NationStates Jolt Archive

Do you support the legalization of cannabis?

1.YES
2.NO

You can add a poll, you know...:p

edit: okok... I was just teasing ya ;)
and I'm not all that against legalization. It would certainly suit my needs.

Catnip is illegal?!?!?

Hands off my Bud, Bud!

How many times have we had this thread?

Oh, and yes, I get high. :D

Of course. I have yet to hear a valid reason why cannabis is illegal, and alchohol, a drug which arguably damages personal health more and undeniably is far worse for society isn't.

I don't care that much.

Hehe, yeah I know, but that's the first time I'm doing it that's why... ;)

I think it's disgusting that you want to legalize cannabis. The very idea of eating another human being is barbaric and nauseating.

The second option implies that I will try canabis at a later date, I will not, though I am all for its legalization.

The government would get to regulate the industry, tax the products, and tax the producers. Moreover, it would give farmers a nice incentive to stop opposing the removal of farming and ranching subsidies.

I fully support the legalization of Cannabis. I mean, Alcohol is worse than weed. Well it is for me. At least with weed I don't get hangovers.

I don't care that much.Ditto. It never had any effect on me personally so I'm not likely to attempt to procure it again in the future.

Oh, and you need a "yes, and I happen to smoke every day" option too.

The second option implies that I will try canabis at a later date, I will not, though I am all for its legalization.

The government would get to regulate the industry, tax the products, and tax the producers. Moreover, it would give farmers a nice incentive to stop opposing the removal of farming and ranching subsidies.

If the government regulates it then quality will go down. Screw that, I'd rather be sneaking around behind the po po's back than be smoking crappy weed.

If the government regulates it then quality will go down. Screw that, I'd rather be sneaking around behind the po po's back than be smoking crappy weed.

No, the quality will go up. As will the price. But there wouldn't be a jail term associated with getting caught with it. Unless you were driving or underage. (A DUI and MIP, respectively.)

Oh, and you need a "yes, and I happen to smoke every day" option too.

Or just one "Yes" and one "No". And maybe one "I don't care/know".

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant. What will be saved is the vast amounts of money wasted in the enforcement and incarciration of people who use pot. The reality is the social cost of pot smokers is relatively low-they aren't violent and most of the crime associated with it is related to its criminality. We are wasting money preventing someone from lighting up a joint, eating some snacks and watching TV.

Not only will that result in a massive savings, but it will free up our law enforcement to deal with more destructive and pressing matters instead.

No, the quality will go up. As will the price. But there wouldn't be a jail term associated with getting caught with it. Unless you were driving or underage. (A DUI and MIP, respectively.)


The price would go down as supply increases and we're no longer paying a 'danger premium' to the dealer who is risking real arrest vs. the ticket that the casual user encounters.

No, the quality will go up. As will the price. But there wouldn't be a jail term associated with getting caught with it. Unless you were driving or underage. (A DUI and MIP, respectively.)

I disagree. The quality of pot you bought from the government may be better than the mexican pebble and twig shake you must get, I don't know. But it will suck compared to good hydro or some white widow.

And if I can grow it in my backyard, the price will drop.

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant. What will be saved is the vast amounts of money wasted in the enforcement and incarciration of people who use pot. The reality is the social cost of pot smokers is relatively low-they aren't violent and most of the crime associated with it is related to its criminality. We are wasting money preventing someone from lighting up a joint, eating some snacks and watching TV.

Not only will that result in a massive savings, but it will free up our law enforcement to deal with more destructive and pressing matters instead.

The price would go down as supply increases and we're no longer paying a 'danger premium' to the dealer who is risking real arrest vs. the ticket that the casual user encounters.

True. I was simply thinking about how taxation would increase the cost that's out there already. Speaking of which, I have no idea what the going price is on canabis, but I would assume that a pack of "canabis-flavored" smokes would cost about the same as a pack of old-fashioned cigs (the government would probably artifically inflate prices of the packs by upping taxation).

The decreased need for jails and vice LE wasn't something I had thought of right off the bat. Although it would probably be nice if the money saved from that went into making our nation safer from terrorist threats (not more wire-taps or things like that, but warehousing doses of drugs to fight biological weapons, upgrading emergancy services' equipment and upping their training, &c.).

And we could turn the newly empty jails into monasteries. Or something.

I disagree. The quality of pot you bought from the government may be better than the mexican pebble and twig shake you must get, I don't know. But it will suck compared to good hydro or some white widow.

And if I can grow it in my backyard, the price will drop.

Wouldn't that give producers an incentive to grow their canabis in the methods you recommend?

No, the quality will go up. As will the price. But there wouldn't be a jail term associated with getting caught with it. Unless you were driving or underage. (A DUI and MIP, respectively.)
The evidence is against you here. In Holland, cannabis produced legally (that the government allows), generally has lower levels of THC than illegally produced cannabis.

I'd imagine the price would stay the same. The profit margins on large-scale cannabis production are phenomenal. Maybe not in the same league as cinema popcorn, but certainly high (no pun intended). If it's produced legally, chances are an open market would force prices down, at least a little, but with tax on it, that price drop would be negated.

I'm for legalisation, as the only effect that it would have on me would be that I could smoke pretty much when and wherever I feel like it.

Wouldn't that give producers an incentive to grow their canabis in the methods you recommend?

That depends. Different strains require different care. It is difficult to stick a brand label onto a plant. I doubt there will be a hundred brands like cigarettes, although that would be pretty damn cool. The mass produced stuff (i.e. mexican), where they don't bother to weed out the male plants (yes, for those not in the know, marijuana grows as both "male" and "female" plants) and just grind it up is really easy to make in large quantities. Some of the really high quality stuff is greenhouse grown hydroponically by guys in lab coats.

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant. What will be saved is the vast amounts of money wasted in the enforcement and incarciration of people who use pot. The reality is the social cost of pot smokers is relatively low-they aren't violent and most of the crime associated with it is related to its criminality. We are wasting money preventing someone from lighting up a joint, eating some snacks and watching TV.

Not only will that result in a massive savings, but it will free up our law enforcement to deal with more destructive and pressing matters instead.


Heres an idea of how MUCH money the government spends each year to keep weed illegal.

A few years ago, there were 750,000 people in jail for marijuana related crimes.
This means that three quarters of a million people were being kept in prison for relatively small amounts of weed.

The average amount of money to keep, feed, and clothe these prisoners is 30,000 per year.

This means that the government spent:

$22,500,000,000 to keep these people in prisons.

For those of you who cant read that...thats twenty-two and a half billion dollars.

Or....a dollar for every star in the Milky Way.

Why we allow this prolific waste of money, is the same reason we vote for Bush.

Just on the subject of 'other soft drugs' as included in the poll - why the fuck did the British government feel the need to illegalise 'shrooms?

It shouldn't be legalised, it should be controlled and decriminalised, so the government can cronk the pushers. just make sure that the regulations regarding its use are in place like those of alcohol.

That depends. Different strains require different care. It is difficult to stick a brand label onto a plant. I doubt there will be a hundred brands like cigarettes, although that would be pretty damn cool. The mass produced stuff (i.e. mexican), where they don't bother to weed out the male plants (yes, for those not in the know, marijuana grows as both "male" and "female" plants) and just grind it up is really easy to make in large quantities. Some of the really high quality stuff is greenhouse grown hydroponically by guys in lab coats.

Seems to me that those labbies would be in the best position to go legit. And they could charge more for their product, too.

I mean, they've already got the technique down, it would just be a matter of building progressively larger hydroponic greenhouses.

The evidence is against you here. In Holland, cannabis produced legally (that the government allows), generally has lower levels of THC than illegally produced cannabis.

Mightn't that be because prior to legalization much of their canabis might've been imported from other nations, instead of being produced legally in Holland, as it would be, now?

Why we allow this prolific waste of money, is the same reason we vote for Bush.

Because illogic is one of America's greatest export....

Because illogic is one of America's greatest export....



Bam!

Direct hit.

"si en la tierra crece yerba buena por q no la puedo fumar...quienes son ellos para impedirnos compartir lo q la naturaleza nos da...legalizenla..."
i support cannabis legalization

I want it all......

Mightn't that be because prior to legalization much of their canabis might've been imported from other nations, instead of being produced legally in Holland, as it would be, now?No, it's pretty much all grown here. But they've been cultivating it for high THC levels.
btw, it's still generally illegal, it can only be legally grown for medicinal use, under very strict conditions. (And on the other hand you can legally buy it in coffeeshops at every corner. Even though they can't legally buy it from their suppliers.)

Mightn't that be because prior to legalization much of their canabis might've been imported from other nations, instead of being produced legally in Holland, as it would be, now?
Possibly, but given government resources, you'd think they'd be able to find at least a half-decent strain and grow it hydroponically...
There shouldn't be such massive differences between illegally available and legally available - government produced generally has 50% less THC than otherwise available.

There shouldn't be such massive differences between illegally available and legally available - government produced generally has 50% less THC than otherwise available.It is a much more consistent quality though. No big surprises in potency, but all the same. The effect you get from what's available on the free market is much less predictable.

My favourite argument why if shouldn't be legalised is that its a gate-way drug.If that holds water then ban fish- sticks because 95% of heroin addicts admit to having used them before getting hooked.As for me my fav species of weed is Zammal.:D

It shouldn't be legalised, it should be controlled and decriminalised, so the government can cronk the pushers.

I don't know what the word "cronk" means.

And "pushers" is a term invented by the Regan administration used to scare parents into jumping on the "war against drugs" bandwagon. I have bought pot from many different people. I have bought mushrooms, ecstacy, and even coke a few times in college. I have never encountered a "pusher". Dealers don't utilize pressure because you can just go elseware to get whatever you want, and they want to retain your business.

Little kids can't afford drugs. They can't get hooked on them like the REAL addictions. (religion and cigarettes)

Even peer pressure is overrated. Unless I just had cool friends.

My favourite argument why if shouldn't be legalised is that its a gate-way drug.If that holds water then ban fish- sticks because 95% of heroin addicts admit to having used them before getting hooked.As for me my fav species of weed is Zammal.:D

You must also ban shoes. 100% of people who are addicted to heroin have once worn shoes.

You must also ban shoes. 100% of people who are addicted to heroin have once worn shoes.
Disco!!!

Uh...you go and kill your braincells. I don't care.

It is a much more consistent quality though. No big surprises in potency, but all the same. The effect you get from what's available on the free market is much less predictable.
In theory, yes, although if I buy from the same dealer every time (and I do), then I know what I'm getting. If I get sold something of lower quality he knows I'll find another dealer.

In Britian it is legal to have 1/2 kilos for personal use.Come on it would take a few days to get through that.In ireland the cops generall throw away anything under a 1/4 ounce(Unless they are young and eager to impress)

Do you support the legalization of cannabis?

1.YES
2.NO

I don't know why, but at first glance I thought this thrad said, "Do you support the leglization of cannibals?"

Which would be a considerably more interesting and novel topic. This one has been rather overdone.

I favor the legalization of cannabis. But not cannibals. And certainly not both. Imagine cannibals with the munchies! :eek:

sure why not

In Britian it is legal to have 1/2 kilos for personal use.Come on it would take a few days to get through that.In ireland the cops generall throw away anything under a 1/4 ounce(Unless they are young and eager to impress)
Is it? Fuck me! I could stay stoned for a week on that much!





I mean 1/2 a kilo, not 1/4 an ounce.

Is it? Fuck me! I could stay stoned for a week on that much!





I mean 1/2 a kilo, not 1/4 an ounce.
That's over a pound of weed. When I used to smoke I only went through an ounce a week tops.

Is it? Fuck me! I could stay stoned for a week on that much!





I mean 1/2 a kilo, not 1/4 an ounce.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13472548,00.html.
Check out above
Thats 1/4 oz is generally hash.Enough for a few days.

That's over a pound of weed. When I used to smoke I only went through an ounce a week tops.
I know. I meant smoking non-stop, not sleeping either. Even then I'd have some left over. I probably get through one ounce a week, or two at most.

I know. I meant smoking non-stop, not sleeping either. Even then I'd have some left over. I probably get through one ounce a week, or two at most.
Man you would need a family of rastas to smoke that much in a month!I was joking when I said a few days.

Heres an idea of how MUCH money the government spends each year to keep weed illegal.

A few years ago, there were 750,000 people in jail for marijuana related crimes.
This means that three quarters of a million people were being kept in prison for relatively small amounts of weed.

The average amount of money to keep, feed, and clothe these prisoners is 30,000 per year.

This means that the government spent:

$22,500,000,000 to keep these people in prisons.

For those of you who cant read that...thats twenty-two and a half billion dollars.

Or....a dollar for every star in the Milky Way.

Why we allow this prolific waste of money, is the same reason we vote for Bush.
That should be on every other billboard.

Absolutely. Marijuana and its various derivitaves are no more dangerous and less addictive than tobacco, and have some medicinal benefits. The costs to our judicial system and our police force due to the enforcement of the ban on it are far more than even the most liberal estimate of health costs; how can you possibly hope to control the production and sale of a product that can be grown easily, stored easily, and requires little or no processing?

We need to legalize it, tax it, and use the proceeds to fight the really dangerous drugs.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13472548,00.html.
Check out above
Thats 1/4 oz is generally hash.Enough for a few days.
Hmmm...that article says it's only planned to bring in the 500 gram limit. And I'd say it's unlikely that that will actually come into force.

We need to legalize it, tax it, and use the proceeds to fight the really dangerous drugs.
Like alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine.

I think it should be legal, but restricted to adult use. I think we are wasting too much money trying to enforce laws about it now, I don't even really think it should be regulated by the government much, because it would cost more money than we could bring in with taxes. I don't think people should be allowed to drive under the influence, because even though I did fine, I know there are people who would not. I haven't had any in years, and if it was legal I probably still wouldn't partake. ;)

I think it should be legal, but restricted to adult use. I think we are wasting too much money trying to enforce laws about it now, I don't even really think it should be regulated by the government much, because it would cost more money than we could bring in with taxes. I don't think people should be allowed to drive under the influence, because even though I did fine, I know there are people who would not. I haven't had any in years, and if it was legal I probably still wouldn't partake. ;)
It's not just the taxes - it's already been posted in this thread how much is spent in the US each year on prisoners in jail for possession of cannabis. I think it was $22.5 billion. Assuming the government could make that much again on tax, that's $45 billion to spend on regulating cannabis use.
I agree with the rest though, except for the last sentence.

yes but i no longer smoke

with restrictions like for booze

Possibly, but given government resources, you'd think they'd be able to find at least a half-decent strain and grow it hydroponically...
There shouldn't be such massive differences between illegally available and legally available - government produced generally has 50% less THC than otherwise available.

I'd think it would be up to private producers, not the government, to up THC levels to the point where customers want it.

Do you support the legalization of cannabis?
Until recently, I would have said no. However, I have come to the conclusion that putting thousands of young people in jail for using something that has less negative impact on them than do things that are legal ( ciggarettes and alcohol spring to mind ) is less than wise. In all fairness, I think cannabis should be removed from the Category I list of drugs.

Absolutely, without a doubt, 100% HELL FUCKIN' YES! Legal for use, legal for possession, legal to grow for personal use. Just like Beer.

Not only is it morally wrong to illegalise it (Behold I give you all seed bearing plants for your use. - God) but it's completely stupid (think of the tax revenue).

Of course. I have yet to hear a valid reason why cannabis is illegal, and alchohol, a drug which arguably damages personal health more and undeniably is far worse for society isn't.
The difference is simple. Alchohol and tobacco became a part of the culture. If we would have known how bad tobacco was 500 years ago we would have outlawed it from the beginning. If we would have known how bad alchohol was 10,000 years ago we would have outlawed it. (in fact most religions did make alchohol sinful when used in excess.) Now you are asking for another harmful drug to be legal?

When you drive down the road, one in ten cars you meet has a driver that has been drinking, do you really want another one in ten high? We are just finding out how dangerous cell phones are and are trying to control their use while driving. The time to control anything is before it becomes a social norm.

No. I don't.

The difference is simple. Alchohol and tobacco became a part of the culture. If we would have known how bad tobacco was 500 years ago we would have outlawed it from the beginning. If we would have known how bad alchohol was 10,000 years ago we would have outlawed it. (in fact most religions did make alchohol sinful when used in excess.) Now you are asking for another harmful drug to be legal?

When you drive down the road, one in ten cars you meet has a driver that has been drinking, do you really want another one in ten high? We are just finding out how dangerous cell phones are and are trying to control their use while driving. The time to control anything is before it becomes a social norm.

Except, 10,000 years ago the choices were either alcohol (long shelf life), milk (really short shelf life), or water (which probably isn't clean).

The difference is simple. Alchohol and tobacco became a part of the culture. If we would have known how bad tobacco was 500 years ago we would have outlawed it from the beginning. If we would have known how bad alchohol was 10,000 years ago we would have outlawed it. (in fact most religions did make alchohol sinful when used in excess.) Now you are asking for another harmful drug to be legal?

When you drive down the road, one in ten cars you meet has a driver that has been drinking, do you really want another one in ten high? We are just finding out how dangerous cell phones are and are trying to control their use while driving. The time to control anything is before it becomes a social norm.
This is true, to a point. However, there is considerable success in many States at keeping drunk drivers off the road, and I suspect that keeping stoners off the road would work as well. I just can't reconcile the somewhat severe penalities for simple possession of weed with the lack of same for things like alcohol and cigarettes. Sorry, but I have serious problems with this.

This is true, to a point. However, there is considerable success in many States at keeping drunk drivers off the road, and I suspect that keeping stoners off the road would work as well. I just can't reconcile the somewhat severe penalities for simple possession of weed with the lack of same for things like alcohol and cigarettes. Sorry, but I have serious problems with this.
Then we are talking about the penalty and not if it should be legal or not.

Then we are talking about the penalty and not if it should be legal or not.
Uh ... if it's not illegal, there's no penalty, yes? :)

Uh ... if it's not illegal, there's no penalty, yes? :)
What he's saying is it is a logical fallacy, and one people who want pot to be legal fall into easily, hell sometimes even I like it.

But-arguing that x is legal and is worse so y should be legal is actually an arguement for making x illegal as well, or at the very least shifts the arguement away from y specificly. Thus, we can't argue that because tobacco and booze is legal and worse or even similar that weed should be legal. It does not follow, as it also suggests that booze and cigarettes should be legal and makes no movement on weed.

You have to argue weed 'in a vacuum.' It has to be legal or illegal on its own merits.

Oh my where to start, lets start at the beginning i suppose. Why does the government have the right to tell me what i put into my body? I'm a resposible adult who uses alcohol and cannabis. I've never driven drunk nor high. If you think legalisation is going to increase the amount of stoned drivers you are wrong, chances are use won't even go up. Sure a few might try it because its now legal, and the believe everything the government tells them, but alot will stop because one of the reasons they smoke is the illegality. Alcohol wouldn't have been outlawed if they knew how dangerous it was. They tried alcohol prohibition in the states... it didn't work. Prices would most likely drop for reasons already stated. As for killing brain cells, well sir you obviously haven't done any research on the subject, since THC and other cannabinoids don't kill brain cells. Why would they we have cannabinoids receptors in our brains because our brain produces cannabinoids naturally.

Personally i think all drugs should be legalised and regulated, prohibition does nothing but leave the market unregulated (resulting in impure and dangerous products)the legality of drugs isn't stoping anyone from using it. I think thats quite obvious by looking at the money the US has to spend on the "War On Drugs." Prohibition also puts money in the hands of criminals and leads to improper education because the government has to put out false "facts" about drugs to keep the public in the dark.

SIN tax!

If we legalised cannabis, we'd be swimming in extra money. Social services, here we come!

SIN tax!

If we legalised cannabis, we'd be swimming in extra money. Social services, here we come!
I agree in principal, but disagee in application. :)

~snip~
You're right, we need a more complete and logical answer.
*gets on soapbox*
*clears throat*

Cannabis has been used for medical and psychoactive effects for thousands of years. Throughout the 20th century there was a massive upswing in the use of cannabis as a psychoactive substance, mostly for recreational purposes but to some extent for religious purposes. Due to negative media attention regarding its psychoactive effects, as well as heavy lobbying from pharmaceutical companies, the possession, use, or sale of psychoactive cannabis products became illegal in most parts of the world during the early twentieth century, and remains that way today.

Why should marijuana be legal?

1.People have a basic right to make choices for themselves as long as their actions do not harm others. Responsible individuals should be allowed to choose whether or not they use marijuana.

2.The government is wasting our time and money by prohibiting marijuana. Taxpayers are forced to pay billions of dollars to persecute, prosecute, and incarcerate people for having marijuana. If marijuana were legal, this money, plus tax revenues from marijuana sales, could be used for other purposes such as education or health care.

3. Prohibition is not an effective solution to the problems associated with marijuana use. We need to learn a lesson from history. Alcohol prohibition did not work, and there is no logical reason to believe that marijuana prohibition is a better idea. The war on drugs is having little or no effect on the trafficking of marijuana, except to make it more expensive. Since the use of all major recreational drugs except opiates has increased since the passing of the laws which illegalized them, the increase in cost cannot be said to discourage the use of marijuana.

*out of breath*
Someone else take over, I could go on for fifty pages.

better? :D

What he's saying is it is a logical fallacy, and one people who want pot to be legal fall into easily, hell sometimes even I like it.

But-arguing that x is legal and is worse so y should be legal is actually an arguement for making x illegal as well, or at the very least shifts the arguement away from y specificly. Thus, we can't argue that because tobacco and booze is legal and worse or even similar that weed should be legal. It does not follow, as it also suggests that booze and cigarettes should be legal and makes no movement on weed.

You have to argue weed 'in a vacuum.' It has to be legal or illegal on its own merits.
Sigh.

How's this then? Cannabis doesn't seem to be addicting. The argument that it leads to the abuse of stronger substances cannot be supported by the available evidence. Keeping it illegal only serves to drive it underground, create a massive illegal traffic in it, and incarcerate those who use it on even a sometime basis. Ergo, it should be legalized.

Better, oh great one?

Sigh.

How's this then? Cannabis doesn't seem to be addicting. The argument that it leads to the abuse of stronger substances cannot be supported by the available evidence. Keeping it illegal only serves to drive it underground, create a massive illegal traffic in it, and incarcerate those who use it on even a sometime basis. Ergo, it should be legalized.

Better, oh great one?
Pull the stick out of your ass. I've argued for the legalization for weed back when you where posting flames about pot smokers in every thread on the subject. You're also the one who used to post about logical fallacies, you where using one. I've made arguments for weed in this thread. I made a straight forward observation without insulting or talking down to you about the argument and you became a fucking pissant. You need to get over yourself.

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant. What will be saved is the vast amounts of money wasted in the enforcement and incarciration of people who use pot. The reality is the social cost of pot smokers is relatively low-they aren't violent and most of the crime associated with it is related to its criminality. We are wasting money preventing someone from lighting up a joint, eating some snacks and watching TV.

Not only will that result in a massive savings, but it will free up our law enforcement to deal with more destructive and pressing matters instead.


True Wisdom

SIN tax!

If we legalised cannabis, we'd be swimming in extra money. Social services, here we come!
The problem with that is: Will the extra tax pay for the extra cost? The alcohol and tobacco tax doesn't pay for the cost to society of the use. Add up all of the cost to society of cancer, heart, liver and damage to nearly every other organ. We pay to educate these people. If they die young we don't as a society recover our investment. Then we pay to support their family in survivor Social Security. We also pay more in health insurance for the costs incurred. How much does it cost for every accident caused by drinking? We don't only pay for the drinker's family, but we pay for the family of the victims. We pay for lost productivity. You skip work or take more sick leave, we all have to pay more for the products or services you were to produce.

Why should society care what is put in your body? Because society as a whole has to absorb the costs of your decisions. And your decisions can affect others that come into contact with you. You crash a car and you have invaded someone else's rights. And that's where your rights end. Yes you take the biggest loss, but not the only loss.

Pull the stick out of your ass. I've argued for the legalization for weed back when you where posting flames about pot smokers in every thread on the subject. You're also the one who used to post about logical fallacies, you where using one. I've made arguments for weed in this thread. I made a straight forward observation without insulting or talking down to you about the argument and you became a fucking pissant. You need to get over yourself.
ROFLMAO! Well said! WELL said! :D

I just can't reconcile the somewhat severe penalities for simple possession of weed with the lack of same for things like alcohol and cigarettes. Sorry, but I have serious problems with this.

Your arguement was about penalties. Then you answered an arguement that would allow for the punishment to fit the crime by saying to legalize and there would be no penalty. This is two different arguements.

There is a middle ground between legalization and severe penalties for small amounts of use.

I agree it makes no sense to throw away the key for a minor infraction. But it also makes no sense to legalize a harmful substance that will cost all of society in both money and blood.

There is also a middle ground when it comes to using a substance for medicine. We have over-the-counter drugs, and we have prescription drugs. There is no reason not to do the same with any drug that is useful in medicine.

Cannabis really causes very little harm to the individual, sure smoking anything is bad for you but it's our decision to make if we want to take that risk, and absolutley no harm comes to society. Legalisation would save the government money and i have no idea what this blood is you speak off, but i've never seen someone get in a fight because they smoked some pot. Infact quite the opposite. Legalisation makes perfect sense unless you believe the propaganda that the government spews forth to the masses.

The problem with that is: Will the extra tax pay for the extra cost? The alcohol and tobacco tax doesn't pay for the cost to society of the use. Add up all of the cost to society of cancer, heart, liver and damage to nearly every other organ.
So, then, to follow your logic, we must make alcohol, tobacco, red meat, caffine, and pretty much EVERYTHING that causes the body damage illegal? I think not. Marijuana is relatively harmless. Are you implying that pot causes cancer, heart disease, liver damage, etc on the same level as tobacco or alcohol? Even were that true, (which it isn't) studies have been shown that society SAVES money when people smoke, for instance. Because they die younger. So, rather than living an additional twenty years, collecting social security, and having all sorts of "old people" illnesses...
We pay to educate these people. If they die young we don't as a society recover our investment. Then we pay to support their family in survivor Social Security. We also pay more in health insurance for the costs incurred.
COMMUNIST! BURN THE COMMIE! Once again, you are implying that marijuana kills. (reminds me of that commercial from Harold and Kumar)

How much does it cost for every accident caused by drinking? We don't only pay for the drinker's family, but we pay for the family of the victims. We pay for lost productivity. You skip work or take more sick leave, we all have to pay more for the products or services you were to produce.
It is not as if people don't drive high as it is. It would be a crime, similar to a DUI I imagine. When prohibition was abolished, alcohol use DROPPED. You seem to think that employers would let people come to work stoned every day, or whole workforces will call in sick so they can stay home and get high. I don't even know where to begin to address the faults in your logic, it is so riddled with fallacies and false assumptions.

It is not as if people don't drive high as it is. It would be a crime, similar to a DUI I imagine. When prohibition was abolished, alcohol use DROPPED. You seem to think that employers would let people come to work stoned every day, or whole workforces will call in sick so they can stay home and get high. I don't even know where to begin to address the faults in your logic, it is so riddled with fallacies and false assumptions.
OMG! You're actually trying to be logical on the NS General Forum! The horror! The HORROR! :D

I fully suport legalising cannabis. Aside from the grounds already mentioned, one of the main reason is that cannabis (and opium and cocaine as well) were originally made illegal on the grounds of racism (at least in the US). This is simply stupid.

Opium was made illegal because the "devil Chinese" were supposedly using it to seduce "good, pure white women".

Cocaine was outlawed becasueit made those "evil hopped up n***ers" crazy and dangerous.

Cannabis was made illegal because it caused "the dirty greasers" to go crazy and attack.

(These were the official reasons. The real reasons were mostly due to "unfair" economic competition from ethnic groups using said drugs.)

edit: This is fairly widely documented. See http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBRARY/histdrug.htm for example.

I hold the popular view in America of wanting to legalize marijuana, as well as the unpopular view of wanting to legalize heroin, crack, cocaine, PCP, and anything else you can think of. :p

I vaporize

oh so wonderful

ahhhhhhh

Wtf is wrong with my eyes/mind. I thought the dunk thread said Drunks, and thought this one said Cannibals. Anyway .. yeah I support the legalization of marajuana for medicinal and recreational.

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant. What will be saved is the vast amounts of money wasted in the enforcement and incarciration of people who use pot. The reality is the social cost of pot smokers is relatively low-they aren't violent and most of the crime associated with it is related to its criminality. We are wasting money preventing someone from lighting up a joint, eating some snacks and watching TV.

Not only will that result in a massive savings, but it will free up our law enforcement to deal with more destructive and pressing matters instead.
Exactly. That Cannabis is still illegal (and [shockingly] is the US is still criminal)
is proof of the undeniably prfound influence (or total control) that buissiness exerts over politics. Hemp is stronger and easier to grow than cotton. Smoking weed is preferable to tobacco, as well as being much easier and cheaper to grow. The only reason pot is illegal is because it would sink both the tobacco and the cotton textile industry (and probably would have a positive influence on the alcohol industry either). Pot is illegal because the southern state fat cats would be shipwreaked if it were legal.

Marijuana would be a huge lubricant on the economy (a) high people buying stuff b) tourism) would probably reduce vioent crime and would lower the cost of maintaining huge prison populations (in Canada, 60% of our prison population are there because of marijuana crimes)

Also most of the oppostion to pot is that "its bad for the kids" as it is kids can get pot easy, becuase its illegal for dealers to sell regardless of their clients age. However if pot were legal, and there was a minimum age (arbitrarily 19) there would be an incentive not to sell to kids that there isn't now-that its illegal. (prolly wouldn't prevent them from getting pot, it would jsut make it harder)

Then there's the whole "its my body my choice" argument. The government has no buissiness saying what we can or cannot do as long as it doesn't seriously harm anyone.

I hold the popular view in America of wanting to legalize marijuana, as well as the unpopular view of wanting to legalize heroin, crack, cocaine, PCP, and anything else you can think of. :p

Well thats just not smart. If the whole population did acid, prodctivity would bvasically shut down, the nation would go into poverty, crime would skyrocket, law and order would shut down, thered be ridiculous health needs that noone could meet cause noone would take time to go to medical school (not to mention noone would be able to afford health care since they'd be spending all their cash on those highly addictive drugs.

The plant is so easy to grow, and the only thing holding back a lot of us from growing it is the illegality, that I don't know that the taxing thing will really be as prevelant.

Tobacco is real easy to grow too, yet hardly anyone bothers. Alcohol is relatively simple to make as well, and when was the last time you bought moonshine?

No, the majority of people don't have the time, energy or space to cultivate cannabis. They'll buy from their local shop, simply for the convenience and guaranteed quality.

Tobacco is real easy to grow too, yet hardly anyone bothers. Alcohol is relatively simple to make as well, and when was the last time you bought moonshine?

No, the majority of people don't have the time, energy or space to cultivate cannabis. They'll buy from their local shop, simply for the convenience and guaranteed quality.
There already is a prolifiration of closet plant growers and if you smoke you know more than a couple people who grow thier own or at least have raised a plant or two. And most of the time it's not even for sale, just so they don't have to go through the hassle of buying it.

Now certainly I would not say that this is an all or nothing, that everyone who uses would grow (Though that would be an incredible way to limit use while legalizing, by legalizing personal growth weed-you want it you have to grow it. But anyway...) there would most certainly be people who just buy it, but I see that more in the Amsterdam model than I do the Marbolo Gold one. And personal growth and a sort of 'moonshine' trade will exist in large enough number that I don't think that the tax will be the large revenue windfall, but rather the big financial benefit is not spending $22.5 billion dollars jailing people who want to make Cabin Boy a little funnier.

Industrial hemp is another matter. You can't get high off the stuff but you can make a ton of other crap with it (half my clothing is made from the stuff. It started out as a novelty but it really is the best fabric. I wish everything I owned was made out of it). It can also be used as an alternative fuel source in BioDiesel. That hemp grow anywhere with little taxing of the soil it seems almost criminal that we would hold back on that because it has a cousin that makes cheese that comes out of a can sound tasty.

... it seems almost criminal that we would hold back on that because it has a cousin that makes cheese that comes out of a can sound tasty.

Mmmmm....squeeze cheese....

Well thats just not smart. If the whole population did acid, prodctivity would bvasically shut down, the nation would go into poverty, crime would skyrocket, law and order would shut down, thered be ridiculous health needs that noone could meet cause noone would take time to go to medical school (not to mention noone would be able to afford health care since they'd be spending all their cash on those highly addictive drugs.

Thats not true. The legality of any given drug does not affect whether people will choose to use it. Legalizing drugs wouldnt destroy the economy because most of the people that want to take drugs already do. And as for your example of acid, unlike most drugs it cannot be taken that regularly cos for some reason after you use it it takes 3 days or so before it will work again. And acid doesnt fuck a person up for the whole day, so really even if everyone took acid as often as possible your only losing a few hours a week. And why would they anyway?

The law doesnt change what people do, it only changes how much money we spend trying to stop them.

The difference is simple. Alchohol and tobacco became a part of the culture. If we would have known how bad tobacco was 500 years ago we would have outlawed it from the beginning. If we would have known how bad alchohol was 10,000 years ago we would have outlawed it. (in fact most religions did make alchohol sinful when used in excess.) Now you are asking for another harmful drug to be legal?

When you drive down the road, one in ten cars you meet has a driver that has been drinking, do you really want another one in ten high? We are just finding out how dangerous cell phones are and are trying to control their use while driving. The time to control anything is before it becomes a social norm.

Marijuana has been used by mankind for thousands maybe even tens of thousands of years, and it is very easily used responsibly, and is a relaxing, intersting experience. Drivers driving high aren't nearly as impaired as drivers driving drunk, and are far less likely to do so. Marijuana is really a harmless plant unless an individual allows it to controll his life and in that case it's his responsibility. It isn't physically addictive like tobacco although it, like anything, can become psychologically addictive. The government wastes Tens, probably hundreds of billions of dollars EVERY YEAR trying to cut down on the use of a substance that is perfectly safe when used responsibly AND FAILS MISERABLY!!! This thread alone should show you how widespread the use of marijuana is despite hundreds of billions of dollars being spent to stop its use. The drug makes criminals out of people looking for a good time, which in and of itself causes much more real crime than the drug itself possibly could. The drug would be far safer if legal and tax money from it would give the government billions of dollars of revenue.

The sheer idiocy of marijuana prohibition is blatantly obvious to anyone with even a hint of impartiality. The fact that cannabis is still illegal is clear evidence of the capacity of the masses to be easily misled, even in blatant disregard of logic.

If marijuana was legal it wouldn't be any fun.

Hell yes it should be.

For general consumption? Don't think society is mature enough.

As a prescribed medicine? Definitely.

Well thats just not smart. If the whole population did acid, prodctivity would bvasically shut down, the nation would go into poverty, crime would skyrocket, law and order would shut down, thered be ridiculous health needs that noone could meet cause noone would take time to go to medical school (not to mention noone would be able to afford health care since they'd be spending all their cash on those highly addictive drugs.

Actually if acid were legal it would be dirt cheap(we're talking 50 cents a trip) not sending the nation into poverty, it does drive people temporarily insane, but not violently so, it lasts for a few hours, has absolutely no health effects(none), it isn't addictive, and most people would never take it more than a few times because it isn't necessarily a positive experience.

What you're saying might almost be true about Heroin, crack, or Meth, but acid is a really safe drug, as long as you don't have a family history of schizophrenia or anything like that. I maintain that it is only illegal because conservative parents didn't want their children to turn on, tune in, and drop out.

If marijuana was legal it wouldn't be any fun.

I could do without waves of paranoia ever time I see a police car, or even a pair of people sitting in a parked car, thanks.

The second option implies that I will try canabis at a later date, I will not, though I am all for its legalization.

The government would get to regulate the industry, tax the products, and tax the producers. Moreover, it would give farmers a nice incentive to stop opposing the removal of farming and ranching subsidies.

I agree. I won't be smoking it but it should be legal to buy.
I'd legalize many things if I could. Free markets rock!

If marijuana was legal it wouldn't be any fun.
It would be a lot more fun because it would be a lot less hassle. If you're doing it just because it's fun to do something illegal you are doing it for some crazy wrong reasons and should re-examine your motives.

i support it's legalization and the legalization of most other drugs

however. i have never used any of them and never plan to.

You missed out the "No and have used cannabis"

the reason I would not support the legalisation of cannabis is that until there is a reliable test for influence for Driving and Working under cannabis, I don't want to be around stoned people and machinary, Cars or even on the phone to them.

if that were allowed than I want to be able to go to work pissed out of my brain, and allowed on public transport / aircraft when drunk,

I support it. Don't know why, but don't know why not. So meh.

Hell yes I do!

The government would profit over 225 BILLION dollars a year, (give or take) simply by not keeping people convicted of having small amounts of weed, in prison.
Thats a phenomonal amount of money, and thats not including the high taxes that would of course accompany profit from direct sale of the plant.

In some states, liquor can only be purchased at government run stores.

I would have no problem buying my weed from the government, provided they showed records of what my money and taxes were going.
If the money was re-directed to education, or social welfare....or health care...so much the better.

In fact, thats not a bad idea, take the 225 billion dollars that isnt being spent on keeping small offenders in prison, and spend it on universal health care.
Why its so simple.....it will never work.

You missed out the "No and have used cannabis"

the reason I would not support the legalisation of cannabis is that until there is a reliable test for influence for Driving and Working under cannabis, I don't want to be around stoned people and machinary, Cars or even on the phone to them.

if that were allowed than I want to be able to go to work pissed out of my brain, and allowed on public transport / aircraft when drunk,
No one is suggesting that we be able to light up before flipping on the combine, alchohal is legal but not when in a car and most employers I imagine would frown on stoned employees as much as they would drunk ones. You're opposed to an aspect no one is advocating.

I was ambivalent on this issue until I had a boyfriend who spent money on pot instead of on food for his daughter. I wasn't even living with him and my fast-food paycheck from my part time job was going to keep his kid alive. That was several years ago (almost a decade) and now I'm rabidly anti-drug (all drugs, even the legal ones) because the human being as a creature is too selfish and irresponsible to prioritize properly.

I don't care that not everybody does it that way, the fact is that people all over the world put alcohol, cigarettes, weed and tons of other things above their children or even themselves - people who buy a pack of smokes instead of food for the night? That's ridiculous. Bad apples ruin the whole bunch.

I do, however, think that the non-drug Hemp version of the plant should be used in far more places. Ropes, clothes, other stuff... it's a good product.

I was ambivalent on this issue until I had a boyfriend who spent money on pot instead of on food for his daughter. I wasn't even living with him and my fast-food paycheck from my part time job was going to keep his kid alive. That was several years ago (almost a decade) and now I'm rabidly anti-drug (all drugs, even the legal ones) because the human being as a creature is too selfish and irresponsible to prioritize properly.

I don't care that not everybody does it that way, the fact is that people all over the world put alcohol, cigarettes, weed and tons of other things above their children or even themselves - people who buy a pack of smokes instead of food for the night? That's ridiculous. Bad apples ruin the whole bunch.

I do, however, think that the non-drug Hemp version of the plant should be used in far more places. Ropes, clothes, other stuff... it's a good product.


But how can you say that one persons mistakes, should affect the whole of society?

If ten people buy guns, and shoot thier kids, should we make guns illegal?
If so, why arent they illegal already?
That happens every day.

If a person prioritize poorly, how is that the plants fault?

That sounds like character flaw, and shitty parenting.

But how can you say that one persons mistakes, should affect the whole of society?

If ten people buy guns, and shoot thier kids, should we make guns illegal?
If so, why arent they illegal already?
That happens every day.

If a person prioritize poorly, how is that the plants fault?

That sounds like character flaw, and shitty parenting.

Well, I do want guns to be illegal, and I think it's insane that people in the states can get hold of them just because they want to. We're arguing about drugs while some of the most dangerous items in existance are in everyone's hands - and people are stupid about it. How many kids every year just accidently happen upon their dad's hunting rifle or grandpa's military arsenal and end up killing themselves, or their siblings or their friends? But that's a whole other topic.

And yeah, he was a really shitty parent. I often wonder if that little girl is ok, and hope she turned out better than either of her parents.

And yeah, he was a really shitty parent. I often wonder if that little girl is ok, and hope she turned out better than either of her parents.



So, at least you agree, that its not the fault of the weed, but the individual who was using it.
With that guy it wouldnt have been any other thing he was into.
Beer, coke, hell, even baseball cards.

Dont blame the weed, becuase some douchebag bought some instead of buying his daughter food.

Blame the asshole who thinks thats acceptable behavior.

Well, I do want guns to be illegal, and I think it's insane that people in the states can get hold of them just because they want to. We're arguing about drugs while some of the most dangerous items in existance are in everyone's hands - and people are stupid about it. How many kids every year just accidently happen upon their dad's hunting rifle or grandpa's military arsenal and end up killing themselves, or their siblings or their friends? But that's a whole other topic.

And yeah, he was a really shitty parent. I often wonder if that little girl is ok, and hope she turned out better than either of her parents.
This is an argument against any excess, as this kind of behavior (I quoted the wrong post, I'm talking about the buying weed rather than food thing) is not exclusive to weed. There are any number of things that people do to excess at the cost of things that are more important. Making weed illegal obviously didn't prevent your ex-boyfriend from doing that anyway. Yours is a different battle that the legalization or criminalization of weed would have at best a minor effect.

I was ambivalent on this issue until I had a boyfriend who spent money on pot instead of on food for his daughter. I wasn't even living with him and my fast-food paycheck from my part time job was going to keep his kid alive. That was several years ago (almost a decade) and now I'm rabidly anti-drug (all drugs, even the legal ones) because the human being as a creature is too selfish and irresponsible to prioritize properly.

I don't care that not everybody does it that way, the fact is that people all over the world put alcohol, cigarettes, weed and tons of other things above their children or even themselves - people who buy a pack of smokes instead of food for the night? That's ridiculous. Bad apples ruin the whole bunch.

I do, however, think that the non-drug Hemp version of the plant should be used in far more places. Ropes, clothes, other stuff... it's a good product.

Your argument makes no sense. As its already illegal obviously prohibition does nothing to stop people that are like that.

the reason I would not support the legalisation of cannabis is that until there is a reliable test for influence for Driving and Working under cannabis, I don't want to be around stoned people and machinary, Cars or even on the phone to them.

if that were allowed than I want to be able to go to work pissed out of my brain, and allowed on public transport / aircraft when drunk,

Don't ever go to New Hampshire then. (The FREE STATE!) It is ILLEGAL there for employers to conduct drug tests, or do a post-accident alcohol test. As ALL of these tests are not 100% reliable.

But there isn't a test to see if I sniffed glue, or huffed gas, or drank too much caffine, so by your own logic you must be in favor of outlawing them. Since they can all be abused, an any substance that can be abused but cannot be tested for must be illegal. That's your argument, right?

i would fully support it. it is about the only drug that no one can od from and it doesnt really harm your body. To od on cannibis you have to intake seven pounds in three minutes. we would like to think that is impossible but you never know.

i would fully support it. it is about the only drug that no one can od from and it doesnt really harm your body. To od on cannibis you have to intake seven pounds in three minutes. we would like to think that is impossible but you never know.
Intaking 7 pounds of anything in three minutes would kill anybody.Even if it were water.

Intaking 7 pounds of anything in three minutes would kill anybody.Even if it were water.

It's also about nine thousand joints. Three minutes? Good luck.

i would fully support it. it is about the only drug that no one can od from and it doesnt really harm your body. To od on cannibis you have to intake seven pounds in three minutes. we would like to think that is impossible but you never know.
It is actually possible to od through ingestion, but you really have to be working at it.

It is actually possible to od through ingestion, but you really have to be working at it.

Has that ever actually ever happened?

Cannabis=SOFTdrug=illegal
Alcohol=HARDdrug=legal

What doesnt make sense here?

I want to say no because I hate the modern generation of pot smokers, but trying to keep it illegal is just an effort in futility. We work so hard to keep this drug off the streets when we could be spending that time trying to break down on coke, heroine, or crack. Drugs that actually destroy lives rather than just make people lazy and idiotic at times.

Then again I think America has given up on the war on drugs.

I want to say no because I hate the modern generation of pot smokers.

You hate one in three people?

You hate one in three people?
:p good point

You hate one in three people?

I hate a lot of people so 2/3 is probably closer.

Has that ever actually ever happened?
I'm going to say yes, but not look it up to verify, so take that as you will...

(keeping in mind I smoke and am in favor of legalization)

I'm going to say yes, but not look it up to verify, so take that as you will...

(keeping in mind I smoke and am in favor of legalization)

No.

It hasnt.

Used to be a member of a weed-legalization lobbyist group.
One of the points they loved to make was that there are no recorded cases of marijuana overdose.

See, weed isnt easy to digest when its in its normal dried plant like state.
You would end up throwing up before you managed to eat any amount that could harm you.
In fact, the most likely result, would be eating enough to make you pass out.
Wich would take a lot.

No.

It hasnt.

Used to be a member of a weed-legalization lobbyist group.
One of the points they loved to make was that there are no recorded cases of marijuana overdose.

See, weed isnt easy to digest when its in its normal dried plant like state.
You would end up throwing up before you managed to eat any amount that could harm you.
In fact, the most likely result, would be eating enough to make you pass out.
Wich would take a lot.
Well, there you go. Totally willing to be wrong on that one.

It is actually possible to od through ingestion, but you really have to be working at it.

that's still next to impossible. you need to take about about 50,000x the amount of weed that gets you high before you OD. so say you make weed brownies and one piece gets you high, you'd need to eat 50,000 brownies in what, an hour or two? even if say, you put 10x the amount of weed needed in one brownie, that's still too many for you to consume.

that's still next to impossible. you need to take about about 50,000x the amount of weed that gets you high before you OD. so say you make weed brownies and one piece gets you high, you'd need to eat 50,000 brownies in what, an hour or two? even if say, you put 10x the amount of weed needed in one brownie, that's still too many for you to consume.

Where did you get the 50,000x figure?

20 joints to a pack, charge a reasonable price, slap some tax on 'em and there ya go.

Well, there you go. Totally willing to be wrong on that one.


However, there IS good news.

You dont have to eat the whole plant.

See, THC isnt water soluble, but it IS fat soluble.
So..you take said weed, and cook it in a shitload of butter. (Real butter, not that margerine shit.), the THC will dissolve into the butter.

Then, you take said butter, and use it to make cookies.
(I prefer chocolate chip)

Presto....cookies that getcha stoned, AND will no absolute nothing for the munchies.

20 joints to a pack, charge a reasonable price, slap some tax on 'em and there ya go.


For 20 joints, pre-rolled, with no seeds or stems, I would glady pay 15.00 dollars at a government run store.

Wouldnt you?

For 20 joints, pre-rolled, with no seeds or stems, I would glady pay 15.00 dollars at a government run store.

Wouldnt you?

I had been thinking somewhere between $10 and $20, so that's perfect!

Wouldnt you?

I'd pay twice that.

Kiss a Royal Marine!

I had been thinking somewhere between $10 and $20, so that's perfect!


So, even if you had to be of a certain age, say, 18, to buy it.
Also, lets say that a portion of the sales went directly into education, like the lottery is supposed to, would you say that the government would stand to make billions in revenue?

So, even if you had to be of a certain age, say, 18, to buy it.
Also, lets say that a portion of the sales went directly into education, like the lottery is supposed to, would you say that the government would stand to make billions in revenue?

Personally, I think so.

Personally, I think so.


I think most people would.

Wich is why I cant imagine why the Government (of any country) isnt already doing this.
As long as they dont put any additives in it, I would have no problem buying my weed from a government run store.
Even if It were 30 dollars for 20 joints, or even forty.
Tax the holy crap out of it...I dont care, as long as I can smoke it in the privacy of my own home, and not have to worry about getting caught, thats fine with me.

Where did you get the 50,000x figure?

i did an extensive (approx. 30 page) research paper for one of my psychology classes on the medical perspectives on cannabis and that's what i remembered offhand.

but, if you just google it quickly...
http://www.drugtext.org/sub/marmyt1.html
www.ccguide.org.uk/young88.php

those say 40,000x. i'm off 10,000 :D

this one's interesting too
www.olywa.net/when/part04.html

I think they should burn the lot of it.

I think they should burn the lot of it.

As long as I'm standing in the near vicinity when they do.

As long as I'm standing in the near vicinity when they do.
in the giant room where they do it. yes.... *ponders*

sure beats hotboxing shitty little tents :p

However, there IS good news.

You dont have to eat the whole plant.

See, THC isnt water soluble, but it IS fat soluble.
So..you take said weed, and cook it in a shitload of butter. (Real butter, not that margerine shit.), the THC will dissolve into the butter.

Then, you take said butter, and use it to make cookies.
(I prefer chocolate chip)

Presto....cookies that getcha stoned, AND will no absolute nothing for the munchies.
Dude, I live in Northern California. I've run across cannibutter plenty of times. And tea, and...

I actually did an anthropology paper on the 420 Hemp Festival in San Francisco. Everything I did there got me stoned. It was fantastic. And the stoniest A I ever got.

Call me harsh, but I support the legalization of anything that could possibly cause idiots to kill themselves.

Call me harsh, but I support the legalization of anything that could possibly cause idiots to kill themselves.
As we've covered here, legalizing weed won't help you in that.

I don't really care, actually... just let them have their cannabis if they want it that badly.