Wrong forum.

This is a domestic issue, not an international one. Please take this to the Got Issues forum and create a national issue for this.
My government will vote and lobby against any domestic issue (legalization or prohibition) that makes its way to the UN floor and will place economic sanctions against any government that proposes such.

I encourage all other nations that have a basic understanding of what the word international means to also "blacklist" nations that seek to abuse the UN.

10kMichael

Cabinia has a powerful education program, and drug education is a part of that. We educate our populace on the use of narcotics, and then we turn them free to use them however they choose... and to deal with the consequences of that use.

We honestly don't understand the hypocrisy of the many national leaders who swill gallons of alcohol and pop designer drugs (Xanax, Prozac, Valium) and get upset over the use of marijuana.

DP

DP

Who thinks Marijuana has legitmate medical uses and who thinks it has no use but to get people high?


Wrong forum.

This is a domestic issue, not an international one. Please take this to the Got Issues forum and create a national issue for this.
My government will vote and lobby against any domestic issue (legalization or prohibition) that makes its way to the UN floor and will place economic sanctions against any government that proposes such.

I encourage all other nations that have a basic understanding of what the word international means to also "blacklist" nations that seek to abuse the UN.

10kMichael

Actually, this is an international, U.N. issue since a proposal for Medical Marijuana is pending as an active proposal and needs only the correct number of regional delegates' votes to become a full resolution. We encourage delegates to vote for the Medical Marijuana proposal and make it a resolution open for vote the all member nations of the U.N. Since, at this time, we have no trade agreements of any kind with you and none are pending, your threat of ecomonic sanctions for making this proposal is meaningless to us.

I don't think Marijuana has been adequately (i.e. scientifically) researched to be proven a benefit for people to use in medical circumstances; thus, we cannot and will not approve this proposal.

Actually, this is an international, U.N. issue since a proposal for Medical Marijuana is pending as an active proposal and needs only the correct number of regional delegates' votes to become a full resolution. We encourage delegates to vote for the Medical Marijuana proposal and make it a resolution open for vote the all member nations of the U.N. Since, at this time, we have no trade agreements of any kind with you and none are pending, your threat of ecomonic sanctions for making this proposal is meaningless to us.

That is the stupidest justification I've heard ...

Just because another group of people are idiots, doesn't provide international standing. Do the rest of us a favour and find a high school history teacher and ask him / her what "international standing" means.

I could write a poor proposal, like yours, but have it require mandatory flossing ... and there are enough morons around here who might just endorse it ... that doesn't make it an international problem.

If you can demonstrate why this problem crosses international borders, then maybe there is a justification, but thus far you've only said, "It is international, because the game allows me to submit the proposal." Guess what, the game also technically allows you to submit plenty of other lame ideas -- this doesn't mean they are good nor international in nature.

10kMichael

Dear 10kMichael/Mikitivity:

Let me ask you to answer one question: If a U.N Nation (most likely a theocracy, but not necessarily so) announced that it would no longer allow the practice of medicine of any kind within its borders and that people would live or die pursuant to the whims of nature (or God(s) if it were a theocracy) would you hold that the matter is one of national soveriegnty or that of international human rights concern? If you say it is OK for a country to treat its people in this fashion, then we have a substantial disagreement on how the U.N. should handle civil rights and I will respectfully agree to disagree with your position. However, if it is your position that a country cannot outlaw ALL medical treatment, then your oppostion to our proposal that requires all countries to allow one specific form of medical treatment is illogical. As noted many times, the countries can decide how, when and where the treatment is to be provided; it just cannot completely outlaw it all together under our proposal.

Sincerely
His Royal Highness,
King 'Lude II

P.S. I've spoken with my country's minister of foreign trade, I did not realize how highly praised your woolen products were. We do not import a significant amount of them, but the loss of trade over this issue would seem to us to be nothing more than the exercise of spite. I'm sure if you check with your foreign trade personnel, you'll find that our leather products are likewise of significant value and in some demand by your citizens. At a bare minimum, I would suggest we agree to disagree over this issue, but since neither of them have any bearing on whether we import/export wool or leather with or without tariffs, I would ask that we leave things as they are between our countries on the exchange of these items. This is a political disagreement over the function of the U.N. and what is and is not to be controlled by them, not an issue that should prevent the citizens from either of our countries to obtain "creature comforts" that they deign desirable.

Again, Respectfully yours,
His Highness,
King 'Lude II

I scarcely read the above posts, but in any case here's my opinion.

The word "legalizing" used in the first couple of posts drove me to vote NO.

I have no problem with the decriminalization of marijuana - decriminalization means that, at a party, the cops walk in. The guy with the joint in his hand gets a fine, if even that. Sometimes the guy with the joint can just walk away free as a bird, without so much as a minute in prison or a penny lost from a fine. The guy who's got the bag of weed and all the people gathered round him, obviously the pusher, he's the one who does the time. I don't have a problem with that.

But legalizing it is a whole 'nother ball-game. Legalizing means that at that same party, cops walk in, see a pusher and a guy with a joint, tell the people to turn the music down a bit and walk out. THAT's what legalizing means. Hopefully this can teach people something of a lesson on specific law terms.

I scarcely read the above posts, but in any case here's my opinion.

The word "legalizing" used in the first couple of posts drove me to vote NO.

I have no problem with the decriminalization of marijuana - decriminalization means that, at a party, the cops walk in. The guy with the joint in his hand gets a fine, if even that. Sometimes the guy with the joint can just walk away free as a bird, without so much as a minute in prison or a penny lost from a fine. The guy who's got the bag of weed and all the people gathered round him, obviously the pusher, he's the one who does the time. I don't have a problem with that.

But legalizing it is a whole 'nother ball-game. Legalizing means that at that same party, cops walk in, see a pusher and a guy with a joint, tell the people to turn the music down a bit and walk out. THAT's what legalizing means. Hopefully this can teach people something of a lesson on specific law terms.

Actually, the reason I support legalisation of recreational drugs is not ignorance about the meanings of the terms, but because I actually do think that the cops should simply tell them to turn the music down and leave, unless there are children around.

Anyway, this proposal isn't even about that - it would only legalise marijuana for medicinal purposes, i.e. in countries where it was previously illegal, the most you'd be forced to do is allow doctors to prescribe marijuana in certain circumstances.

Who thinks Marijuana has legitmate medical uses and who thinks it has no use but to get people high?

what is and is not a legit medical use can be debated and whether or not using it just for the intoxicating effects should be legal is also debatable. What we want to know is how many people think it should be a legitmate medical drug and want only to debate and decide what is and is not a legit. medical use and the method of dispensation.

Via perscription and only under supervision by a trained medical professional such as a nurse or doctor.