NationStates Jolt Archive

hey i wanted to know who thought it should be legeal or not

At first I though you misspelled "marriage", but realized what you meant when I saw the poll and questioned the logic of the sentence, "marriage should only be legal for medical purposes."

Yes. Pot should be legal.

It should be treated just like alchohol, after all, it's certainly no more dangerous.

what i like is that it was made illegal on the basis of a lie, with approximately 25 seconds of 'debate'

Yeah.

No, not if it causes people to be as terrible at spelling as the original poster.
:fluffle:

Yeah, it should be legal. Its better than alcohol.

It should be treated just like alchohol, after all, it's certainly no more dangerous.
It is actually much less dangerous, to any and all parties involved. The only real way that marijuana might have more adverse effects than alcohol is in that people tend to use more marijuana at one time, whereas some people stop at just a drink or two.

what i like is that it was made illegal on the basis of a lie, with approximately 25 seconds of 'debate'
No, it was really made illegal on the basis that it was threatening to the synthetic fibre and cotton industries. That was the major motivator.

And if you want people to support you,don't call it "mary j" and refer to "situation" as "sit". It really doesn't help your case, Lilsminions.

Be a little cultural, say marijuana like a real Mexican.

I mean, we do it all the time here in So Cal.

All drugs should be legal.

No, it was really made illegal on the basis that it was threatening to the synthetic fibre and cotton industries. That was the major motivator.

i don't deny that there were other motives behind the writing of the various drug laws, but they happened largely behind the scenes. the debate in the house amounted to a question as to what the bill was actually about (because these fuckers have never actually read any of the shit they vote for), a slightly confused answer from the speaker, and some guy lying about what the american medical association had said in the committee hearing.

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

Be a little cultural, say marijuana like a real Mexican.

I mean, we do it all the time here in So Cal.
Well then why don't you also spell it like un Mexicano real, and spell it marihuana?

I think it should be legal and regulated like tobacco.

The War on Drugs FAQ (http://www.drugwarfaq.com/)
Cannibus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis)

Above are a couple of good links on marijuana and the War on Drugs.

Well then why don't you also spell it like un Mexicano real, and spell it marihuana?
....you make an amazingly good point....

Part of me feels it should be legal, but then cops would have less of an excuse to arrest hippies. It is a tough call.

if people want it they can get it anyway
:mp5:

Just because we, the part of society that still has morals, are losing the drug war doesnt mean we should throw in the towel. If pot were legalized or decriminalized, I honestly dont think you'd see that much of a rise in use, because right now anyone can get it if they want it. But having said that, we must keep it as an illegal drug. As for medical purposes.....no way! Whats next? Cocaine helps AIDS victims cope with pain? Where do we draw the line?
No one else will probably say it, so I will........We dont need to have medical marijuana because if they're going to die, a little bit of weed isnt gonna help them. And if you're that concerned about their suffering, do the humane thing and put them out of their misery. Liberals have corrupted our youth and anyone who cares about their children's and grandchildren's future will oppose the legalizing or decriminalizing of any illegal narcotic.

Are you aware that opiates, physically addictive, are used as painkillers? Yet marijuana, not physically addictive, with the only withdrawl symptoms, purely psychologically induced, are typically depression, is banned? Opiates are terrible to get over an addiction of. I'd go into the pharmacological reason for this, but I'm tires right now. Your "drug war" is ridiculous. It is trying to enforce your moral values on other people. Meh, I'd go further into the terrifying implications and consequences of your authoritarianism, as well as the pharmacological aspects in which you are ignorant, but I am going to bed now, so perhaps tommorow. Assuming I can even rouse myself from my bed...tommorow is not a day I'm looking foreward to...and I'm quite near to where It's happening, I have no school because of It...

Just because we, the part of society that still has morals, are losing the drug war doesnt mean we should throw in the towel.

I don't understand how using marijuana is immoral.

We dont need to have medical marijuana because if they're going to die, a little bit of weed isnt gonna help them

It's used in Glaucoma patients as well, and they aren't going to die.

Cancer patients who have undertaken successful chemotherapy also use it as an appetite stimulant.

Just because we, the part of society that still has morals, are losing the drug war doesnt mean we should throw in the towel. If pot were legalized or decriminalized, I honestly dont think you'd see that much of a rise in use, because right now anyone can get it if they want it. But having said that, we must keep it as an illegal drug. As for medical purposes.....no way! Whats next? Cocaine helps AIDS victims cope with pain? Where do we draw the line?
No one else will probably say it, so I will........We dont need to have medical marijuana because if they're going to die, a little bit of weed isnt gonna help them. And if you're that concerned about their suffering, do the humane thing and put them out of their misery. Liberals have corrupted our youth and anyone who cares about their children's and grandchildren's future will oppose the legalizing or decriminalizing of any illegal narcotic.

Buddy, take it from a guy who fought the war with his own addiction to cocaine and heroine, your feelings are not based on any factual evidence. I personally have faced withdrawl from several illegal substances, and "mary j" was actually the easiest.

The lasting effects of marijuana are also far less than those which are currently legal in the civilized world. Alcohol? Terrifying effects on the liver if consumed in an unsafe manner. Tobacco? Holy crap man, the smoke alone will tear up your lungs like a bunch of children in a candy store. Marijuana? Not known to have any lasting physical effects other than those caused by inhaling smoke into your lungs (which is bad no matter what you do).

Terribly sorry to burst your little malinformed bubble, but the truth is far easier to swallow than your ignorance.

Not intended to be flamebait, just using you as an example.

I don't understand how using marijuana is immoral.

it's totally in leviticus. god plainly tells moses to lay off the pot.

All drugs should be legal.

No, no they should not. Watch your best friend die from a drug reaction, and then come back and tell me that.

Buddy, take it from a guy who fought the war with his own addiction to cocaine and heroine, your feelings are not based on any factual evidence. I personally have faced withdrawl from several illegal substances, and "mary j" was actually the easiest.

The lasting effects of marijuana are also far less than those which are currently legal in the civilized world. Alcohol? Terrifying effects on the liver if consumed in an unsafe manner. Tobacco? Holy crap man, the smoke alone will tear up your lungs like a bunch of children in a candy store. Marijuana? Not known to have any lasting physical effects other than those caused by inhaling smoke into your lungs (which is bad no matter what you do).

Terribly sorry to burst your little malinformed bubble, but the truth is far easier to swallow than your ignorance.

Not intended to be flamebait, just using you as an example.
*claps* Hurray for Zoidberg :D
drugs are bad mmmkay

Fuck it. Let's all just move to Netherlands.

No, no they should not. Watch your best friend die from a drug reaction, and then come back and tell me that.

What if they were legal, but socially unacceptable? I'm not saying I like drugs, but I feel if they were legal and properly regulated, people would be safer.

it's totally in leviticus. god plainly tells moses to lay off the pot.

LOL :D

No, no they should not. Watch your best friend die from a drug reaction, and then come back and tell me that.

I'm sorry for your loss, but that also happens with legal drugs such as alcohol anyway. At least if it's regulated, the purity of drugs can be controlled.

This might have been said b4 (I was just passing through) but the Chinese used it for relief of rhuemitide arthritis (spelling?) a couple thousand years ago...

It should be treated just like alchohol, after all, it's certainly no more dangerous.

I agree, we should have full prohibition. We would if it weren't for the damn gangsters.

:sniper:

I'm sorry for your loss, but that also happens with legal drugs such as alcohol anyway. At least if it's regulated, the purity of drugs can be controlled.

Drug purity wasn't what caused his death, Alex died because the heroine depressed his central nervous system to the point that his brain "forgot" to tell his heart to beat. There are some drugs that should just not be legal under any circumstances, heroine one of them.

Also, please don't feel sorry for my loss. Alex's death was terrible, but not without a positive outcome. Yeah, I know, finding a bright side to a train wreck, but Alex's death is what cause me and the friends who were there to get off our addictions and make a new life for ourselves. I mean come on, I went from a complete junkie to being a college student holding down a 3.89 GPA with a major in psychology.

And THANK YOU CLEVELAND! GOOD NIGHT!

I used to think it should be legal but regulated.

Then I think medical purposes only since its potency and probability for addiciton seems to be increasing and I just didn't want us legalizing the next tobacco.

I'm sorta stuck between these two points. But I am for legalization to some extent so I chose 'medical purposes only' to be on the safe side.

and the question is................?

Does anyone actually have any good arguments for banning drugs? The "immorality" charge is garbage, read the constitution. "They're so dangerous"... um I think people can take responsibility for their own actions, I know I don't need the government protecting me from myself... If the problem is that people don't know how bad drugs are for them, or how to limit their use to prevent overdosing, then the solution would be education. It's a lot safer to help make sure people who use drugs use them safely than to ban them and hope people will stop.

I mean, obviously drugs are a problem, but if prohibition doesnt make them go away, it also increases crime rates with cartels and gangs, and it fills jails with non-violent criminals, i don't see how it's worth it. The anarchist in me wants to say all drugs should be legal with no regulation whatsoever, but I guess I could settle for regulation because its the most logical in terms of a balance of safety and freedom.

The best arguments i've heard for prohibition are that people can do messed up stuff when they're high, so its a preventative measure to reduce violent crime. The problem with that argument is that a) the same thing goes with alcohol, or even mental pollution (should we start banning ideas?). b) if prohibition creates underground drug trafficking and turf wars and terrorism and all that crazy stuff, wouldn't that at least counter whatever amount of violence would be prevented by the few people that won't use drugs if they're illegal?

Does anyone actually have any good arguments for banning drugs? The "immorality" charge is garbage, read the constitution. "They're so dangerous"... um I think people can take responsibility for their own actions, I know I don't need the government protecting me from myself... If the problem is that people don't know how bad drugs are for them, or how to limit their use to prevent overdosing, then the solution would be education. It's a lot safer to help make sure people who use drugs use them safely than to ban them and hope people will stop.

I mean, obviously drugs are a problem, but if prohibition doesnt make them go away, it also increases crime rates with cartels and gangs, and it fills jails with non-violent criminals, i don't see how it's worth it. The anarchist in me wants to say all drugs should be legal with no regulation whatsoever, but I guess I could settle for regulation because its the most logical in terms of a balance of safety and freedom.

The best arguments i've heard for prohibition are that people can do messed up stuff when they're high, so its a preventative measure to reduce violent crime. The problem with that argument is that a) the same thing goes with alcohol, or even mental pollution (should we start banning ideas?). b) if prohibition creates underground drug trafficking and turf wars and terrorism and all that crazy stuff, wouldn't that at least counter whatever amount of violence would be prevented by the few people that won't use drugs if they're illegal?

Hear! Hear!

When one talks about the legalization of marijuana, the stereotypical image is that of "smoking a joint". Smoking is bad for you and everyone around you, and I will never ever support a legalization of smoking. However, if marijuana truly has non-euthanasian consequences when used medically, then I suppose I would support its legalization (just not in a "joint-like" form). I do believe it to be a good substitute for wood in making paper, and I supported the NS-UN resolution to make marijuana paper.

I feel that the the arguments "alcohol is worse, tobacco is worse" fulfill the exact opposite of what the arguer intends. You are merely encouraging my inner-self to support the prohibition of alcohol and tobacco, not the legalization of marijuana.

There's my two cents.

It should be treated just like alchohol, after all, it's certainly no more dangerous.

Well, it takes quite a bit of alcohol to affect judgement adversely (but reflexes can still be impaired with smaller amounts, so you still shouldnt operate machinery!,) and the effects are shorter lived. THC almost immediately dims judgement, stays in the body for long periods of time, and also has additional effects which impair conciousness and memory. THC also contributes to obesity by increasing appetite (but that doesnt mean you should lay on the malt and hops.)

If you mean THC is less toxic than alcohol, then yes. But do remember that a healthy human will be knocked out be liver byproducts before consuming a lethal dose of alcohol (alcoholics and those who have built a tolerance or mixed stimulants to prevent this can still kill themselves though, as can very rapid introduction of alcohol into the body.) Also, do remember that Marijuana is often smoked, making it far more harmful than alcohol due to permanent damage to the respitory system with ANY amount of use, and carcinogens in concentrations as much as 30 times greater than that found in tabacco (although tabacco products somehow still tend to remain more toxic, even allowing for the greater toxiciticy of Nicotine.)


I wholeheartedly support the legalization of Marijuana, for the purposes stated below:

Imposing an age limit of 21 for all hemp products regardless of the presence of THC, and 24 for all smokeable forms of Marijuana.

Forming a beureau designed to track and punish producers which do not abide by stringent health and safety regulations, and charge them excessive fees and tarriffs.

To make sure all retailers of hemp products have purchased a liscence from the government and pay tarriffs or sales taxes.

To collect tarriffs and impose quotas on imports, and collect tarriffs on exports.

To create several new laws which, if broken in tandem, will result in penalties far harsher than what is currently in place.

To create "sin tax" funded rehabilation and healthcare facilities and enforce warning labels on packaging, hopefully after a class action suit is filed against "Big Hemp" by smokers in failing states of health who were promised that Marijuana was harmless.

Does anyone actually have any good arguments for banning drugs? The "immorality" charge is garbage, read the constitution. "They're so dangerous"... um I think people can take responsibility for their own actions, I know I don't need the government protecting me from myself... If the problem is that people don't know how bad drugs are for them, or how to limit their use to prevent overdosing, then the solution would be education. It's a lot safer to help make sure people who use drugs use them safely than to ban them and hope people will stop.

I mean, obviously drugs are a problem, but if prohibition doesnt make them go away, it also increases crime rates with cartels and gangs, and it fills jails with non-violent criminals, i don't see how it's worth it. The anarchist in me wants to say all drugs should be legal with no regulation whatsoever, but I guess I could settle for regulation because its the most logical in terms of a balance of safety and freedom.

The best arguments i've heard for prohibition are that people can do messed up stuff when they're high, so its a preventative measure to reduce violent crime. The problem with that argument is that a) the same thing goes with alcohol, or even mental pollution (should we start banning ideas?). b) if prohibition creates underground drug trafficking and turf wars and terrorism and all that crazy stuff, wouldn't that at least counter whatever amount of violence would be prevented by the few people that won't use drugs if they're illegal?

Other than the crime related to the distribution, and that some people think it is fun, what are the reasons to legalize it? The crime thing doesn't work as an argument, because it just gives someone like myself more reason to believe we should get tougher on criminals. Also, it works the other way as if you do purchase the stuff it means you are knowingly giving money that will be used to support those actions, whether you want to or not. It paints an image that you care more about getting high than you do about reducing crime.

potsmoking is for trailer trash, ghetto people and communists. plus, you brain dead tokers, ever think of the government tax if it was legal?? Why do you want it legal, anyhow? iT'S NOT LIKE IT IS STOPPING YOU FROM SMOKING IT ANYHOW!

potsmoking is for trailer trash, ghetto people and communists. plus, you brain dead tokers, ever think of the government tax if it was legal?? Why do you want it legal, anyhow? iT'S NOT LIKE IT IS STOPPING YOU FROM SMOKING IT ANYHOW!
well thats enough of your generalizations! I know some really smart people that smoke pot, 4.0 GPA students to be precise, and they toke it up everyday.

well thats enough of your generalizations! I know some really smart people that smoke pot, 4.0 GPA students to be precise, and they toke it up everyday.

so then, why smoke it? can't deal with life how it presents itself? By the way, I also know high upstading members of the community, who made the deans list in medical school who molest their kids. what does one have to do with the other?

so then, why smoke it? can't deal with life how it presents itself? By the way, I also know high upstading members of the community, who made the deans list in medical school who molest their kids. what does one have to do with the other?
and that little factoid does not disturb you at all?

My point was that you said that smoking refer, makes you brain dead, I was proving you wrong, And I never said I did

....
1)However, if marijuana truly has non-euthanasian consequences when used medically, then I suppose I would support its legalization (just not in a "joint-like" form). I do believe it to be a good substitute for wood in making paper, and I supported the NS-UN resolution to make marijuana paper.

2)I feel that the the arguments "alcohol is worse, tobacco is worse" fulfill the exact opposite of what the arguer intends. You are merely encouraging my inner-self to support the prohibition of alcohol and tobacco, not the legalization of marijuana.

There's my two cents.

1) there are many things that MJ does good for cancer paitents and the like. It can help recover an appatite that has left due to extreme pain and the other medications that are used to fight the cancer. It also allows for a pain relief that can be used and still go about your normal life, unlike a lot of the drugs that just knock you out.

2) Nearly everything that is used in medicine can hurt your system, though the good out does the bad. Most toxins are filtered out, but they can still cause damage, look at tylenol, they found it causes some pretty good damage to the liver, though they still use it because it gets the job done and saves lives. Smoking MJ is better then most ways of taking it, though eating it is another way it can be done, though each person's system will be effected differently. Interveiniously is very dangerous way of taking the drug because it can lead to vein damage and bone damage, I had to work with someone that had done weed this way and he was always sore from it.

If they do legalize it, it should be done like Cigs are done, put a tax on them to keep it from just being bought in huge amounts, and filter them, keeping them from getting laced with other drugs like Acid, which is a common event.

To the person that said all drugs should be legalized, I would say grow up. You haven't seen what drugs do to people, and even with government control they can still be abused. I'm glad to live in a state that just invented an additive to put into Anhydrix Ammonia(sp?) to make it low yield for Meth making. It seems you live under the dream that Drugs are just grown up's candy. Some drugs, in very limited amounts, are good for medicine work like Coke and Morphine, but would be utterly foolish to put in the hands of people that don't understand toxic levels and proper use.

well thats enough of your generalizations! I know some really smart people that smoke pot, 4.0 GPA students to be precise, and they toke it up everyday.

There have been many studies that show people do better on Weed during school, not because it enhances the brain, but because its a de-stressing agent. The long term effects though showed a lessening in the retention ability of people that used Weed for long periods at a time. My father, who grew up through the 60s actually smoked enough that he lost an entire week. He remembers going to sleep and waking up, and realizing it was a week later. Everyone said he was up and around, doing things like normal, but his retention for it was lost.

Its much like the effect of drinking on the mind. There is damage to the liver, and minor damge to brain cells, but the retention is often times much less. Though with drinking your motor skills are impared even more, so its harder to do tests and such.

I'm not arguing that it doesn't cause damage like that, I just hate it when people make such stupid generalizations and stereotypes like that

and that little factoid does not disturb you at all?

My point was that you said that smoking refer, makes you brain dead, I was proving you wrong, And I never said I did

Responsible use wont permanently harm your intellect, but it will temporarily dull it. Irresponsible use may have permanent effects on memory.

Who said marijuana would make you "brain dead?" o.o Brain dead is a specific medical condition in which a living person is declared dead due to the fact that they will never regain conciousness or have concious thought.

I'm arguing that it doesn't cause damage like that, I just hate it when people make such stupid generalizations and stereotypes like that

damge like what? all information that I've stated comes from my own personal knowledge. The damage to the veins and bones is from a co-worker that was told from his docter of the damage. Its what you get when you take a substance that doesn't belong in the system into it from a forced entry.

potsmoking is for trailer trash, ghetto people and communists. plus, you brain dead tokers, ever think of the government tax if it was legal?? Why do you want it legal, anyhow? iT'S NOT LIKE IT IS STOPPING YOU FROM SMOKING IT ANYHOW!
he did, I just hate stereotypes like that, that was more of my point of arguing than anyother reason

damge like what? all information that I've stated comes from my own personal knowledge. The damage to the veins and bones is from a co-worker that was told from his docter of the damage. Its what you get when you take a substance that doesn't belong in the system into it from a forced entry.
it was a typo, I meant to put not after I'm. it's a tad bit late so I missed it

Imposing an age limit of 21 for all hemp products regardless of the presence of THC, and 24 for all smokeable forms of Marijuana.

The FDA has already approved the use of hemp products in food items, becaue they found there was not enough thc to cause harm to the system.


Forming a beureau designed to track and punish producers which do not abide by stringent health and safety regulations, and charge them excessive fees and tarriffs.

they should treat smokeing MJ like drinking, keep it at 21, and fine them for underage use and set up a legal limit.


To make sure all retailers of hemp products have purchased a liscence from the government and pay tarriffs or sales taxes.

just like with alcohol and tobacco


To collect tarriffs and impose quotas on imports, and collect tarriffs on exports.

its a pretty standard thing to impose taxes and tarriffs on imports and exports, though most of the MJ would probally be grown either here in the midwest of the USA or in Mexico for cheaper wages.


To create several new laws which, if broken in tandem, will result in penalties far harsher than what is currently in place.

just treat it like alcohol for most cases, like driving and maybe public intox.


To create "sin tax" funded rehabilation and healthcare facilities and enforce warning labels on packaging, hopefully after a class action suit is filed against "Big Hemp" by smokers in failing states of health who were promised that Marijuana was harmless.

I think the big tobacco companies that would take over the sale of MJ would put the standard warning label on them. I think tobaco sales have a tax on them set up for what you call a "sin tax" and so one on MJ should be used too, though smokers sueing shouldn't be able to win that much, since health warnings have been out forever.
[/QUOTE]

There have been many studies that show people do better on Weed during school, not because it enhances the brain, but because its a de-stressing agent. The long term effects though showed a lessening in the retention ability of people that used Weed for long periods at a time. My father, who grew up through the 60s actually smoked enough that he lost an entire week. He remembers going to sleep and waking up, and realizing it was a week later. Everyone said he was up and around, doing things like normal, but his retention for it was lost.

Its much like the effect of drinking on the mind. There is damage to the liver, and minor damge to brain cells, but the retention is often times much less. Though with drinking your motor skills are impared even more, so its harder to do tests and such.

Well, I have read very reliable studies (from the government of the state of washington) showing that drug-abuse, ESPECIALLY marijuana abuse (less so for alcohol, methamphetamines, party drugs, and tabacco,) are most common among students who dropped out of or are failing undergraduate or high school courses. And I have seen friends-of-friends and 2 former friends fall from glory due to Marijuana abuse (one went into the rehab and the other ran away from home and was later arrested for petty theft. Needless to say, the latter's parents were irate. He ran again and is probably out on the streets, I have heard he set up a tent in the nearby greenbelt.)

I also made made an acquintance in a rehabilitated user who (after years of abstinence) was still complaining about some trouble with memory. He is perhaps the most important influence that turned me against the drug. And lo and behold, he was a very intelligent person who was attending comm. coll. with aspirations of repairing his abilities to persue more prestigious academics in regards to music.

All in all I would say that smoking marijuana is simply a dumb idea. Next to alcohol, it is one of the great means of uncovering the inner Darwin Award Nominees in ordinary people.

Just for the record, Cocaine is NOT physically addictive, only psychologically.. and yet, it's certainly something we consider a "hard" drug. Psycological addiction can be quite severe, often worse. After all, kicking physical addiction merely takes time to purge oneself of the drug, rather than of the urge for the drug. ;)

Well, I have read very reliable studies (from the government of the state of washington) showing that drug-abuse, ESPECIALLY marijuana abuse (less so for alcohol, methamphetamines, party drugs, and tabacco,) are most common among students who dropped out of or are failing undergraduate or high school courses. And I have seen friends-of-friends and 2 former friends fall from glory due to Marijuana abuse (one went into the rehab and the other ran away from home and was later arrested for petty theft. Needless to say, the latter's parents were irate. He ran again and is probably out on the streets, I have heard he set up a tent in the nearby greenbelt.)
.......


I think the studies are rather one sided. I would venture a guess that MJ use is a sign of other problems like depression, rebellion, and the like, due to the people that commonly use the drug are those that are outsiders from the main group. The other drugs tend to be for the upper crust more, because they cost more money, compared to the low cost of getting MJ. $20 compared to $200.

Just for the record, Cocaine is NOT physically addictive, only psychologically.. and yet, it's certainly something we consider a "hard" drug. Psycological addiction can be quite severe, often worse. After all, kicking physical addiction merely takes time to purge oneself of the drug, rather than of the urge for the drug. ;)

smoking is mainly a mental addiction, though that nicatine is pretty fierce too, though it only stays in the system for like 48 hours, after that its mental.

smoking is mainly a mental addiction, though that nicatine is pretty fierce too, though it only stays in the system for like 48 hours, after that its mental.

Yep. I was just trying to make the point that when some say of marijuana, "It's not physically addictive!" That it means just about nothing, and that psychological dependency can be worse. Not that that means marijuana should be banned for that reason specifically though.. If anything, the main failure of marijuana advocates is the ridiculous additive fallacy of comparing it to alcohol, etc.

I think they should bring MJ into the medicine side of things first, study it under longterm effects, then bring it into the consumer world, with restrictions set as high as drinking and smoking.

Also they should allow the growing of industrial hemp either way, it would save tons on trees, and has oils that are helpful on the body. Evidence of this, the FDA has approved the use of Hemp in foods, stating that there is no harmful effects.

And I have seen friends-of-friends and 2 former friends...
Anectdotal evidence isnt going to help in a serious discussion. I can name at least three high-tech professionals among my friends who are long-term tokers (daily basis) and still get their life and job in line. So what does that prove? Nothing.
I do support the point that all drugs should be legal. All those examples of drug affected drop-outs and the many people killed by heroin or crack show one thing: drugs are there, no matter how illegal. If someone is stupid enough to involve himself with the really bad shit, it is his own fucking problem. No one forced him to touch the stuff. When i hear stories like "But my friend died from drugs", i can only respond "Yeah, because he was a bloody dimwit!". That most drugs are very harmfull is known, anyone who still wants to be involved with that stuff, hey, stupid, but his own freaking decision. It is not that drugs are unavailable because they are illegal, they only lead to drug-related crime.

I wholeheartedly support the legalization of Marijuana, for the purposes stated below:

Imposing an age limit of 21 for all hemp products regardless of the presence of THC, and 24 for all smokeable forms of Marijuana.



Why the hell would you want an age limit on hemp products? Do you believe that you have to be 21 to be trusted with shirts/rope etc? No commercial hemp product is going to contain THC anyway, they use different strains!

its a pretty standard thing to impose taxes and tarriffs on imports and exports, though most of the MJ would probally be grown either here in the midwest of the USA or in Mexico for cheaper wages.

If it's legal, I'm not gonna downgrade to swagweed. NorCal sticky for me, please. Marijuana grows everywhere, but it excels up here.

Nit picky and more local cheerleading than an actual point....I'll just show myself out....

EDIT: I just looked up, I made this post at 4:20 local time :D

getting stoned is fun, especially when you combine it with alcohol, party pills, more alcohol and an hour walk home. Not that I condone that sort of behavior.

Personally I'm a rabid anti-smoker, so I think we should legalize marijuana and ban tobacco. But I'd never really do that, because I believe that this is the United States of America and we're supposed to have freedom and rights and all that crap. (I say crap because it seems like we don't really have any rights).
I think we need to legalize pot because it is an essentially harmless herb, yes I said herb. No different than say, St John's Wort for depression that you can buy over the counter in a nice little pill. Why is it ok to do that but not smoke a little pot?
Also, it is just silly for police officers to have to waste their time putting some guy in jail for having a joint in his pocket when he gets pulled over. I mean honest, who cares? I think the police force should be doing more important things with their time.
But then, my philosophy is, you should be allowed to do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt anyone. I guarantee that when people get high they don't drive around and crash into people, they don't start fights, they don't do much of anything, come to think of it, but what's wrong with that?
BTW, I have a 3.92 cumulative GPA in a 4-yr university, I also work nights, and I smoke a little pot a few times a week at night after my boy is in bed. Why should I have to go to jail for that, huh? Just for getting relaxed and laughing and forgetting about my problems for a while (and having extra special sex, nobody's mentioned that yet).

getting stoned is fun, especially when you combine it with alcohol, party pills, more alcohol and an hour walk home. Not that I condone that sort of behavior.
fun watching too, yet smelly

Simple possession of marijuana should be punishable by fine. Trafficking, production and smuggling should be punished by incarceration. The trafficking, production and smuggling of 'hard drugs' should be punished by death. The U.S. Air Force and Coast Guard should interdict drug shipments from South America, responding to resistance with lethal force, and U.S. special forces should be deployed to drug-producing nations to disrupt production on the ground.

Clear and Present Danger, only better. :D

fun watching too, yet smelly

Its worse when you wake up in the morning and find out that you did in fact have enough left over to get a taxi :(

Its worse when you wake up in the morning and find out that you did in fact have enough left over to get a taxi :(
:D you fool

and that little factoid does not disturb you at all?

My point was that you said that smoking refer, makes you brain dead, I was proving you wrong, And I never said I did

no, it actually doesn't . in my line of work , you quickly realize that people, in general, are very sick and strange. Abusing ANYTHING, makes you braindead in my opinion, because you are a slave to addiction, and the unatural brain patterns that result. I will give you your point that I shouldn't generalize, though, but that's me, basically an unrelenting type. Addicts have no place in my new order, however. they just are not reliable.

Simple possession of marijuana should be punishable by fine. Trafficking, production and smuggling should be punished by incarceration. The trafficking, production and smuggling of 'hard drugs' should be punished by death. The U.S. Air Force and Coast Guard should interdict drug shipments from South America, responding to resistance with lethal force, and U.S. special forces should be deployed to drug-producing nations to disrupt production on the ground.

Clear and Present Danger, only better. :D


Yikes! That's scary! :eek:

Fuck it. Let's all just move to Netherlands.
:D
That works, that works.

And if you're that concerned about their suffering, do the humane thing and put them out of their misery.
This sounds only far too familiar...

Anybody else thinking Nazi Germany here?

EDIT:
What in the nine Hells happened to my spoiler?

Buddy, take it from a guy who fought the war with his own addiction to cocaine and heroine, your feelings are not based on any factual evidence. I personally have faced withdrawl from several illegal substances, and "mary j" was actually the easiest.

The lasting effects of marijuana are also far less than those which are currently legal in the civilized world. Alcohol? Terrifying effects on the liver if consumed in an unsafe manner. Tobacco? Holy crap man, the smoke alone will tear up your lungs like a bunch of children in a candy store. Marijuana? Not known to have any lasting physical effects other than those caused by inhaling smoke into your lungs (which is bad no matter what you do).

Terribly sorry to burst your little malinformed bubble, but the truth is far easier to swallow than your ignorance.

Not intended to be flamebait, just using you as an example.

*nods*
damn right. feel free to correct me if i'm wrong, but as far as i know, marijuana was only declared illegal roughly around the 1920's or 1930's, up until then it was about as acceptable in social life as drinking alcohol...
the effects aren't half as bad, if it helps in medical situatuations then why not just make its use a minor offence, around the same as a parking ticket?

The U.S. Air Force and Coast Guard should interdict drug shipments from South America, responding to resistance with lethal force, and U.S. special forces should be deployed to drug-producing nations to disrupt production on the ground.


Hey, why only us. What is wrong with interdicting shipments from anywhere.
(Damn stereotyping.) :rolleyes:

For general background information, from a relatively neutral source (i.e. not campaigning for or against mary j) try the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/cannabis/index.shtml)

wowo i never thought that there would be so many people. i think if drugs were legal we would not have such a high drug rate and also that the drug dealers would probably go out of buissness,

I think all laws against things indulged in by consenting adults, that don't involve those who don't or can't consent, should be taken off the books. It's creeping paternalism. I had a daddy, I don't need the government to be one. If I want my governments help with something, I'm capable of asking.

The moralists attempt at every turn to convert us to their own sense of superiority. They want us to join the ranks of their paternalism. "You and I, of course, can take part in our simple pleasures without overdoing it," they tell us, "but whereas we use it to amuse ourselves, they use it to abuse themselves." When we get to the top of the power structure, then we will have total freedom.
Such nonsense. It's nothing more than the elitism of the pecking order.
In fact, people who want to take part in the currently illegal consensual activities already do. Following the repeal of Prohibition, for example, after a minor burst of curiosity, alcohol consumption actually went down. Some people discovered they had problems with alcohol, and stopped drinking altogether. Others found that, when drinking stopped being clandestine, it wasn't as much fun. Still others found that one or two drinks a couple times a week were all they wanted. With alcohol readily available, they stopped overindulging because they no longer had to compensate for scarcity. As we shall see in the discussion between William F. Buckley, Jr., and Professor Gazzaniga in the chapter, "Drugs," the percentage of people who abuse rather than use a substance or activity will be roughly the same whether that substance or activity is illegal or not.
From Peter Mcwilliams, someone the government basically murder by refusing to let him use medical marijuana in a state where it's legal.

His site: http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/books/aint/toc.htm

Very smart man, RIP

Yikes! That's scary! :eek:
That's the idea. ;)

Damn, I thought you meant Mary J. Blige!

Hey, why only us. What is wrong with interdicting shipments from anywhere.
(Damn stereotyping.) :rolleyes:
Touche. Well, the only substantial sources of illegal drugs coming into the United States -- other than South America -- are from Canada and Mexico (and almost exclusively via land transport), making interdiction the job of Border Agents, the DEA and local law enforcement.

Nonetheless, you are correct, and I apologize. Naturally, the plan would be to interdict all incoming narcotics; I specified South America only because it's the primary point of departure for air/sea smuggling.

I don't need the government telling me I can't do something because it's bad for me. I'm an adult (legally, anyway) and if I want to do something bad for me it's my business alone. To those that think we should ban smoking (anything) or alcohol consumption because it's bad for you, should the government control your calorie intake? How about monitor your cholesterol? How about making you serve ninety days for jaywalking? That's dangerous! Skydiving? Should be illegal. What about shopping addiction? Probably causes more divorces than drugs. All that coke I drink probably gives me cavities. Outlaw it! Not getting enough exercise? Have the government put the flabby in mandatory bootcamps!

The government has the responsibility to tell me if something is dangerous. After that it should be my responsibility to decide if I want to do it. The whole idea of being an adult is making your own life choices. If you want to be stupid, by all means go ahead. As long as it doesn't directly effect you, let them go ahead. And I mean directly. If you make everything illegal that effects someone else negatively we won't be able to do anything.

Thomas Jefferson said something about religion that I believe could apply to any consensual crime. "... if it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
Yes, drug addiction does cost the state money. But not near as much as the largely ineffective drug war. Drug use doesn't cost nearly as much societally as the drug war. The drug war does the same thing to our society as prohibition did' and it's not good.

hey i wanted to know who thought it should be legeal or not
fuck yeah it should. but with restrictions...

Marijuana, how I love thee...

It should be legal, and the debate about this is getting old and tired.

Yes, Marijuana is the next tobacco in the sense that it's the perfect cash crop. But unlike tobacco, Marijuana is not physically addicting, I think we've all accepted that fact. It also hasn't been proven yet that Marijuana could cause cancer like tobacco, all though it is likely.

So here's the facts as I understand them:
Marijuana is safer and healthier than both tobacco and alcohol.
Marijuana has many short-term effects including memory loss, distorted perception, hunger, dry-mouth. However, except minor respiratory damage due to smoke inhalation, Marijuana has NO long-term effects.
You cannot OD from Marijuana, it's impossible; you can smoke yourself retarded but you can't smoke yourself to death.
Don't believe me? In 1995, based on thirty years of scientific research, editors of the British medical journal Lancet concluded that, "the smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health."

It's time to get over the morality issue, you can't stand behind tobacco and alcohol and not behind Marijuana. And the point that users can get it anyway, is a stupid point. If Marijuana was legal, it could be regulated and taxed. Bam, there goes the billions of dollars we spend on the useless Drug War. The government gets money, so they're happy, but you know what else happens:
all those local dealers now need a license to sell their product, once they get that license they've become a business and can hire employees, we've now created jobs in America and isn't that what we want?
Also, since cops aren't on the lookout for marijuana users they can focus on the big boys: heroin, cocaine, meth, lsd, all those man-made drugs that really are killing people.

Okay, this got a little longer than I wanted it too, oh well.
"I pledge allegiance to the bag of Mary Jane in my pocket, and to the reefer for which it stands. One nation, under some clouds, not invisible, with clips and papers for all."

Well then why don't you also spell it like un Mexicano real, and spell it marihuana?

It is spelled with a 'j'. In Spanish, 'j' is pronounced like a strong 'h'. I can only talk for Spanish Spanish in Spain ;).

I voted Yes, however, the only reason I would like to see marijuana legalized is to earn money and HELP the drug war. I think the police spend too much time with marijuana, when big time drug dealers are right there. Furthermore, marijuana is only a "gateway drug" because it exposes you to that enviroment, not because of the drug itself. Finally, if marijuana is legal we should stiffen penalties on every other illegal drug. I mean long jail terms and no plea bargains. I have seen plenty of cops let people go when they find drugs, because it is too much trouble for such an insignificant crime. If we take marijuana out of the mix, then we can focus more on the harder drugs. If marijuana was legalized it shouldn't be like cigarettes (i.e smoke them whereever you want) they should only be allowed on private property or in special designated bars.

anyone watch bill bailey's stand-up on channel 4 last night? he said why pot's illegal; the inability of its users to debate eloquently for its legalisation, "oh look, a squirrel!"

It needs to be legal, so we can start growing hemp again, which is probably the best damn plant ever.
Hemp paper is better than wood pulp, and you can get up to 3 harvests a year as opposed to 1 every 30 years;
It doesn't need much bleach (if any) to whiten it for paper - unlike wood pulp which needs shitloads that's then usually just dumped into the waterways;
Hemp ropes are as strong if not stronger than synthetic;
Hemp has more protein content than nearly any other plant, so it can be eaten as an ideal substitute to meat;
Hemp actually returns Nitrogen to the soil rather than depleting it like most plants and trees;
Hemp doesn't need pesticides - unlike cotton which account something like 1/2 of the pesticides used in the USA every year;
Which brings up the next point - Hemp makes better jeans and shirts than cotton (Levis were originally hemp);
And it just rots away - it doesn't leave any nasty chemicals to leech into the soil;
And of course, it has so little THC that you'd need to smoke a doobie the size of a telegraph pole to get high.

There's lots other reasons, but those are the ones of the top of my head.

So let's hear it for Hemp!

It is spelled with a 'j'. In Spanish, 'j' is pronounced like a strong 'h'. I can only talk for Spanish Spanish in Spain ;).
Oh, yes, I speak Spanish myself. However, though I am aware of Spanish pronunciation, marijuana was indeed derived from the Mexican Spanish word marihuana of uncertain origin. This is etymological, and it is probably now spelled marijuana even in Mexican Spanism now.

And of course, it has so little THC that you'd need to smoke a doobie the size of a telegraph pole to get high.
Not to mention that the cultivate used for industrial purposes is very different from the one used for recreational purposes.

Responsible use wont permanently harm your intellect, but it will temporarily dull it. Irresponsible use may have permanent effects on memory.

Who said marijuana would make you "brain dead?" o.o Brain dead is a specific medical condition in which a living person is declared dead due to the fact that they will never regain conciousness or have concious thought.
Well... Funny thread to read...

I can't say I see much reason and logic within this thread.
Should all drugs be legal? No, there are drugs and there are drugs. Some drugs are addictive physically and/or mentally, others are not. Some will kill you easily, i.e overdose of heroin, some are impossible to overdose on (marijuana)

Personally, I have smoked weed since the mid 70's, that is about 30 years people, and I'm regarded as one of the best in my profession, so from a personal point of view, I can't say that weed smoking will make you dumber.

I will much rather smoke some weed than have a drink. I get a nice high that lasts for an hour or a few, depending on the quality of the product. No hangover, no puking, no beating up of spouses etc. It makes even the most stupid Hollywood movie fun to watch and I support the capitalists by getting the munchies and running down to the nearest convienience store to buy some snack. Maybe the only side-effect could be obesity?

Personally, I have smoked weed since the mid 70's, that is about 30 years people, and I'm regarded as one of the best in my profession, so from a personal point of view, I can't say that weed smoking will make you dumber.
Your short term memory is not as good as it would be otherwise. You are also probably at a higher risk of lung cancer, though, oddly enough, there has yet to be any relation between the two, despite marijuana having threefold the carcinogens that tobacco has.

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but the anti hemp laws in the US are historically rooted in anti-Hispanic racist hysteric propaganda. That, in and of itself, makes them suspect.

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but the anti hemp laws in the US are historically rooted in anti-Hispanic racist hysteric propaganda. That, in and of itself, makes them suspect.
I don't think that's true, though it's possible. I do know that the largest motivation was from clothing industries being threatened by hemp for industrial purposes. Recreational purposes was secondary, though now not so much.

Legalize it! Wooo...

I don't think that's true, though it's possible. I do know that the largest motivation was from clothing industries being threatened by hemp for industrial purposes. Recreational purposes was secondary, though now not so much.

Well the official reasons and propaganda of the day were certainly racist. One strong indicator is the substitution of the term “marijuana” for cannabis. Cannabis was ok, and had been used for quite some time in the US. Marijuana was a "dirty Mexican drug" and was outlawed.

http://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/dpf/whitebread05.html
http://www.masscann.org/facts/racist.htm
http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/newsheads.html

Yes!!!!!!

I just remembered that two years ago, back behind the subdivision I'm in, they hired a team to come in and remove some plants. I sketched them before they did, because they were very interesting looking plants. I only just figured out what they were when I found my old sketch:
Cannabis sativa. Somebody planted some marijuana in our collective backyard!

Damn Gummint, curtailing our enjoyment of the fruits of our labours...
:p

Simple possession of marijuana should be punishable by fine. Trafficking, production and smuggling should be punished by incarceration. The trafficking, production and smuggling of 'hard drugs' should be punished by death. The U.S. Air Force and Coast Guard should interdict drug shipments from South America, responding to resistance with lethal force, and U.S. special forces should be deployed to drug-producing nations to disrupt production on the ground.

Clear and Present Danger, only better. :D

Or we can just legalize it and use all that military force against terrorism.

Because guess what, if drugs where legalized there would be reason enough to grow it in the US, adding more jobs.

I agree with Gore Vidal here. Make all drugs legal, but be brutally honest about the potential medical effects. Marijuana won't do much of anything, while harder drugs like cocaine will seriously affect your system.

U.S. special forces should be deployed to drug-producing nations to disrupt production on the ground.
Wait, so now we'll decide what other governments get to do?

Wait, so now we'll decide what other governments get to do?
Have you been reading the paper at all within the past three years?

Have you been reading the paper at all within the past three years?
...
Maaaaybe...

Okay, so I'm an idiot that excels at not noticing the blatantly obvious. Nothing new.

I agree with Gore Vidal here. Make all drugs legal, but be brutally honest about the potential medical effects. Marijuana won't do much of anything, while harder drugs like cocaine will seriously affect your system.
What about the effects to other people? If you drive while high, it can pose a danger to other people. This is the strongest argument against drug decriminalisation, since I think that it is plain social authoritarianism to tell people what they can or can not do to their bodies. Alcohol is probably worse than any other recreational drug for this, but I have a friend who drove while high on heroin, and almost killed herself and another person because of it. There should be limitation on things like that, driving while high or drunk. However, I also believe that people on drugs should be able to be discriminated against for healthcare. If a person smokes, and gets lung cancer, it should be perfectly acceptable to tell that person they have to pay more, within reason, for healthcare. Alcoholics and liver failure as another example. This is letting people decide what to do to their bodies, but also face the conomic consequences for their actions.

It should be treated just like alchohol, after all, it's certainly no more dangerous.
It's more dangerous than alcohol, for sure. It has no health benefits, unlike wine, which is heart-healthy.

mary j is a nice way to relax.

Yes, marijuana should be legal. It is as equally dangerous to a person's body as smoking and drinking. If it is illegal, people will use it anyway-- but it will cost more, and people will kill for it. I have witnessed this in my old town (Baltimore, MD).

It is as equally dangerous to a person's body as smoking and drinking.
And by "equally dangerous" you mean "less dangerous", right? Alcohol is much worse for the body than marijuana, and that there have been no reported deaths from marijuana (how many from smoking, praytell?).

mary j is a nice way to relax.
Its hard to relax when your paranoid. :rolleyes:

Its hard to relax when your paranoid. :rolleyes:
That is only with extensive long-term use, and is by no means the most common negative side effect.

No, but only in the sense that it shouldn't be legally recognized. It is too evasive into private lives.

That is only with extensive long-term use, and is by no means the most common negative side effect.
Actually Paranoia can occur on the first use of the drug. While not common, it is extremely dangerous.

well acutallly cigs are worse for than mary j

Its hard to relax when your paranoid. :rolleyes:
acutally i have never been parniod.

well acutallly cigs are worse for than mary j
By that mangling of the english language I hope you mean,
"Marijuana contains 70% more tar then ciggerates, and is thus worse for your health"

acutally i have never been parniod.
Well by that fine logic, ciggerates dont cause cancer, because my father smokes a pack a day and doesn't have cancer :rolleyes:

By that mangling of the english language I hope you mean,
"Marijuana contains 70% more tar then ciggerates, and is thus worse for your health"
and where di dyou hear that little tidbit?

http://www.gdcada.org/statistics/marijuana.htm
and from there the american lung association.

you realize if its legal it'll lose all alure

I agree with Gore Vidal here. Make all drugs legal, but be brutally honest about the potential medical effects. Marijuana won't do much of anything, while harder drugs like cocaine will seriously affect your system.

Exactly. I'm an adult. All I need is accurate information on which to base my decisions.

Exactly. I'm an adult. All I need is accurate information on which to base my decisions.
So by your logic, I just need accurate information to have a barbeque in my yard and a garage full of fireworks.

Legalize marijuana. Pretty much make it the same as alcohol.

By that mangling of the english language I hope you mean,
"Marijuana contains 70% more tar then ciggerates, and is thus worse for your health"
Though marijuana does indeed have 3 times the carcinogens that tobacco has, there have, oddly enough, been no reported incidences of cancer caused by marijuana use, while there are many (can not remember the statistics off the top of my head, but it's big) cases of lung cancer every year from smoking cigarettes.

you realize if its legal it'll lose all alure
Half true. Where legalisation of recreational marijuana has occured, there has been a brief spike in use, then it levels of to roughly the same level as before. Just there is drastically less police work used for marijuana users. This information is staight from my uncle, who works at NIH.

The problem with saying "make it legal and treat it like alcohol" is that once it's legal it would be very easy to drive while smoking, which would impair your ability to operate said vehicle. Is there a test to determine what the level of marijuana has been used, like alcohol?

The other issue that everyone always overlooks in this debate is what marijuana's effect is when used in conjunction with other prescription drugs. There, at this moment, is no answer to this question, or at least, not one that is recognized by the AMA. The reason for this is that it is, currently, an illegal drug, and before it can be legalized for use by the general public, these studies need to be done.

Personally, I think that it should be legalized specifically for medicinal purposes, and that the use should be strictly regulated. If you are prescribed marijuana, and choose to use it, you should be under 24 hr. care by a medical professional to insure that you are not abusing the drug, and that you are not sharing your prescription with those who do not share your affliction.

The problem with saying "make it legal and treat it like alcohol" is that once it's legal it would be very easy to drive while smoking, which would impair your ability to operate said vehicle. Is there a test to determine what the level of marijuana has been used, like alcohol?
Aha! That is indeed the one viable argument against marijuana that I had forgotten to mention. The other one I guess is also, but I had never read anything about that before, and wasn't aware that we don't know how marijuana interacts with other drugs. We've only had this drug in excess of 7000 years, which is how far back we can actually measure its use--how long is it going to take us?

The problem with saying "make it legal and treat it like alcohol" is that once it's legal it would be very easy to drive while smoking, which would impair your ability to operate said vehicle. Is there a test to determine what the level of marijuana has been used, like alcohol?

The other issue that everyone always overlooks in this debate is what marijuana's effect is when used in conjunction with other prescription drugs. There, at this moment, is no answer to this question, or at least, not one that is recognized by the AMA. The reason for this is that it is, currently, an illegal drug, and before it can be legalized for use by the general public, these studies need to be done.

Personally, I think that it should be legalized specifically for medicinal purposes, and that the use should be strictly regulated. If you are prescribed marijuana, and choose to use it, you should be under 24 hr. care by a medical professional to insure that you are not abusing the drug, and that you are not sharing your prescription with those who do not share your affliction.

If you choose not to use it, you will be fine. You don't need the AMA, FDA or any other regulatory agency to make that decision for you.

The DUI aspect is a valid concern. However, the solution to this is to make it illegal to drive under the influence; not to ban "Mary J" completely.

[QUOTE=Slinao]

If they do legalize it, it should be done like Cigs are done, put a tax on them to keep it from just being bought in huge amounts, and filter them, keeping them from getting laced with other drugs like Acid, which is a common event.

QUOTE]


That made me giggle. If you filter a Cannibis cigarette with a normal filter, it will filter out the THC, making it pretty useless to smoke.

Lacing weed with acid, LOL

To me, the question has nothing to do with whether marijuana is good or bad for you, but rather does the government have the right to tell you what you can and can't put into your body? In my opinion, the answer is no.

We've only had this drug in excess of 7000 years, which is how far back we can actually measure its use--how long is it going to take us?

True, but as far as I know, there have been no studies to test its reaction with other drugs. We could simply slap a generic warning on it and say "consult a physician before using this in combination with any prescription medication", but how many people are really gonna do that? They say not to drink alcohol when you take aspirin...

I know for a fact that it doesn't react too well with certain anti-depressants.

I know that we dont know what it can be taken with but most the time it is taken when no other method has worked

The problem with legalising Cannabis is simple:

You need to tax it, because of it's inherent affect and detrimental value of society and health (especially in the long run effects on the brain and memory).

The Black Market will supply it way below the tax line, if you legalise it.

Most people will buy the cheapest they can get because lets face it, it's an expensive habit as with anything of that nature (Fags, Booze etc), they may start off on the 'legal' stuff but they will nearly always end up doing the back door stuff.

Thus, you get all the bad effects of it by legalising it, with little/no actual gain from it. Also, there is a point is that if you legalise Cannabis the next logical step will be to legalise half the world's drugs, or things like Herbal E etc, you need to draw the line somewhere. Cannibis just happens to be the most convient place currently to do that...

What about the effects to other people? If you drive while high, it can pose a danger to other people. This is the strongest argument against drug decriminalisation, since I think that it is plain social authoritarianism to tell people what they can or can not do to their bodies.
No real argument, DUI is a crime by itself.

mary j could be treated like any other thing.

Though marijuana does indeed have 3 times the carcinogens that tobacco has, there have, oddly enough, been no reported incidences of cancer caused by marijuana use, while there are many (can not remember the statistics off the top of my head, but it's big) cases of lung cancer every year from smoking cigarettes.
Now why would you go out and admit to your doctor that you've been doing something illegal, when you can say it was ciggerates?

So by your logic, I just need accurate information to have a barbeque in my yard and a garage full of fireworks.
No, the logic is that endangering yourself is fine, endangering other is not.

Btw, the link you provided shows nothing about THC causing paranoia and contains inconclusive/vague information about the risk of lung damage. Carcerands "sometimes in higher concentrations" is in no way the same as threetimes and includes that the concentration is less or equal on other occasions. Even worse, "Someone who smokes 1 to 3 joints can produce the same lung damage and potential cancer risk as smoking five times as many cigarettes." (italics by me). "Can" has no worth in a scientific context, a person "can" get lung cancer just by sitting around and breathing fresh air, "1 to 3" doesnt seem like any real test or even a poll among tokers and a control group were made. This combined with the point that the council obviously has an agenda makes the information a bit unreliable.

Now why would you go out and admit to your doctor that you've been doing something illegal, when you can say it was ciggerates?
because there is tar on cigs and mary j dont have that and also mary j doesnt have all the harmful chemicals cigs do.

My mom is a psychiatrist at a juvenile detention center. If anyone knows what effects the drug has, she does.

For all of you people who go around saying "pot doesnt do anything bad, DAWG" YOURE WRONG. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. First off, it reduces your ability to make intelligent decisions and your reflexes, just like alcohol. It is addictive, psychologically but not physically. You become tolerant to it, meaning that you end up consuming more and more to get the same effect.

And yes, Marajuana DOES KILL BRAIN CELLS. IT screws around pretty badly with the chemistry of your brain and the rest of your body. Although it is not as bad as many other drugs (they are FAR FAR WORSE) it is still a horrible thing. Without a doubt it should be illegal.

I think that it should be legal i don't smoke it anymore, however its just POT i would much rather see my child do that than any cocanie or alchol cause at least i know its not going to be addictive and she will not be selling her body to get it, like cocaine or herione.

i like your pont of view it is very true.

pot IS psychologically addictive. It's not physically addictive (no horrible symptoms for withdrawal), but you DO have a psysiological craving for it. Your brain tells you that you need it.

well then you should just work on resiting so you dont get addicted

potsmoking is for trailer trash, ghetto people and communists.
I don't smoke pot, dipshit, but that isn't going to make me stop others from doing it.

People will always do it, so we should legalise it. Plus, it's much less harmful than a lot of the other drugs out there, including cancerettes.

People will always do it, so we should legalise it.
So by that logic, Murder should be legal, because people are still gonna do it.
Plus, it's much less harmful than a lot of the other drugs out there, including cancerettes.
Already debunked.

nah...

it wouldnt be as fun if it were legal... :p :D

Just because we,...illegal narcotic.
Is this thing actually that ignorant, or is it a troll?

Other than the crime related to the distribution, and that some people think it is fun, what are the reasons to legalize it? The crime thing doesn't work as an argument, because it just gives someone like myself more reason to believe we should get tougher on criminals. Also, it works the other way as if you do purchase the stuff it means you are knowingly giving money that will be used to support those actions, whether you want to or not. It paints an image that you care more about getting high than you do about reducing crime.

I have another reason. I have Relapse/Remitting Multiple Sclerosis. For those who are not aware, MS is thought to be an autoimmune disease that affects the central nervous system (CNS). The CNS consists of the brain, spinal cord, and the optic nerves. Surrounding and protecting the nerve fibers of the CNS is a fatty tissue called myelin, which helps nerve fibers conduct electrical impulses.

In MS, myelin is lost in multiple areas, leaving scar tissue called sclerosis. These damaged areas are also known as plaques or lesions. Sometimes the nerve fiber itself is damaged or broken.

MS is not a transmissible disease. No one can 'catch' it, like a flu, or HIV. No one can 'prepare' for it. No amount of hand washing, or clean living changes who gets it.

And study after study have demonstrated the efficacy of marijuana. It would take far too long to type all of the information available on this topic. So i present you a series of links. Peruse at your leisure.

http://www.mpp.org/releases/nr022900.html
http://www.cannabis-trial.plymouth.ac.uk/
http://www.idmu.co.uk/medicinal.htm

'Google'ing the topic will find more studies, reports, etc.

I won't even get into the topics presented earlier (Marijuana's effect on crime, and it's use as a money making tool for the Govt, economic values, etc..). I was asked for another reason, I gave you one.

I am not saying 'Legalize'. That gives a credential that is un-needed. I do say 'Decriminalize'. For the love of Pete, it's a WEED. Imagine the catastrophe that would occur if it was learned that oak leaves could get you 'high'. what would the US government do then, declare a 'War on the Woods'?

Smoking marijuana doesn't hurt anyone else, it should be legal.

No, no they should not. Watch your best friend die from a drug reaction, and then come back and tell me that.
I watched my father die from tobacco, and it wasn't a reaction due to overdose or impure drugs, it was what normally happens. Should tobacco be illegal? I've known people who died in automobiles, one of the number one causes of death waaaaay ahead of all drugs combined, should they be banned as well?

Did that friend die because he took a legal substance according to the instructions on the package? Perhaps he might be alive if there was standardized purity and dosage.

I say this as someone who has had plenty of "I should've been dead" experiences with drugs in the past and who has lost close friends to O.D.s. - but those were my and their own damn fault.

I agree, we should have full prohibition. We would if it weren't for the damn gangsters.

:sniper:
The gangsters were created by prohibition, and similarly today's drug lords want nothing more than for the big markets to keep busting people, because it drives profits through the roof.

Smoking marijuana doesn't hurt anyone else, it should be legal.

I disagree. It CAN. The topic arises of personal accountability. People stoned ARE not capable of driving for the same reason as alcohol-using people. It IS a drug. Both of them. And someone stoned while driving should have the SAME penalties as a drunk driver. And marijuana CAN cause other issues as well. It is the SAME, at least for me, as any other mood-altering substance. Responsibility and personal accountability are the watchwords.

Does the Netherlands have a problem with lung cancer? Did the legalization of MJ causes a spike in lung cancer rates?

Drug purity wasn't what caused his death, Alex died because the heroine depressed his central nervous system to the point that his brain "forgot" to tell his heart to beat.
I know it's painful to lose a friend and one wants to consider the dead blameless, but your friend died because he took too much heroin...and assuming he was reasonably intelligent, having something of known purity might very well have saved his life.

I disagree. It CAN. The topic arises of personal accountability. People stoned ARE not capable of driving for the same reason as alcohol-using people. It IS a drug. Both of them. And someone stoned while driving should have the SAME penalties as a drunk driver. And marijuana CAN cause other issues as well. It is the SAME, at least for me, as any other mood-altering substance. Responsibility and personal accountability are the watchwords.

Exactly, which is why I say treat it as the same as alcohol.

I used to think it should be legal but regulated.

Then I think medical purposes only since its potency and probability for addiciton seems to be increasing and I just didn't want us legalizing the next tobacco.

I'm sorta stuck between these two points. But I am for legalization to some extent so I chose 'medical purposes only' to be on the safe side.
The vast majority of marijuana users have no problem from it.

The vast majority of people who eat peanuts have no problems from it.

A small percentage of people might have adverse reactions to either one (though only peanuts can be fatal, there is NO LD50 for MJ), so you have to be cautious using either for the first time.

Wow just think of all the money the snack food industry would make ..

When one talks about the legalization of marijuana, the stereotypical image is that of "smoking a joint". Smoking is bad for you and everyone around you, and I will never ever support a legalization of smoking.
Despite tracking the same subjects for decades and generations, no significant health problems have been associated with insanely heavy (rastafarian) marijuana use.

I'm not saying that smoking isn't harmful, but it's been shown that it's not severe or likely enough to be measured in rigorous, long term studies.

Many people now consume their MJ in vaporizers, which heat the volatile oils containing the psychoactive component to the point where it becomes a fragrant mist that you inhale, with no tar or anything else. Many other people eat it, particular medical patients.

I agree though that there should be limits on smoking in public, because you don't have the right to intruduce anything into another person's body that they haven't consented to, but beyond that the law has no valid interest.

I don't understand how using marijuana is immoral.



It's used in Glaucoma patients as well, and they aren't going to die.

Cancer patients who have undertaken successful chemotherapy also use it as an appetite stimulant.

They have a pill in the works that uses the same chemical (albiet, somewhat altered) that both relieves glaucoma and stimulates appetite without getting someone high. The medicinal marijuana argument is a moot point. Besides, even though this pill isn't quite through testing, there are other, proven treatments that don't involve illicit narcotics.

Well, it takes quite a bit of alcohol to affect judgement adversely
Nonsense, everyone knows someone who becomes an asshole after two drinks. Individuals may be sensitive to anything, that is no reason to regulate the behavior of the vast majority who have no problems with it.

the effects are shorter lived.
That's a meaningless statement. A few puffs of weed certainly wear off faster than 3-4 pints of ale - and carb-heavy foods can actually end the high rapidly, something which cannot be done wtih alcohol.

has additional effects which impair conciousness and memory.
No reputable scientific study says so. Even the ones that try to imply (mostly by the same guy, the publically disgraced 'researcher for hire' Gabrial Nahas) it have been financed by anti-drug crusaders who take their money from the tobacco and alcohol industries. Go to the primary sources, don't just echo this unsubstantiated twaddle some couldn't-do-so-she-taught fed you in 7th grade.

far more harmful than alcohol due to permanent damage to the respitory system with ANY amount of use, and carcinogens in concentrations as much as 30 times greater than that found in tabacco (although tabacco products somehow still tend to remain more toxic, even allowing for the greater toxiciticy of Nicotine.)
You have not quote a reputable study that says so for a simple reason: it does not exist, any more than "tabacco" is a word.

Imposing an age limit of 21 for all hemp products regardless of the presence of THC
So no rope, clothing, cat litter, housepaint, automobile fuel, industrial lubricants, high-protein food, birdseed, jewelry, building materials, paper, etc. until the age of 21?!

Forming a beureau designed to track and punish producers which do not abide by stringent health and safety regulations, and charge them excessive fees and tarriffs.
Absolutely, it should be regulated as a foodstuff or OTC drug.

To create "sin tax" funded rehabilation and healthcare facilities and enforce warning labels on packaging, hopefully after a class action suit is filed against "Big Hemp" by smokers in failing states of health who were promised that Marijuana was harmless.
THERE you go...since thousands of years of use have resulted in zero fatalities, I'd be happy to be the attorney for this one! You let me know when that case goes to court, meanwhile most users will be growing their own or getting it from a friend's backyard anyway.

Other than the crime related to the distribution, and that some people think it is fun, what are the reasons to legalize it? The crime thing doesn't work as an argument, because it just gives someone like myself more reason to believe we should get tougher on criminals. Also, it works the other way as if you do purchase the stuff it means you are knowingly giving money that will be used to support those actions, whether you want to or not. It paints an image that you care more about getting high than you do about reducing crime.
Human and civil rights are not given by the state, they are "self evident" (at least theoretically in the U.S.) You need a compelling reason to make something illegal; if you cannot show that Citizen X is harming others by growing and smoking a little weed on his terrace, you have no interest in the matter.

potsmoking is for trailer trash, ghetto people and communists. plus, you brain dead tokers, ever think of the government tax if it was legal?? Why do you want it legal, anyhow? iT'S NOT LIKE IT IS STOPPING YOU FROM SMOKING IT ANYHOW!
Proof that mental derangement and poor language skills are the result of poor education or limited native ability, not responsible marijuana use.

so then, why smoke it? can't deal with life how it presents itself? By the way, I also know high upstading members of the community, who made the deans list in medical school who molest their kids. what does one have to do with the other?
You should stop hanging around with child molesters, and they are by definition not upstanding members of the community.

I expect that you will not be using caffeine, aspirin, or sugar, all of which can (unlike marijuana) be fatal in large doses, and all of which change how 'life presents itself' to you

damge like what? all information that I've stated comes from my own personal knowledge. The damage to the veins and bones is from a co-worker that was told from his docter of the damage. Its what you get when you take a substance that doesn't belong in the system into it from a forced entry.
Wow, your friend is privy to information that nobody else ever heard even a rumor of! We are so lucky that major medical breakthroughs are announced first on Nationstates boards!

drug-abuse, ESPECIALLY marijuana abuse (less so for alcohol, methamphetamines, party drugs, and tabacco,) are most common among students who dropped out of or are failing undergraduate or high school courses. And I have seen friends-of-friends and 2 former friends fall from glory due to Marijuana abuse
Losers who cannot handle life fail to use MJ in a responsible manner. They also have more auto accidents. So what?

You are assuming a causal relationship because you want it to be there but there is no such indication.

I am a successful professional in a managerial position, as are most of my friends. They almost all smoke marijuana. By your logic, marijuana must have propelled us to top positions in the corporate world.

If it's legal, I'm not gonna downgrade to swagweed. NorCal sticky for me, please. Marijuana grows everywhere, but it excels up here.

Nit picky and more local cheerleading than an actual point....I'll just show myself out....

EDIT: I just looked up, I made this post at 4:20 local time :D
haha, they really show their complete ignorance about the substance when they talk about mexican! Jesus, does anyone still smoke that crap? Most MJ in the US is Canadian or domestic, since at least the early 90s

no, it actually doesn't . in my line of work , you quickly realize that people, in general, are very sick and strange. Abusing ANYTHING, makes you braindead in my opinion, because you are a slave to addiction, and the unatural brain patterns that result. I will give you your point that I shouldn't generalize, though, but that's me, basically an unrelenting type. Addicts have no place in my new order, however. they just are not reliable.
Really? People too mentally weak to handle their intoxicants are the ones I'd watch out for...

There should be limitation on things like that, driving while high or drunk.
There are. At least here in NY state, drunk driving laws apply to someone who is too stoned, sleepy, or emotionally upset to drive safely. No need for another law, it's already illegal to threaten other peoples' safety.

I also believe that people on drugs should be able to be discriminated against for healthcare. If a person smokes, and gets lung cancer, it should be perfectly acceptable to tell that person they have to pay more, within reason, for healthcare. Alcoholics and liver failure as another example. This is letting people decide what to do to their bodies, but also face the conomic consequences for their actions.
Absolutely! Cigarette taxes should be earmarked for healthcare, as should alcohol taxes. Of course, the money is instead used to give tax breaks to Walmart and Halliburton, but humans are messy....

Yes, marijuana should be legal. It is as equally dangerous to a person's body as smoking and drinking. If it is illegal, people will use it anyway-- but it will cost more, and people will kill for it. I have witnessed this in my old town (Baltimore, MD).
Nobody kills for marijuana, unless they're the kind of psycho who would kill for a pair of sneakers (In my town, Brooklyn NY!), and it is nowhere near as dangerous as tobacco or alcohol

Quote:
Plus, it's much less harmful than a lot of the other drugs out there, including cancerettes.

Already debunked.

Funny then, that the American Institute of Medicine reports (in an analysis of the benefits of smoking cannabis for medicinal purposes):

""...the adverse effects of marijuana use are well within the range of effects tolerated for other medications.""

Now, as far as i've read your genius 'debunking' is the fact that cannabis contains more tar than cigarettes. However, i must haev missed a post of yours somewhere because using that one fact to prove it's worse is nothing short of laughable. Firstly, tar isn't the only negative aspect of cigarettes by a long way - they contain numerous chemicals which cannabis doesn't and also the dangerously addictive nicotine. Secondly, as Gnostikos points out there is no proof of a link between carcinogens in cannabis and lung disease - what we do have is proof of the opposite in the studies of long-time smokers, as Dingoroonia points out.

Boumistan - what's the price of extracting (or synthetically manufacturing), then chemically altering it to meet specific requirements? Sounds like a complicated and expensive way when there's a far simpler method (and one which doesn't necessarily hand control of supply to rich pharmaceutical corperations)

Marijuana should certainly be legal along with all the other drugs. The government doesn't have the right to tell adults what they can't ingest.

Since the Mary J. I know is only 9 years old, no. :p

You become tolerant to it, meaning that you end up consuming more and more to get the same effect.
Bullshit. I have been smoking regularly for over 20 years and I still like to take only one or two puffs.

And yes, Marajuana DOES KILL BRAIN CELLS. IT screws around pretty badly with the chemistry of your brain and the rest of your body.
Your mommy is in disagreement with every study that's ever been done, this is perhaps why she's a local rehab psych instead of a leading researcher. I don't mean to insult your mom, she's doing good work I'm sure, but she is no more an authority than your gym teacher is an olympic athlete.

As a matter of fact, MJ is used successfully to treat people with brain injuries and epilepsy, and in every study memory effects have disappeared when the THC was processed out of the body.

Also, marijuana is now considered one of the most promising treatments for some brain cancers - quite different from damaging the brain!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3561686.stm
http://www.alternet.org/story/9257

The fact is that LOSERS who cannot handle life, who eat too much and play video games all day, who commit crimes, are also irresponsible in their use of intoxicants. That's their problem, not the problem of the 98% who have no ill effects.

No one else will probably say it, so I will........We dont need to have medical marijuana because if they're going to die, a little bit of weed isnt gonna help them.
I agree. Hell, let's just do away with medicine altogether. :rolleyes:

No, no they should not. Watch your best friend die from a drug reaction, and then come back and tell me that.
And if it was legal, the doctors in the hospital would probably be better able to prevent his death.

If drugs were legal and regulated, I actually believe that there would be less drug deaths, because people would know what they were taking.

From what I've read on this thread for the past 30 mins or so, my opinion is as follows...

Legalize MJ and regulate it just like other drugs are regulated i.e. aspirin, alcohol, painkillers etc. etc. So that those who use MJ know the purity/strength of the drugs they are taking.
There should be more studies (or at least one, lol) on the effects of MJ reacting with other substances before we legalise it otherwise we are sort of selling drugs in major ignorance of the effects it might have.
No doubt the drug would be taxed (as are most things).
Legalising MJ would create some more jobs (cos they'll be grown on more farms etc.) but I don't seriously think there will be that many more jobs.
It should free up the police for more productive work and help against crime (although crime seems to be growing no matter what the government tries...).

So I guess I'm all for legalisation then.

:rolleyes:

All drugs should be legal.

Yeah thats a brilliant idea.

Just for arguments sake if achohal is so bad for you we should ban it to
(sorry I just can't understand why so many peoples want to destroy their own health willingly)

And yes, Marajuana DOES KILL BRAIN CELLS. IT screws around pretty badly with the chemistry of your brain and the rest of your body.
I was going to mockingly correct you, but Dingoroonia beat me to it, and did a better job, too.

Your mommy is in disagreement with every study that's ever been done, this is perhaps why she's a local rehab psych instead of a leading researcher. I don't mean to insult your mom, she's doing good work I'm sure, but she is no more an authority than your gym teacher is an olympic athlete.

As a matter of fact, MJ is used successfully to treat people with brain injuries and epilepsy, and in every study memory effects have disappeared when the THC was processed out of the body.

Also, marijuana is now considered one of the most promising treatments for some brain cancers - quite different from damaging the brain!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3561686.stm
http://www.alternet.org/story/9257

I disagree. It CAN. The topic arises of personal accountability. People stoned ARE not capable of driving for the same reason as alcohol-using people. It IS a drug. Both of them. And someone stoned while driving should have the SAME penalties as a drunk driver. And marijuana CAN cause other issues as well. It is the SAME, at least for me, as any other mood-altering substance. Responsibility and personal accountability are the watchwords.
So, by your logic, people should not be allowed to drive when on drugs. That means no more morning coffee and no more phychiatrics--psychology is all that's permitted for those who drive, eh? And marijuana is not nearly as detrimental to driving capabilities as alcohol is. You're just flat out wrong there.

Just for arguments sake if achohal is so bad for you we should ban it to
Wow...you really know your history!

So, by your logic, people should not be allowed to drive when on drugs. That means no more morning coffee and no more phychiatrics--psychology is all that's permitted for those who drive, eh?
Good thing I already walk everywhere...
:D

Good thing I already walk everywhere...
:D
Well, to be fair, I believe that everyone should drive less. Public transportation needs to be completely revamped, and made actually practical on a massive scale. I think that would greatly improve the environment, and probably society as well. But that is regardless, because we're talking about civil rights here, and the only place where I believe significant infringment of civil rights is permissible is when dealing with the environment or when there are victims (i.e. the environment!).

Completely off-topic, but having a tiny bit to do with earlier things, specifically when Gnostikos was saying that not all natural substances are good for you:
I was looking up some information about belladonna, which Gnostikos has inadvertantly gotten me interested in without even mentioning it, when I found out that the Legendary Pink Dots did a song called Belladonna and it's really good too.
Woo.

Now that I think of it, that post by Gnostikos might actually have been in the thread on methamphetamines, and this is even more off-topic than I thought.

I win the off-topicness prize, I guess.

I win the off-topicness prize, I guess.
I think we should hold a contest to see who can get the most off topic and still be on the topic at hand, you drive a tough competition Neo, but I think I'm in the lead with this post here, still on the topic, as to why you were off topic on the topic at hand, but even more off the topic than yours :D

We've all seen this debate before. Something I wonder about however: when marijuana is legalized (and that will happen within the next 20 years I'd guess, just based on demographic changes), what will become of the status of other drugs? Will they be clamped down even further, just to show that we are still tough on "hard" drugs? We've come to the point where politicians can admit to smoking weed, and even support legalization, without committing the equivalent of political suicide. But to support legalization of something like heroin...I doubt that's coming anytime soon.

Legalizing marijuana may be a step towards legalizing all drugs (which I support), or it may obscure the greater debate. Instead of talking about personal responsibility and compassion towards addicts, we will instead focus on the narrow topic of one single drug, its risks and benefits, etc.

Just for arguments sake if achohal is so bad for you we should ban it to
(sorry I just can't understand why so many peoples want to destroy their own health willingly)
Moderate amounts of alcohol are harmless, as a matter of fact they're beneficial. One drink a day has been shown to be good for your heart and your mental sharpness later in life, and 6 or so will get even a NS geek laid if properly administered.

But as for destroying their health...I don't get it either. It's such a joy to have a healthy, fit body that I can't imagine how people let that go (I'm 36 and many friends my age have become sedentary blobs). I just came in from a good mountain bike ride through the wonderful slippery havoc left by a blizzard, I'm barely able to breathe after the exertion of riding in deep snow, and it felt soooo good.

Well, to be fair, I believe that everyone should drive less. Public transportation needs to be completely revamped, and made actually practical on a massive scale. I think that would greatly improve the environment, and probably society as well. But that is regardless, because we're talking about civil rights here, and the only place where I believe significant infringment of civil rights is permissible is when dealing with the environment or when there are victims (i.e. the environment!).
Yes, a key connection that many anarchists and libertarians miss. What you do to the environment, you do (by force) to all of us without our permission.

ok i think that we have had some good ideas and i hope that more contin ue to come.